"The Knowledge Economy" - A Political Myth?

southsiderosie

_tony_ wrote: »

Lecturers need to be evaluated based on their students. Currently publications and funding is how these people are evaluated. Students don't matter (thus the quality of lectures and supervision). Promotions are granted based on funding, publications and administrative tasks - surely the students are more important! I recently heard that some of the top US universities are starting to phone students ...if someone applies for a lecturing job the Uni will track down some of their past degree/ PhD students and phone them for comments on the teacher... great idea if you ask me. if an unusual amount of students fail a course, the lecturer should be asked why. if a PhD with tax-based funding takes 5 years and is not finished, the supervisor should have to answer for this.

Until our education system teaches students how to be responsible and accountable we are going to stay in the same place we're at now.

Just a few points...

The reputation of a university is built on its research output, not if 19 year-olds "like" their professors. Some of the most popular profs with students are pretty lazy researchers. In the US, people have the option of attending liberal arts colleges like Amherst or Oberlin if they want small classes and attentive faculty for their undergraduate education (not sure if these exist in Europe?). Many of these are great schools - and have good placement records when it comes to jobs and/or getting into graduate school - but they are not research universities.

Research universities matter, especially those with an engineering or medical component, because they do a lot of the basic and secondary research that drives innovation. They also are increasingly critical economic actors, as they are a major source of jobs that range from highly technical, to clerical, to basic services. To be honest, this is why I think the "knowledge economy" is bull**** - there are very few high-flying, high paying jobs at the core, and an awful lot of ****ty service jobs that revolve around the needs of those at that core. Saskia Sassen writes about this in "Global Cities": basically these kinds of jobs end up concentrating in a few megacities like New York or London, and in the meantime, the middle-class base is driven out by high costs, and an underclass of poorly paid service workers live in near-poverty. In addition, these cities are a "talent suck": other areas lose their high-flyers to a few regional hubs (this is actually why there is a strong argument against small countries having fully publicly funded tertiary education: they lose a lot of their best educated to other countries whose taxpayers did not underwrite that fine education!).

Also, from this perspective, the opinions of undergraduates are of little importance. NO major research university in the US consults with undergraduates when making hiring decisions. And I say this having participated in discussions around search committees. MAYBE if there is a lateral hire the committee will ask former graduate students who worked under someone if they are a complete psychopath (or to clarify issues around sexual harassment, etc), but that's about it, and only in extreme cases.

Finally, as for students being responsible, they are more likely to be responsible when they are working on their own dime, and not on the taxpayers. I firmly believe that students should be responsible for shouldering a significant percentage of the cost of their education. Yes there should be means-tested aid, but having a financial stake in your education makes it more likely that you will a) graduate on time (whether an undergrad or graduate), and b) you will major in something that you care deeply about, or that will lead to a job upon graduation.

_tony_

southsiderosie wrote: »

Just a few points...
The reputation of a university is built on its research output, not if 19 year-olds "like" their professors.

Also, from this perspective, the opinions of undergraduates are of little importance. NO major research university in the US consults with undergraduates when making hiring decisions. And I say this having participated in discussions around search committees.

I agree with your comment about students would be better if working on the own dime.

At no point did I mention 19 year old students being consulted. I said people with degrees/PhD. Of course, if at the degree level I would only think the students opinion is important is if it was in a final-year supervisory role. I certainly do not think people should be asked if they "like" their supervisor, but they should be asked if the supervisor made time for them, and gave them advice. This of particular importance to PhD students who are funded by tax-based sources.

Under our current set up, there is little motivation for professors to meet with, or advise students. Instead, they are encouraged to deal with University administration and apply for bigger grants. Whether a prof actually meets with and advises their students is up to the prof. Some do it, some don't. The University and funding sources don't provide any motivation for them to do this.

I assume from your comment that you are staff in one of our Universities. While I'm certainly not trying to put you down, I do think that the fact that you argued the idea of past students being consulted, yet you did not argue against my other comment of "students don't matter" - re-enforces my beliefs.

southsiderosie

_tony_ wrote: »

I agree with your comment about students would be better if working on the own dime.

At no point did I mention 19 year old students being consulted. I said people with degrees/PhD. Of course, if at the degree level I would only think the students opinion is important is if it was in a final-year supervisory role. I certainly do not think people should be asked if they "like" their supervisor, but they should be asked if the supervisor made time for them, and gave them advice. This of particular importance to PhD students who are funded by tax-based sources.

Under our current set up, there is little motivation for professors to meet with, or advise students. Instead, they are encouraged to deal with University administration and apply for bigger grants. Whether a prof actually meets with and advises their students is up to the prof. Some do it, some don't. The University and funding sources don't provide any motivation for them to do this.

I assume from your comment that you are staff in one of our Universities. While I'm certainly not trying to put you down, I do think that the fact that you argued the idea of past students being consulted, yet you did not argue against my other comment of "students don't matter" - re-enforces my beliefs.

