ATAR Notes: Forum
Uni Stuff => Faculties => Arts => Topic started by: brendan on November 16, 2008, 02:45:59 pm
-
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/11/15/1226319000858.html
Graduate Careers Australia executive director Cindy Tilbrook said while the pain might be eased by vacancies due to an ageing workforce and an continuing skills shortage in areas such as health and engineering, those with a "less defined" career path from humanities or generalist degrees were more likely to struggle to find work.
"They are the ones who feel it even in good times because their outcomes are not as good as those in skill-shortage areas," she said.
http://andrewnorton.info/2008/11/over-qualified-workers/
26.3% of graduates were working in jobs that the ABS occupational classifications system says require vocational or no post-secondary education rather than higher education. That’s only .2% lower than last year. Work I have done on data from the 2006 census suggests that it is the generalist degrees, and particularly arts (with the exception of those with degrees in ‘philosophy and religious studies’), that drag down the average. About 40% of other Arts graduates are in jobs that don’t require higher education.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2007/02/07/UUKfulltext.pdf
One of the first analyses to consider the economic benefits of higher education subjects found that men in possession of an undergraduate degree achieved an earnings premium of approximately 15% over individuals in possession of A-levels.The corresponding estimate for women was 19%.
However, men in possession of mathematics degrees achieved a 25.7% earnings premium over those with A-levels as their highest qualification, while corresponding women achieved a 38.6% earnings premium. In contrast,the premium for men in possession of undergraduate degrees in the arts was 4% less relative to those individuals with A-levels,whilst women achieved a 17% premium. Irrespective of the subject of study,the financial benefit of completing a degree is much greater for women than for men, but this may be due to the relatively low earnings of non-graduate women.
http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter00/polwin00-9.htm
… a survey by ACNielsen found that employers thought their Arts graduates had below average literacy skills. …
Since the mid-1970s Arts graduates have in each decade been experiencing a more difficult transition from study to work, to the point where more than 30% are still looking for full-time work four months after graduating. While their labour market position improves substantially over time, they never come close to matching their peers in some other degrees. People with degrees in what the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls ‘society and culture’ have unemployment rates about 50% above those of graduates generally. Wages too remain well below average, probably partly because some graduates are working in jobs for which degrees are not required.
-
you should have done an arts course brendan... experience it a bit,.
-
Wow, do you think that possibly, maybe we get the picture by now?
You dislike Arts and look down on people who do Arts. And constantly post links that don't put Arts in a good light, and are constantly negative about it, just to show how useless it is, and that doing an Arts degree amounts to nothing, and no-one who does Arts will ever be successful ever.
I THINK WE GET IT BY NOW!!!
-
commerce students have difficulty in stfu'ing about how useless art degrees are?
-
commerce students have difficulty in stfu'ing about how useless art degrees are?
Yes! Superiority complex much?
-
haha arts students vs brendan. come here and commentate droodles
-
haha arts students vs brendan. come here and commentate droodles
For the record, I'm not an Arts student. But I am vs. Brendan.
-
haha arts students vs brendan. come here and commentate droodles
For the record, I'm not an Arts student. But I am vs. Brendan.
yes, but they will come.
-
DID SOMEBODY CALL?
BAD BRENDAN
-
Wow, do you think that possibly, maybe we get the picture by now?
You dislike Arts and look down on people who do Arts. And constantly post links that don't put Arts in a good light, and are constantly negative about it, just to show how useless it is, and that doing an Arts degree amounts to nothing, and no-one who does Arts will ever be successful ever.
I THINK WE GET IT BY NOW!!!
Asides from the part sometimes he posts articles about Arts and lack of employment/job opportunities, he has not said anything to even imply anything else. You can't infer any of those things.
It's true with an arts degree and no direction afterwards you'll find it hard getting a good job anyway.. That doens't mean I don't think arts can be incredibly useful, rewarding and put you in a good situation financially. It can do all of those things :P
-
same thing with a science degree, no direction = no job
-
Where does it say anything about Arts Degrees?
It says, 'generalist degrees'...
-
humanities == arts.
-
"and discovered early, and perhaps too thoroughly, the acute pleasures of provocation."
I can relate to that.
:P
-
haha arts students vs brendan. come here and commentate droodles
cbf, doing français. toi?
-
Wow, do you think that possibly, maybe we get the picture by now?
You dislike Arts and look down on people who do Arts. And constantly post links that don't put Arts in a good light, and are constantly negative about it, just to show how useless it is, and that doing an Arts degree amounts to nothing, and no-one who does Arts will ever be successful ever.
I THINK WE GET IT BY NOW!!!
I'm just the messenger.
-
Wow, do you think that possibly, maybe we get the picture by now?
You dislike Arts and look down on people who do Arts. And constantly post links that don't put Arts in a good light, and are constantly negative about it, just to show how useless it is, and that doing an Arts degree amounts to nothing, and no-one who does Arts will ever be successful ever.
I THINK WE GET IT BY NOW!!!
I'm just the messenger.
