IT vs. university

EDmon

Hi,

I'm just wondering if there's a big difference in studying courses in ITs (Information Technology) vs. those in universities in Ireland.
The points in general for the same course are higher in eg: UCD and TCD vs. DIT, why is this ?

And would someone with e.g. a business degree who studied in eg: UCD have a greater chance of obtaining a job than someone who obtained the degree in e.g: DIT ?

I'd appreciate some help as I would take your views into account when filling out my cao.

Thanks.

Dannyg90

it depends on what course you're doing really, like UCD had the best business course in the country but WIT's one is not bad either. If everything else between you and someone else going for the job was the same the person who went to UCD would get the job because the course is seen as better.
There was a statistic out recently that showed why universities had higher points and why their courses were better, the average lecturer in a university(something like 70%) has a PHD while most lecturers at IT's only have masters so university lecturers are more qualified

IrishKnight

Just as an aside. IT in this case is not Information Technology but Institute of Technology.

As for difference, generally ITs are see to be more vocational rather than academic. Also, a degree from a university may be seen more favourable than one from an IT.

Ultimately, it depends on what you want to do. If you want to study something that only is taught in an IT, good and well. But if I was you, if you are going for something like business, science, etc, go for a university or DIT. DIT being the IT closest to a university than any other.

HavingCrack

Dannyg90 wrote: »

it depends on what course you're doing really, like UCD had the best business course in the country but WIT's one is not bad either.

I'd argue that BESS in Trinity or Business and Management would both be better than Commerce in UCD to be honest.

Dannyg90 wrote: »

If everything else between you and someone else going for the job was the same the person who went to UCD would get the job because the course is seen as better.

Not true, if everything else is similar it will usually come down to how the candidate preformed at the interview.

Dannyg90 wrote: »

most lecturers at IT's only have masters so university lecturers are more qualified

Maybe in the 80's and early 90's but the majority of lecturers in IT's have PhD's these days.

[Jackass]

Universities are, obviously, considered better than IT's. Why? It could all be bullsh*t, like status of the university etc., i'm not saying the education is definitely better, but the university degree is definitely more valuable...

longhalloween

From an employers point of view, I suppose a University degree is more appealing. But from a student point of view, I prefer studying in an IT as opposed to a university.

From my own experience, lecturers in UCD don't really have much time for undergrads and often seem detached from students outside of the lecture halls. They're more interested in postgrad work or their own personal work and they'll usually point you in the direction of the library if you have a problem.

IT lecturers seem to be more hands on and approachable and actually eager to help you learn. There's a much friendlier atmosphere but I suppose at the end of the day it depends on who you get.

Wompa1

Uni Degree is seen as being better but in my opinion an IT course gives you more practical experience and makes you better prepared for an industry job. In a University the class numbers are too big for people to get enough practical experience.

AdamD

HavingCrack wrote: »

I'd argue that BESS in Trinity or Business and Management would both be better than Commerce in UCD to be honest.


Not true, if everything else is similar it will usually come down to how the candidate preformed at the interview.



Maybe in the 80's and early 90's but the majority of lecturers in IT's have PhD's these days.

Commerce in UCD has a better reputation than Business and Management in DIT.

Dannyg90

HavingCrack wrote: »

I'd argue that BESS in Trinity or Business and Management would both be better than Commerce in UCD to be honest.


Not true, if everything else is similar it will usually come down to how the candidate preformed at the interview.



Maybe in the 80's and early 90's but the majority of lecturers in IT's have PhD's these days.

(1)Quinn is the highest ranked business school in the country for undergraduates, Smurfitt being top for postgrads
''The UCD School of Business is ranked as Ireland’s No. 1 business school and has a Top 20 international ranking.[citation needed]
The UCD School of Business is the only business school in Ireland, and one of a small elite worldwide, to hold accreditation from the American College of Business, AACSB(International), as well as the top European accreditations, EQUIS and AMBA.'' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCD_Quinn_School_of_Business

(2) as i said if everything about you and the other people being interviewed is the same, that takes into account how well you interview. Also its obvious that Universities are more respected in general

(3)and what i meant was that most university lecturers have Phd's and get paid more as Universities pay extra for the best lecturers http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0628/1224299679850.html

ironclaw

In all job scenarios, your degree gets you your first job, but after that its purely experience. People make the mistake of thinking that having a high flying degree, an excellent masters and a pHD that they are instantly employable. Its equally possibly to be over qualified.

