Stop laying into the students

The fact that degrees cost tens of thousand of pounds now does wonders for the application of the students taking them. I got a third, but if I had had to pay for my education I would have taken it a lot more seriously and actually done some work! I am sure that the increasing price of a university education explains the increase in grades.

grades may be higher but expectations have raised the same amount. it's like with gcses. it probably was much harder to get an A in your O levels, but back then it was perfectly acceptable to get a smattering of Bs, Cs and Ds - it was considered impressive if you managed to pass them all. nowadays if you don't have 23 A*s you might as well go get yourself fitted for a burger king hat and nametag.

With exam papers and coursework marked by the very same academics who teach the students, there is obvious pressure to mark up grades to enhance the university's and the academics' reputation, with all that implies for future student applications and government funding. This has long been the case but with financial pressures on universties increasing, and some whole faculties under threat at many of the newer ones, the tendency to mark up has doubtless proved irresistible

You have to tailor your comments to the courses being discussed. Degrees in hairdressing, health and beauty and media studies are to be ridiculed for not being academic. They require the intellectual prowess of a gnat.

When the BBC interview another unemployed graduate, they really should ask what the subject is that set him/her on the course to financial ruin and despondency. If it is Engineering, Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, Computer science or the like then we ought to be worried but if it is one of the Mickey Mouse subjects then we should ignore the inadequately presented report. After all the job of Mickey Mouse is already filled.

As for 13% getting firsts, remember that the degree should be for summa cum laude, so how can 13% of the cohort of students be awarded that?

"They require the intellectual prowess of a gnat."

Please get off your high horse. The increased number of courses offered by universities tries to reflect the multitude of opportunities and roles that can be filled. Personally, I would rather somebody with a degree in hairdressing look after my hair than a computer science graduate who couldn't get a job after obtaining their 'proper' degree.

Anything to make a news story. If it was a well conducted bit of reporting and properly investiagted hacking, then it might just get some serious reply. Sadly, it will get the DELETE button treatment it thoroughly deserves :(

I got A Level maths, Physics, Chemistry in the 1950's, my son took the same in the 1980's. I looked at his papers afterwards and would not have known where to start!

I went on to get an Engineerig degree, subsequetly becoming Chartered. Both of my sons did the same in different branches of Engineering, and I am sure that it was not any easier for them.

Maybe it would have been easier if they had taken degrees in humanities or some of the new Micky Mouse subjects on offer.

Maybe Science and Engineering undergraduates are as they ever were mugs for taking courses that are reqiring far more work than many others have to put in.

Well, Anonymous 1, perhaps it's not necessary for your hairdresser to have a degree and tha vocational and on the job training might suffice. A lot of the degree courses on offer now are less rigorous and more vocational than the old 'traditional' degrees. That does not make them worthless and does not degrade the more 'academic' subjects (it's pretty easy for someone to spot the difference between a mathematics degree and a hairdressing degree). For the less rigorous subjects there needs to be more thought applied to making them directly applicable (like the old vocational traing and apprenticeships) and balancing supply and demand (for jobs).

From experience with my kids, it does seem that GCSEs are easier than O Levels but A Levels are about the same (at least for maths and physics).

I do feel, however, that we are putting up cost barriers against our kids going to university. It's no good widening access if you impose crippling debts. It does feel like our generation is pulling up the ladder. This will harm us as it will be our kids who will be paying taxes to provide services to keep us in our dotage (and also generating returns on our investments). Yet anothe case of well meaning politicians putting in place socialist policies that ruin our future.

I received a 2:1 Business Management degree and my top exam score throughout the course was an essay graded at 76%. This coursework had a low 'weighting' for the year so at the end of the year my average result wasn't really affected by this high score.

However, several of my peers chose modules which tested their Maths skills - as a science this meant they were marked right or wrong for each of their answers. Some of the students recieved 100% in these Maths exams (electronically marked multiple choice) which carried a high weighting for their year.

Depending on the type of course you pick and the way in which you are tested you can increase your chances of getting a first class degree. There is no way that an essay will ever get 100% without being highly scrutinised/objected.

Its amazing really University used to be something to aspire to. 'We' take a punch at the degree courses but my partner has just finished the same MBA I did in 1997 and the tutor basically told him what to do for his dissertation and gave him all the information he needed to do it so the university- not like when I did it!. I believe we need to increase the difficulty of courses throughout the education system so students work harder and qualifications mean something. At the other end of the scale I have a work experience student at the moment, just finished his gcse's, he walked in on the first day and said he was lazy and had chosen advertising industry because it's a 9-5 job - he can have an idea and that's it for the day! What are they teaching these youngsters? (His father secured him the work placement!) The government also needs to ensure that targets are achievable and give educational establishments the means to achieve them. Grading needs to be undertaken by an external body only then will qualifications earn respect.

I am a pupil of the 60's in Scotland. In my day you were required to have a selection of results which satisfied the universties of choice (generally that closest to home). Note the 'that'..............because there were not all those 'climb on the Blair bandwagon' outfits available locally and money was tight despite Wilson's 'white heat of technology' grants (without which I would never attended further education).