I love the 1 line answer:D
-
*rolls eyes*
You may well be a 'just the messenger', Brendan, I don't know, but I don't think that's it, you're probably too clever for that. But the quote you provided in the first post takes the article out of context. The article is not about 'arts students to have difficulty finding jobs', rather, it's another scare piece on the economic downturn and about how young people in general will find things more hard than the previous generation. The mention of people who do 'generalist degrees' just explores where the 'crisis' might hit. Note: Not all generalist degrees are also Arts degrees. So, in merely naming the topic as you do, you're providing us a reinterpretation of the entire article either explicitly or inadvertently. Perhaps you're trying to provoke some kind of response in people who are Arts students or are sympathetic to Arts students. Well done if you are, because look at how I'm responding.
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces, despite there being lots out there. Melbourne University's propaganda on why generalist degrees are a really good idea being one such case. Probably more importantly, the fact that last year Arts at UoM was the most popular course to do and required an ENTER of over 85, showed that not just people see the benefits of an Arts degree, but high performing students who are presumably quite smart see the benefits of doing an Arts degree.
Furthermore, a big 'duh', to the idea that degrees which are career specific or are in skill shortage areas will lead to a higher likelihood of employment than degrees which are not. But, it's important to understand that there are other outcomes in doing a degree than those that are employment specific. I remember one of the first speeches given to me and my Artsy cohort was in terms of career outcomes, 'it doesn't matter'. We were assured that we would get a job in the end, but more importantly, we were assured a good education. But, if you measure success in life in terms of employment, then you should not be disappointed with the outcomes one is provided by Arts. Arts students can expect jobs if they are good at what they do and if they can demonstrate the passion for what they do. If they can't, then they shouldn't have done Arts in the first place. In any case, just having a university degree can get you to a lot of places.
Often people pull out the figures in saying that Arts students have a lower employment rate than those of other degrees. This is probably quite true. However, many people also ignore the fact that 'Arts is the degree you do when you don't know what degree to do.' As a result, some graduates still aren't sure what to do, and are less motivated than other graduates. If you aren't a motivated person, it's much easier to do a career specific degree because the career path is easy and obvious. Those doing an Arts degree who want a job have to be reflective in regard to what they'd like to do with their lives and must be motivated. I would say that Arts might actually be the worst degree to do if you don't know what to do.
-
.But the quote you provided in the first post takes the article out of context.
Well by definition, any quote that doesn't reproduce the whole article, is taken out of context!
Not all generalist degrees are also Arts degrees.
But Arts degrees are generalist/humanities degrees.
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces
Oh and what is supposed to be "pro-Arts"? I guess that means you think this article is not "pro-Arts". Why isn't it "pro-Arts"?
-
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces
He doesn't have to.
I haven't seen anyone post any pro-IT articles yet from anyone, have I?
-
i mite study arts ... with eco major...maybe
-
i mite study arts ... with eco major...maybe
i find that hard to believe
-
.But the quote you provided in the first post takes the article out of context.
Well by definition, any quote that doesn't reproduce the whole article, is taken out of context!
Not all generalist degrees are also Arts degrees.
But Arts degrees are generalist/humanities degrees.
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces
Oh and what is supposed to be "pro-Arts"? I guess that means you think this article is not "pro-Arts". Why isn't it "pro-Arts"?
1. Science is a generalist degree, so why not mention science in the title?
2. I'm not sure. I don't think the main focus was to be either anti or pro arts, it was supposed to be anti-economic crisis. But, you did put an anti- spin on the whole thing in the title.
-
Yeh Brendan
Even though you don't personally state "arts degrees are shit", you post alot of this arts stuff just to get a rise out of people, to stir up the humanities kids to watch them get all defensive.
I don't personally care, but you kinda have to admit that secretly you get your kicks giving arts students crap about lowered job prospects and seemingly irrelevant subjects
But then again, who hasn't teased their arts based colleagues
-
.But the quote you provided in the first post takes the article out of context.
Well by definition, any quote that doesn't reproduce the whole article, is taken out of context!
Not all generalist degrees are also Arts degrees.
But Arts degrees are generalist/humanities degrees.
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces
Oh and what is supposed to be "pro-Arts"? I guess that means you think this article is not "pro-Arts". Why isn't it "pro-Arts"?
1. Science is a generalist degree, so why not mention science in the title?
2. I'm not sure. I don't think the main focus was to be either anti or pro arts, it was supposed to be anti-economic crisis. But, you did put an anti- spin on the whole thing in the title.
1. The closest degree in Australia that fits the description of "humanities or generalist degrees" is the Arts degree.
2. How is it anti-Arts?
you kinda have to admit that secretly you get your kicks giving arts students crap about lowered job prospects and seemingly irrelevant subjects
I am simply the messenger.
I will say one thing though: I do not think taxpayers should be paying for 106-052 Gothic Fictions
-
I will say one thing though: I do not think taxpayers should be paying for 106-052 Gothic Fictions
Haha, I would literally be afraid to take one of those hardcore arts subjects.
-
Hehe, arts would be interesting. But nevertheless, I don't think I have the stamina for it. :P
-
Moderator Action: Off topic posts moved to Sweet Nothings
-
But then again, who hasn't teased their arts based colleagues
This photo has been doing the email rounds:
(http://www.actnow.com.au/files/4361/ArtsDegreedrwmak_1.jpg)
*NB: Brendan does not endorse the contents of the photo. You cannot get Arts degrees from a toilet paper dispenser.
