The Education System
-
<p>Being out of the country for the 80's plus a bit either side one of the things that I noticed immediately upon my return was the negativity associated with trades and vocational training in general which is just fucking stupid and ignores reality.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I don't know if it is related but there was also a lot of BS about kids not being told they're failures (which is laudable) but by completely fucking up the message.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Giving a kid an A for effort because they tried is OK when they're younger but does them no favours as they approach maturity and have to enter the workforce, but that seems to have become the norm along with degrees in freakin everything.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>When I went through school (back when dinosaurs roamed the Queen St valley) 50% of students <b>​had </b>to fail School Cert. Only 10% were expected to qualify to enter university. Elitist sure, but what it meant was there was no shame in not getting SC (don't know the modern equivalent or even if there is one) because half the population were in the same boat.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It also meant there was no denigration of someone taking on a trade and a much more effective apprenticeship programme. Kids would still work hard (obviously not all but in the main) in their 5th form year because even if they knew they wouldn't get the overall pass a good result in (e.g.) woodwork would get them a chippie apprenticeship.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Sure society has changed dramatically, but I see a lot of applicants who have completed their 7th form because that's the new minimum - and as an employer it means jack shit. So they all go on to complete (often meaningless) degrees and after 15 years education some of them are woefully ill-educated.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I went to uni because I was academic. I've never used it and it didn't teach me how to think or any of the other shit it was supposed to. Hitchhiking round Europe and north Africa at 19 taught me far more, but I failed it as much as it failed me. I was way more interested in sex, drugs and drink than Aeschylus or how a beach is made, but I had 3 very social years completely unsaddled by debt.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I see a lot of people with $30K + student loans that are probably never going to get a high paying job to enable them to pay it off quickly. Yeah yeah I'm a boomer and as such have led a charmed life, but where I think society has failed is by raising a meaningless bar to a level that creates billions of public and private debt for in most instances very limited return.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Far better IMO to have a system that encourages people to go as far as they want as long as they can and doesn't pillories whole career paths.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>We need deckhands as well as doctors, garbo's as well as GM's but structurally our society doesn't seem to realise this and has become very wasteful in terms of financial and human resource.</p> -
<p>Blurring that academic v vocation pathway is really important imo. Agree with others that raising/developing good people (attitude, positivity, social skills etc) is a huge part of it. Alongside that I'd hope for keen, resilient people who can think, communicate and learn. Get that mix right and you've got a heap of options. Still a big stigma that blurring academic content with vocation material/skills is dumbing 'it' down. Let alone talking about assessment approach and ranking/comparison of all kinds of education data and Kids!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's getting more and more vital that people get a solid level education to build on. Especially with the way job markets are changing with fewer low skill jobs available. </p> -
<p>Some random thoughts:</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.careers.govt.nz'>www.careers.govt.nz</a>: it's the perennial careers favourite for a reason. They've faffed around with the structure in recent years, but dig deep enough and you'll find this for parents: <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='https://www.careers.govt.nz/plan-your-career/helping-young-people-make-decisions/role-of-the-parent/'>https://www.careers.govt.nz/plan-your-career/helping-young-people-make-decisions/role-of-the-parent/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>"Follow your passion" can be very good careers advice or utterly dreadful advice, depending on the person. If it is advice for someone with stickability/tenaciousness and a great work ethic, then fantastic. Otherwise, it's a slippery slope at worst, or luck at best. For the <em>average </em>person on the street it should look something like:</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Self awareness <- -> Opportunity awareness</p>
<p> </p>
<p>... what am I good at/do I like? and what's out there? ... Bouncing back and forth between the two till you narrow it down. "Follow your passion" tends to just be one part of the picture...</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'm very happy with schools keeping kids in sciences/maths up until year 12, so long as they are doing the same for English. For every kid cursing being made to stay in science, there's a few more at the Careers Expo in year 13 who've suddenly realised that they dropped science or maths too early for the path that they wanted to take straight from school. No system will work perfectly for everyone, so my careers maxim for people who were unsure of their choices was to: keep their options open as long as possible. Plenty of kids who go into trades may lament being made to stay in school for their 16th year altogether, let alone subject choices. :)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I sometimes wonder if the Polytechs haven't helped themselves over the years - given most are now Institutes of Technology and offer degrees in competition with Universities.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Never doubt that as a parent, you are the #1 influence on your kids career choices. That doesn't mean they'll do what you want, or even look like they're listening, but they are. We (in a past working life) used to do seminars with parents, and when asked who was the biggest influencer of their kids career decisions, they suggested mates, school, careers teachers, media, etc. They're all a big part of it, but kids do listen to mum and dad more than you think (or they'll ever admit). Heather Carpenter did some really interesting research about ten years ago, and the Year 12's she spoke with knew exactly what career direction their parents thought they should take. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>- A student may spend 2-3 one hour career sessions concluding that they should do a trade. But if the parents spend the next six months in the car, at breakfast, etc telling them that a trade is a waste of time and they should study law instead... the long term impact of that wearing down may be far more powerful than 2-3 career sessions (sessionsthat may have cost a lot of money too...)</p>