I'm not. I'm based at a major US research university, but am visiting an Irish university. So my comments are based on the US model, where, to put it frankly, students don't matter that much in the greater scheme of things. But there is a trade-off; the more prestigious the supervisor, the less time they will probably have for you, but the more likely you are to get a good job. The best researchers often get the best students, even if they aren't the nicest (or most punctual) people. Honestly, the most important thing about your relationship with your supervisor is did they help you get a job (or grants, or whatever). If they can do that, the fact that they don't return email, or forget about meetings is secondary (and here I am speaking from experience - I know for a fact my advisor and committee members opened doors for me by virtue of the power of their reputation, even though they were terrible about meetings, email, etc).

The bigger problem with the European university system, as I see it, is that they are severely underfunded, and the students act overly entitled yet are incredibly unfocused. I used to admire the "free uni" system until I saw it up close. You get what you pay for.

Spudmonkey

_tony_ wrote: »

Free/Cheap education is critical, but why shouldn't this be performance based? In University/College if a student got 60% or higher average for a year - give them free education! if someone averages 50% - let them pay a modest fee - maybe 1-2k. If someone just scrapes it by - with a 40% average - let them pay a bit more...3k or something. The people who really want to be there, won't have to pay. The people who are only half bothered can pay to show they want to be there.

Thats a great idea. Why should good students be lumped into the same group as dossers. And why should dossers be subsidised by the taxpayer. If they want to waste four years in college, let them do it on their own dime!

Eliot Rosewater

Some good suggestions here. Over in the UCC forum a fee for repeats was suggested. This would encourage students to attend classes and study lest they have to fork out some cash. You could also look into making the free fees conditional. If you fail x amount of modules in the Summer, the percentage of your fees paid for the rest of your degree is reduced by an amount proportional to x.

Of course the students unions would oppose this. In the UCC department of medicine, students have to attend a certain percentage of their lectures to pass. One of the candidates for the student union presidency this year wanted to reduce this percentage to 50%. I was thinking, why are you attending only 50% of your classes? But clearly this kind of slacking off is the sort of thing the unions want to protect.


The entitlement culture is, quite frankly, frightening. It's hard to even talk about fees with my fellow students. They are under the impression that the University is there for them and that they have some God given right to attend for free. When the college introduces some fee they take it as the college exploiting them or something (usually the word "profiteering" is thrown out) - "what gives the University the right to charge me?"

The priorities are all messed up. Their main goal is not getting a degree of good international standing. It's to get their degree for free.

_tony_

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The entitlement culture is, quite frankly, frightening. It's hard to even talk about fees with my fellow students. They are under the impression that the University is there for them and that they have some God given right to attend for free. When the college introduces some fee they take it as the college exploiting them or something (usually the word "profiteering" is thrown out) - "what gives the University the right to charge me?"

The priorities are all messed up. Their main goal is not getting a degree of good international standing. It's to get their degree for free.

I do think it is very important for there to be a free path through university. Regardless of how poor one's family is, it should be possible for them to attend uni (as long as they are there to apply themselves). What you say is spot on, the sense of entitlement is the real issue.

The sense of entitlement is so widespread. Finding the solution to it will play a major part in the recovery of the economy, and the growth of our universities. We need the attitude of students to change from 'Im doing uni cos i'm entitled to it' to be 'I want to go to uni and I want to achieve my goals', and when students are eager to learn, it's up to the lecturers to encourage them in absolutely every way possible.

I'm not too sure that such a change can happen quickly though. Most universities that have a significant amount of research see students as "something that doesn't matter much", meanwhile the students themselves are 'entitled' to go to uni to attend a minimum number of classes and collect their degree....(which they may also be entitled to).

Eliot Rosewater

_tony_ wrote: »

I do think it is very important for there to be a free path through university.

Agreed. At the moment there isn't a tradition in this country of saving up for one's child's education, and this lack of foresight could hurt the prospects of many children.

One solution often proposed is a graduate tax. People are taxed at a higher rate until a certain percentage of their fees are paid off. Fine Gael support this I think. It don't know if it's practical or not, but it strikes me as a good solution for people who can't pay up front.

I'm completely despondent about the culture of entitlement. I don't think it's going away at all. It is the single greatest factor in my current desire to move abroad. I feel it's holding me and this country back.

thebaldsoprano

It's funny, I was anti fees while studying for my first degree. I'm studying for degree #2 at the moment, working ~40 hours a week to pay for it and have completely changed my outlook. The drop out rate among the free fees group was around 40% last year, largely from people not giving much of a damn. Among those of us who are paying only one student dropped out - for some very legitimate family reasons and they plan to return. A couple of tutors commented the those of us paying are producing more work of a better quality than the free fees bunch, despite the time constraints we have.