-
But then again, who hasn't teased their arts based colleagues
This photo has been doing the email rounds:
(http://www.actnow.com.au/files/4361/ArtsDegreedrwmak_1.jpg)
*NB: Brendan does not endorse the contents of the photo. You cannot get Arts degrees from a toilet paper dispenser.
ahahha. you mean doing the toilet rounds, i see it everywhere. and i love the person who wrote it in the toilets IN THE OLD ARTS BUILDING!
-
'Gothic Fictions' linked to a page titled 'The Victorian Supernatural'. It's clearly an English course which focuses on a specific genre of Literature in the Victorian Era. Literature is more or less a subject which investigates culture through texts. I don't understand why it's so remarkably wrong?
-
Wow, do you think that possibly, maybe we get the picture by now?
You dislike Arts and look down on people who do Arts. And constantly post links that don't put Arts in a good light, and are constantly negative about it, just to show how useless it is, and that doing an Arts degree amounts to nothing, and no-one who does Arts will ever be successful ever.
... he has not said anything to even imply anything else. You can't infer any of those things.
Exactly.
'Gothic Fictions' linked to a page titled 'The Victorian Supernatural'. .
Fixed.
I don't understand why it's so remarkably wrong?
I never said the subject was "wrong".
you did put an anti- spin on the whole thing in the title.
How is it "anti-Arts"?
-
I will say one thing though: I do not think taxpayers should be paying for 106-052 Gothic Fictions
He was being "clever", Eriny. The above statement is suggestive of an attitude that ridicules esoteric Arts subjects, however it doesn't contain it intrinsically. You can't *prove* he feels that way. He doesn't think taxpayers should be paying for any university subject.
-
You can't *prove* he feels that way.
It's pretty obvious, really, we're not putting him on trial here, we don't need consensus beyond a reasonable doubt, he, like alot of people doesn't think some arts subjects are of any value, and i can't say i disagree sometimes.
But c'mon bubble sunglasses, his implication is very obvious
-
You can't *prove* he feels that way.
It's pretty obvious, really, we're not putting him on trial here, we don't need consensus beyond a reasonable doubt, he, like alot of people doesn't think some arts subjects are of any value, and i can't say i disagree sometimes.
But c'mon bubble sunglasses, his implication is very obvious
But because it's not *implicit* in what he's written, when people slam him for it, he can then say "Me? attack arts? Where have i said anything 'against arts'? Go on, quote me."
-
err, i'm confused, it's very much implicit
-
err, i'm confused, it's very much implicit
Read my post at 9.31
-
i did, i just assumed you were using the wrong word
-
But then again, who hasn't teased their arts based colleagues
This photo has been doing the email rounds:
(http://www.actnow.com.au/files/4361/ArtsDegreedrwmak_1.jpg)
*NB: Brendan does not endorse the contents of the photo. You cannot get Arts degrees from a toilet paper dispenser.
I've seen one at Monash that goes 'Pull here for Arts degree'.
On the other wall, I see a lionface and 'sup /b/'.
-
But because it's not *implicit* in what he's written, when people slam him for it, he can then say "Me? attack arts? Where have i said anything 'against arts'? Go on, quote me."
Didn't the "Arts (criticism)" thread used to be titled "Arts (hate)", or something similar? I believe that's "against" Arts.
-
i did, i just assumed you were using the wrong word
yeah, you're right actually
-
Didn't the "Arts (criticism)" thread used to be titled "Arts (hate)",
No?
-
I don't understand why it's so remarkably wrong?
I never said the subject was "wrong".
[/quote]
But it isn't okay for the taxpayer to pay for it? Even though the generic skills picked up in such a course would be just as valuable as whatever skills you pick up, in say, commerce. The difference being that the skills one picks up in Arts are transferable and makes one versatile, as opposed to the skills picked up in career specific degrees which are less transferable but lead to a more direct path.
Probably irrelevant: To me, it made sense to study arts because it put me in touch with *knowledge*, as opposed to other degrees which are more specific, dated, mechanical, and extremely specific to our context (as in, the humanities - and law is traditionally a humanities subject - and an approximation of science have been around since thought, but many other things you can study now don't have illustrious histories, and try to explain modern things, as opposed to just things). I know this is probably an unfair portrayal of other degrees, but I'm not so obsessed with the supremacy of the current world that I feel like that's what I should limit my study to.
And in doing arts, I do have a career in mind. And back-ups if that doesn't work out.
you did put an anti- spin on the whole thing in the title.
How is it "anti-Arts"?
You aren't trying to say that you're portraying a completely balanced outlook on the whole issue, are you?
It's anti-arts because you said that 'arts students to have difficulty finding jobs' ignoring that:
a) according to the article, everyone will have difficulty finding jobs, including people who do 'generalist degrees'; and
b) the reasons why this happens has little to do with the degree itself, rather the type of people who are more likely to do the degree.
In essence, it is anti-arts because it's simplistic. The bias is fine, it's not a problem or an accusation. We're all biased, right? It's unlikely that I'll ever post a link that I totally disagree with (unless I think it's absurdly funny).
It is also rather characteristic of you to latch onto a couple of words and in turn ignore the fact that I've put together an actual argument that you 'won't' dispute. This 'anti-arts' thing is extremely peripheral (perhaps in the end, irrelevant?) to the point I was making.
