Value of University Degree Continues To Decline (www.cbc.ca)

BarbaraHudson writes: Following up from an earlier report from Statistics Canada (pdf), the Parliamentary Budget Officer warns that an increasing number of university graduates are overqualified for their jobs. The CBC reports: "Last year, 40 per cent of university graduates aged 25-34 were overqualified for their job. Five years ago, that percentage was only 36 per cent. In 1991, it hit a low of 32 per cent, or less than one out of every three university graduates. The problem is bigger than that, because those young workers spent money, time, and resources to get those qualifications.

Comments

Why Not Vocational?

[Frosty Piss]

"Everyone" says you'll go nowhere without a college degree. But guess what? This is neither what many kids want nor society needs.

Vocational schools need to amp up the sales pitch. Machinists of the Tools and Die variety make 40$ and 50$ an hour, and that ain't bad.

Some people just are not interested in the 4 year menu.

Re:Why Not Vocational?

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to be a CNC machinist. Tool and Die machinists are not representative of the salary you can expect as a college dropout gone tradeschool. You can expect to make $25-30 in a city or $18-25 away from a population center. Most of the people you're selling this idea to are going to become machine operators. It's a hard and competitive industry with razor thin margins and high stress. I'm convinced the 2 years I spent in that industry aged me by 5...

For those not in the know: Tool and Die makers almost universally have white beards and pass on sage advice to the younger generation from their 25+ years experience. You can go through an apprenticeship to become one in a union shop but for the most part: nobody is going to hire someone in to that position who has less than 5-10 years experience running manual machines/programming CNC equipment.

Contrast that you what you can make with a CCNA or doing plumbing: I do not recommend Machining as a viable career choice unless you loved metal shop in high school and want to turn a hobby in to something you hate. The best machinists are usually mechanical engineers who got tired of sitting at a desk.

Back in the old days

[Dunbal]

University graduates were rare. There were far fewer universities and university places. Thus the intrinsic value of having a degree was higher, all other things being equal. And the difference in education between someone who had finished university and someone who had not was readily apparent. Nowadays the lines have become blurred. The sheer volume of graduates means that you are competing against many people who have exactly the same educational qualifications as you, whereas before it was a distinct advantage.

A degree is no longer a guarantee of a decent job in your field. In fact nowadays a Bachelor's is almost a minimum requirement for many jobs. On the other hand, NOT having a degree can be a disadvantage. It's up to the individual to weigh themselves carefully and judge whether the time and effort and debt required to receive higher education are worth it. A brilliant person will shine through even when covered in mud, and you can polish a turd as much as you want but it will remain a turd. So are you brilliant, or a turd? This should influence your decision.

Re: Back in the old days

[Dunbal]

Universities have been dumbed down

This I fully agree with. I've seen graduates who can't do basic arithmetic without a calculator much less the ability to apply their knowledge to a situation they have not specifically encountered before. I think it's because students are taught to pass tests instead of taught actual practical and applied knowledge.

Then why all the Temporary foreign workers?

[Anonymous Coward]

If so many people are overqualified, then why all the complaints about not being able to find qualified workers and why all the foreign workers in both Canada and the US.

It couldn't be because of the crappy wages being offered, could it?

This

[NotQuiteReal]

In the context of the article, it seems to me "overqualified" means - you bought an education which you cannot use / do not need for your work.

E.g. having a university degree is "overqualified" for a barista job. Sadly, there are many (usually non STEM) degrees for which there is literally zero demand by employers. Where are the counselors on the front end of the university acceptance process? Hmm, seems like they just take students for the good of the school, not the needs of the student, or society.

Re:This

[__aaclcg7560]

E.g. having a university degree is "overqualified" for a barista job.

I spent my first three years out of college working as a backup cook for a restaurant. Why? I skipped high school and went into college, getting a college degree without getting a high school or G.E.D. diploma. Most entry-level employers focused on the high school diploma and refused to hire me even though I had a college degree. I didn't start my technical career until a roommate's company hired me on as an "intern" because they didn't have the budget to hire a full-time staffer. With the economy in the Great Recession crapper, I know a lot of "overqualified" baristas.

Re:This

[TWX]

There are more journalism graduates per year than there are journalism jobs in the totality of the profession.

I blame two things on creating this situation- a college degree requirement or strong preference where it does not actually contribute anything, and a glut of people going through programs in college to get any degree in order to satisfy the unnecessary requirements.

Now that there's a bubble in the number of those seeking college, colleges charge more for tuition. That in turn means students take on a greater debt-load or their families spend disproportionate money on something. Those that do not finish college or can't find the work that they trained for effectively wasted tens of thousands of dollars or more. It also means unscrupulous businesses operating as colleges can collect tuition money so long as they manage to squeak-by with their accreditation, and I'm not entirely certain that the ratio of enrollees-to-graduates factors into accreditation.

I think that we need stronger rules for accreditation and we need employers to stop pushing so damn hard for college-graduates for jobs that do not need them. We also need to be more realistic about the sizes of programs based on the actual growth of fields they train for and to put an end to churning out orders-of-magnitude more graduates than there are jobs. I'm looking at you, music schools, journalism schools, business schools, and your ilk.

Re:Paper Mills

[Opportunist]

This.

Let brains be the decider, not money. If we make sure everyone can get into college, we can up the requirements in terms of skill and brain power and end up with the same amount of graduates but at a FAR higher skill level.

This is actually how it was in my country from the 1970s until about ten years ago. Around 1970 (forgot the exact year), our "socialist" government decided to make university free. You wouldn't BELIEVE the outcry. And of course the university were flooded with new students the next year, but the flood soon vanished as professors noticed that they have to weed out most of the students because there simply was not enough room to even educate them properly. This in turn meant that anyone who got a passing grade before because, well, we need doctors, would not stand a chance anymore. Only the upper sliver, the cream of the crop, went on. The rest was left in the dust.

What came out of our universities in the coming decades was pure gold. We, a small, insignificant country in Europe, had some of the most renowned universities on the planet. Free universities, too. Anyone could get in. Getting through, though, was a completely different matter. And that contributed in no small part to the reputation of the degrees. If you made it here, you'd have made it anywhere.

Things changed big time when politics changed in the early 2ks and they decided we really need more people with a university degree. And we got them. And HR is already catching on. You already get asked "You got your degree from $university before or after 2004?" when applying for a job. 2004 was pretty much the "cut" where we suddenly had a surprising leap in graduates...

Employers ain't dumb. They know what degrees are worthless. Just 'cause you can wave a sheet of paper means jack. What matters is what that sheet of paper means to your employer.