I guess paying for a third level education reminds you of the privilege that it is, something that is completely lost on a lot of students. Some of these students might argue that they wouldn't be able to attend college if fees were introduced, but funding and accessibility are two different problems. Government or college sponsored student loans are one possibility, or even some form of subsidies, but asking students to cough up a reasonable amount towards their education might help focus their attention. At this stage, I'm getting a little tired of putting up with reduced library hours and the like so that a new bunch of first years can go on the piss for a year.

kuntboy

Might help if Irish students went to uni a little older. Then the partying is out of their system, they're more likely to pick the right course and work a bit harder. Compare the attitude of mature students to 1st years who did their leaving 6 months ago. The CAO system is a joke also and puts the wrong people in the wrong professions.

MisterAnarchy

Knowledge Economy = Myth
There is almost no R&D in Ireland .
As for the research carried on in Irish Universities,it is pathetic and shameful by International standards.

southsiderosie

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Some good suggestions here. Over in the UCC forum a fee for repeats was suggested. This would encourage students to attend classes and study lest they have to fork out some cash. You could also look into making the free fees conditional. If you fail x amount of modules in the Summer, the percentage of your fees paid for the rest of your degree is reduced by an amount proportional to x.

In the US, some state schools had a problem with people staying forever, repeating multiple courses, etc. So they made a rule capping credit hours - most people needed around 120 to graduate. Once you went over 130 hours, the charged rates per credit hour tripled. This quickly dis-incentivized being an undergrad "lifer". However, students would need to bear more of the costs for this to work...

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Of course the students unions would oppose this. In the UCC department of medicine, students have to attend a certain percentage of their lectures to pass. One of the candidates for the student union presidency this year wanted to reduce this percentage to 50%. I was thinking, why are you attending only 50% of your classes? But clearly this kind of slacking off is the sort of thing the unions want to protect.

Well, in my view, if someone teaches a course that students can pass without attending class, then the problem is with the teacher, not the students. If people know they need to come to the lectures in order to master the material, then they will. There are very easy pedagogical ways to deal with attendance issues.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The entitlement culture is, quite frankly, frightening. It's hard to even talk about fees with my fellow students. They are under the impression that the University is there for them and that they have some God given right to attend for free. When the college introduces some fee they take it as the college exploiting them or something (usually the word "profiteering" is thrown out) - "what gives the University the right to charge me?"

I found the debate at UCC over commencement fees to be...amusing.

The flip side in the US is that students feel entitled because they are "consumers" and/or they "tried hard". And unfortunately since too many of them have been told they were the greatest thing since sliced bread from the time they could walk, they don't know what to do if someone tells them that their work is average, at best.

But to veer back towards the original topic, the knowledge economy, I don't think that heavily subsidizing uni fees is the way to go, especially since a lot of kids who end up studying something like finance may end up working abroad anyway. Frankly, fees should go UP so universities in Ireland can have better research resources and physical capital (with the side benefit of pushing students to be more focused and strategic about school).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Byron85

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

"Hi. I'm the surgeon carrying out your liver transplant but there is a slight problem. I only know how to take out your liver and not put a new one in. I missed that particular lecture and couldn't get the notes off anyone.":rolleyes:


It's bad enough missing 50% of your lectures for some of the Arts subjects but for medicine, good god. We'd have medical graduates of the Dr.Zoidberg quality.

ei.sdraob

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

"Hi. I'm the surgeon carrying out your liver transplant but there is a slight problem. I only know how to take out your liver and not put a new one in. I missed that particular lecture and couldn't get the notes off anyone.":rolleyes:


It's bad enough missing 50% of your lectures for some of the Arts subjects but for medicine, good god. We'd have medical graduates of the Dr.Zoidberg quality.

jmayo

To anyone who thinks we can have a knowledge or smart economy please read some of the replies in the threads concerning one of our biggest entrepeneurs and his little financial problems with our regulatory authorities.

We have people in this country who want to continue the nod and wink method of doing business, who appear to be quiet happy if they are fired a few jobs at any costs as they watch their benevolent masters fly over them in their new Eurocopter, all the while every few years picking up for the messes left behind by those masters.

FS we can't get the little economy we have right nevermind building some master smart economy.
Some people it appears have learned nothing from the last few years and we are expected to create some new marvel to behold.

Jeeze we couldn't even build decent houses, something we were supposed to be really good at, so how can we expect to build a new 21st century green environmentally friendly world leading robotic nano technology smart cloud computing economy with copious amounts of knowlegde spewing forth from the masses ?

SkepticOne

For the sake of argument let's assume that the knowledge economy means the sort of industry where scientific and technical skills are valued. How is Ireland doing on that front?

One of the advantages of the Irish CAO system is that it easy to see at a glance what type of student is doing what kind of course. A quick glance at the sorts of courses and the points the require tells us that Ireland is not doing well and that as the OP suggests, the knowledge economy is indeed largely a buzzword.

Below I've extracted the points required for different courses from different colleges. What we see is that at the top end, predictably, professional services (Law, Medicine etc.) dominate. Technical subjects (e.g. Electronic Engineering in UCD) tend to be fairly low on the list.