-
Didn't the "Arts (criticism)" thread used to be titled "Arts (hate)",
No?
http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,1610.msg26378/topicseen.html#msg26378
-
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions? Do you think students gain anything from studying them? Do you think they're less worthwhile than subjects from other faculties, such as Economics and Finance, or Law or Science units?
-
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
I do not think taxpayers should be forced to pay for that.
isn't okay for the taxpayer to pay for it?
No, it absolutely is not OK. If a person wants to study 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural' they should pay for it themselves rather than forcing someone else pay for them.
You aren't trying to say that you're portraying a completely balanced outlook on the whole issue, are you?
I wasn't trying to portray any "outlook" on any issue at all. I was simply relaying the information - a messenger.
It's anti-arts because you said that 'arts students to have difficulty finding jobs'
It wasn't "anti-arts" at all. It's your own mind that interpreted it as "anti-arts". I'm simply relaying information. The statement that arts graduates are more likely to encounter labour market difficulties is a statement of fact, not one of value where you are "anti" or "pro" something.
a) according to the article, everyone will have difficulty finding jobs, including people who do 'generalist degrees';
Actually this is what the article said:
Graduate Careers Australia executive director Cindy Tilbrook said while the pain might be eased by vacancies due to an ageing workforce and an continuing skills shortage in areas such as health and engineering, those with a "less defined" career path from humanities or generalist degrees were more likely to struggle to find work.
b) the reasons why this happens has little to do with the degree itself, rather the type of people who are more likely to do the degree.
In essence, it is anti-arts because it's simplistic.
You are latching onto a straw-man. Where, in any of my posts in this thread, did I ever argue that the job market problems that Arts graduates encounter were solely due to the degree itself?
actual argument that you 'won't' dispute.
Because much of your argument is simply grasping at straw-men.
-
I wasn't saying that you said those things, I wasn't arguing with you. There's little to argue with, evidently.
Where does my first post 'grasp at straw men'? I was merely explaining why it may seem as though there are fewer job prospects in Arts. I was examining the claims of the article and many of the claims I read about arts on VN.
-
Where does my first post 'grasp at straw men'?
I wasn't referring to your first post specifically.
-
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
I do not think taxpayers should be forced to pay for that.
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects? Do you see Commerce subjects as more worthy of taxpayer money than the subjects I listed?
Also, do you think there is anything wrong with the subjects I mentioned above being cross-subsidized, funded by the fees of International students?
-
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
I do not think taxpayers should be forced to pay for that.
Why not?
No, it absolutely is not OK. If a person wants to study 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural' they should pay for it themselves rather than forcing someone else pay for them.
Why?
What gives you the right to decide which subjects are worthy of taxpayer dollars and which are not?
Indeed, how and where does one draw the line?
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Do you see Commerce subjects as more worthy of taxpayer money than the subjects I listed?
See above.
What gives you the right to decide which subjects are worthy of taxpayer dollars and which are not? Indeed, how and where does one draw the line?
When it comes to the cost of higher education, there is no free lunch. Someone, somewhere has to pay. The only question is: who?
On that question, I do not think the non-users of higher education should be forced to pay for those that do use it. In addition, once you think about the kind of people that attend university, and the kind of people that don’t, taxpayer subsidies to higher education is awfully regressive.
Do you think there is anything wrong with the subjects I mentioned above being cross-subsidised, funded by the fees of International students?
Cross-subsidisation hasn't been mentioned before in this thread. My thoughts on it are this: Cross-subsidisation happens in many businesses and organisations, and whether or not is efficient can vary from business to business. My libertarian tendencies tell me that businesses and individuals ought to be able to spend their revenues however they wish. From a social welfare standpoint, I don't know whether or not cross-subsidization is efficient. If the market is relatively competitive, then it wouldn't be something I would think too much of. In the realm of higher education, I and many other policy analysts think that cross-subsidisation is mainly occurring as a result of the unnecessary government regulation (mainly through quotas and price controls) of higher education. Furthermore, its readily acknowledged by many of those working inside higher education, that international students cross-subsidise a lot more than just the Arts faculty. I'd suspect that they are propping up the science faculty, and probably other faculties too that don't have a lot of fee-paying students whether local or international.
-
humanities kids to watch them get all defensive.
I will say that I am amazed just how extraordinarily defensive they can get.
-
Yeah, one thing that they should accept is that even though the evidence may be against them, if you are a good Arts student with direction you can still get a good job.
Also, who says a job is all that matters? Brendan didn't say that. Maybe you think it is though, and then perhaps that's why you're offended. But no one is saying that Arts is bad, it only becomes perceived that way with your own value input.
-
humanities kids to watch them get all defensive.
I will say that I am amazed just how extraordinarily defensive they can get.
Probably because on some level they know it to be true
-
humanities kids to watch them get all defensive.
I will say that I am amazed just how extraordinarily defensive they can get.
Probably because on some level they know it to be true
bam!
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
What's your point?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural'.
I was specifically asked:
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
What's your point?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural'.
I was specifically asked:
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
No.
You whinged about it before that question.
-
humanities kids to watch them get all defensive.
I will say that I am amazed just how extraordinarily defensive they can get.
