maelorin | commenting on "overeducation" and "oversupply" of uni graduates

commenting on "overeducation" and "oversupply" of uni graduates

a recent comment i made over at catallaxy

the 'overeducation'/'undereducation' palaver is all in the () minds of employers and policymakers.

in some sectors, certain 'qualifications' have been reified to excess - so much so that the person gets blamed if they're 'unprepared' for the job offered, not the so-called 'qualification'.

apparently, we seem to have slipped back into an early industrial factory mentality with regards to what education is, and what it is for. 'education institutions' are supposed to pop out 'employment ready' bods. no longer are employers expected to train their own workforce. if you don't already have what the employer wants, you have little chance of getting it.

even if you 'go back to school', you have to pick the 'right school' and the 'right qualification'.

on the other hand, if you come to the table with a big bag of skills and qualifications, the employer gets scared off.

for example, what job would you apply for if you have honours degrees in science and law, postgraduate studies in computer science, law and education, and an emplyment history that looks like the list of job titles at a company now exempted from all that unfair dismissal nonsense?

more to the point, who would you expect might employ you?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The unfortuneate thing is that most University degrees don't actually prepare you directly for the workforce. They can give you the skills to learn the job quickly, but they don't neccessarily give you the skills to do the job.

It was actually the old Institute that directly supplied industry. I remember interviewing for programmers for a project; the candidates from Adelaide & Flinders usually couldn't write a simple test program, although the ones who did usually had innovative solutions to the problem, whilst the University of South Australia (the old Institute of Technology) could write code (which, while generally not brilliant, did the work). Guess who we hired.

Unfortuneately, in the modernization that's been occurring in Commonwealth Universities since the Thatcher era, these vocational educational institutions have been "upgraded" to the more academic institutions, usually by seriously downgrading the practical aspects of the education. For example, a third of the practical experience in the old radiotherapy courses here was lost when it was upgraded to a degree course, in favour of academic subjects not related directly to radiotherapy, but considered to enhance the degree nature of the course. Similiarly, I won't repeat the comments that most of my mother's old friends (who usually occupy CNC positions these days) have concerning the uselessness of degree nurses (especially when it come to getting their hands dirty).

As to overqualifications, there are a number of reasons this may affect you.

The public sector is (was, soon) required to pay you according to your qualifications, regardless if your qualifications are directly applicable, and even if you want to work for less. However the budgets for government departments are usually set for the lowest possible qualifications for the position. Thus you can get in trouble with HR if you hire someone overqualified for a position. I've encountered this a number of times.
Many employers without experience with university graduates will think they are brilliant and creative individuals who will be bored doing manual labour. This is generally more of a student summer vacation problem, but it still exists. Even if you do like working with your hands.
The individual doing the hiring might be insecure in their position and feel you might be a threat. Of such things are office politics made. Which is why I avoid them like the plague.
And once you reach a certain level of paper, employers will begin to wonder why you haven't got the matching job experience. Perhaps there is a reason he is still unemployed. Where is his stick-to-it-iveness.
Finally, most jobs at the level you are looking at (with your qualifications) generally require the applicants to already be known to the employers (or their aquaintances). There have been a number of times where I have had to give my resume to the secretary on the way in to the job interview. It's not a question of what you know so much as who you know. And whether your selection of appropriate blackmail material is capable of landing you the position. <grin>

Another advantage of actual volunteer work (as opposed to paid volunteer work) is that it enables you to make the contacts you need to spring into a career, although a career these days is getting harder and harder to find. I don't think I'll ever escape from soft-money contracts (it's not quite as bad as it was when I was a researcher in science, but it's still there.

I'd suggest going into business for yourself, but I gather you need more practical time before you are qualified. Still, there is always conveyencing... <evil grin>

i volunteer all over the place. not doing much to help me. and a few employers have commented on my "other commitments" ...

universities were not about job preparation. even in the professions. that was what happened on the job. unis were about acquiring the appropriate body of knowledge - and most importantly, the attitudes, for the intended profession.

our glorious leaders™ want to get rid of 'useless' stuff like literature and so forth. they really only want commercial training houses, paid for by the fourtunate students. they are all about shifting the burden of being 'job ready' onto the worker, so the owner of the 'capital' can maximise their profits without having to 'invest' in the tools - at least the tools they can't trade off in tax.

i've been close to public service jobs. but they always find an excuse not to hire me.

my education is an example of "sticking-to-it" ... but i know what you mean. i just lost an opportunity because the employer decided that if no one else though i was worth keeping, they wern't going to be the ones to risk it.

so, i'm back to working for myself.

just need to find a client or two. who can pay.

i'm also working on formalising my networking strategy.

if conveyancing was open to me, i'd be doing it. i'm that desperate (besides, it pays stupidly wee for what you do)

More to the point too is that half the courses out there do not prepare one. The Business Admin III course I'm currently doing {just to get the qualification} is pretty much basic office work. It's what I picked up in jobs along the way - except it leaves a fair bit out - but if you were coming straight from school to the course it wouldn't make you qualified at all - particularly re; the supervisory experience bec you are not in a real situation!