Nothing wrong with these professional courses attracting high points in themselves, but a knowledge economy as defined earlier would benefit more if the top leaving cert students also went into engineering, science etc. We could probably survive is slightly less qualified leaving cert students went into medicine, and indeed it has been recognised that extremely high leaving cert results don't necessarily produce the best doctors.

So why are we not a knowledge economy? Why aren't the best going into science and engineering and other technical subjects that might lead to an indigenous hi-tech exporting industry in Ireland? And what is the solution?

I think one of the reasons is that there's an artificial restriction on supply of places into these professional courses. Consequently, these course attract high points. Another consequence is that for some of these professions the remuneration is quite high relative to other countries. For example, we have fewer doctors than most countries yet we pay them more.

What all this suggests is the the solution is the opposite to that normally suggested by policy makers. The politicians solution to the problem of creating a knowledge economy is to create more places at third level in technical subjects. This fails because all it does is drive points down and, more importantly, it does not create more jobs at the other end for graduates.

Instead, what should be done is that as many barriers to entry to the high points professional services courses should be removed as possible. All courses should be streamlined. Barriers to foreign competition should be lowered to the greatest extent possible. Restrictions on the numbers of places at university should be removed. The competition authority has recommended a lot of this stuff.

This is very counter-intuitive and so would be difficult to sell, yet it is what should be done. We are dealing with a market here and the correct way of dealing with a market is often the opposite of what common sense suggests. Another difficulty is that trying to implement it would involve confronting the various vested interests that have the country destroyed.

There might be more doctors and lawyers and so on initially but the prestige that goes with those professions would be reduced greatly once barriers to entry are removed. Then you would see more of the brightest going for other subjects, and some of these having graduated will go on to be entrepreneurs.

The idea here would not be to make, say, engineering and extremely high points subject but rather to spread the points around, to make the choice of subject less based on points but on interest. That is the best way, imo, to ensure that we generate the needed people.

UCD -Bottom
DN050 Computer Science - Arts 300 350
DN038 Climate and Earth System Science 305 420
DN042 Forestry 320 340
DN058 Arts (International) - German 325 345
DN048 Horticulture, Landscape and Sportsturf Management 330 360
DN073 Electronic Engineering or Electrical Engineering 330 405
DN091 Dairy Business 330 370
DN041 Landscape Architecture 345 390
DN023 Arts - Part time Day 350* 623
DN043 Food and Agribusiness Management 350 395

UCD - Top
DN060 Law with History 500 510
DN065 Law with Politics 500 520
DN067 Law with Economics 500 520
DN029 Law with French Law (BCL) 505 520
DN066 Law with Philosophy 505 515
DN004 Radiography 515* 530
DN006 Physiotherapy 525 535
DN020 Actuarial and Financial Studies 530 550
DN028 BCL Mâitrise 550 580
DN005 Veterinary Medicine (Undergraduate Entry) 555 575
DN002 Medicine (Undergraduate Entry) #719 #72

UCC - Bottom
CK401 Computer Science 300 350
CK211 Commerce (International) with Chinese Studies 305 410
CK207 Commerce (International) with Italian 320 425
CK406 Chemical Sciences 330 435
CK505 Food Science 335 375
CK210 Government 345 390
CK402 Biological and Chemical Sciences 350 445
CK506 International Development and Food Policy 355 405
CK605 Electrical and Electronic Engineering 355 470
CK101 Arts 360 405
CK102 Social Science 370 395

UCC - Top
CK302 Law and French 510 535
CK704 Occupational Therapy 510 525
CK305 Law (Clinical) 515* 525
CK407 Mathematical Sciences 515 550
CK603 Energy Engineering 520 550
CK304 Law and Irish 525* 545
CK306 Law (International) 540 550
CK703 Pharmacy 545 565
CK702 Dentistry 575* 580
CK701 Medicine - (Undergraduate Entry) #715 #728

NUI Galway - Bottom
GY313 Health & Safety Systems 285 325
GY120 Arts - Environment and Society/Youth and Family Studies (Sli 300 340
GY306 Computing Studies/Mathematical Science 315 395
GY350 Information Technology 315 365
GY103 Arts (Public and Social Policy) 325 345
GY301 Science 325 395
GY116 Arts with Global Women's Studies 330 340
GY204 Commerce (International) with Spanish 330 480
GY304 Biotechnology 330 390
GY318 Biopharmaceutical Chemistry 330 400

NUI Galway - Top
GY112 Arts with Film Studies 450 485
GY207 Commerce (Accounting) 455 485
GY115 Arts with Theatre and Performance 460 475
GY202 Commerce (International) with French 465 490
GY303 Biomedical Science 465 500
GY111 Arts with Creative Writing 470 505
GY502 Occupational Therapy 505* 525
GY503 Speech and Language Therapy 505 520
GY104 Arts (Psychology) 525* 535
GY501 Medicine (five year/six year course) #712* #717

J.S. Pill

Batt O Keefe was on the news just there saying that the creation of 300 call centre jobs in Cork was a good example of the Knowledge economy in action (or something to that effect).