Probably because on some level they know it to be true
Not really. I'm expecting a job I like. Though I'm not doing a "BA" and the degree I'm doing currently won't be my last, either.
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
What's your point?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural'.
I was specifically asked:
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
No.
You whinged about it before that question.
And your point is?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural' and Gothic Fictions etc.
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
What's your point?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural'.
I was specifically asked:
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
No.
You whinged about it before that question.
And your point is?
I oppose taxpayers subsidies to the 106-043 The Victorian 'Supernatural' and Gothic Fictions etc.
Yes, but why bring up particular ARTS subjects you're opposed to taxpayer funding of?? You also oppose Commerce taxpayer funding
Here are the facts:
- you say you're not anti-arts
- you are anti-arts
-
Do you think taxpayers should be paying for Commerce subjects?
No.
Lol! So what was the point of whinging about taxpayers paying for a specific Arts subject, when you're opposed to the idea of taxpayers paying for any university subject?
?!
You *might* infer that he gets a kick out of provoking Arts students into defensive responses
Also, there's no point in calling him "anti-Arts." It's very general and hence meaningless and easy for him to deny. I estimate that he'll have harder insinuations to refute before he finishes uni :)
-
You *might* infer that he gets a kick out of provoking Arts students into defensive responses
Done and done.
-
Yes, but why bring up particular ARTS subjects you're opposed to taxpayer funding of?? You also oppose Commerce taxpayer funding
Because I oppose taxpayer funding of them? And if you haven't yet noticed, this thread is about Arts students.
- you are anti-arts
No that isn't "the facts", that's what you think to satisfy yourself.
What I actually said:
Brendan, what do you think of subjects in the vein of: Art, Pornograhpy, Blasphemy and Propaganda, The Victorian Supernatural, Film and the Body, Witches and Witch Hunting in Europe and Gothic Fictions?
I do not think taxpayers should be forced to pay for that.
Not supporting having the taxpayer be forced to pay for X does not imply that I am somehow "anti-X".
-
http://andrewnorton.info/2008/11/over-qualified-workers/
-
LOL he had to do TWO arts degrees to get a casual teenage job and security guard on weekends to make up the extra cash haha.
btw when did u get another job? where r u working?
-
OMGOMGOMGOGMG ANTI ARTS
-
who gives a shit seriously
-
The repetitive posting of any article you found which criticized arts degrees used to be mildly annoying, but now it's just getting really quite sad and downright pathetic.
I think we get the point.
-
Rudd had an arts degree..
-
People have different interests to you Brendan. Some are interested in furthering their general education, especially in the humanities field and therefore study arts. I think you could use it to open your mind a bit, maybe learn something different besides how to make money.
-
People have different interests to you Brendan. Some are interested in furthering their general education, especially in the humanities field and therefore study arts. I think you could use it to open your mind a bit, maybe learn something different besides how to make money.
Where have I said that I am not interested in "furthering ... general education" or "something different besides how to make money"?
The repetitive posting of any article you found which criticized arts degrees used to be mildly annoying, but now it's just getting really quite sad and downright pathetic.
I think we get the point.
How is this article "critical" of arts? It seems more like you don't like or can't handle the message, so you choose shoot down the messenger.
-
Rudd had an arts degree..
wasn't it asian studies? lol
-
Rudd had an arts degree..
wasn't it asian studies? lol
Arts (Asian Studies)
-
The repetitive posting of any article you found which criticized arts degrees used to be mildly annoying, but now it's just getting really quite sad and downright pathetic.
I think we get the point.
How is this article "critical" of arts? It seems more like you don't like or can't handle the message, so you choose shoot down the messenger.
Such a predictable response.
Why wouldn't I be able to handle the message? I'm not even currently considering doing an Arts degree, I am looking to do Medicine, so as far as that goes I don't really care.
You might just be the "messenger", but you're certainly being very selective about the messages you deliver.
No one is forcing you or is requesting that you create these threads whenever you find an article which suggests Arts Graduates earn less money. And not only are you posting these articles repetitively, but you're also posting articles from different sources yet with essentially the same information, after people have already refuted it and given their counter arguments in other threads.
So what is your motive behind posting these? Because in all honestly, it's getting pretty damn pathetic now.
-
The repetitive posting of any article you found which criticized arts degrees used to be mildly annoying, but now it's just getting really quite sad and downright pathetic.
I think we get the point.
How is this article "critical" of arts? It seems more like you don't like or can't handle the message, so you choose shoot down the messenger.
Such a predictable response.
Why wouldn't I be able to handle the message? I'm not even currently considering doing an Arts degree, I am looking to do Medicine, so as far as that goes I don't really care.
You might just be the "messenger", but you're certainly being very selective about the messages you deliver.
No one is forcing you or is requesting that you create these threads whenever you find an article which suggests Arts Graduates earn less money. And not only are you posting these articles repetitively, but you're also posting articles from different sources yet with essentially the same information, after people have already refuted it and given their counter arguments in other threads.
So what is your motive behind posting these? Because in all honestly, it's getting pretty damn pathetic now.
I post plenty of articles on VN, and why do I need a motive? I can do what I like. Furthermore, what is it that you find so annoying about the articles? How are the articles "critical"?
-
That's fine, you can choose to post what you wish. As long as you aware that it reflects badly on you for posting something so repetitively.