<p>- Consider it in the reverse. Take families with inter generational unemployment: the kids never see the parents in any regular work routine - going somewhere at the same time each day, week in week out. If their parents don't do it, why should they attend school or work regularly? Just by doing what you do, you send a powerful message.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And all of the above - and any careers advice - should be taken with a grain of salt. Who has had a career that hasn't had a lift (or a jolt) from happenstance?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Or as John Lennon put it: life is what happens when you're busy making other plans.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Donsteppa" data-cid="584927" data-time="1464921891">
<div>
<p>Never doubt that as a parent, you are the #1 influence on your kids career choices. That doesn't mean they'll do what you want, or even look like they're listening, but they are. We (in a past working life) used to do seminars with parents, and when asked who was the biggest influencer of their kids career decisions, they suggested mates, school, careers teachers, media, etc. They're all a big part of it, but kids do listen to mum and dad more than you think (or they'll ever admit). Heather Carpenter did some really interesting research about ten years ago, and the Year 12's she spoke with knew exactly what career direction their parents thought they should take. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Cannot agree with this statement more. I've seen parents on the news complaining about the day care/school/college their kids are attending, saying things like "the school should be the one to inspire our child" etc. There are quite a number of parents that solely rely on the education system to do everything for them, and as a result their children suffer. If I'm not setting an example, and supporting my child in what he wants to learn about then he is far less likely to succeed. Blaming the school for that is such a fucking cop out.</p> -
<p>Those are the same losers who want celebrities/sportspeople etc to be the role models - and blame school/tv/video games/sponsorship when their bored, rotten-toothed, antisocial, chubby kid who has seen violence and ill discipline and mocking of education and intelligence every day at home, goes off the rails.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Nope.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="jegga" data-cid="585503" data-time="1465291151">
<div>
<p>Mike Rowe is probably known to most of you from dirty jobs , he's got some interesting things to say about education in America that probably apply here</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>He's not (known to me)!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>What has he got to say? I watched for the first 60 seconds and he said nothing. Not promising for investing a further 27 minutes.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Videos are a piss poor way of communicating generic messages that are longer than 30 seconds. I'm very severe on them, because unlike something that's written, you can't flick through them to see if there's anything worthwhile.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If you're going to post half hour videos, I reckon you should at least post a couple of sentence precis' to give some idea of what the viewer should expect to get out of them. Not having a go at you - just something that annoys me - here and elsewhere.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>On education - agree with Dogmeat that it's become increasingly wasteful. When I started High School (in 1976 at a country high school) very few people (5) entered the 6th form. I think one of them might have passed University Entrance (UE). The year that I did UE was the first year we had accrediting and the first year people stayed for the 7th form. The next year, when I stayed for the 7th form, I think there were nearly 30 sixth formers - most of whom didn't progress to any sort of "academic" type jobs. Five years earlier 20 of them wouldn't have had to "waste" the year.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Facing facts - I did five years of university studies - much of which was based around calculus - and I have not applied a single differential equation in my working life. My time wasn't really wasted, because I needed the qualifications to get my foot in some doors - and some of what I learned was useful. But most was completely irrelevant - to me and to everyone else who was required to learn it.</p> -