Curious - Most of the jobs being created are going to be essentially unskilled and will pay just above the minimum wage. They might employ one or two PhD holders but they're likely to have studied post-structural feminism and can't get a job anywhere else.

p1akuw47h5r3it

I find it very disheartening reading comments by Eliot Rosewater, donegalfella and a few others and see how little faith they have in todays youth.

They just seem to have no faith in Irish people in general. The youth are all a bunch of wasters trying to mitch as much as possible and the elders are trying to make as much money as possible to the detriment of everyone else.

jmayo

SkepticOne wrote: »

Below I've extracted the points required for different courses from different colleges. What we see is that at the top end, predictably, professional services (Law, Medicine etc.) dominate. Technical subjects (e.g. Electronic Engineering in UCD) tend to be fairly low on the list.

UCD -Bottom
DN050 Computer Science - Arts 300 350
DN073 Electronic Engineering or Electrical Engineering 330 405

UCD - Top
DN060 Law with History 500 510
DN065 Law with Politics 500 520
DN067 Law with Economics 500 520
DN029 Law with French Law (BCL) 505 520
DN066 Law with Philosophy 505 515
DN004 Radiography 515* 530
DN006 Physiotherapy 525 535
DN020 Actuarial and Financial Studies 530 550
DN028 BCL Mâitrise 550 580
DN005 Veterinary Medicine (Undergraduate Entry) 555 575
DN002 Medicine (Undergraduate Entry) #719 #72

UCC - Bottom
CK401 Computer Science 300 350
CK406 Chemical Sciences 330 435
CK505 Food Science 335 375
CK402 Biological and Chemical Sciences 350 445
CK605 Electrical and Electronic Engineering 355 470

UCC - Top
CK302 Law and French 510 535
CK704 Occupational Therapy 510 525
CK305 Law (Clinical) 515* 525
CK407 Mathematical Sciences 515 550
CK603 Energy Engineering 520 550
CK304 Law and Irish 525* 545
CK306 Law (International) 540 550
CK703 Pharmacy 545 565
CK702 Dentistry 575* 580
CK701 Medicine - (Undergraduate Entry) #715 #728

NUI Galway - Bottom
GY306 Computing Studies/Mathematical Science 315 395[/COLOR]
GY350 Information Technology 315 365
GY301 Science 325 395
GY304 Biotechnology 330 390
GY318 Biopharmaceutical Chemistry 330 400

NUI Galway - Top
GY112 Arts with Film Studies 450 485
GY207 Commerce (Accounting) 455 485
GY115 Arts with Theatre and Performance 460 475
GY202 Commerce (International) with French 465 490
GY303 Biomedical Science 465 500
GY111 Arts with Creative Writing 470 505
GY502 Occupational Therapy 505* 525
GY503 Speech and Language Therapy 505 520
GY104 Arts (Psychology) 525* 535
GY501 Medicine (five year/six year course) #712* #717

Those lists make for very depressing reading.

Why the f*** are all the law courses so high ?
There seems to be every type of law course bar "Law and how to rip off your clients" ala by michael lyng.

Maybe we will be a smart legal society ?

"Art with Film Studies" ???
"Arts with Creative Writing" ???

Medecine, Veterinary, Dentistry have always been high points due to what it can lead to down the road.
At least they are doing something in medecine to not alone have very bright individuals entering, but also individuals that may have the other human qualities necessary to make a good doctor.

I know from family that Occupational Therapy is a tough grind of a job, a very necessary one for lots of recovering people.
The joke though is we don't employ these people our colleges are producing since our health service decides it is more important to have lots of admin staff.

ei.sdraob

jmayo wrote: »

Those lists make for very depressing reading.

tell me about it, i did one of those highlighted courses

southsiderosie

J.S. Pill wrote: »

Batt O Keefe was on the news just there saying that the creation of 300 call centre jobs in Cork was a good example of the Knowledge economy in action (or something to that effect).

Curious - Most of the jobs being created are going to be essentially unskilled and will pay just above the minimum wage. They might employ one or two PhD holders but they're likely to have studied post-structural feminism and can't get a job anywhere else.

This speaks to my earlier point: in so-called "knowledge economies" there is a small group of highly skilled people who get paid a lot of money, and a huge pool of poorly paid service workers with little to no job security. It's just a new form of labor market dualism, dressed up in fancy buzzwords that politicians like. Since not everyone is going to be an investment banker or programmer for Google, and most people can't support a family on call center or retail wages, the big question then is, what kind of work is there for people who are in the middle, especially since today manufacturing is basically dead in most industrialized countries?

From what I've seen, shifts in the labor markets of Europe and the US suggest that increasingly these people are filling jobs in the public sector, which then begins to grow exponentially. In a certain way it makes sense: work in the PS provides a baseline level of economic security the way large, unionized companies like GM and Ford did in the 50s and 60s. The flip side is, an increasing number of governments are going the way of GM, without the option of declaring bankruptcy.

