# Have we too many third level students?



## Brendan Burgess (31 Aug 2015)

An interesting article by Cormac Lucey in the Sunday Times yesterday: 

Ireland has too many students - Discuss.

Some extracts:

Ireland has the highest proportion of 25- to 34-year-olds who have completed third-level education in the EU. Almost half, 47%, of young adults in Ireland have completed third-level education, compared with 39% across the developed world (of OECD members).

according to ESRI researchers [broken link removed], Seamus McGuinness and [broken link removed], one in three Irish workers is over-educated for their job. That’s the highest proportion in Europe. 

The earnings advantage that a degree appears to confer may just be a consequence of the fact that the better and brighter students go on from school to further study. They would be the best and brightest anyway, even if we had no universities. But, largely because they converge on our colleges, we risk conflating the earnings advantage they would have secured anyway with an advantage conferred by a university education.

The proliferation of third-level education also risks infantilising our youth well into what should be their most productive years. Instead of being encouraged to strike out on their own they are encouraged to follow pre-school, primary education and secondary education with yet more education where their focus is less the acquisition of their own experience than regurgitating what teacher says obeying teacher.


----------



## thedaddyman (31 Aug 2015)

I have a friend of mine who lectures in construction studies in one of the IT's. He found that after the Tiger went belly-up, the demand for his courses and the points required to get it dropped significantly. However the nature of the course and the difficulty factor of that course didn't change. As a result, he ended up lecturing to people who frankly did not have the ability to complete the course and had massive drop out's in the first year as a result. That was a waste of a year for the students and a waste of resources for the college. There seems to be a view that everyone who does the leaving cert should go to college and if you don't you are a failure and that view is wrong.


----------



## odyssey06 (31 Aug 2015)

I think there's a few different issues...

Colleges are relying on the points system as entry criteria to ensure they get students capable of passing the course, but in lean years they are getting people on low points. 
They should be able to set more specific minimum entries e.g. a B in certain relevant subjects


Too many people are going to college, and not just college, there's a proliferation of post secondary places. 
Is it a deliberate attempt to massage youth unemployment figures?

We have high demand courses like medicine, where taxpayers subsidise students to the tune of hundreds of thousands of euros. A large number of these students promptly emigrate. They should either have to pay those back or work for X years in public sector - I think this is done in Canada. Which leads me to my next point.

I would be in favour of fees, but not while it's subject to the same means tests as grants etc which are totally biased against PAYE sector. I think everyone should have to pay back fees in one form or another (public sector work, income tax for X years, working in high demand sectors for X years) 
and there should be no exemptions (i.e. even if the student is from a poor background - it is future earnings that should be considered not current parental income). 
This is the only fair system as the state is incapable of properly means testing, as they have proved for last 30 years.
This would reduce the number of people doing courses for the sake of it, and direct students to where we think they need to go.


----------



## Jetblue (31 Aug 2015)

Could anyone tell me how much the Government/Dept of Education fund each college per student? I
think this money is called a capitation grant?

I see hundreds of third level students at a local IT I occasionally work in, they breeze in and out sometimes attending lectures, more often not! At the end of the term the pressure seems to be on the staff to "retain" the highest possible number of students into next year. Every effort is made to "pass" as many students as possible. Insufficient numbers retained questions the viability of the course.


----------



## STEINER (31 Aug 2015)

Compared to 30 years ago, when I entered 3rd level, the country is awash with 3rd level institutions.  It certainly can be described as a major industry from the employment perspective, with many courses and fields available to thousands of school leavers each year.  Up to 20% of students here are non-Irish also.

What would Irish young people do instead of college?  Employment here is limited.  Everyone can't be wunderkinds like the Collison brothers. School leavers certainly could study or work abroad as an alternative to Ireland, ie emigrate.

At age 18/19 how many teenagers know what they would like to do in life?  Most people go to college hoping to get a job out of it.  Some courses have mandatory job placements as part of their degrees, the two NIHEs (now UL and DCU) were providing these degrees in the 1980's.

The focus on 2nd level education needs to shift from the exam to continuous assessment.  I understand that group projects, reflective of work situations are standard in certain 3rd level courses and this element should be incorporated into the 2nd level system.  Is the  points' race which I used 30 years ago still the way to go?

It is a good thing that everyone has a chance to go to 3rd level now.  Hopefully the old snobbishness is gone, ie you didn't have  a  university degree in pharmacy for example as opposed to catering from DIT or you want to be a carpenter.  A school leaver should do whatever they want.  They can change focus or mind later.  How many people's primary degrees are relevant to their work?


----------



## muinteoir (1 Sep 2015)

I think this is a very interesting topic and it is one that has come up in discussions at home. I have to agree about colleges depending too much on the points system. When I went for teaching I did an interview where we had to play a musical instrument, sing songs, do an Irish interview and possibly an interview in English (I'm afraid I can't remember. It was a long time ago!). The whole thing took all day. There was a girl at the interview who did not get in despite her excellent results because obviously she wasn't cut out for the job. Getting the best results does not necessarily make you the best teacher. The interview should be brought back. 

I also agree that there is that perception that it is not good enough to get a Leaving cert. There could be nothing more humiliating that dropping out of a course because you couldn't cut it. Instead of choosing a career that is suited to your abilities you have started your adult life by failing. That can't be good for your self-esteem. I have worked in all kinds of jobs. I have greatest respect for people who do them particularly physical jobs as I am not very strong myself. It is time that this obsession with going to university changed. Some people are just not academic but have other excellent skills. To be honest I don't understand why things changed so much. Nursing for example. Nurses began by working on the wards and then did their degree. There are some excellent nurses around who might not get in based on the new points system. Nursing is as much about your people skills as it is about your medicinal skills. 