I've often sat with people who have a basic degree but are far more employable, purely based on extra courses they have done and job experience. Your education isn't everything, as you have to suit the job too.

On topic however, I believe IT and University degree's are case equal. At least in Ireland. If you plan on going abroad, I'd lean towards a University. Purely for the international weight and ties.

Psychobiker

ironclaw wrote: »

In all job scenarios, your degree gets you your first job, but after that its purely experience. People make the mistake of thinking that having a high flying degree, an excellent masters and a pHD that they are instantly employable. Its equally possibly to be over qualified.

I've often sat with people who have a basic degree but are far more employable, purely based on extra courses they have done and job experience. Your education isn't everything, as you have to suit the job too.

On topic however, I believe IT and University degree's are case equal. At least in Ireland. If you plan on going abroad, I'd lean towards a University. Purely for the international weight and ties.

Even that (International) doesn't matter sometimes. When I got my first job here (Montréal), a B.Eng is a B.Eng. They seemed more interested in my previous position and experience than my grades and school. Honestly, one thing I've seen from 'outside the box' is that in Ireland, some employers are hugely snobbish.

And btw, my technician back in Ireland was from a Uni. Just saying...

[Jackass]

I agree it's 90% snobbery. I don't know specifics of outside Ireland, but you would imagine that a university, in theory (although not necessarily true), by default of being accredited as a university, would have greater resources and better academic staff, as it could be assumed places like DIT have failed to meet the requirements for university accreditation in the past attempts to obtain it.

But again, it's hugely relative, I've had some piss poor lecturers in UCD and I'd say the ratio of academic staff to students is one of the worst in the country at the moment, given the financial constraints the college is under and the quality of staff that have left also.

But as has been mentioned, a degree is a degree and once you're in your relevant field, it becomes all about your experience and track record. I would argue however that not having a degree limits your career potential hugely in terms of getting in the door in a decent position with potential for high earning.

Psychobiker

True - Ireland is still largely monocultural. In places with a more diverse labour force, qualified immigrants come from all over the place with their qualifications. I know that I'll need to complete some credits (in Ireland there is no 'stage' = internship, so I miss some there) before being granted admission to the Order of Engineers here, but it was worth getting out 'before the rush'. And in universities here, you can choose your coursework - if I'd stayed for the Honours degree in GMIT or NUI...way too late. No hope for holiday visas and the skilled worker immigration programs have been put on hold for Canada entirely since June.

Employers don't care a hoot, that I can say resoundingly. Even the Order - I posit that when I come to do my official application to the OIQ (l'Ordre des Ingénieurs du Québec), they'll factor in my work experience versus credits.

Fad

Depends really on the course you're doing.

IT/Comp Sci courses in IT are often a lot more practical than similar courses in Universities are copping on and trying to make their courses a bit more job orientated that pointlessly abstract theory!

Psychobiker

Fad wrote: »

Depends really on the course you're doing.

IT/Comp Sci courses in IT are often a lot more practical than similar courses in Universities are copping on and trying to make their courses a bit more job orientated that pointlessly abstract theory!

DING DING DING! Sound the bell! We have a winner!

Gae

HavingCrack wrote: »

Not true, if everything else is similar it will usually come down to how the candidate preformed at the interview.

But *all* other things being equal (i.e. interview performance, experience, skills, references etc.) an employer would probably choose the candidate with a University degree.

Procrastastudy

Gae wrote: »

But *all* other things being equal (i.e. interview performance, experience, skills, references etc.) an employer would probably choose the candidate with a University degree.

It depends on the employer and what they are looking for. Its also a very, very unusual day that two candidates turn up that are the same. Its a very bad attitude to get into that I went to XYZ so therefore I'm grand for a job. There are very motivated people at ITs and Private colleges getting work experience and relevant extracurricular experience that would be held in much higher regard then a 2.1 at undergrad.