So maybe then, the trade-off for having a so-called "knowledge economy" at the top end of the labor market is that you have a significant "middle bureaucracy", and a huge "service slush pool" of labor at the bottom. If this really is the case, then at least governments and policymakers need to be honest about it, because the path to full employment does not run through call centers.

Eliot Rosewater

DanDan6592 wrote: »

I find it very disheartening reading comments by Eliot Rosewater, donegalfella and a few others and see how little faith they have in todays youth.

In fairness I am a member of "todays youth" and the reason I have so little faith in them is because of talking with them, especially about the recent conferring fees debacle. All I see is a focus on short term gain and getting the Government to do everything for them. This attitude conflicts with my own belief that we should primarily help ourselves.

SkepticOne

jmayo wrote: »

Medecine, Veterinary, Dentistry have always been high points due to what it can lead to down the road.
At least they are doing something in medecine to not alone have very bright individuals entering, but also individuals that may have the other human qualities necessary to make a good doctor.

It is good that medicine attracts high points but many also feel that once you go beyond a certain level you don't necessarily get better doctors. This is why interviews have been introduced in recent years rather than purely relying on points.

What I wanted to highlight was not so much that medicine, law, etc were high points subjects but that there was a lack of what we might call "knowledge economy" subjects intermingled among them.

If we really had a knowledge economy would for example pharmaceutical chemistry be at the very bottom of the UCG list? Chemical and pharmaceutical products make up a large proportion of our exports so you naturally would expect those subjects to be popular.

Of course the reality is that chemical and pharmaceutical knowledge is valued, just not in Ireland. It is valued in the US and elsewhere where the products are actually designed. For the most part they are merely packaged in Ireland. Leaving cert students realise this and so steer clear of these subject but our politicians do not (or pretend not realise it).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In fairness I am a member of "todays youth" and the reason I have so little faith in them is because of talking with them, especially about the recent conferring fees debacle. All I see is a focus on shot term gain, and getting the Government to do everything for them. This attitude disagrees with my own belief that we should help ourselves.

ye i knew you were u are, I read your other posts:)

I'm like you in that I believe that you have to help yourself. In speaking to other students in my Uni i don't get that sense that they believe the gov. should do everything for them at all.

A few people have claimed that we don't pay fees but we do. We pay 1500 euro at the start of the year. I don't mind having to do this because it's better than having to pay 4000, 5000 etc. like they do in the USA and UK. I read (somewhere, can't remember were) that the goverment is trying to increase the "registration fee" to 2000euro. Again I wouldn't be wholly against this. However I also don't see how trying to prevent these increases or full fees being introduced isn't trying to help yourself...are you not preventing yourself from having future debt?

Btw, I don't want to turn this thread into a big discussion about fees as i am sick of them!!!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

p1akuw47h5r3it

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Thanks for the link I will watch it eventually. I would agree with you in that many people are just looking for someone to blame. However not everyone under 30 is like that. That was my point, i didn't really make that clear sorry.

Tbh I don't really know what the political aims of the PD's were. From reading your posts on this and other threads, however, I would agree with you on most things; for example PS wages being to big and needing to e cut. I just feel that you seem to have no faith in people, like u seem to believe that we will never recover from this recession.

And apologies for double posting.

MaceFace

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Knowledge Economy = Myth
There is almost no R&D in Ireland .
As for the research carried on in Irish Universities,it is pathetic and shameful by International standards.

Well, I am firmly part of the knowledge economy, and I can assure you that it is alive and well and vibrant.
There is also plenty of R&D in Ireland within the IT sector.
To say different is just plain wrong. Many of my colleagues who have been let go over the last few years have very quickly got jobs in other R&D companies.
I don't know anyone who struggled for long to get a job (>3 months).

As for the Irish Universities. Things are getting a lot better, and it is true that we are very far behind the US in terms of university startups, but it certainly is happening. We need to be much better and we need the Government to buy into the Innovation Taskforce findings and act on them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RichardAnd

I seen that front line, nothing but whining from one end of the show to the other. The attitude of young people in this country absolutely stinks. Most, though not all, live in a fairy tale work whilst in college and are now coming out to find that the shining career they were promised was a figment of some professors cocooned mind.

When I started in software engineering back in the not so distant past (I'm only 23), I was told that I was 100% getting a job and a 30k+ salary. This was in the boom and I knew is was BS. The sad thing is that the same professors are still telling it to new students in the same course.

I have a friend who did Civil Engineering and who is now on the dole. He would be the same as the front liners in that he feels FF cheated him out of the career he is "entitled" to after 4 year of, in his case, partying and sex.

There are thousands of graduates like this in Ireland. They sit around feeling cheated because they believed all that celtic tiger rigmaroo about guarantied employment, big houses and big salaries and won't accept that the whole thing was a castle built on sand. Yet my same friend turned down a min wage job as he "didn't do 4 years in college to work in Tesco".