<p>I also have no idea who that guy is and sat through the whole video let me sum it up for you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>He hates the phrase "work smarter not harder". Americans cheer when he mentions their home state and there is a lack of skilled trade people available, because colleges were so successful recruiting people since the 80s, and demonised skilled labour. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>That is all I took from it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I find this topic interesting as in my family my brother and I both work in broadly the same industry yet he took the trade school route while I took the university route. The most notable difference is while my degree is recognised universally his trade school qualifications are not. That theoretically provides me with more opportunity. Though realistically I don't think I would want to work somewhere where they valued a piece of paper earned 20 years ago over the last 20 years of real world experience. But sometimes you just need it to get past HR. Neither of us have job hopped very much any way.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I went to uni with the idea that it would be more vocational for me as I had a clear idea of the type of work I wanted to do. But after the first year and realising how overly theoretical some of the pre-req courses I did were. I started to view it differently and instead did the mandatory minimum of papers in my chosen discipline and used the rest of the time earning credits in fields I was intrigued with. Psychology, Literature and Biology. Instead of pursuing purely Math and Comp Sci. It meant I enjoyed my time there a lot more and I would like to think taught me to learn outside of my comfort zone. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>For my kids would I recommend the same? I am not sure. The big reason for my switch in mentality was I had gone too far before I realised that I was not doing what I had hoped to be doing, and did not want to waste a year of my life only to have to go back to square one and start again. My big regret from this time is that I did not learn a trade on the side. I really wish I had learned to weld or labored for my uncle the builder or had something practical I could always fall back on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Also never used any of the rather complex university math that I had to sit twice to graduate in either my professional or private life. I have no idea why it was a pre-req and if they had any sense they would have dropped it by now. So no doubt it still persists.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mooshld</p> -
<p>Mike Rowe, hes the host of a show called dirty jobs. He goes around the states interviewing people who make money doing all kinds of shit most of us wouldn't want to do. He's also the voice of deadliest catch.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway the video, he's the guest speaker at the annual function for Skills USA , he hams it up at the start plugging his show and mentioning the states he visited then moves on to the more serious stuff about how as mentioned earlier in this thread that a lot of people have this impression that you need to go to varsity to get anywhere in life so they sign up and a fair few come out with little more than a student loan and competing for entry level jobs as well as delaying the chance of earning by four or so years.</p>
<p>Goes on to mention that there's a shortage of tradespeople in the states in some trades and the education system looks down on trades as an employment option.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Said a much more condensed and formal version of the speech when he addressed congress a few years ago and mentioned a damn project that was put on hold because they couldn't find enough welders. He's also publicised some schools shutting down their woodwork/metalwork classes and kids who protested getting banned from attending their senior proms .</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Anyway I thought it was interesting and probably relevant to NZ , as I mentioned he's addressed congress about it and there's videos on different chat shows and conferences etc expanding on his ideas. Good on him although it must be a bit of an uphill battle trying to get people to take you seriously when they might have seen you on the discovery channel 10 minutes earlier with your arm up a cows arse. Thats also the reason he's never been allowed to show his face and only do the voiceover on deadliest catch .</p> -
<p>Too much of tertiary education is a rort now. Universities, private facilities offering all manner of courses to attract as many students as possible so they can get a bigger pull of the sauce bottle that is government funding. There seems to be shortages of tradies everywhere now and we are paying the price for pushing people into useless qualifications that give them next to no chance to get a job from. If CF Jnr turns out not to be academically inclined I'd have no problem suggesting a trade. With a little bit of business nous you can do extremely well</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="mooshld" data-cid="585657" data-time="1465373884">
<div>
<p>I also have no idea who that guy is and sat through the whole video let me sum it up for you.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>He hates the phrase "work smarter not harder"</strong>. Americans cheer when he mentions their home state and there is a lack of skilled trade people available, because colleges were so successful recruiting people since the 80s, and demonised skilled labour. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>That is all I took from it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I find this topic interesting as in my family my brother and I both work in broadly the same industry yet he took the trade school route while I took the university route. The most notable difference is while my degree is recognised universally his trade school qualifications are not. That theoretically provides me with more opportunity. Though realistically I don't think I would want to work somewhere where they valued a piece of paper earned 20 years ago over the last 20 years of real world experience. But sometimes you just need it to get past HR. Neither of us have job hopped very much any way.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I went to uni with the idea that it would be more vocational for me as I had a clear idea of the type of work I wanted to do. But after the first year and realising how overly theoretical some of the pre-req courses I did were. I started to view it differently and instead did the mandatory minimum of papers in my chosen discipline and used the rest of the time earning credits in fields I was intrigued with. Psychology, Literature and Biology. Instead of pursuing purely Math and Comp Sci. It meant I enjoyed my time there a lot more and I would like to think taught me to learn outside of my comfort zone. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>For my kids would I recommend the same? I am not sure. The big reason for my switch in mentality was I had gone too far before I realised that I was not doing what I had hoped to be doing, and did not want to waste a year of my life only to have to go back to square one and start again. My big regret from this time is that I did not learn a trade on the side. I really wish I had learned to weld or labored for my uncle the builder or had something practical I could always fall back on.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Also never used any of the rather complex university math that I had to sit twice to graduate in either my professional or private life. I have no idea why it was a pre-req and if they had any sense they would have dropped it by now. So no doubt it still persists.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Mooshld</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Well I'm glad I didn't watch it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>One of my mentors was a State Senator and an executive at a huge chemical company - "working hard is working smart" was his maxim. It's very important to learn to make the most of your time, and optimise what you do to add value.</p> -
<p>I read this thread with interest when it was started (but was too busy to reply in depth as it was the start of the trimester), I work in the tertiary education sector and have always been slightly amused by a large number of the Fern's poster's thoughts on academia. I've mentioned before that I find it odd that academia is held in a pretty low regard until a heated debate gets going, then the fruits of academia (published research) tend to get a pretty hefty workout.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So I wasn't surprised when a number of posts took a swipe at academia in favour of the trades even though I think. In NZ there has been a concerted effort to increase the numbers of young people going into trades for a number of years now and Australia is a country where tradies are probably held in higher regard than anywhere else in the world. It probably goes 1. Sportsmen, 2. Tradies, 3. Everything else. I come from tradie families, the old man, both grandfathers - but it was a different era - my old man didn't really have the option to do anything other than a trade and I'm glad I had the choice. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Not everyone is cut out for the trades and not everyone is cut out for academic university, and not everyone is cut out for that in between 'tertiary' education (practical colleges etc) than can take in young people. I think young people should have all the options available. Consider this scenario, a young person goes of to university with the intention of becoming an geologist, find out they don't like and decide to become a carpenter. A lot would say that the year at university is wasted. A similar scenario is that off a guy who takes up a building apprenticeship, after a year they decide they want to be an accountant instead. A lot wouldn't say that was a year wasted. I've had this exact conversation with people before who thought that way. I don't get it, they're both working out stuff for what is going to be a long life ahead and they're both learning life lessons.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I guess I'm all about choice, and giving young people the chance to make a wrong choice if they have to and hopefully that leads to more people making the right choice for themselves.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Lots of posters seem to think their university degree wasn't important, but that's likely untrue. Sure there's lots of successful people out there without university degrees but whether you like it or not for a range of jobs now a university degree is a basic requirement - often to get your foot in the door and often to advance up the ladder. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Rancid</p>
<p>Your thoughts on degree factories are quite interesting and contain some truth. I've been out of the NZ tertiary system too long now, but it appears from conversations with friends and colleagues that their has been a pushback from within against quantity over quality. However, Oz is doing some really weird stuff at the moment. I work in a Creative Arts university and our typical student base was genuine creative types who succeeded academically and those with ATAR scores that weren't high enough to get them into the 'big' universities, however, we've noticed that we're actually losing those with lower ATAR scores and recent(ish) reports have suggested that students with really low ATAR scores are being admitted to those big places.</p>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/nsw-universities-taking-students-with-atars-as-low-as-30-20160125-gmdvr6.html'>http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/nsw-universities-taking-students-with-atars-as-low-as-30-20160125-gmdvr6.html</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>However, those schools still have the top performers as well and I don't for a moment think the top end education has suffered too much. Where I do think Australia is doing irreparable damage is at Masters level. The Australian Masters system is built on one year programs, many that substitute recognition of prior learning (including workplace) in place of a Bachelors which is pretty dodgy (a Masters should build on the skills and theory developed in an undergraduate degree - what Oz is doing is basically Advanced Diplomas). My school is planning two Masters programmes, not because we necessarily think they're going to be worthwhile but because many in the creative industries bypass undergrad and get into Masters programmes and as we're privately owned that's a revenue source we're currently missing out on. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Donsteppa</p>
