Guardian 15.08.07

One repeatedly reads of the government's aim to educate up to 50% of our youth to university level (Brown's bonanza, August 14). I lead a scientific research group. Recently I advertised for a scientific assistant; minimum academic requirement two A-levels and salary range £17-19,000pa. Out of 37 applications, one was from a postdoctoral scientist, seven others had a PhD, seven an MSc and 22 had a BSc, including first and 2.1 degrees. Clearly, science graduates are being produced in conveyor-belt quantities, while there are simply too few appropriate opportunities for them.

Some argue a degree provides a training for life, rather than a passport to a chosen profession. The government, in justifying tuition fees and student loans, instead suggests it represents a financial investment for the future. It seems to me that the government is perpetuating a cruel deception upon our young people, which involves a huge misapplication of government (ie our) money. Higher education may artificially keep the unemployment figures down at the students' expense. However, it wastes the time and money, and destroys the dreams, of so many of our young people, most of whom should have never have gone to university in the first place.
Professor Philip Brookes
Luton, Bedfordshire

I really thought it was just me being crap (not being able to find a scientific job), but really if people at the postdoc level are applying for £17-19k jobs, I may as well have just worked in McDonalds at 16- I would have made area manager by now! This kind of report is just worrying.

I agree the situation isnt good. We should have stuck with 20% going to Uni and keeping the standards high, with a high success rate of gaining professional jobs upon graduation.

However, having 50% in Uni keeps the yobs off the streets, and the top 20% still have the opportunity to excell by getting MSc distinctions and PhDs.

The wider problem is the dumming down of job requirements and the general lack of positions where you need a PhD. This UK government does not value brilliance at all, unlike China where their government and the whole culture really looks highly on doctorates.

The culture in the UK is more about being famous and rocket science is generally looked down on. In the 60/70s the answer was to go to the US, but maybe now it is to go to China?

Maybe that's it: there are not too few opportunities: there a just too few opportuntites in the UK.

...and Australia.

Part of the letter alludes to the real issue, and the real reason why the government is so keen to push people into university - they don't count as unemployed, and they can swell government coffers.

That's what you get when you have a government which can't make its mind up about its position, so just takes the worst parts of socialism and the worst parts of capitalism.

That is really worrying, I have to say. I wanted to do a PhD because I thought I would earn respect and recognition for my work - in this country.

Should I even bother starting to look for a PhD?

I'm earning that now in my job at the minute.

I dont think the system alone is responsible. The attitue of universities is not helping. Universities appear to measure themselves by size alone and think nothing of taking more students than they can accomodate, with a result students doing get the requried support and drop out. I myself was taught at an insitutuion with a stack 'em high mentality. The result was a 70% drop out rate in the first year.

The sad thing is that the students still comming to university are no longer the brightest and the best. Now the majority are the ones who don't know what else to do. The smarter ones have gone into employment and are apprentice engineers or builders. As the graduate market becomes over saturated the smarter students pick up on this and focus their attentions else where.

Tiggs

It's an interesting debate. If you make the reasonable assumption that the 20% who went to university back in the day were pretty much the brightest 20% of the population (money aside), then by definition increasing the participation rate to 50% must lower standards.

Why then, does the proportion of students gaining 2:1s or higher every year remain more or less static (except for the ex-polys who dish them out like confetti)?

Maybe 20% of the students I taught last year were completely unsuited to HE - no talent and no motivation. High fliers aside, it begs the question, why are these weak students prepared to wrack up £30k of debt if their chances of a decent job at the end are so weak?

I saw this letter too and I must say it added to my current depression regarding my financial status (currently paying for essentials on credit card - not good).

Maybe we could get the public to worship us by setting up a science gossip mag complete with paparazzi style shots of us in the lab. eg. ooh look at her vpl in that lab coat. We could also get picks of us rolling out of a club at 4am. Unfortunately in my case these would have to be staged !

"That is really worrying, I have to say. I wanted to do a PhD because I thought I would earn respect and recognition for my work - in this country."

I would love to think that this is the case, SoxonWhittle, but in reality, the best way to gain respect and recognition is to act like a vacuous bimbo/yob, drink too much, commit minor crime, take lots of hard drugs, revel in your ignorance, and generally act like an idiot. If you try to make something of yourself the proper way, you'll be cut down...

Ehi guys, if in the UK the situation is so bad, in other Country like Italy.........??? As usual a relativistic point of view helps, for an Italian the UK is a paradise......

what's it like in Italy?