I have to agree with the poster who said everyone should pay fees in some shape or form. We all did it. It was difficult and I struggled. If you pay something it makes you appreciate the opportunities you have been given and you put more of an effort into it. You've nothing to loose if you don't pay anything. As well as that you appreciate the money you get when you start working because often your first job is very difficult but at least you have some money in your pocket. 

I have to disagree with the poster who said that the focus on 2nd level education needs to shift to continuous assessment. I've seen that in action abroad and the staff in the school have had to chase and mollycoddle students into doing the work for the continuous assessment. Who monitors how much help they get? How does nagging them into doing the work prepare them for university? In an exam situation at least everyone is clear. You cannot cheat and no one can help you. I think that the Leaving Cert is a fair system though I would suggest having a re-sit for the end of August in order for students who have been sick, failed etc. to have a chance to repeat the exam without having to repeat a full year. They could then apply for college based on new results rather than resitting the Leaving and often struggling with an entirely new syllabus. In the mean time they could get a job to fund themselves and get some life experience.


----------



## Sophrosyne (1 Sep 2015)

muinteoir said:


> It is time that this obsession with going to university changed. Some people are just not academic but have other excellent skills. To be honest I don't understand why things changed so much. Nursing for example. Nurses began by working on the wards and then did their degree. There are some excellent nurses around who might not get in based on the new points system. Nursing is as much about your people skills as it is about your medicinal skills.


 
Could not agree more!

In particular, regarding nursing.


----------



## Protocol (1 Sep 2015)

odyssey06 said:


> I would be in favour of fees, but not while it's subject to the same means tests as grants etc which are totally biased against PAYE sector. I think everyone should have to pay back fees in one form or another (public sector work, income tax for X years, working in high demand sectors for X years)
> and there should be no exemptions (i.e. even if the student is from a poor background - it is future earnings that should be considered not current parental income).
> This is the only fair system as the state is incapable of properly means testing, as they have proved for last 30 years.
> This would reduce the number of people doing courses for the sake of it, and direct students to where we think they need to go.



You seem to speak as if fees don't exist.

The "registration fee" has been massively increased from 900 to 1500, to now 3000, so in effect we now have fees.

Though they are called "student contribution"


----------



## Branz (1 Sep 2015)

Brendan Burgess said:


> The proliferation of third-level education also risks infantilising our youth well into what should be their most productive years. Instead of being encouraged to strike out on their own they are encouraged to follow pre-school, primary education and secondary education with yet more education where their focus is less the acquisition of their own experience than regurgitating what teacher says obeying teacher.



So blame the youth for the crap educational system  on offer.
In relation to infantilising, look at the German model where they are still learning at 24, 25 etc

Most productive after secondary school?  reproductive maybe but not productive.

From 30 or so years ago when U of L was set up, each and every student who has enrolled  has been made do the the SAT test.

Since then, homo sapiens' general intelligence level has not changed that much, AI is making a lot of progress but not HI.

The SAT results have declined over the intervening 30 years while the points required for entry has gone up.

The result is that the Irish educated teachers in the educational system now have lower SAT grades than their predecessors so the whole educational system is slowly decaying.

As for Universities here: today they have no interest in the students, all they want is the funds from Government so as they can build their little dynasties and get Alumni, from UCD, such as O'Reilly, Sunderland and the ubiquitous Redacted One to fund buildings for their research, but only if the buildings are named after them.

Re the trades, the apprentices are exploited by the different industries.
Look at the Nordic model: trades at the outset get paid same as the young Uni graduates so trades are equally attractive money wise at the start.


----------



## thedaddyman (2 Sep 2015)

ircoha said:


> From 30 or so years ago when U of L was set up, each and every student who has enrolled  has been made do the the SAT test.
> .



I'm a UL grad within the last 20 years and never sat or was asked to sit a SAT test


----------



## T McGibney (2 Sep 2015)

ircoha said:


> So blame the youth for the crap educational system  on offer.
> Re the trades, the apprentices are exploited by the different industries.
> Look at the Nordic model: *trades at the outset get paid same as the young Uni graduates* so trades are equally attractive money wise at the start.



How on earth can a builder's apprentice just out of school justify a graduate salary? If apprenticeships are to work there has to be something in it too for the tradesman who hires and trains the apprentice.


----------



## Firefly (2 Sep 2015)

I think most people would agree that we have too many people at 3rd level than are needed.

Having said that most of us would continue to send _our_ children to 3rd level.

A 2:1 is the new 2:2
A degree is the new diploma
A masters degree is the first degree


----------



## Leo (2 Sep 2015)

Perhaps one aspect of the issue is more too many in courses that don't really prepare students for careers, or at least careers where there are sufficient openings at graduate level. IT is facing significant shortfalls at the moment, with a significant amount of open roles being filled from abroad.


----------



## odyssey06 (2 Sep 2015)

Protocol said:


> You seem to speak as if fees don't exist.
> 
> The "registration fee" has been massively increased from 900 to 1500, to now 3000, so in effect we now have fees.
> 
> Though they are called "student contribution"



Without in any way defending the "registration fee", you must realise that if tuition fees were being charged you could add another 0 to the amounts quoted above.


----------



## Branz (3 Sep 2015)

The German and UK position
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-34132664
This much more balanced and less judgemental article does deal with the plight of the lower skill cohort, which is now being exploited by the part-time work/ZHC's and the like which allow folk like Tesco, Dunnes, Aldi, Lidl, etc all claim to be employing 4 or 5 times the FTE number of  employees, and telling us folk that their employees "love" the flexibility of ZCHs etc.
[ Open rant: 
Then roll in the self employed employee PRSI scam and the fact that Burton et al, in cahoots with the aforementioned employers supports 20 hrs over 5 days, with no dole, as opposed to the old model of 21hrs over 3 days and a bit of dole for 2. Close rant  ]


----------



## Purple (3 Sep 2015)

T McGibney said:


> How on earth can a builder's apprentice just out of school justify a graduate salary? If apprenticeships are to work there has to be something in it too for the tradesman who hires and trains the apprentice.