You also have to bear in mind where the likes of UCD and TCD rank in terms of Universities across the British Isles if you do find one of the few employers that particularly care where the degree was from.

Lastly - if you do have a 'very sensitive to qualification' employer they are much more likely to be looking for a Masters or PhD - so your undergrad is pretty moot. To be fair it DOES matter where postgraduate qualifications come from but you'd be surprised who has the edge in certain subjects.

PS - As for lecturers having PhDs so are more qualified... ever heard the expression those who can't, teach?

Psychobiker

Procrastastudy wrote: »

It depends on the employer and what they are looking for. Its also a very, very unusual day that two candidates turn up that are the same. Its a very bad attitude to get into that I went to XYZ so therefore I'm grand for a job. There are very motivated people at ITs and Private colleges getting work experience and relevant extracurricular experience that would be held in much higher regard then a 2.1 at undergrad.

You also have to bear in mind where the likes of UCD and TCD rank in terms of Universities across the British Isles if you do find one of the few employers that particularly care where the degree was from.

Lastly - if you do have a 'very sensitive to qualification' employer they are much more likely to be looking for a Masters or PhD - so your undergrad is pretty moot. To be fair it DOES matter where postgraduate qualifications come from but you'd be surprised who has the edge in certain subjects.

PS - As for lecturers having PhDs so are more qualified... ever heard the expression those who can't, teach?

GMIT took only lecturers with industry experience (Electronics Eng., anyway)

HavingCrack

Edit: Just realised my original post was back in February :O

Gae wrote: »

But *all* other things being equal (i.e. interview performance, experience, skills, references etc.) an employer would probably choose the candidate with a University degree.

I've never heard of all those things being equal though, it would be so unusual as to be almost non existent. The interview or experience of one person will always be better than the other. In fact I'd have very serious reservations about working for an employer that put what university you attended above work experience or the interview.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

Lastly - if you do have a 'very sensitive to qualification' employer they are much more likely to be looking for a Masters or PhD - so your undergrad is pretty moot. To be fair it DOES matter where postgraduate qualifications come from but you'd be surprised who has the edge in certain subjects.

I think the only people who would be suprised as to has the edge in the certain subjects are those who don't work in the field. In my particular research area for example Oxford University would be very much a middle ranking university in terms of research output with universities like Bristol and Exeter (both excellent universities in general) far out preforming it.

Procrastastudy wrote: »

PS - As for lecturers having PhDs so are more qualified... ever heard the expression those who can't, teach?

I think that's a bit simplistic an expression. It really depends on the field again. I don't like using personal anecdotes that much but I will again. In the discipline I'm in being able to research is very important. In fact research output is pretty much everything in this area whether you're working in academia or for private industry (where nearly everyone has a PhD in my field). If I wasn't able to prove my research ability (ie a PhD) I wouldn't be getting very far.

In the case of something like Computer Science or Engineering though I definately agree real world experience is vital for any lecturer and is more important than a PhD in most cases.

[Jackass]

Procrastastudy wrote: »

PS - As for lecturers having PhDs so are more qualified... ever heard the expression those who can't, teach?

Well, I can only comment on the Economics faculty of UCD, but I was lectured by Morgan Kelly at UCD, arguably the finest economic mind in the country and if you do the research, probably the only major economist in the country to call the scale of the crash in Ireland long before it happened and at a time when talking down the boom was tantamount to treason.

Other UCD lecturers have included Dr. Gareth Fitzgerald, two time Taoiseach and Dr Constantin Gurdgiev (now at Trinity), a massively successful published financial expert and one of the guru's of economic journalistic affairs in Ireland (notably contributing regularly on Vincent Browne) amongst many other highly successful consultant based and multiply published academics.

Maybe an Economics secondary school teacher is someone who teaches "because they can't", but at university level, usually the people who lecture are there "because they can".

These only refer to the Economics staff of UCD, but I'm sure the situation is the same is other faculties of the universities as well.

