Teenagers are choosing to study over Saturday jobs, new report suggests

[ExRes]

What she should have said was that you are encouraged to work wherever you can, secondarily to maintaining a good balance of health and realising whatever your full potential for studying is. Not get a job even at the expense of your qualifications. Her comments are in line with government policy though, to get as many people in low-skilled, low-paid jobs as possible, even though it doesn't help develop the economy, because it allows the Prime Minister to claim umployment is falling.

Perhaps you're all a little detached from youth (sorry) to see that growing up while being told that you must always be better than you are is unhealthy. This is just another way in which that pressure manifests itself on people in my generation. It could just be my own predisposition to worry about things and get stressed easily, but I do wonder where we will be in 30 years of time with the workforce we are now 'nurturing'.

Talk about make it up as you go along, where exactly did she say 'get a job even at the expense of your qualifications' ?

As for your second paragraph, what exactly is the difference between your generation and all those that have gone before you ?

 

[tony_mac]

Perhaps it is more difficult these days to find and get a suitable part time job.

I think that's probably true; there are now very many more part-time and casual workers than there were even 10 years ago, many will be competing for additional work.

I don't think that pressure has increased

I think the sources of those pressures have increased.
When I was at school, teachers did try and push me to perform well, but I always got the impression that was just because they wanted me to succeed.

These days, a teacher's prospects, salary, and even job, can all be based on the performance of their students. I'm sure that additional pressure must be working its way down....

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I've read the article about what Ms. Patel said and I still can't see anything wrong with it. I'm a second year uni student and about three years ago now I took on a voluntary job to gain first hand experience of work, and also give me something different to do (the amount of ammo it gives my CV and me in job interviews is a pleasant extra :P). It is so important to keep that work-play balance, which is why I like the nature of volunteering so much - you are bound by yourself and yourself alone, but you still reap a lot of the benefits work brings (minus the pay ).

Everyone is different and we all have various preferences. I love how laissez-faire my uni is with me, it really helps the way I work; however someone I live with detests it and consequently really struggles with some aspects. I've had to adapt at points so uni is my priority, and I've not always liked doing so, but that's life. I work on in the hope that what I do now brings its reward, and so far it has.

 

[Greenback]

I think the sources of those pressures have increased.

When I was at school, teachers did try and push me to perform well, but I always got the impression that was just because they wanted me to succeed.

These days, a teacher's prospects, salary, and even job, can all be based on the performance of their students. I'm sure that additional pressure must be working its way down....

You could be right. I don't know enough about teachers to be sure, but I suspect there's more than a grain of truth in what you say.

 

[theblackwatch]

I've had to adapt at points so uni is my priority, and I've not always liked doing so, but that's life.

Adapting priorities isn't limited to uni - it can also apply when you reach the world of work too! For example, if/when you get a mortgage, you may find yourself having to work more in order to pay for it, rather than, for example, spending every other day out travelling on trains or out socialising. As you rightly say, that's life.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Perhaps you're all a little detached from youth (sorry) to see that growing up while being told that you must always be better than you are is unhealthy. This is just another way in which that pressure manifests itself on people in my generation. It could just be my own predisposition to worry about things and get stressed easily, but I do wonder where we will be in 30 years of time with the workforce we are now 'nurturing'.

All a little bit detached from youth or perhaps more accurately you don't quite grasp what Universities are designed to do. The whole point of going to University is to challenge yourself and at the same time benefit from an education. With the exception of the first year the work load will always be fairly heavy but on the other hand University life is not supposed to be a picnic.

I also think it's worth mentioning here that many people after completing their degrees then study for professional qualifications whilst holding down a job. That means working at least 9 - 5 Monday to Friday and then going home and studying / revising in the evening. Some organisations offer study support, some do not. However those that do offer study support expect first time passes and its often a case of God help you if you mess up more than once.

 

[Clip]

What she should have said was that you are encouraged to work wherever you can, secondarily to maintaining a good balance of health and realising whatever your full potential for studying is. Not get a job even at the expense of your qualifications. Her comments are in line with government policy though, to get as many people in low-skilled, low-paid jobs as possible, even though it doesn't help develop the economy, because it allows the Prime Minister to claim umployment is falling.