I agree completely.
I've been an apprentice and I've trained apprentices in engineering trades. I can say for certain that if they worked for nothing for the first year they would still cost their employer money. That's if their employer was actually training them properly.
A newly qualified tradesperson in my industry is nowhere near being able to work unsupervised or control a project or job on their own. That takes another 4 or 5 years at a minimum.
If we want tradespeople to get comparative Nordic pay differentials then we need to train them to Nordic skill levels. The training our tradespeople get is nowhere near adequate. We are miles behind Germany, Poland and most other European countries.


----------



## Purple (3 Sep 2015)

ircoha said:


> The German and UK position
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-34132664
> This much more balanced and less judgemental article does deal with the plight of the lower skill cohort, which is now being exploited by the part-time work/ZHC's and the like which allow folk like Tesco, Dunnes, Aldi, Lidl, etc all claim to be employing 4 or 5 times the FTE number of  employees, and telling us folk that their employees "love" the flexibility of ZCHs etc.
> [ Open rant:
> Then roll in the self employed employee PRSI scam and the fact that Burton et al, in cahoots with the aforementioned employers supports 20 hrs over 5 days, with no dole, as opposed to the old model of 21hrs over 3 days and a bit of dole for 2. Close rant  ]


Part time contracts and low pay do not mean exploitation.

I am against zero hour contracts, especially without visibility a few weeks out but low skills will always result in low pay. That’s the way it is and that’s the way it should be.


----------



## Branz (3 Sep 2015)

More grist for the mill:
Rewarding failure yet again:
to paraphrase the great Larry Gogan: the questions didn't suit you today
http://www.independent.ie/irish-new...icate-in-2017-has-been-unveiled-31499601.html



Purple said:


> Part time contracts and low pay do not mean exploitation.



In my view they do when 4 part-time contacts are being used to do the work of a what should be a FT position: it allows companies pay lower PRSI etc, meaning less benefits for the 4 employees and say they are employing 4 times as many people: e.g. Tesco AFAIR 16,000.

Its exploitation supported by the blue shirts and the labour party and by FF before them


----------



## Purple (3 Sep 2015)

ircoha said:


> In my view they do when 4 part-time contacts are being used to do the work of a what should be a FT position: it allows companies pay lower PRSI etc, meaning less benefits for the 4 employees and say they are employing 4 times as many people: e.g. Tesco AFAIR 16,000.
> 
> Its exploitation supported by the blue shirts and the labour party and by FF before them


Employing 4 people on 10 hours a week to do 1 persons job?

That sounds like a really stupid idea;

4 times as much payroll costs

4 times as many people to manage and schedule

4 times as many tax returns

4 times as much training (even if it’s only HS&E induction etc)

4 times as many chances of sick leave, shifts not being covered etc.


...and for what? The Employer will pay the same rate whether a person on the minimum wage works 10, 20 or 39 hours a week. It is only the Employee who pays less.


What’s the etc.? What else do you think the employer can avoid paying?

Why do you think employers are less ethical than employees? What evidence do you have to support such an idea?


----------



## Jetblue (4 Sep 2015)

*PPPP*PURPLE:
"If we want tradespeople to get comparative Nordic pay differentials then we need to train them to Nordic skill levels. The training our tradespeople get is nowhere near adequate. We are miles behind Germany, Poland and most other European countries."

Would you mind expanding on this please? I was under the impression that Irish apprentices spent longer training and were far better and "broader" trained than any others?

IRCOHA:
"As for Universities here: today they have no interest in the students, all they want is the funds from Government so as they can build their little dynasties and get Alumni, from UCD, such as O'Reilly, Sunderland and the ubiquitous Redacted One to fund buildings for their research, but only if the buildings are named after them."

"Spot on!" also you can add research and research grant money to this!

ANYBODY PLEASE? BRENDAN?
"
Could anyone tell me how much the Government/Dept of Education fund each college per student? I
think this money is called a capitation grant?"

I'd really appreciate an answer to this question? or can anyone point me in the right direction as to where/whom to inquire from?
This goes to the heart of the costs involved in running third level colleges.

JB


----------



## Purple (4 Sep 2015)

Jetblue said:


> Would you mind expanding on this please? I was under the impression that Irish apprentices spent longer training and were far better and "broader" trained than any others?


No, we have very low standards of training; it is almost impossible to fail you exams. We have very little technical training along with the practical element and generally do not create a culture of quality. 
My experience is mainly in engineering trades where the training element outside the place of employment is just about useless. Eastern European trade training is vastly superior to ours. I have no expectation that an Irish qualified tradesperson will be competent. It's a pity as 20 or 30 years ago the training was excellent but it has not changed with the requirements of the industry; we still teach skills which are no longer relevant and select people without the brains for the job and won't be able to succeed in a much more technical sector.

My experience in building trades is mainly as a consumer and I now have a policy of not hiring Irish trained tradespeople.


----------



## Leper (11 Sep 2015)

I haven't read all the posts on this subject yet, but what I have read is an eye-opener.  I looked at the 3rd Level Yearly Table and am surprised that since 1990, double the amount of students started 3rd Level Courses.  I wonder how many of them use 3rd Level as an extension of 2nd Level? How many are working in the field of courses taken? What is the percentage drop-out? What is the failure rate? Are education vested interests screaming necessity to attend 3rd Level? How genuine is the 3rd Level Grants Scheme? It is a Sunday Times well worded piece.


----------



## dub_nerd (12 Sep 2015)

ircoha said:


> The result is that the Irish educated teachers in the educational system now have lower SAT grades than their predecessors so the whole educational system is slowly decaying.