The Big Red Button

I studied first year of Commerce in NUI Galway, but transferred to Sligo IT to complete a degree in Business Studies.

There was no comparison in the learning experience between the two places - Sligo IT was far better. Small class sizes, a far greater number of hours in college per week, four-year course as opposed to three, incorporating a five-month work placement (no work placement in NUIG.) Excellent lecturers, all of whom knew each and every one of their students, and took interest in their individual learning and development. Loads of individual and group projects, real hands-on practical experience.

It felt like Commerce in NUIG was just a continuation from Leaving Cert. Whereas studying in Sligo IT actually prepared me for the real world of work.

After finishing my course, I had no trouble getting interviews and offers from the Big Four accountancy firms, as well as other medium/small firms (I went with one of the Big Four in the end.)

In my experience, any snobbery that existed in the past is gone now. Employers recognise the fact that IT students often tend to get better practical experience, and that the coursework is very similar. IT students often get better learning resources and are better prepared for exams than university students, as a result - but that's certainly not a bad thing!!

OP don't worry about points - go with the course that you want to do. You could always approach the college and ask to speak to current students/lecturers, this might help you with your decision.

Best of luck!

Procrastastudy

[Jackass] wrote: »

Well, I can only comment on the Economics faculty of UCD, but I was lectured by Morgan Kelly at UCD, arguably the finest economic mind in the country and if you do the research, probably the only major economist in the country to call the scale of the crash in Ireland long before it happened and at a time when talking down the boom was tantamount to treason.

Other UCD lecturers have included Dr. Gareth Fitzgerald, two time Taoiseach and Dr Constantin Gurdgiev (now at Trinity), a massively successful published financial expert and one of the guru's of economic journalistic affairs in Ireland (notably contributing regularly on Vincent Browne) amongst many other highly successful consultant based and multiply published academics.

Maybe an Economics secondary school teacher is someone who teaches "because they can't", but at university level, usually the people who lecture are there "because they can".

These only refer to the Economics staff of UCD, but I'm sure the situation is the same is other faculties of the universities as well.

I know something of some of the lecturers in UCD - granted not in the Economics department. Not all of them are as distinguished as the above. Also you should realise that my comment was meant to be a flippant one. All that said (and your admonishment rightly accepted) we should return to the matter at hand - does being lecturer by the world's foremost expert make you more employable than another undergraduate lectured by someone else?

POSSY

Procrastastudy wrote: »

I know something of some of the lecturers in UCD - granted not in the Economics department. Not all of them are as distinguished as the above. Also you should realise that my comment was meant to be a flippant one. All that said (and your admonishment rightly accepted) we should return to the matter at hand - does being lecturer by the world's foremost expert make you more employable than another undergraduate lectured by someone else?

Before you start being critical of lecturers you should check their academic publications and not the national newspapers/TV whoring of the likes of Constantin Gurdgiev. Journals (and journal quality) publications give an insight into the standard and quality of research being undertaken by a university. In terms of quality output in the economics department, the true expert would be Karl Whelan for example. It should be noted that the primary focus of a university is not to educate undergraduate students but rather to carry out research. A simple argument for this view is the fact that academic appointments/promotions are based on publications, not teaching.

The difference between universities and ITs is the quality of research and academics. In all reality there is no comparison. From having seen exam papers for ITs and universities, it is also clear that examinations are a little more rigorous in universities.

Wompa1

POSSY wrote: »

The difference between universities and ITs is the quality of research and academics. In all reality there is no comparison. From having seen exam papers for ITs and universities, it is also clear that examinations are a little more rigorous in universities.

A lot of University lecturers seem to give 'tips' before their exams. And by tips I mean the topics of each question that's coming up. And also Uni's offer compensation if you fail an exam....

I think the correct answer is that Irish 3rd level is **** crap overall

POSSY

Wompa1 wrote: »

A lot of University lecturers seem to give 'tips' before their exams. And by tips I mean the topics of each question that's coming up. And also Uni's offer compensation if you fail an exam....