2. Where have I said that I am not interested in "furthering ... general education" or "something different besides how to make money"?
And where exactly have I said that you weren't interested in furthering general education and were only interested in making money? I think you will find I didn't.
EDIT: he edited his post while I was writing the response...
-
That's fine, you can choose to post what you wish. As long as you aware that it reflects badly on you for posting something so repetitively.
2. Where have I said that I am not interested in "furthering ... general education" or "something different besides how to make money"?
And where exactly have I said that you weren't interested in furthering general education and were only interested in making money? I think you will find I didn't.
EDIT: he edited his post while I was writing the response..
What is it that you find so annoying about the articles and how are the articles "critical"?
-
Brendan, you can play the innocent self-victimising "WHAT, ME?!" game as much as you like, but anyone with half a brain can see through it. You either dislike arts degrees/students/whatever, or enjoy provoking this response from your repeated posting of such articles, or a bit of both (in fact I'm sure it's a combination of the two). Stop acting as if this isn't deliberate - it is.
This whole "WHAT, ME?!" act is beginning to get annoying. Man up and actually declare your vendetta against arts degrees/students instead of passively-aggressively antagonising people with your constant bullshit.
This post is dedicated to ninwa :)
-
Why wouldn't I be able to handle the message? I'm not even currently considering doing an Arts degree, I am looking to do Medicine, so as far as that goes I don't really care.
So by that logic, men would be expected to be indifferent to, say, the issues in abortion as it doesn't directly affect them.
I think we get the point.
What is this point? Is this what troubles and "annoys" you?
That's fine, you can choose to post what you wish.
If you make this concession, then why attack Brendan as "pathetic" and "annoying"?
And where exactly have I said that you weren't interested in furthering general education and were only interested in making money? I think you will find I didn't.
Conversely, where have you said that he was interested in furthering general education and not only interested in making money? You have not.
Again, what is it that you find so critical about the articles and how are the articles "annoying"?
Stop acting as if this isn't deliberate - it is.
Which part do you see as deliberate? He is merely posting up articles.
-
Man up and actually declare your vendetta against arts degrees/students instead of passively-aggressively antagonising people with your constant bullshit.
What bullshit? The articles? I am just the messenger.
It says more that people like you choose to make unsubstantiated accusations against the messenger rather than address the message.
Brendan, you can play the innocent self-victimising "WHAT, ME?!"
It's more like people making unsubstantiated accusations. If a person is going to make an accusation then they better stand ready to provide some evidence.
-
You have the power to choose which articles you post up. The considerable proportion of articles that you post up which are critical of the arts degree, indicates a heavy bias on your part. Indeed, a quick glance at the first page of this forum alone yields 30% of your topics to be on negative aspects of the arts degree.
You are a coward, and you refuse to own up to your bias.
-
How is this article critical of the Arts degree?
-
Notice that I have used arts degree and arts student interchangeably as I am unsure where your vendetta truly lies :)
-
Also, you're grasping at straws now. :)
-
Notice that I have used arts degree and arts student interchangeably as I am unsure where your vendetta truly lies :)
You know why are you are unsure; it is because you are just speculating about some supposed "vendetta", without providing any substantial evidence at all.
You have the power to choose which articles you post up. The considerable proportion of articles that you post up which are critical of the arts degree, indicates a heavy bias on your part. Indeed, a quick glance at the first page of this forum alone yields 30% of your topics to be on negative aspects of the arts degree.
How is it "negative"?
-
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2007/02/07/UUKfulltext.pdf
One of the first analyses to consider the economic benefits of higher education subjects found that men in possession of an undergraduate degree achieved an earnings premium of approximately 15% over individuals in possession of A-levels.The corresponding estimate for women was 19%.
However, men in possession of mathematics degrees achieved a 25.7% earnings premium over those with A-levels as their highest qualification, while corresponding women achieved a 38.6% earnings premium. In contrast,the premium for men in possession of undergraduate degrees in the arts was 4% less relative to those individuals with A-levels,whilst women achieved a 17% premium. Irrespective of the subject of study,the financial benefit of completing a degree is much greater for women than for men, but this may be due to the relatively low earnings of non-graduate women.
-
You have the power to choose which articles you post up. The considerable proportion of articles that you post up which are critical of the arts degree, indicates a heavy bias on your part.
So?
Also, you're grasping at straws now. :)
You have a habit of trying to end arguments (and having the last word) in this manner and failing miserably each and every single time.
There was another example of the above in the 'Muslims' thread, but that's gone now.
-
... Every article you have posted about the arts degree has talked about the arts degree negatively. This article is awakening the old stereotype (true or not) that arts students are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's etc.
Don't do this "omg how is it negative?" bullshit.
And no, I'm not unsure because i'm "speculating" with unsubstantiated evidence. It's because I'm unsure where your vendetta stems from.
Your focus on the arts degree and its negative aspects in a RIDICULOUSLY HIGH proportion of your posts is evidence enough of your bias. Your denial of it is a clear indication of your cowardice.
-
Hahahahahahaha, way to reinforce my point. You are quite obsessed with arts students Brendan. :) Methinks you just like provoking a response. A little bit attention starved? HERE'S YOUR ATTENTION BRENDAN :):):)
-
... Every article you have posted about the arts degree has talked about the arts degree negatively.