I don't know about SAT tests but from talking to a teacher friend the standards sound pretty lamentable. He said he attended a maths refresher course with other teachers recently, and not one of them could say what integral calculus was, or was used for, even though they could solve simple problems by rote. Having made up for my own lack of honours Leaving Cert maths by doing an honours degree in physics and associated maths thirty years later, it's hard to imagine a topic more central to any science than calculus. Yet it seems many of our educators barely understand it themselves.


----------



## Purple (14 Sep 2015)

dub_nerd said:


> I don't know about SAT tests but from talking to a teacher friend the standards sound pretty lamentable. He said he attended a maths refresher course with other teachers recently, and not one of them could say what integral calculus was, or was used for, even though they could solve simple problems by rote. Having made up for my own lack of honours Leaving Cert maths by doing an honours degree in physics and associated maths thirty years later, it's hard to imagine a topic more central to any science than calculus. Yet it seems many of our educators barely understand it themselves.


I think that’s a critically important point; if you don’t fully understand something, where is fits in to the broader subject, what it is used for and what problems it solves then you cannot teach it properly. You don’t just have to know your subject, you have to know what’s around it.

The same applies to History, Art History and the evolution of science and industry. For example we can teach kids about the Spinning Jenny and their eyes will glaze over but if we tell them how advances in spinning technology in the 1760’s had a large influence on cottage industry in Ireland and contributed in no small way to the Famine then they might remember it better. We could also use it as an example of how things work in the modern world. Suddenly history is alive and science and engineering matter. Connect the dots and they will see the big picture; science, engineering, economics, politics, history etc. are all connected.


----------



## daheff (18 Sep 2015)

My 5 c on this is the following:

Our entire education system is designed to send people to 3rd level colleges through the CAO. In the past we had electricians, plumbers, tradesmen etc get their qualification from apprenticeships. Now pretty much all those apprenticeships are via the CAO rather than people applying to companies and gaining their experience that way.

Compare Ireland to Germany:

Germany has apprenticeships for most trades (even for things like travel agents & tourism )- people gain on the job experience and serve an apprenticeship to get a qualification. These qualifications are of a set standard and recognised across the country.
In Ireland qualifications are via colleges- people study travel and tourism in college for a diploma/degree. 

So while Ireland may have a higher number of people in college than other countries, the figures have to be taken in context (something that statistics generally arent).

If you were to ask me which is a better approach...i'd say the German one is. It allows people to get actual job experience while getting a qualification. It allows the company to have a lower cost base (as they pay trainees less than qualified people) and ultimately a lower cost to the consumer.


----------



## DrMoriarty (18 Sep 2015)

I've been teaching at third level in this country for over 25 years and, regretfully, find increasingly that some of the rapidly-growing numbers of students being enrolled on (now near-worthless) primary degree courses by our 'bums-on-seats' policy-makers (managers and administrators, mainly, _not _academics) are astoundingly ignorant, illiterate, lazy and 'entitled'. Or, as an American colleague puts it — and Lord knows, he knows of what he speaks — they suffer from delusions of adequacy. Apart from lecturing and supervising postgrads, I have regular contact with employers across a wide range of sectors and they are increasingly dismayed and baffled at the decline in standards. From _all _institutions, I hasten to add. When I hear commentators calling for the reintroduction of fees, I might not share their logic but I do have to wonder whether certain of my undergrad students might take their studies a little bit more seriously, if it was costing Mom and Dad €9K or €10K a year instead of 'just' the €3K 'administration charge'...

_(Incidentally, in response to an earlier poster's question, the capitation grant per student, paid directly to the institution by the State, is essentially the equivalent full fee for that course if the student were not eligible for a fees waiver (e.g. repeat students who fail the year first time around, or mature students funding themselves). About €6K and rising for a typical Arts degree, if you're an EU citizen)._

Admittedly, this is a very old trope*.

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.​
Attributed to Plato, _The Republic_, Book IV (_c._432 BC)​
(* Not quite that old, in fact, because this frequently misattributed passage was in fact crafted by a student, Kenneth John Freeman, for his Cambridge dissertation published in 1907 .)

I have to agree with those who suggest that something closer to the German (or Scandinavian) model would be of far greater usefulness to society. Not that that should be the primary concern of education, at any level but especially at "higher" level. Universities can never be simply the handmaidens of industry. But in Germany (for example), if you buy a cup of coffee, it will be prepared by a trained _barista _and probably served by an experienced waiter. Both of them well-paid. If you go to buy a pair of shoes, you'll have your foot size measured properly by someone who actually knows something about the shoes they're selling. And so on. Here the snobbery around degree courses, perpetuated by parents in the main, drives us to believe that 70-something per cent of school-leavers should go on to do a degree. In a _proper _Collidge, y'know? And to make sure they get there in satisfactory numbers, we'll now give everyone CAO points for _failing _an exam at their Leaving Cert.

When of course we should be flogging them in public. 

_Edit: some relevant stats and observations here._


----------



## Purple (21 Sep 2015)

Interesting link Dr.M.
I think that as long as we have that level of snobbery around 3rd level qualifications universities will continue to move towards being mere training grounds for industry instead of what they should be; places were knowledge is values for its own sake and where concepts and ideas originate, with their commercial value not mattering a whit when assessing their worth. 
We now have universities populated by people who do not understand what a university is. They are merely seeking to be trained for a particular job. In essence the institutions are simply places where industry outsources its training needs. 
I say this as a tradesman.


----------



## Purple (10 Sep 2018)

LisaKelly said:


> The over-education is a real problem that us and the rest of the Europe will be facing in the future. We are kinda "wasting" money as we educate people too much for work. Still we should remind ourselves that you learn valuable skills during the education for example critical thinking. You also increase the size of your social network. These factors might be valuable in ways that we might not take into account when calculating the benefits of education. So over-education for work does not equal over-education for life.