I think the correct answer is that Irish 3rd level is **** crap overall

I would agree Irish 3rd level is pretty ****e, but that's another discussion entirely I think. Beyond 3rd level (and most Masters), there are some good things happening within the universities, mainly on the ERC/SFI funded research programs. I think this is the integral function of universities that most undergraduate students just don't see/realize.

Wompa1

POSSY wrote: »

I would agree Irish 3rd level is pretty ****e, but that's another discussion entirely I think. Beyond 3rd level (and most Masters), there are some good things happening within the universities, mainly on the ERC/SFI funded research programs. I think this is the integral function of universities that most undergraduate students just don't see/realize.

I'm sure there's some great research being done. I would bet me bollocks there's also a lot of sh!t research being funded too but then I'm a cynic

POSSY

Wompa1 wrote: »

I'm sure there's some great research being done. I would bet me bollocks there's also a lot of sh!t research being funded too but then I'm a cynic

Cough liberal arts cough

Procrastastudy

POSSY wrote: »

Before you start being critical of lecturers you should check their academic publications and not the national newspapers/TV whoring of the likes of Constantin Gurdgiev. Journals (and journal quality) publications give an insight into the standard and quality of research being undertaken by a university. In terms of quality output in the economics department, the true expert would be Karl Whelan for example. It should be noted that the primary focus of a university is not to educate undergraduate students but rather to carry out research. A simple argument for this view is the fact that academic appointments/promotions are based on publications, not teaching.

The difference between universities and ITs is the quality of research and academics. In all reality there is no comparison. From having seen exam papers for ITs and universities, it is also clear that examinations are a little more rigorous in universities.

My information on lecturers comes internally. As for exams I've seen the Nottingham Trent Exams sat by GCD and the papers sat by DCU in first year law - the evidence from that does not bear out what you are saying. I'm willing to concede that neither of us have seen a representative sample of papers. I'm also aware of the weaknesses in a particular university's examination process as opposed to the examination itself - I won't name it but ask yourself if you're permitted to come in late and be given extra time and if blatant cheating goes unmoderated in your exams.

To be fair to your point on research; that is the difference between a university and an IT or private college and it has very little impact on the employability of someone with a bog standard 2.1 undergrad degree looking for a job.

POSSY

Procrastastudy wrote: »

My information on lecturers comes internally. As for exams I've seen the Nottingham Trent Exams sat by GCD and the papers sat by DCU in first year law - the evidence from that does not bear out what you are saying. I'm willing to concede that neither of us have seen a representative sample of papers. I'm also aware of the weaknesses in a particular university's examination process as opposed to the examination itself - I won't name it but ask yourself if you're permitted to come in late and be given extra time and if blatant cheating goes unmoderated in your exams.

To be fair to your point on research; that is the difference between a university and an IT or private college and it has very little impact on the employability of someone with a bog standard 2.1 undergrad degree looking for a job.

With respect to your first point on the exams, my opinion was formed on looking at first year economics exams given by universities vs those of Sligo IT and GMIT, but as you point out they could be isolated instances.

The research point will have some bearing, perhaps not universally across university courses, but with respect to some courses. For example, there is a reason Paddy Power set up in such close proximity to UCD and why it is beginning to engage on industry/academic research with UCD. From what I've been told, by both people in PP and UCD, they are looking forward to a future of having a good inflow of graduates with a mid level knowledge of math going to PP.


Having lecturers who carry out industry focused research or lecturers who are known within industry (and known for the right reasons) will help some students in the employment process, I will concede that this is possibly more prevalent at Masters level.

Procrastastudy

POSSY wrote: »

Having lecturers who carry out industry focused research or lecturers who are known within industry (and known for the right reasons) will help some students in the employment process, I will concede that this is possibly more prevalent at Masters level.

I agree whole heartedly with the industry experience/reputation - I suppose the salient point is that this isn't limited to Universities in my opinion.

I suppose I should point out a flaw in my own argument re exams in that private colleges would have their exams set by the accrediting university, which I suppose could mean that they are sitting 'a university' level exam. The only caveat I would have on that is DIT having a better reputation for Law then DCU.