How is every article "negative" regarding the Arts degree?
This article is awakening the old stereotype (true or not) that arts students are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's etc.
Where in the article does it state that all arts students "are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's"? The only person that has actually said that in this thread is you.
-
why not stop being so bloody antagonistic? you've made your point, so why don't you just get over it. BTW do you not realise how insulting it is for arts students to have their choices degraded by people like you posting these pointless articles?
-
You are quite obsessed with arts students Brendan. :) Methinks you just like provoking a response. A little bit attention starved? HERE'S YOUR ATTENTION BRENDAN :):):)
I think it's more the case that your post, bearing little relation to the topic at hand, shows that you are more obsessed with the messenger than the actual message.
-
... Okay Brendan, if you're going to act like a moronic child, I'm going to treat you like a moronic child.
Dictionary definition of negative, because clearly self-victimising Brendan never learnt this in school!
"being without rewards, results, or effectiveness: a search of the premises proved negative."
The crux of the article you just posted was that an arts degree is not likely to provide an arts student with a relevant job. I.E. An arts student will not be REWARDED with a job in their field. THIS WOULD IMPLY, BABY BRENDAN, A NEGATIVE ASPECT.
Now, I'd love to go through and do this with each one of the articles you have posted, but I can't baby you through this self-victimising game you have going. You'll have to do it for yourself, can you do that, little baby? :)
WHO WANTS ATTENTION. Brendan does :D
-
I think it's more the case that you're an elitist git who gets off on condescending those he feels are beneath him. :)
-
And too bad NO ONE CARES seeing as this applies to people in the UK. Way to make a point dude.
-
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Welcome to reality art students.
Hmm, I have a feeling he posted this to purposely get on your nerves after your reaction in the last post :P. ("Your" refers to anyone who got overly defensive in the last post)
-
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
Welcome to reality art students.
Um, what?
How is something relating to the UK pertinent to any Arts student here?
-
And too bad NO ONE CARES seeing as this applies to people in the UK. Way to make a point dude.
Not only that, but the article is from 2007, meaning that he actually went to search for this article. You can just imagine him sitting there typing in "arts degrees poor earnings" and his face lighting up with glee when he found what he was looking for.
It's pathetically funny :)
-
^ HAHA, how true! What do you think his problem is with arts anyway? Could it be the fact it is far more interesting than what he is doing, and jealousy is a major factor???
-
For fuck's sake. It's fucking trolling. How pointless...
-
Yeah, it's probably trolling at this point. Trouble is, it's 'clever' trolling, so none of us can accuse Brendan of anything. Best we can do is attack the article itself, then, whatever valid points we might make are labeled 'defensive' and aren't actually addressed.
-
:)
Half of you are in denial. The other half already know that you don't aim at the average anyway. We visit VCEnotes for higher ENTERs than the average.
-
... Okay Brendan, if you're going to act like a moronic child, I'm going to treat you like a moronic child.
Dictionary definition of negative, because clearly self-victimising Brendan never learnt this in school!
"being without rewards, results, or effectiveness: a search of the premises proved negative."
The crux of the article you just posted was that an arts degree is not likely to provide an arts student with a relevant job. I.E. An arts student will not be REWARDED with a job in their field. THIS WOULD IMPLY, BABY BRENDAN, A NEGATIVE ASPECT.
Now, I'd love to go through and do this with each one of the articles you have posted, but I can't baby you through this self-victimising game you have going. You'll have to do it for yourself, can you do that, little baby? :)
WHO WANTS ATTENTION. Brendan does :D
I think this post, more than any other in this thread, has to take the cake when it comes to immaturity, and attacking the person rather than addressing the actual topic.
The crux of the article you just posted was that an arts degree is not likely to provide an arts student with a relevant job. I.E. An arts student will not be REWARDED with a job in their field.
1. The finding that 40% of arts grads are in jobs that don’t require tertiary education does not imply that “An arts student will not be REWARDED with a job in their field.”
2. Your statement would imply taking a 60% probability as being “not likely”.
3. People can be in jobs that they love without it requiring a tertiary education, so its not abundantly obvious that 40% of arts graduates not being in jobs that require a tertiary degree is an absolutely negative thing.
... Okay Brendan, if you're going to act like a moronic child, I'm going to treat you like a moronic child.
…You'll have to do it for yourself, can you do that, little baby? :)
WHO WANTS ATTENTION. Brendan does :D
gets off on condescending those he feels are beneath him.
-
If you guys really had half a brain you wouldn't respond to him, because statistics don't matter a whole lot if we're the high achievers that we all strive to be. Since when did we aim for the average bar?
It is the action of individuals that lead statistics, not the other way around.
-
Brendan, I did not condescend you at all in these posts up until that last post. And it was done as exaggerated sarcasm to give you a dose of your own medicine :)
-
Seriously, though, just what is your problem with arts?? You're clearly not an arts student, and I simply do not understand why you insist on posting these articles. Because really, no-one cares about this information except for you apparently
-
For fuck's sake. It's fucking trolling. How pointless...
Yeah, I think the word is "pathetic". :)
-
I'm thinking maybe we should merge all of these types of Arts threads (I can't call them 'anti-Arts' threads, or 'negative Arts' threads) into one topic, because it just involves the same posts getting rehashed.