20 or 30 year ago nurses didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
20 or 30 years ago accountants didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
Are nurses and accountants much better at their job now than their counterparts 20-30 years ago?


----------



## Sophrosyne (10 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> 20 or 30 year ago nurses didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
> 20 or 30 years ago accountants didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
> Are nurses and accountants much better at their job now than their counterparts 20-30 years ago?



In addition by working in these areas and experiencing the practicalities at first hand, people quickly discovered whether nursing or accountancy was for them, rather then waiting years to find out.


----------



## T McGibney (10 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> 20 or 30 years ago accountants didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.



Not true. And I was that (graduate) soldier.


----------



## Purple (10 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Not true. And I was that (graduate) soldier.


You need one to become a CPA now but I have two friends (who qualified in the 80's) who didn't have a degree before they were accountants. From what I remember from talking to one of them he had to complete a certain number of credit hours (or something) before he could do his CPA exams.


----------



## cremeegg (10 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> 20 or 30 year ago nurses didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
> 20 or 30 years ago accountants didn't have to go to college; they learned the same skills while working and being paid.
> Are nurses and accountants much better at their job now than their counterparts 20-30 years ago?



Medicine has advanced greatly in the last 30 years. The work nurses are expected to do today requires a much higher level of education than the work required 30 years ago. Health Care assistants have taken on much of the manual work formerly done by nurses.

Accountancy however has gone backwards. In the past an accountant needed to set up every individual chart of accounts, that required a real understanding of both accounts and business. Almost every business needed a proper accountant. Today you simply unwrap the COA supplied by Sage and follow the instructions on the box.

Revenue have recently launched a scheme where transaction files are uploaded directly. Removing the need for accountants completely from most businesses. Mr. McGibney may be the last of his kind.


----------



## RETIRED2017 (10 Sep 2018)

cremeegg said:


> Medicine has advanced greatly in the last 30 years. The work nurses are expected to do today requires a much higher level of education than the work required 30 years ago. Health Care assistants have taken on much of the manual work formerly done by nurses.
> 
> Accountancy however has gone backwards. In the past an accountant needed to set up every individual chart of accounts, that required a real understanding of both accounts and business. Almost every business needed a proper accountant. Today you simply unwrap the COA supplied by Sage and follow the instructions on the box.
> 
> Revenue have recently launched a scheme where transaction files are uploaded directly. Removing the need for accountants completely from most businesses. Mr. McGibney may be the last of his kind.


 And what about your good self I suspect you are in the same
You better start looking after the people who pay your wages the people who do direct work ,


----------



## joe sod (10 Sep 2018)

cremeegg said:


> Medicine has advanced greatly in the last 30 years. The work nurses are expected to do today requires a much higher level of education than the work required 30 years ago. Health Care assistants have taken on much of the manual work formerly done by nurses.
> 
> Accountancy however has gone backwards. In the past an accountant needed to set up every individual chart of accounts, that required a real understanding of both accounts and business. Almost every business needed a proper accountant. Today you simply unwrap the COA supplied by Sage and follow the instructions on the box.
> 
> Revenue have recently launched a scheme where transaction files are uploaded directly. Removing the need for accountants completely from most businesses. Mr. McGibney may be the last of his kind.



I suppose that really makes the point about automation coming after white collar jobs, whereas skilled tradesmen cant really be replaced by technology as it is too difficult to create a robot that can crawl through an attic to repair damaged pipes , robots can only do tasks that are predictable and repeatable.


----------



## Purple (11 Sep 2018)

cremeegg said:


> Medicine has advanced greatly in the last 30 years. The work nurses are expected to do today requires a much higher level of education than the work required 30 years ago.


Yea kinda, just like every other job and, just like every other job, those skills can be learned as part of continuing professional development.
I say kinda because machines do most of the diagnostic stuff like pulse, blood pressure, blood-oxygen levels etc. The first time a line is put in a cannula is inserted so administering drugs etc intravenously is much easier. Technology makes our lives easier and de-skills much of the labour involved. Everything from shaving to heart surgery is much easier than it was in the past. So, I'm not sure what work nurses are ding now that requires a much higher level of education. That's not to say that they are not skilled, but most of the skills they need and use are learned on the job. I suspect the same is true for many jobs.


----------



## T McGibney (11 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> You need one to become a CPA now but I have two friends (who qualified in the 80's) who didn't have a degree before they were accountants. From what I remember from talking to one of them he had to complete a certain number of credit hours (or something) before he could do his CPA exams.


So do I but each of them spent 2 years in college getting a diploma or something of that order before they could start the accountancy exams. And even then, these people were in a minority.


----------



## T McGibney (11 Sep 2018)

cremeegg said:


> Accountancy however has gone backwards. In the past an accountant needed to set up every individual chart of accounts, that required a real understanding of both accounts and business. Almost every business needed a proper accountant. Today you simply unwrap the COA supplied by Sage and follow the instructions on the box.
> 
> Revenue have recently launched a scheme where transaction files are uploaded directly. Removing the need for accountants completely from most businesses. Mr. McGibney may be the last of his kind.



Perhaps, but during my career the apparent simplification of accountancy work has been accompanied by an exponential increase in demand for accountants.


----------



## Purple (11 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Perhaps, but during my career the apparent simplification of accountancy work has been accompanied by an exponential increase in demand for accountants.


So the jobs got simpler as demand has increased? Nice one!


----------



## RETIRED2017 (11 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> So the jobs got simpler as demand has increased? Nice one!