Knowlege economy, I think not.

southsiderosie

RichardAnd wrote: »

When I started in software engineering back in the not so distant past (I'm only 23), I was told that I was 100% getting a job and a 30k+ salary. This was in the boom and I knew is was BS. The sad thing is that the same professors are still telling it to new students in the same course...Knowlege economy, I think not.

I find it curious that software engineers are being told they would "get" a job, rather than create jobs. The professors don't push people to develop start-ups? Interesting.

ei.sdraob

RichardAnd wrote: »

I seen that front line, nothing but whining from one end of the show to the other. The attitude of young people in this country absolutely stinks. Most, though not all, live in a fairy tale work whilst in college and are now coming out to find that the shining career they were promised was a figment of some professors cocooned mind.

When I started in software engineering back in the not so distant past (I'm only 23), I was told that I was 100% getting a job and a 30k+ salary. This was in the boom and I knew is was BS. The sad thing is that the same professors are still telling it to new students in the same course.

I have a friend who did Civil Engineering and who is now on the dole. He would be the same as the front liners in that he feels FF cheated him out of the career he is "entitled" to after 4 year of, in his case, partying and sex.

There are thousands of graduates like this in Ireland. They sit around feeling cheated because they believed all that celtic tiger rigmaroo about guarantied employment, big houses and big salaries and won't accept that the whole thing was a castle built on sand. Yet my same friend turned down a min wage job as he "didn't do 4 years in college to work in Tesco".

Knowlege economy, I think not.

You will do fine young jedi
you can see thru the bull**** (RTE news was hilarious last night with them callcenter jobs being titled "model smart economy" jobs)


anyways see new updated sig

Byron85

Another thing is that people get comfortable within the 3rd level education system here. It's higher education kindergarten. The thought of doing their undergrad degree or their postgrad in another country doesn't come into their minds at all. I wonder if the statistics from before fees were eliminated, say from 1985 until 1995, would show that more Irish people went abroad for their third level education compared to nowadays. As soon as I get the chance i'm leaving the country for my postgrad, even though it's a while away yet, and at the very least going to England.

ei.sdraob

southsiderosie wrote: »

I find it curious that software engineers are being told they would "get" a job, rather than create jobs. The professors don't push people to develop start-ups? Interesting.

They do "encourage" startups in some places, now in all fairness

I can directly credit 2 of my undergrad proffessors who did try to stir up enterpreneurship in the students (unfortunately only 2 of the ~30 graduates went on to start a business few years later...) for providing some motivation

And my current line of work is partly due to an interest i picked at undergrad level (that none of the others did, their loss, my gain)

My postgrad professor/supervisor also always loved discussing any potential ideas and giving great feedback, could have been due in part to having to work with EI

RichardAnd

southsiderosie wrote: »

I find it curious that software engineers are being told they would "get" a job, rather than create jobs. The professors don't push people to develop start-ups? Interesting.

to be fair to the professors, the chance of getting a job out of software is pretty high. But yeah, start-ups were something we heard little about but in my case, I'm happier working for someone else.

thebaldsoprano

RichardAnd wrote: »

Yet my same friend turned down a min wage job as he "didn't do 4 years in college to work in Tesco".

That is madness. I wonder how he'll feel competing with an enterprising immigrant using that job to fund their degree.

With that attitude, he'll still be on the dole in four years time complaining about "them foreigners taking our women and our jobs".

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MaceFace

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Indeed, and asking anyone who has thought about setting up a company themselves, the reasons they don't are pretty clear:

1. Bankruptcy laws in Ireland are too oppressive.
2. If your startup goes bellyup, your chances of drawing the dole are pretty much zero.

No safety net for people to "give it a go".

ei.sdraob

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

why would anyone want to start a business here especially in IT/Software?

considering that you can take your skills elsewhere and all you will face for next few years of increased taxes year on year coupled with reduced services, bad infrastructure and being kicked up the balls for being responsible

no no people should milk the system for "entitlements" untill it collapses under own weight, why be a programmer when you can be dole artist or a protected cog in the state beuracracy

</sarcasm>

MaceFace wrote: »

Indeed, and asking anyone who has thought about setting up a company themselves, the reasons they don't are pretty clear:

1. Bankruptcy laws in Ireland are too oppressive.
2. If your startup goes bellyup, your chances of drawing the dole are pretty much zero.

No safety net for people to "give it a go".

1. not for limited companies

2. unfortunately true

/

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

southsiderosie

ei.sdraob wrote: »

They do "encourage" startups in some places, now in all fairness

I can directly credit 2 of my undergrad proffessors who did try to stir up enterpreneurship in the students (unfortunately only 2 of the ~30 graduates went on to start a business few years later...) for providing some motivation

And my current line of work is partly due to an interest i picked at undergrad level (that none of the others did, their loss, my gain)

My postgrad professor/supervisor also always loved discussing any potential ideas and giving great feedback, could have been due in part to having to work with EI

Ok - that's reassuring.