Perhaps you're all a little detached from youth (sorry) to see that growing up while being told that you must always be better than you are is unhealthy. This is just another way in which that pressure manifests itself on people in my generation. It could just be my own predisposition to worry about things and get stressed easily, but I do wonder where we will be in 30 years of time with the workforce we are now 'nurturing'.

Ahh that would be it umployment.

What she said was perfectly valid - she never said get a job at the expense of your studies, you are making it up and being hysterical again. And who says that a part time job whilst at school or uni has to make you unhealthy? I take it you have not tried it then because you 'get stressed easily'. Maybe the pressure being put on 'your generation' is the apparent need for everyone to actually go to uni and study for a degree of sorts when they maybe don't need to? I didn't go and I seem to have a decent career for myself which was gained through just working - granted Ill never be a nuclear engineer but then again I don't want to be and quite happy where I am. I don't even want to climb the greasy pole any higher anymore like I used to.

Its called being content.

Maybe you should give it a shot to actually know what you are talking about before you come to that conclusion and dismiss it like you do - I was out doing work, part time, after school and any home work by the time I was 13/4. Granted it had no bearing on what I now do in my career but it made me understand something more that school had never taught me in as much that your actions(being late or pretending to be ill) would lead you to not getting paid or indeed not losing your job. It taught me more about personal responsibility than my school ever did and I loved the fact that at that age I had me own money all for the sake of a few nights and maybe a weekend or two in a hotel kitchen.

I take it that as you don't appear to have any need for a part time job that you are paying for your living expenses and stuff through grants and bursary's?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What she should have said was that you are encouraged to work wherever you can, secondarily to maintaining a good balance of health and realising whatever your full potential for studying is. Not get a job even at the expense of your qualifications. Her comments are in line with government policy though, to get as many people in low-skilled, low-paid jobs as possible, even though it doesn't help develop the economy, because it allows the Prime Minister to claim umployment is falling.

Managing your time and your health is largely your business (other than the support available via e.g. the NHS) and I wouldn't want the Government poking its nose into it. She's made a suggestion, you consider whether it applies to you or not. I mostly didn't work during uni (except over the summer) and think I maybe should have done in retrospect, FWIW - would have helped me getting a job.

Unemployment stats have no relevance to student jobs because a student is not unemployed as far as the stats go as they are a full time student - in fact if anything students taking those jobs makes the stats worse! In my view it is a sensible suggestion for your future. Not everything the Government says is bad! (I never get why people seem to think everything the Tories say is bad or everything Labour says is bad - the parties are remarkably close to one another in policies, so in reality they will both say things that are good and bad for you, but the one you support will say more good and less bad.

Perhaps you're all a little detached from youth (sorry) to see that growing up while being told that you must always be better than you are is unhealthy.

For quite a lot of people, me included, a bit of pressure (but not too much!) is quite motivating. It's nothing new - it has always been thus.

This is just another way in which that pressure manifests itself on people in my generation. It could just be my own predisposition to worry about things and get stressed easily

I think it is, and from what I've read about your position I think my best advice would be to relax, do your very best and be happy with yourself that you have done so even in a bad situation. The pressure will not reduce; "real" adult life isn't easier than uni life (sorry!) - you just learn to deal with it better and know when to ignore it and how to manage it.

 

[Tetchytyke]

In a banal and meaningless way what she said was correct. She's also correct to point out the Pope is Catholic and bears defecate in the woods.

Pressure has always been with us, but I honestly think that the stakes are higher now than they have ever been. A 2:2 degree is now seen as a failure and you won't get on graduate schemes with one, whereas when I graduated in 2004 you probably would. Ten years ago the Civil Service took a 2:2 as a minimum; now it is a 2:1.

The "pass mark" is higher, the margins are smaller. I'm glad I'm not a student now, and I work with them every day.

 

[RichmondCommu]

In a banal and meaningless way what she said was correct. She's also correct to point out the Pope is Catholic and bears defecate in the woods.

