1. In a list of the 10 top reasons (i can’t remember where i read it) why a person won’t get interviewed, let alone hired, number 5 is:
“Over-qualified” – HR assumes that the moment a “better” job comes along the person would leave the company.
2. An Op-Ed in the Boston Globe today:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/edito ... n_failure/
tells the story of a young man whose parents stood back and instead of pushing him into University looked at his aptitudes. He’s working in a home for developmentally-delayed adults and working out what he needs to study to get on in a job he really loves – and is good at.
Comments on that Op-Ed included a couple that suggested that he wouldn’t earn enough to pay his way in life and should give it up and do that Uni course in order to make the money he will need to be a success.
But there is also one comment from a music graduate:
Graduated with honors from high school and was admitted to Smith. I had no academic problems in college and received my BA. Now, 20 years later, I'm 50,000 in debt and work in customer service making less than $30,000 a year. So, in spite of doing everything "right" in school, I still have a low paying job that I hate. Why? Because a BA in music doesn't prepare you for anything but graduate school (which I can't afford.)
Questions:
Should a society regulate the numbers and types of courses available at Universities solely to meet the labour market?
Do / should vocational courses merit the same “respect” as Uni courses?
What value do you think attaches to a Uni degree when it comes to employment? Is it only about money?
What is “over-qualified”?
What thoughts on the notion of education and employment came to your mind when you looked at the juxtaposition of my recent readings?
The floor is open.
.