When I was of that age all my elders said it was much tougher in my day. My response was that as mankind progresses there's more knowledge to absorb and use so it's got to be tougher now.

In retrospect I believe my elders were talking about the obtaining of entrance qualifications to universities. For them it was obtaining matriculation in one go over a wide variety of subjects. I f you failed one you had to do the lot again. For me, you could obtain the requisite number of passes and grades in two subsequent go's (4 with resits) and all the exams being on the day tests; the result being additive.

As I progressed through academia and professionalism, I came to believe that all universities from Moscow to Dublin plus Japanese and Opidean regimes together with the Ivy league in USA and several Canadian institutions all had roughly the same calibre. The rest were no better than worse than A- level (then).

Nowadays, it seems as though one can go to 'uni' for a handfull of newspaper tokens. The quality of so called qualifications has been so diminished as to be risible. It's so easy to do things in modules, particularly with end exams being multi question types and to have the answers to questions being posted on the internet for those who wish to plagiariase them. A lot of the so called students of today are not able to apply the knowledge imparted to them in tuition to situations they have never seen. Witness the furore over the biology A level questions recently. This is the problem with todays academic process. It does not sort out the wheat from the chaff. For this reason place like oxbridge and others wish to see a further sieve to obtain the best brains.

Personally, I think that students nowadays put more work in. I recall my uni days where I was grant funded and had a high old time doing virtually all my reading in the last 6 months.

My two sons had a much tougher regime of deadlines and waypoints which could have resulted in 'the grand order of the boot' if abused too much.

The degree choice being offered reflects the diversity in specialisms required in modern life, there are frivolous degrees being offered but they will fall by the wayside sooner or later. Turning back the clock to the '3R' degree subjects is impractical and shows the proposers poor grasp of the complexity in life that we take for granted.

The current proposal to add a further graduate tax in replacement of the student fee is poorly thought out and amounts to double taxation. Graduates are alleged to enjoy higher salaries therefore they pay back their fees as a result of taxation.

It should be a requirement of entry that politicians have a degree in Economics or better still an MBA. I'm sure they would jump at the chance of a legitimate MP expense. After this, we might have an elected body of representatives capable of running a school tuck-shop which is a step up from the current level. This being the reason we are having the education costs debate in the first place.

I graduated fairly recently (2005) from the University of Manchester with a 2:1 in Ancient History. Of around 30 people who finished the course, only two got firsts, whilst I was one of only three who got 2:1s.

Everyone else got 2:2s or thirds.

Hardly gives the impression of it being easy, though maybe things have moved on again since then.

I think the important thing is for students to either study a well established subject that will teach them skills they can deploy in the real world, or something vocational.

Philosophy or media studies whilst very interesting, are hardly a degree likely to super-charge your entry into the labour market...

But surely employers take note of all aspects of the degree, such as which University it was from and what subject it was in.

If I was a commercial manager for a large company I wouldn't take on someone with a 1st class degree in traffic cone management or hairdressing.

As far as I am concerned, let people do what they want and it is then up to the employers to choose if they want the graduate or not.

The problem with students is that they do not really ask themselves why they are going to uni before doing so.

The technocratic educational establishment has to promote itself by selling the idea that education will entitle you to a job in a meritocratic world.

The problem is that students believe the technocrats' view of the world although evidence is all around that life is not so simple.

Hence students end up in a futile race to nowhere hoping to get certified for something or other.

The world is not meritocratic and no one should be arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to anything.

What has happened over the last 20 years is the general devaluation of degrees. Its now all about getting a 2.1 or 1st, preferably a Masters or PhD for the top jobs. This is only likely to continue unless there is a rethink about the world of work and the recent graduates place in it.

You should also be asking about the affect the "competition" for grades is having on young people. Those who do not achieve the top grades are being told they are second class - not worthy of something or other. This is just wrong. These people need to feel like they can make a difference and are contributing to society.

The answer is to stop sending so many people to university and get them doing more apprenticeships.

Unfortunately the educational "business" has a lot to lose if the tertiary education system is scaled back.

It doesn't matter why there is grade inflation. There is, so employers will find another way of differentiating candidates. This may well fall back on the tried and trusted Oxbridge plus a handful of Russell Group universities. This has always happened for City jobs and a few other sectors and may well become the morm elsewhere. As for the slur of Mickey Mouse degrees, well it is simply true that some Universities, in the race to the bottom for cash, have elevated perfectly respectable career training that would formerly have been adequate at certificate or diploma level to 'degree'. The New Labour push for 50% of school leavers to go into higher education has had the effect that all such social engineering measures have - the opposite effect of what was intended. We have kids with quite literally worthless qualifications who would have been far better going to night school while working. Now I know I'm an old fart in my 50s, but I did both the day release, night school apprenticeship route then gave up a good job to get a degree in the hope of a better one. It paid off for me. I feel so sorry for kids conned into believing a degree in something less than rigorous from a University that should have stayed a College is the equivalent of a Law, Engineering or Medical degree from a top 20 University. They don't benefit and neitehr do the employers.