Pressure has always been with us, but I honestly think that the stakes are higher now than they have ever been. A 2:2 degree is now seen as a failure and you won't get on graduate schemes with one, whereas when I graduated in 2004 you probably would. Ten years ago the Civil Service took a 2:2 as a minimum; now it is a 2:1.

The "pass mark" is higher, the margins are smaller. I'm glad I'm not a student now, and I work with them every day.

However, in all honesty unless you have family problems / health issues is there any excuse for not getting a 2:1? I know this sounds harsh but I don't think there is.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I got a 2:2 from Durham because of serious mental health problems throughout my degree, especially in my final year. I'm glad I got a 2:2 then and not now; it held me back a bit, but it wasn't a disaster, now it is. Employers don't care why you didn't get a 2:1, your CV still goes in the bin.

I also don't agree with you. A 2:2 is a good achievement (but then I'm biased).

 

[gswindale]

However, in all honesty unless you have family problems / health issues is there any excuse for not getting a 2:1? I know this sounds harsh but I don't think there is.

Is there any necessity for getting a 2:1 though?

All that shows to me is that you've learnt how to pass the exams; not that you know your subject matter.

If there is no excuse for not getting a 2:1; then you are expecting a higher & higher proportion of students to obtain this - which means it becomes less valuable. Give it time and you'll be posting that you won't accept anyone with less than a 1st.

Real life experience is much more important than a piece of paper that just shows how you performed on selected dates.

 

[yorksrob]

However, in all honesty unless you have family problems / health issues is there any excuse for not getting a 2:1? I know this sounds harsh but I don't think there is.

That's not really a logical way to look at it. The whole point of having grades is to differentiate one student from another, so even if every student did enough to achieve a 2:1, employers would demand a new grade of more highly educated 2:2 students.

In any cohort of students, there will always be a range of abilities and achievements, and any grading system will have to reflect this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

All a little bit detached from youth or perhaps more accurately you don't quite grasp what Universities are designed to do. The whole point of going to University is to challenge yourself and at the same time benefit from an education. With the exception of the first year the work load will always be fairly heavy but on the other hand University life is not supposed to be a picnic.

And in any case I fundamentally disagree that challenging young people to grow and improve is in any way a bad thing, provided it's made clear that doing your best is all that can be asked for. After all I spend a fairly large amount of my time volunteering for a certain uniformed organisation that has that as a bit of a keyword, and I find it works very well.

If you want to spend your life being unchallenged, fine; there are basic jobs for that if you want them, they need doing and there are many people who are quite happy doing them their entire life - but university is not the path where that will happen.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is there any necessity for getting a 2:1 though?

All that shows to me is that you've learnt how to pass the exams; not that you know your subject matter.

If there is no excuse for not getting a 2:1; then you are expecting a higher & higher proportion of students to obtain this - which means it becomes less valuable. Give it time and you'll be posting that you won't accept anyone with less than a 1st.

Real life experience is much more important than a piece of paper that just shows how you performed on selected dates.

But if we took your comments at face value, what's the point in a degree at all?

It's a difficult one. In the end, I think if there are more students than before but no more jobs (there are), employers can be more selective. Simple as that, really. It's a problem caused in my view by too many people going to University when we would be better having many of them take a vocational route - and for that vocational route to be properly respected as it is in Germany and not looked down upon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I also don't agree with you. A 2:2 is a good achievement (but then I'm biased).

A 2:2 is a better achievement than a Third, and a Third is a better achievement than no degree at all (particularly given the background you mention). But there are only so many jobs, and so I don't see why employers shouldn't be selective.

 

[NSEFAN]

The university is important when considering the grade. A 2:2 from Oxford may be valued higher than a first class from Bucks New uni, depending on the subject. Any employer that literally just looks at grades and nothing else is potentially throwing away very good employees!

Regarding part time jobs, I think the best option depends on what people want to do in the long-term. In engineering, I know that summer internships are a good way to build up real experience and make connections with companies, whilst a part-time job at Tesco would be a nice little earner but not essential. I cannot speak for other disciplines, but I wouldn't advise someone to burn themselves out with work for the sake of a few hours a week in a shop! If you can get a job then that's great, but it's not the end of the world if you don't have the time.