Indeed, and asking anyone who has thought about setting up a company themselves, the reasons they don't are pretty clear:

1. Bankruptcy laws in Ireland are too oppressive.
2. If your startup goes bellyup, your chances of drawing the dole are pretty much zero.

No safety net for people to "give it a go".

+1000

Eliot Rosewater

DanDan6592 wrote: »

In speaking to other students in my Uni i don't get that sense that they believe the gov. should do everything for them at all.

I'm mainly basing this opinion on the student attitude towards the UCC conferring fee (and University fees in general). It's not so much the desire for free fee's that has me worried, but rather the assumptions that underlie that desire.

Over on the UCC forum one of the posters said that he couldn't even see the basis for my argument. Another person said that the introduction of a "graduate tax" to recoup some of the costs of our university education would amount to "punishing people for going to college." The recurring theme of all these comments is a set-in-stone assumption that students are entitled to free education, and that any attempt to have them contribute towards the cost of what they're receiving is "profiteering".

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

As soon as I get the chance i'm leaving the country for my postgrad, even though it's a while away yet, and at the very least going to England.

Me too.

At the risk of sounding dramatic, the debate over on the UCC forum was a bit of a "revelation" for me. The main trend was, in my opinion, the prioritizing of ones short term monetary gain over the long term future of the University and one's degree.

I think the current system, and by extension the majority of students protecting it, holds back people who are genuinely interested in getting the best degree possible, because it continues the long-standing funding problems which are a constant restraint on the University.

ei.sdraob

everyone remember this guy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Collison

won young scientist award
went to Enterprise Ireland with idea for fundung, was told to feck off
went to US
made millions


theres your knowledge economy, leaving for other shores

ei.sdraob

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I'm mainly basing this opinion on the student attitude towards the UCC conferring fee (and University fees in general). It's not so much the desire for free fee's that has me worried, but rather the assumptions that underlie that desire.

Over on the UCC forum one of the posters said that he couldn't even see the basis for my argument. Another person said that the introduction of a "graduate tax" to recoup some of the costs of our university education would amount to "punishing people for going to college." The recurring theme of all these comments is a set-in-stone assumption that students are entitled to free education, and that any attempt to have them contribute towards the cost of what they're receiving is "profiteering".



Me too.

At the risk of sounding dramatic, the debate over on the UCC forum was a bit of a "revelation" for me. The main trend was, in my opinion, the prioritizing of ones short term monetary gain over the long term future of the University and one's degree.

I think the current system, and by extension the majority of students protecting it, holds back people who are genuinely interested in getting the best degree possible, because it continues the long-standing funding problems which are a constant restraint on the University.

dont leave Eliot (if possible)

play and milk the system, if you cant beat them join them sort of speak

get your free education, milk for any grants etc

this rustbucket is going down fast, dont let it drag you down with it

Brussels Sprout

SkepticOne wrote: »

UCC - Top
CK302 Law and French 510 535
CK704 Occupational Therapy 510 525
CK305 Law (Clinical) 515* 525
CK407 Mathematical Sciences 515 550
CK603 Energy Engineering 520 550
CK304 Law and Irish 525* 545
CK306 Law (International) 540 550
CK703 Pharmacy 545 565
CK702 Dentistry 575* 580
CK701 Medicine - (Undergraduate Entry) #715 #728

The others make sense but this one sticks out as being an unusual choice-is there some angle I'm missing here-are people using it as a stepping stone to acturial finance or investment banking or something like that?

Amhran Nua

southsiderosie wrote: »

the big question then is, what kind of work is there for people who are in the middle, especially since today manufacturing is basically dead in most industrialized countries?

Not to take away from your point, which is good, but manufacturing is far from dead in industrialised countries. Germany was only overtaken by China as the world number one exporter this year, and not by much. We can still compete, just not on the likes of shoes and clothes.

Valmont

Considering the rabid opposition of most students to the reintroduction of fees and the reticence of any political party to challenge this, I figure I will be better off acquiring my postgraduate qualifications in the UK. At the rate this country is going, there is not going to be very much money going around to pay for research grants and lecturing positions; both of which I will be looking for in the next few years. I may be wrong, but I'm not willing to gamble on it. I've already been accepted for a masters in the UK and I feel it's the only way I can adequately express my disdain for the direction Ireland is going in and to serve my own interests at the same time. Let the brain drain begin!

Eliot Rosewater

ei.sdraob wrote: »

dont leave Eliot (if possible)

The resistance of students to pay fees doesn't leave our universities in a strong position. I'd prefer to move abroad where things are a little brighter. At the risk of sounding cocky or self-righteous, I think this "culture of entitlement" is holding me back.

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The others make sense but this one sticks out as being an unusual choice-is theare people using it as a stepping stone to acturial finance or investment banking or something like that?

Yes. About 40 people go into Maths Science I'm sure; the majority proceed into the financial maths stream and the majority of the remaining do physics. In my brothers year only about 8 people took the maths stream. From talking to people within my own class, the only reason most people are doing maths is to eventually do financial maths.