Things may have got simpler but the advice got more important ,
In creemmg example about revenue uploading
But what about the exemptions and other valuable advice you need to take form an Accountant who knows how to go about getting the most out of your tax returns


----------



## T McGibney (11 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> So the jobs got simpler as demand has increased? Nice one!


I did say "apparent"


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

To broaden this topic a little; what do posters think the implications of the increasing rate of technological change will have on our current educational system? Put simply what you learn in college/university/ trade school now will be our of date faster than ever before. This is true not just in IT, Finance, Pharma, Bio-Sciences and Engineering but in Medicine, Law, Accountancy and other traditional professions.
Machine learning is the new automation; machines can read MRI's and X-Rays faster and better than any Doctor. Technology will remove the need for conveyancing in house purchasing and many other bread and butter areas of law. Apps and OCR software will enable people to do their own tax returns. The list goes on and on. 
Should we move from an education system which places emphasis on what a student knows to one with more emphasis on what and how they think?


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> To broaden this topic a little; what do posters think the implications of the increasing rate of technological change will have on our current educational system? Put simply what you learn in college/university/ trade school now will be our of date faster than ever before.



That was ever the case. The accounting stream in my own 1980s B Comm college course was heavily focused on current cost accounting, which was more or less obsolete even then and totally obsolete by the time I started working.  Learning it didn't do me any harm and probably sharpened me up for newer and more relevant things.


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> That was ever the case.


Yes, but the rate of change is increasing dramatically and Machine Learning is a game changer.


----------



## Protocol (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Machine learning is the new automation; machines can read MRI's and X-Rays faster and better than any Doctor. Technology will remove the need for conveyancing in house purchasing and many other bread and butter areas of law. Apps and OCR software will enable people to do their own tax returns. The list goes on and on.
> Should we move from an education system which places emphasis on what a student knows to one with more emphasis on what and how they think?




A lot of talk about automation / AI / machine learning, etc.

But very little of it in practice in Ireland, IMHO.

Mortgage application - still loads of paper to and fro
remove the need for conveyancing - this will be resisted by vested interests, and also what about liens/searches/etc.
health - we still don't have much ICT in health, still paper charts
If I go to a Cork GP, can they see my records from a hosp visit in Dublin = NO.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Protocol said:


> A lot of talk about automation / AI / machine learning, etc.
> 
> But very little of it in practice in Ireland, IMHO.
> 
> ...


Automation and machine learning removes what the Americans call grunt work but in my experience if anything increases the need for expertise in monitoring and interpreting it.


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

I knew I'd find something on this if I .


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Automation and machine learning removes what the Americans call grunt work but in my experience if anything increases the need for expertise in monitoring and interpreting it.


Everything from surgery to actuarial calculations to industrial design to farming will be impacted. I'm not saying that there will be fewer jobs but there will be different jobs and those currently working in those areas will have to adapt. 
I trained as a Toolmaker. It was primarily a manual job 25-30 years ago. Now it's primarily a technological job. Many of the same people are here, producing the same sort of parts, but they spend most of their time in front of a computer now. That's my point; we should be teaching people how to learn, how to think, how to understand, not how to remember things.


----------



## RedOnion (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Technology will remove the need for conveyancing in house purchasing


This is a claim I don't understand, and I've heard it in the context of the many things Blockchain is going to fix as well.
Surely conveyancing is only simplified once a property has gone through conveyancing and transferred into some new platform that the machines can take over? Given that less than 1% of agriculture land changes hands each year in Ireland, I see plenty of work ahead for conveyancing solicitors.



Purple said:


> That's my point; we should be teaching people how to learn, how to think, how to understand, not how to remember things.



Similar to @T McGibney 's point about learning things that are out of date, I think there is too much focus on what specifically people study. Fine, if you want to be a doctor you need to stydy medicine, but in general one of the greatest things you can learn in college is how to think. I used to recruit quite a few graduates into technology roles, and some of the people that have ended up with the best careers had completely unrelated degrees.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Everything from surgery to actuarial calculations to industrial design to farming will be impacted.


Will be impacted? All those sectors have already been impacted, and hugely.



Purple said:


> I'm not saying that there will be fewer jobs but there will be different jobs and those currently working in those areas will have to adapt.
> I trained as a Toolmaker. It was primarily a manual job 25-30 years ago. Now it's primarily a technological job. Many of the same people are here, producing the same sort of parts, but they spend most of their time in front of a computer now. That's my point; we should be teaching people how to learn, how to think, how to understand, not how to remember things.



Isn't that my point too? We learn, think and understand by remembering things.


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Will be impacted? All those sectors have already been impacted, and hugely.


 Yes, and the rate of change will continue to increase massively, making the old fashioned educational system less and less fit for purpose. 



T McGibney said:


> Isn't that my point too? We learn, think and understand by remembering things.


 Yes, and the point I made in post 41.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Yes, and the rate of change will continue to increase massively, making the old fashioned educational system less and less fit for purpose.
> 
> Yes, and the point I made in post 41.



I don't necessarily buy that. 

The current emphasis on what a student knows to one equips them fine for adapting to new technologies and new developments.

Telling people what to think is a solution for nothing.


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

RedOnion said:


> This is a claim I don't understand, and I've heard it in the context of the many things Blockchain is going to fix as well.
> Surely conveyancing is only simplified once a property has gone through conveyancing and transferred into some new platform that the machines can take over? Given that less than 1% of agriculture land changes hands each year in Ireland, I see plenty of work ahead for conveyancing solicitors.


It is currently a very manual and opaque process for the customer. It can be simplified greatly thus reducing the labour and technical skill required and so the cost to the customer and value to the seller. 

Industrialisation meant that the up front investment in time, skill and capital was increased so that the process was simplified and de-skilled thus reducing the unit cost of production. AI does the same thing in more areas.