 

[gswindale]

But if we took your comments at face value, what's the point in a degree at all?

Good question.

If we take Richmond commo's view; then if he had a choice of employing me or my father ( we both studied the same subject at the same uni 30 years apart ), then he would employ me as I received a higher class degree.

If I had a choice; I'd employ my father due to his better knowledge of the subject matter.

Thus the quality of the candidate should not just be judged on who performs better on a given day.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thus the quality of the candidate should not just be judged on who performs better on a given day.

Except that in every job interview that is exactly what happens. And in any case, a degree result is not based on performance on "a given day", as (almost?) all degree courses are now modular, it's based on performance on many exam days through the 3-4 years plus coursework.

And a company might well want a "fresher" graduate, so they can mould them into the company's ways of thinking much more easily.

 

[tony_mac]

And a company might well want a "fresher" graduate, so they can mould them into the company's ways of thinking much more easily.

They may want that, but in many cases doing that would be unlawful.

 

[DarloRich]

However, in all honesty unless you have family problems / health issues is there any excuse for not getting a 2:1? I know this sounds harsh but I don't think there is.

because like me you spent your time drinking and having a life I will admit that less time in the pub/nightclub in years 1-3 might have landed me a better grade. I got a first level results in year 4 and for my dissertation (when i tried) but I don't think Ihave lost out by not having a 2:1 or better.

I declared the grade, 2:2, on my CV and had several interviews and received more than one job offer in my (then) chosen profession which I then worked for 10 years. I was never asked about my grade. In fact I don't think I have ever been asked!

I will also admit i knew what I wanted career wise (which was very different to many of my contemporaries) and while perhaps I wouldn't have been selected by city firms for their graduate intake I was happy with that as i didn't want to work for them i don't feel i have lost out. I liked working and helping real people not helping one corporate entity screw another million out of another corporate entity.

 

[Starmill]

No excuse for not getting a 2:1 from Richmond Commun, no excuse for not having a part-time job from Ms Patel, and no excuse from emoloyers for not having relevant work experience (not shelf-stacking, and maybe unpaid).

See what I mean about unrealistic expectations? If there is a person alive who can do all of those things while maintaining a healthy lifestyle and participating in society (by, I don't know, having friends) I will eat my sandals.

It all stems from the continuing obession with the idea that if you're not rich and successful, it must be because you didn't try very hard. And it's just nonsense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

NIt all stems from the continuing obession with the idea that if you're not rich and successful, it must be because you didn't try very hard. And it's just nonsense.

It isn't. I know people who were lazy at uni and came out with a 2.2 but could have got a First. I also know people who got a 2.2 while trying their best. I see no reason we shouldn't push the former to put the effort in.

If you know you're putting the effort in, why "succumb" to the pressure?

 

[radamfi]

I "only" got a 2:2 because I made a mistake in my subject options. However, I did a MSc afterwards, directly related to the industry I wanted to get into, and I am certain that was more use than a 1st would have been, and I got a job soon after finishing the MSc, as did most of the people on my course. In fact, part of the marketing of the course said that people found a job soon after doing the course.

So maybe think about doing an MSc if you are unhappy with your degree result.

I did a BSc in Maths at Bath University, yet the lad down the road did Maths at Middlesbrough and got a 2:1. It took a lot of convincing my dad that you can't compare the two because each university has its own syllabus. When I compared my course to the guy who went to Middlesbrough, he admitted that his degree was much easier than mine. On the other hand, we had drop-outs from Oxford on our course (because their Maths degree was too hard) and they were top of the year.

The really stupid thing is that my MSc (in Transport Engineering and Planning) was so easy compared to my BSc, yet it is of higher status. Sometimes I am embarrassed to admit I have a MSc. The MSc was very numerate, but the hardest maths/statistics on there was only comparable to A-Level. It had to be that easy because only a GCSE in Maths was required for entry to the course, and some people on the course only got a C in their GCSE so they struggled. Inevitably, I was top of the year. I recommended it to my friend who was about to finish his Maths degree with a 2:2, and similarly he finished the top of his year.