The quals I've got - c'link said {before I went on disability}that I was overqualified. & since then through tafe/open learning picked up a few more. And none of them can get me a decent job. :(

if you're overqualified, i'm in real trouble ... oh, and *hugs*

what do you do with a too-sober lawyer, scientist, teacher/educator, computer nerd with a horrific habit of being too damn honest, and asking too many bloody awkward questions.

i'm still amazed i got the dsp.

and angry that i may have to live on it for the rest of my unnatural life here on planet illiberal corporate consumption ...

in terms of quals; mine are roughly in order below;
School Cert.
Julian Ashton School - Art Certificate
East Sydney Tech - Art Certificate {major in photography & art history}
On the job experience as Layout Artist/Production manager for Publishing co {sic' Bride to Be & various others}
Cells background inker {hanna barbera}
Research assistant to photography curator at Art Gallery NSW
Insurance co investigation/incl surveillance photography
Switchboard Operator/ditto receptionist
Data Entry/Keyboard Operator/surveillance operator {various govt jobs}
Proofreader {x Fairfax}
2 years of Zoology degree {unfinished due to illness}but picked up 2 further yrs certification with ARC wildlife rescue team
UTS - BA Communications honours major in Film/Video Production & Media studies
Mural painting experience
Steinbeck film editing/& precode camera operator/precode video editor
IT Certificate I & II
(Medical - Disease Clinical Classification} Certification
" Coding ICDM10 WHO coding system.
" Medical IT Records Systems}
Ist Aid Certifcate
and the Business Admin III {one year to go}
& various short courses incl the first term of the prerequisite for TAFE Teacher thingo. & School kids Mentor in art etc.
I've probably left something out.
But none of it equals a law degree.

bsc(hons) in molecular biology and biochemistry
llb/lp(hons)
most of msc in computer science
dropped research llm or phd in international criminal law
incomplete grad dip ed
national modules in office management and business management
soem other stuff, oh yeah, bar & waiting, including silver service

work experience includes:

two weeks bar, two years bouncer/crowd control
stupid range of ict jobs over fiften years, including systems analyst stuff, two years as consultant, soem programming, team leader, project management, requirements analysis, and whatever.
selling books door to door. (that was so not worth it)
a year putting books on shelves and rearranging the collections in a library
about six or seven years as a research assistant/associate
three months as a solicitor (need another 9 to be independant :(

i'm thinking of getting back into consulting. and the bottle.

i've got two publications, a bunch of book reviews, some newspaper articles, and what not. i've edited some books, and proofread many, many published articles and books.

all io really want is to be happy. and stupidly wealthy.

is that really so much to ask?

;P

(deleted comment)

most of those nifty movements are volunteer non-profits ...

Disclaimer: I have a ubiquitous BA LLB, allowing me to be gainfully employed. So I speak as one who hasn't had trouble getting a job, who has sat on the employer's side of the fence and who has friends running small businesses (employing between 5 and 25 people).
(1) Universities have always proclaimed that their brief is not to prepare people for jobs, except in the overtly professional degrees like Medicine, Dentistry, Engineering, Commerce and Law - given the preponderance of privately educated sweet young things from the middle classes (are we allowed to use "bourgeois" these days?) in Arts/Law courses, I wonder about applying the professional label to present day Law courses.
(2) In these days of high taxation (not withstanding recent cuts in company tax rates) and the cult of user pays, both individuals and companies often ask what are they getting for their money and expect that one thing will be school/university leavers who are equipped for jobs. "If we are expected to hand our money to government, then the least government can do in return is pick up some of our training costs by supplying employable people through the education system".
(3) In the 80s and 90s, when things were not so good (according to private industry), companies cut their scholarship, graduate and apprenticeship schemes, as cost reduction measures. "Why should we give out apprenticeships, because they leave us and join our competitors after they have finished their apprenticeship?". In the case of apprenticeships, companies are now reaping the rewards of those measures - hence the lack of sympathy from many quarters when, for example, the mining industry bleats that it is being hampered by a lack of skilled labour and that it is all the fault of short-sighted governments.
(4) Most graduates are not ready for direct entry into the work-force - not into the globalised, "look out for yourself" workplace of 21st century Australia. Recurring complaints from employers are that new graduates "have excessive expectations/ambitions", "lack appropriate skills", "can't write/communicate to save their lives", "expect a recipe for everything", "want a computer program where they can click some check-boxes and hey-presto, there's the answer", "expect to be paid just to turnup", ad nauseum ...
(5) Some professions recognise that fresh graduates are unready for employment, so they put in place post-graduate training, eg PLT, CPA courses, residency in Medicine, IE membership.
(6) Lots of graduates end up working in areas far removed from their fields of study, eg. political science graduates as receptionists in hotels, environmental scientists in retail ...
(7) In 21st Century Australia, 17 is too young to make a decision about a future career, even if there will be 2 or 3 major changes/reskilling in career during their working lives. That may have been ok 40 or 50 years ago, but not now.
(8) In 21st Century Australia, 20 is too young to be entering the workforce as a graduate.
(9) Universities and employers should 'fess up and admit that 3 year degrees are next to useless for professional employment (it may be ok to have a 3 year BA if you are going into door to door mobile 'phone sales, ...).
(10) Universities should admit that many degrees will not lead to a "good job" - they are not employment prospect enhancers.

