The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) has released a report showing that almost 60% of graduates are in “non-graduate” jobs. This, it argues, should be seen as a wake-up call about the role of the university degree and the “waste” of talent the “conveyor belt of graduates” represents.
The report, however, misses the point about the system of schooling we have in Britain, and what education should be for.
As I argued recently, the school system in Britain is set up to hand out credentials so that students can fulfil their role in society. A university degree is no different in that sense. And, as the CIPD report explains, it is becoming necessary to hold a degree for jobs that previously did not need them.
The purpose of credentials is to weed people out. So whether or not you need the skills from your degree is irrelevant: you need a degree to be considered for the job in the first place, and that is the value of the qualification.
It is this principle that requires a GCSE grade C in maths for most university courses and many jobs, irrespective of whether you actually need the skills. The CIPD report actually shows that the degree is fulfilling its purpose.
There is a wider problem with the report though, in that it assumes that education should be directly linked to employment. In the Robbins Report of 1962, which led to the expansion of university, this idea was directly rejected . The focus was on making a degree open to anyone who had the ability and desire. However, Sally Tomlinson, in her book Education in a Post Welfare Society explains how successive governments have eroded this principle. The 1985 Conservative Better Schools white paper demonstrates the principles underpinning school and university reforms. It aimed to remind schools that “preparation for working life is one of their principal functions” and that “industry and commerce are among the school’s main customers”.
The Browne Review in 2010 completed reforms that fully marketised the university sector, fully critiquing the Campaign for the Public University, founded by Professors John Holmwood and Gurminder Bhambra. The burden of debt that has been placed onto students has made them customers, seeking the best deal in the market. The aim for the government is that graduates get into the best-paid jobs possible and can pay back their fees. Therefore, the system of ranking university relies heavily on measures of employment after a particular course. As someone who works in the sector I can attest to the pressure that is being put on lecturers to embed “employability” skills into the course and to create links with industry.
Education should be about far more than employment. Particularly at degree level it is an opportunity to study a subject in depth and in doing so pick up a range of transferable skills. Graduates should leave university, among other things, being able to critically engage with problems and issues; have the skills to research a topic and present their work; and to study both independently and in groups. It is the range of transferable skills that make graduates attractive to employers, yet the drivers from marketisation actually make student less likely to develop them. Reading weeks as replaced with “employability” ones; lecturers are encouraged to wrap students in cotton wool; and dissertations are made optional so that students can pick a range of modules to fit their career paths.
All is not lost however, and a university degree as a credential presents an ironic opportunity for students. In the majority of cases having any degree is enough, and therefore students are free to make choices not based on job prospects. The best advice for any prospective student is to pick a degree that interests you – one that will challenge and extend you. The greatest benefit of education is not to the economy: it is about spreading critical thought and ideas throughout society.