Where I work we have de-skilled the machining process through investment in technology and process development. The next step is collaborative robots which can load and unload the machines. That further reduced the production cost by front loading the technological investment. That means we have to train our people in new skills which increases their labour value and thus their pay levels; the same people produce more and get paid more with the same labour input.
The skills they learned before they started working here are less and less relevant. Training and skills development are less and less tied to training in educational institutes and more and more tied to on the job uncertified training.


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Telling people what to think is a solution for nothing.


Of course it isn't; It's about teaching them how to think. Maybe the arts and humanities degrees will be more valuable in the future.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Should we move from an education system which places emphasis on what a student knows to one with *more emphasis on what* and how *they think*?


----------



## Purple (28 Sep 2018)

Yes, totally different from telling them what to think.
I don't know where you are going with this.


----------



## T McGibney (28 Sep 2018)

Purple said:


> Yes, totally different from telling them what to think.


Is it?


----------



## Firefly (28 Sep 2018)

[QUOTE="Purple, post: 1585006, member: 114"we should be teaching people how to learn, how to think, how to understand, not how to remember things.[/QUOTE]
I think this is very important. I think we should have more puzzles in the LC. 

I also think more multiple choice exams might help with the accuracy and turnaround of exam results.


----------



## Purple (1 Oct 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Is it?


Yes.


----------



## T McGibney (1 Oct 2018)

Firefly said:


> I think we should have more puzzles in the LC.


Very easy to game these unless you keep inventing an infinite number of new puzzles. 



Firefly said:


> I also think more multiple choice exams might help with the accuracy and turnaround of exam results.



Multiple choice  questions are ok for pub quizzes and TV game shows but any exam which allocates marks for good guessing is unworthy of the name.


----------



## losttheplot (1 Oct 2018)

I've had some multiple choice exams with negative marking. Makes guessing a bit risky.


----------



## T McGibney (1 Oct 2018)

losttheplot said:


> I've had some multiple choice exams with negative marking. Makes guessing a bit risky.


Asking kids to gambling to achieve Leaving Cert marks is if anything even worse.


----------



## Firefly (1 Oct 2018)

T McGibney said:


> Very easy to game these unless you keep inventing an infinite number of new puzzles.


True!


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Nov 2018)

Interesting programme on BBC Radio 4 tomorrow. 

The series challenges received wisdom. 

*The Case Against Education*
Thought Cages
Education is often seen as a panacea for a liberal civilised society: the more, the better. But what if we’re wrong? What if the desire to deliver higher education to as many people as possible is actually making society less fair?

Economist Bryan Caplan poked a hornet’s nest recently with his book “The Case Against Education”. It argued passionately that higher education has become a mere signalling exercise for employers – one which rewarded rote-learning conformism and threw anyone with less than a 2:1 on the scrapheap.

Much admired – and much criticised – Caplan’s book was a call-to-arms for an end to a futile, economically-crippling education arms-race. His solution? Simply pull funding for almost all higher education until its social worth was fully proven.

Advertising guru and behaviourist Rory Sutherland is joined in studio by the Executive Director of the Education Policy Institute Natalie Perera - and down the line by Bryan Caplan himself – to assess one of liberal society’s most sacred cows.

Produced by Steven Rajam for BBC Wales


----------



## joe sod (18 Nov 2018)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Education is often seen as a panacea for a liberal civilised society: the more, the better. But what if we’re wrong? What if the desire to deliver higher education to as many people as possible is actually making society less fair?



Its probably the case that there are too many third level institutions and students in third level. However i completely disagree with the above hypothesis afterall the most advanced societies on the planet also have the best universities. Its obviously the case that advanced societies need higher level education in order to be advanced. In order to have smart phones we need smart people in universities studying the science behind this advancement. However there is an awful lot of rubbish now being "studied" in higher level institutions that has little value to society


----------



## Purple (19 Nov 2018)

joe sod said:


> Its probably the case that there are too many third level institutions and students in third level. However i completely disagree with the above hypothesis afterall the most advanced societies on the planet also have the best universities. Its obviously the case that advanced societies need higher level education in order to be advanced. In order to have smart phones we need smart people in universities studying the science behind this advancement. However there is an awful lot of rubbish now being "studied" in higher level institutions that has little value to society


I don't see how your post disagrees with the link Brendan quoted. Yes, we need technical and science based universities but do we need so many meaningless degrees? There are some companies which have a policy of requiring a third level degree to become a senior executive. If someone has worked there for 20 years and is clearly the best candidate why on earth should they be excluded from promotion because they don't have a degree in English Literature?


----------



## BilliamD75 (19 Nov 2018)

The people who created smart phones most likely never went to universities, the advancement of society is created by the risk takers based upon their dreams and asperations,


----------



## odyssey06 (19 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> The people who created smart phones most likely never went to universities, the advancement of society is created by the risk takers based upon their dreams and asperations,



Dreams aren't much use unless you have the skils to develop them into reality - and the opportunity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_J._Canova


----------



## BilliamD75 (19 Nov 2018)

you need the dream first to advance society  there are many other dreamers who never went to universities, your dreams and ideas can be developed by others, universities have there place also, I taught the smart phone was developed by someone else apologies for that, I am sure you would agree also,


----------



## odyssey06 (19 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> you need the dream first to advance society  there are many other dreamers who never went to universities, your dreams and ideas can be developed by others, universities have there place also, I taught the smart phone was developed by someone else apologies for that, I am sure you would agree also,



I think it depends. Sometimes the idea is the hard part and for that you may not need technical training.
Sometimes the idea is obvious and the hard part is the realisation... thats where you need trained engineers, scientists etc from stem courses.

These days that means university as companies dont train people to that level from scratch anymore.

I do think we are sending too many people to third level and to the wrong types of courses.