 

[Clip]

No excuse for not getting a 2:1 from Richmond Commun, no excuse for not having a part-time job from Ms Patel, and no excuse from emoloyers for not having relevant work experience (not shelf-stacking, and maybe unpaid).

See what I mean about unrealistic expectations? If there is a person alive who can do all of those things while maintaining a healthy lifestyle and participating in society (by, I don't know, having friends) I will eat my sandals.

It all stems from the continuing obession with the idea that if you're not rich and successful, it must be because you didn't try very hard. And it's just nonsense.

I think that may be just your obsession with it not anyone elses.

Maybe once you grow up and discover life and all its niceness you will realise that not everyone thinks the way you think they think. It seems you have a chip on your shoulder about stuff and don't like others who have far more years of experience than you giving their opinion because they are 'not young' and 'don't know the pressures you are under'. To which I would say that many people on this very thread understand that totally but you just don't seem to want to listen to them.

 

[Starmill]

I think that may be just your obsession with it not anyone elses.

How so? I'm not arsed about being rich and famous! I just want to try and lead I life that I can feel satisfied with what I've got, even if it's not all that. Not be told constantly by everyone, certainly not Priti Patel, that I am somehow insufficient.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It isn't. I know people who were lazy at uni and came out with a 2.2 but could have got a First. I also know people who got a 2.2 while trying their best. I see no reason we shouldn't push the former to put the effort in.

If you know you're putting the effort in, why "succumb" to the pressure?

I didn't say people who don't try won't do badly because of it. But that doesn't mean that most people who don't get where they really wanted to be is for lack of effort. I know countless people for whom this is the case. Nobody suffers from stress voluntarily and its difficult to rationalise out - it's a reaction to various inputs. My point is we often have too many of the very negative inputs that cause it these days when there is just no need for them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In a banal and meaningless way what she said was correct. She's also correct to point out the Pope is Catholic and bears defecate in the woods.

Pressure has always been with us, but I honestly think that the stakes are higher now than they have ever been. A 2:2 degree is now seen as a failure and you won't get on graduate schemes with one, whereas when I graduated in 2004 you probably would. Ten years ago the Civil Service took a 2:2 as a minimum; now it is a 2:1.

The "pass mark" is higher, the margins are smaller. I'm glad I'm not a student now, and I work with them every day.

I got a 2:2 from Durham because of serious mental health problems throughout my degree, especially in my final year. I'm glad I got a 2:2 then and not now; it held me back a bit, but it wasn't a disaster, now it is. Employers don't care why you didn't get a 2:1, your CV still goes in the bin.

I also don't agree with you. A 2:2 is a good achievement (but then I'm biased).

I think you and I are a lot alike, Arctic Troll.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not everything the Government says is bad! (I never get why people seem to think everything the Tories say is bad or everything Labour says is bad - the parties are remarkably close to one another in policies, so in reality they will both say things that are good and bad for you, but the one you support will say more good and less bad.

I'm not trying to say its an intrinsically bad idea! Of course it isn't - but the way she says it 'don't let your studies get in the way' makes it quite clear that she either doesn't understand - or doesn't care - about how difficult that is for a lot of people to put into practice.

I think it is, and from what I've read about your position I think my best advice would be to relax, do your very best and be happy with yourself that you have done so even in a bad situation. The pressure will not reduce; "real" adult life isn't easier than uni life (sorry!) - you just learn to deal with it better and know when to ignore it and how to manage it.

That's a bit of a silly generalisation I think unfortunately. My main problem is one that I could solve easily if I (or my parents!) were very rich. However...

 

[ralphchadkirk]

As someone who has just graduated with a 2:1 (0.25% off a first, but there you go!), with a job due to start imminently and already with the weight of professional responsibility, I agree with Priti Patel and RichmondCommuter.

It may be difficult to accept, but employers do not just want a good degree, they also want a well rounded person with relevant experience. That's life. You can refuse to get experience because you don't think you can manage it, but ultimately the only person you're hurting in the long term is you. I'm well aware of how stressful university can be, but I'm also of the experience that it is (barring external problems) as stressful as you make it. Leave assignments to the last minute then of course you're going to do worse and be more stressed.