OMG, what a grab bag of points - I think I'm trying to say something here.

The BBs could assume that a degree (of any kind) led to enhanced employment prospects. We Gen Xers and Gen Yers do not have the luxury of that assumption. In 21st Century Australia, it is disturbingly easy to waste 4 years and accumulate a large HECS debt on a degree which will do nothing for your employment prospects. Since the Whitlam reforms of the early 1970s, it has been assumed that getting a degree is a "good thing" and necessary for career advancement, thus the push to make degree courses available to everyone and anyone who wanted to get one. The validity of that assumption is questionable.

Ok - I've used enough of your (and my) bandwidth.

mary

welcome to the rats' nest. pull up a chair. [perhaps create a free acocunt so you can get email replies?]

i agree with much of what you say, and would perhaps differ on a few points.

we can identify the problem, but what are we to do about it?

i have a mild disability that affects the way i interact and communicate with others. ironically, i am also highly gifted in verbal-lingustics (amongst others).

the problem, as i see it is, employers will not take the time to get to know me well enough to place me effectively. after all, why should they when there are many other qualified people out there who can do the job they offer without "accomodation". who cares if i miss out. according to the market ideology, if i had what the market wanted, i'd get a job. or to put it another way, i should be taking whatever job the market is prepared to give me. and, apparently that job is no job.

so, to celebrate being eminently qualified and capable, and having invested heavily in employable skills, but nevertheless unemployable, i'll have to keep looking for scraps.

but i am thinking of starting my own business. of course, that's not entirely encouraged by the way the "employment services" are funded and the way they're expected to help me. but, i suspect i'll be doing what i have to to pervert the system to my needs once again.

"To do" is the big question.

In general, given that I believe the whole Year 12/post-high-school issue is now a massive stuff-up, first requirement is across the board recognition that there is a major problem in present day post-high-school education/training/vocational preparation. Perhaps B Nelson recognises this, even if he lets himself get preoccupied with more ideological issues like VSU.

We are persevering with a model of an education system which has grown like topsy from what it was in the 1950s, but its basics haven't really changed, even though the employment environment now is dramatically more complex (and will be more so in the next 50 years). The notion of a job for life has gone, getting through a 40-50 year working life with a single set of primary skills/qualifications acquired when you were 18-22 will no longer be possible, and an individual's local employment environment can and will be affected by unpredictable actions and events in far off places (the butterfly effect brought into the job market).

As to your particular situation - I think you're in trouble. I'm guessing that you're in your early 30s, have done a variety of courses, have bounced from one job to another over the past 15 years, and don't believe yourself that you come across well at interviews. Since most employers have fuck all understanding of what those qualifications actually mean WRT what you have learned, what you can do and the alignment of your skills and personality with their requirements for an employee, they will usually rely upon how you are able to communicate and present at the interview, and what your prior employment history is. Bouncing from one job to another and from one course to another turns a lot of employers off.

Bugger of an answer, isn't it?

Innovative self-employment is a very real (and I think attractive) option for you, if you are prepared to bet your life and your future well-being on your cognitive and intellectual skills.

All the best,
mary

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

commenting on "overeducation" and "oversupply" of uni graduates

no subject

no subject

no subject

what's that you say?

Re: what's that you say?

oh hell...

no subject

This could open up a rat's nest

Re: This could open up a rat's nest

Re: This could open up a rat's nest