----------



## BilliamD75 (19 Nov 2018)

I always feel the ideas and dreams are in the future terms and universities are in the present, it's most likely the reason all businesses fail eventually, I would also agree, to many people go to college,


----------



## joe sod (19 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> I always feel the ideas and dreams are in the future terms and universities are in the present, it's most likely the reason all businesses fail eventually, I would also agree, to many people go to college,



not sure what you are talking about here, surely there were plenty of ideas and dreams in the past also , it could also be the case that there were more dreamers and idealists in the past than there will be in the future as the future is unknowable.


----------



## BilliamD75 (20 Nov 2018)

Yes of course there were plenty of dreams and ideas in the past, it's those ideas that have brought human advancement to the present day and future ideas and dreams will bring human advancement to the next level based upon past ideas and dreams, just making the point that not all dreamers go to college


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> I always feel the ideas and dreams are in the future terms and universities are in the present, it's most likely the reason all businesses fail eventually



That doesn't really make any sense.


----------



## BilliamD75 (20 Nov 2018)

It makes perfect sense, Dreams and ideas are just that until they become reality it's never instantaneous making it part of the future, business that stand still are superceded by future advancement in their fields being the creator or inventor maybe dies and the business eventually goes, colleges work on the development of the ideas and dreams making it the present terms, both have their place in society but the dream and ideas must come first.


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2018)

No, it still makes no sense. Dreams don't inherently have a tense. Just like universities have been around for centuries, and will continue to exist for centuries to come, people have always dreamt. DaVinci dreamt about manned flight for example, as did many others since, the Wright brothers finally made it reality, but that's all still in the past.

If you're trying to say nothing new can be developed without someone thinking of it first, bar the occasional happy accident such as teflon or cyanoacrylate, with a linear timeline, that's just fundamental. I don't see how that has any effect on businesses failing.


----------



## BilliamD75 (20 Nov 2018)

Universities have been around for centuries, the human taught process has been, ie dreams ideas have been around since human evolution began, the human taught process comes first, there is nothing linear about the process, the devinci and Wright brother's example is not valid, I dream humanity will time travel to distant galaxies in the future, it doesn't mean I will develop the technology now to do it  but humanity over time will develop it, the human taught process comes first though,  a business starts from its creator and when the creator leaves for whatever reason the business will decline over time however sometimes the new owners with the aid of New technology will advance the business but ultimately it will fail, the human taught process will be stuck in the present, I am sure you would agree


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> Universities have been around for centuries, the human taught process has been, ie dreams ideas have been around since human evolution began, the human taught process comes first, there is nothing linear about the process,



Thought process for a start. So if the thought process comes first, you are agreeing that it is linear? The idea comes before the development which in turn comes before the finished article?



BilliamD75 said:


> the devinci and Wright brother's example is not valid



Why not? Because the Wright brothers had no relevant formal education and beat those with it to the punch? Or something to do with their dreams being in the past?



BilliamD75 said:


> I dream humanity will time travel to distant galaxies in the future, it doesn't mean I will develop the technology now to do it  but humanity over time will develop it,



Bit of a sideline, but I'm not convinced that will ever be possible.



BilliamD75 said:


> a business starts from its creator and when the creator leaves for whatever reason the business will decline over time however sometimes the new owners with the aid of New technology will advance the business but ultimately it will fail,



Given long enough, and the probability of human extinction that's almost certainly true, but I'm failing to see how it relates to number in 3rd level. There are many businesses that have survived hundreds of years, many that have gone on to far exceed the achievements of their founders, many, many more don't make it past year 2. The thoughts or dreams of a founder have a level of influence over the short term, but little or none on the long term success of multi-generational companies they have formed.



BilliamD75 said:


> the human taught process will be stuck in the present, I am sure you would agree



Absolutely not. Human thought is only constrained by the imagination and experience of the subject, is vastly different from person to person and does not stand still, but evolves continuously. Visionaries dream of posibilities that may take weeks or hundreds of year to come to fruition. It's untrue to state their thought process is stuck in their present.


----------



## BilliamD75 (20 Nov 2018)

Leo said:


> Thought process for a start. So if the thought process comes first, you are agreeing that it is linear? The idea comes before the development which in turn comes before the finished article?
> Yes but there is nothing linear about the taught process the ideas have to come first,
> 
> 
> ...


The taught process is stuck in the present when dealing in third level that's what I am and have said, human dreams and ideas are in the future as they have not been created yet,


----------



## Leo (21 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> The taught process is stuck in the present when dealing in third level that's what I am and have said,



Anything 'taught' has to be in the past by definition, present tense would be teaching. 

QUOTE="BilliamD75, post: 1591094, member: 105931"]human dreams and ideas are in the future as they have not been created yet,[/QUOTE]

Dreams and ideas occur all the time, but future dreams havn't been dreamt yet. New developments or inventions that may result from dereams or ideas past or present may well occor in the future, but that's a different matter entirely.

Are you using the word dream to refer to an advancement or invention? Regardless, it's hardly newsworthy to suggest that stuff that hasn't been invented yet might be invented in the future rather than the past.


----------



## BilliamD75 (21 Nov 2018)

Yes teaching is the present, ie college that's what I have been saying, you can say you have been taught the teaching in a past sense, i am saying the human taught process ie dreams and ideas have to come first, you said it yourself davinci dreamt of maned flight and 400 years later the wright brother's brought that dream to reality, the taught process bridged that gap, everything we know comes from the taught process which is the future,, that's just my opinion


----------



## Leo (21 Nov 2018)

BilliamD75 said:


> i am saying the human taught process ie dreams and ideas have to come first,



OK, back to basics, you understand taught and thought are two very different things?


----------



## BilliamD75 (21 Nov 2018)

Yes apologies, I will send my own messages in future(my son sent them and I never noticed it)


----------