I think it's rather telling that all those who have graduated or have jobs are all of a similar opinion on this point.

 

[DarloRich]

As someone who has just graduated with a 2:1 (0.25% off a first, but there you go!), with a job due to start imminently and already with the weight of professional responsibility, I agree with Priti Patel and RichmondCommuter.

It may be difficult to accept, but employers do not just want a good degree, they also want a well rounded person with relevant experience. That's life. You can refuse to get experience because you don't think you can manage it, but ultimately the only person you're hurting in the long term is you. I'm well aware of how stressful university can be, but I'm also of the experience that it is (barring external problems) as stressful as you make it. Leave assignments to the last minute then of course you're going to do worse and be more stressed.

I think it's rather telling that all those who have graduated or have jobs are all of a similar opinion on this point.

I don't agree with you! I will agree that it may well depend on what kind of job/career you are looking for. My chosen profession (I am now on my second ) had a very defined and structured graduation to certification route to which university bar work offered roughly nothing.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I don't agree with you!

But we all know how much you like an argument!

I will agree that it may well depend on what kind of job/career you are looking for.

I would agree with that. Although if you were recruiting two English teachers, would you take the one with a first from York, or the one with a 2:1 from Newcastle but had also worked as a teaching assistant part time/worked with special needs pupils etc? I know which one I would choose!

 

[NSEFAN]

How so? I'm not arsed about being rich and famous! I just want to try and lead I life that I can feel satisfied with what I've got, even if it's not all that. Not be told constantly by everyone, certainly not Priti Patel, that I am somehow insufficient.

If you're happy with your lot then why should what Priti Patel or anyone else say be bothering you so much? Remember that Priti Patel might well be giving advice from a position of privilege, not realising that she may sound patronising to some people even though the advice may be good.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They may want that, but in many cases doing that would be unlawful.

Technically. However, there is (just as with redundancy) always *some* way of adjusting the job spec to achieve what they want.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How so? I'm not arsed about being rich and famous! I just want to try and lead I life that I can feel satisfied with what I've got, even if it's not all that. Not be told constantly by everyone, certainly not Priti Patel, that I am somehow insufficient.

Where in her quote did she say you were insufficient? You are drawing that conclusion yourself.

Genuine question: long term, what do you want in life with which you think you will feel satisfied? Establishing that is a start point.

]My point is we often have too many of the very negative inputs that cause it these days when there is just no need for them.

I don't agree, because I don't agree that the input she made *was* negative at all; quite the opposite. It suggested a way you could improve yourself; take it or leave it. It didn't criticise anyone.

I'm not trying to say its an intrinsically bad idea! Of course it isn't - but the way she says it 'don't let your studies get in the way' makes it quite clear that she either doesn't understand - or doesn't care - about how difficult that is for a lot of people to put into practice.

She didn't say anything of the sort. She said:

Work is important. Studies are important. But one should not preclude the other

She called for a balance. And she is absolutely, 100% right in my book to do so. FWIW, I think it would have benefitted me initially if I'd got more work experience during my degree.

That's a bit of a silly generalisation I think unfortunately. My main problem is one that I could solve easily if I (or my parents!) were very rich. However...

...bluntly, you can complain about the pressures, or you can start working out how you're going to solve it to the best of your abilities, given that lack of funds? And while at uni, there is lots of help out there if you need to talk to someone to work that out. One of those two options will actually have a positive effect on your life...

 

[DarloRich]

But we all know how much you like an argument!

I would agree with that. Although if you were recruiting two English teachers, would you take the one with a first from York, or the one with a 2:1 from Newcastle but had also worked as a teaching assistant part time/worked with special needs pupils etc? I know which one I would choose!

But that assumes that work experience is the only criteria. If the person with work experience comes over badly they wont get the job. You were obviously interested in the non experienced candidate as you didn't discount their application at stage one.

I look at all aspects of the CV in determining if a candidate is suitable for interview. It all depends ont he job. For an entry level graduate job i may look at work experience prior to degree but for "normal" level jobs i am more interested in career, personality and character.

I am not saying you shouldn't work at uni (it is nice to have extra cash after all) just that it might not be quite the limiting factor many suggest.