<p>I thin it's less private/technical institutions offer degrees in competition with universities and more they offer them in conjunction and develop curriculum that meet specific needs. As long ago as I was at uni (mid 90s) I had a mate who chose to do his accounting degree at Wintec as oppose to the Uni for the practical aspects and his at the time perceived lack of academic rigour. Of my bean counter mates (and there's lots of them) he's probably one of the top earners and he's adamant today he likely wouldn't have got through at the uni. But he hires new staff he likes to have a balance from both as he thinks it's good having different backgrounds and viewpoints. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Some form of education can point people in their 'right' direction. I have an aunty who spent 30 years of her working life picking apples and doing other low skilled work before she did a counselling course at EIT because she was working as overnight stay person for IHC people. She went from the course, to a diploma to a Bachelors and then a Masters. She did this in her 50s because the opportunities to do so weren't available to her in her 20s. One of my cousins has done the same thing (if you go see a Maori counsellor in HB there's a good chance they're related to me) but she's only in her early 30s now but she was able to transition from shitty school to degree courses at Massey via EIT.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Also, agree with your last point too. Scratch that, the second to last point, not the quote from the thug second best Beatle. ;)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Phew, might be time to stop before this gets long enough to be submitted for a Masters Thesis (in NZ, not the Oz-lite version).</p> -
<p>No idea about how it all works in NZ or Aus but in the UK much has changed over the last 20 years. Previously we had Universities and Polytechnic Colleges. The former regarded as superior to the latter. The latter generally catering for the more creative, liberal and vocation based degrees. Fees were capped at (at last count) £3,000 per year and non re-payable grants were available - more for the less privileged. We now have all classed as Universities and all sorts of degrees available from everywhere. The number of students in higher education has exploded and many degrees are now classed as a "Clit qualification" - every fluffybunny has one. For sure a degree is now almost a pre-requisite but conversely carries no real value (caveat: depending upon the degree taken and in some cases the establishment granting the degree). Fees are now capped at £9,000 per year and there are no grants, only loans. The increase went from £3K to £9K in one year and guess what? Every bloody Uni decided they were worth £9K a year. Think on this; any business that can triple it's turnover in one year without increasing the cost base must think they've died and gone to heaven. It surely has to make them consider the primary driver of what they are doing. The result is that Universities are more about numbers than quality of education. In order to improve the revenue they cram more and more students in on an ever widening number of degree courses. Many courses are not worth a wank. Many do not have the infrastructure to make them viable, but hell. It's £9K pa, per student. An example is Ms Cato no2 who decided she wished to study game design. Her A Level results were not quite good enough to get her into her chosen Uni. No problem. They were good enough to get her in as a music student and then swap to game design after one week. That is not one week of study, that is one week after applying. Is she right for the course? Well that's not the point. £9K pa is the point.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Ms Cato No1 has just finished her art degree. She has come out of this with a good degree and a debt of over £50K. She doesn't even get to keep the crayons.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Higher education in the UK is now getting out of reach for anyone but the wealthy but the Unis are all geared up for huge numbers. A lot of the slack is taken up by short term foreign students doing one or two year Mickey Mouse courses, but sooner or later something has to change.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The alternative is - we're fucked.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Nepia" data-cid="585695" data-time="1465388441">
<div>
<p> Consider this scenario, a young person goes of to university with the intention of becoming an geologist, find out they don't like and decide to become a carpenter. A lot would say that the year at university is wasted. A similar scenario is that off a guy who takes up a building apprenticeship, after a year they decide they want to be an accountant instead. A lot wouldn't say that was a year wasted. I've had this exact conversation with people before who thought that way. I don't get it, they're both working out stuff for what is going to be a long life ahead and they're both learning life lessons.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The difference of course is that on one scenario you earnt money, and in the other you racked up debt. So they are not equivalent.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="585786" data-time="1465428259">
<div>
<p>The difference of course is that on one scenario you earnt money, and in the other you racked up debt. So they are not equivalent.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Weird!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You don't get what the gist of what he was getting at? Do you really need to take it that literally?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Hooroo" data-cid="585790" data-time="1465429048">
<div>
<p>Weird!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You don't get what the gist of what he was getting at? Do you really need to take it that literally?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>He said he had that exact conversation and I was explaining that many people dont see it as a waste of time..,. but as a waste of money.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="585792" data-time="1465429925">
<div>
<p>He said he had that exact conversation and I was explaining that many people dont see it as a waste of time..,. but as a waste of money.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>My WT family down south think that it's both. A waste of time and money. I had that conversation with them at wedding last year and we both had to walk away from it. It came up again on FB, and I was shouted down from the rooftops.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>He drives a digger, she has good experience in admin that she doesn't want to throw away, even though after 5 minutes of speaking to her you can work out that she's very bright.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It's infuriating.</p>