-
Brendan, I did not condescend you at all in these posts up until that last post. And it was done as exaggerated sarcasm to give you a dose of your own medicine :)
Just where have I been condescending, resorted to name-calling, and made unsubstantiated accusations against certain persons, in the act of simply posting articles?
-
Brendan, I did not condescend you at all in these posts up until that last post. And it was done as exaggerated sarcasm to give you a dose of your own medicine :)
Not really, because he kind of owned you in the posts before you had to resort to ad hominem.
... Every article you have posted about the arts degree has talked about the arts degree negatively.
How is every article "negative" regarding the Arts degree?
This article is awakening the old stereotype (true or not) that arts students are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's etc.
Where in the article does it state that all arts students "are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's"? The only person that has actually said that in this thread is you.
Once again, I'll bring my point from another thread. These are the summary statistics about arts. They are true facts, you cannot deny them. However, people who take Arts degrees may not necessarily take them for their high job prospects. There are other things to life. Brendan never said that "jobs" are the only thing that are important, so he has never been posting "negative" articles about Arts. They only become negative when you attach your own values and draw your own meanings from the statistics.
-
Eriny, if you want to, I give you permission to do it :) I cbf investing that much effort into Brendan's pathetic trolling attempts. But, if you want to, by all means :P
-
Seriously, though, just what is your problem with arts?? You're clearly not an arts student, and I simply do not understand why you insist on posting these articles. Because really, no-one cares about this information except for you apparently
Ignore them then. Getting riled up is probably more of an indication that you care than you don't.
-
I vehemently disagree with the proposition that the threads are "anti-Arts". To those that claim that they are: just how are these threads "anti-Arts"?
-
^ oh, i ignore them, and i don't care, because they'll never change my opinions about arts. I'm more interested in discovering why brendan is so anti-Arts - a question he seems unable to answer.
-
^ oops, that was in reply to coblin
-
Brendan, I did not condescend you at all in these posts up until that last post. And it was done as exaggerated sarcasm to give you a dose of your own medicine :)
Not really, because he kind of owned you in the posts before you had to resort to ad hominem.
... Every article you have posted about the arts degree has talked about the arts degree negatively.
How is every article "negative" regarding the Arts degree?
This article is awakening the old stereotype (true or not) that arts students are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's etc.
Where in the article does it state that all arts students "are merely burger-flippers at mcdonald's"? The only person that has actually said that in this thread is you.
Once again, I'll bring my point from another thread. These are the summary statistics about arts. They are true facts, you cannot deny them. However, people who take Arts degrees may not necessarily take them for their high job prospects. There are other things to life. Brendan never said that "jobs" are the only thing that are important, so he has never been posting "negative" articles about Arts. They only become negative when you attach your own values and draw your own meanings from the statistics.
Lol, brendan didn't own me by any stretch of the imagination. All he did was show how coarse the straws are that he's willing to clutch in order to hide behind the truth of his arts vendetta. And his repeated posting of these "summary statistics" shows his bias and condescension of the arts degrees. There are also numerous times where he's posted saying that arts (or, at least, certain arts subjects) should no longer be given HECS funding. But he hasn't said this of other courses. It's ONLY been Arts, pretty much. It is clear that he has a bias against arts. His refusal to admit this is pure cowardice, and my calling him on this fact is not unjustified when he's simply being a pathetic troll. :)
-
How is he being anti-Arts?
When you look at his posts, they seem innocent, and sure, he may have another motive, but one has to wonder why such a calm and collected post can elicit such a response.
You have to ask the reader. They are attaching meanings to the message that didn't come bundled with it. If you find these posts outrageous or annoying, you are merely victim to your own perception.
-
Lol, brendan didn't own me by any stretch of the imagination. All he did was show how coarse the straws are that he's willing to clutch in order to hide behind the truth of his arts vendetta. And his repeated posting of these "summary statistics" shows his bias and condescension of the arts degrees. There are also numerous times where he's posted saying that arts (or, at least, certain arts subjects) should no longer be given HECS funding. But he hasn't said this of other courses. It's ONLY been Arts, pretty much. It is clear that he has a bias against arts. His refusal to admit this is pure cowardice, and my calling him on this fact is not unjustified when he's simply being a pathetic troll. :)
Wrong. He is against HECS funding for all subjects, and he has publicly stated this. Once again, these statistics are not 'biased' or 'condescending'. They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
-
Lol, brendan didn't own me by any stretch of the imagination. All he did was show how coarse the straws are that he's willing to clutch in order to hide behind the truth of his arts vendetta. And his repeated posting of these "summary statistics" shows his bias and condescension of the arts degrees. There are also numerous times where he's posted saying that arts (or, at least, certain arts subjects) should no longer be given HECS funding. But he hasn't said this of other courses. It's ONLY been Arts, pretty much. It is clear that he has a bias against arts. His refusal to admit this is pure cowardice, and my calling him on this fact is not unjustified when he's simply being a pathetic troll. :)
Wrong. He is against HECS funding for all subjects, and he has publicly stated this.
Numerous times at that. And not so much against the idea/principle behind Income Contingent Loans likes HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP, but rather outright subsidies from the Commonwealth Government.
They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
That's exactly right.
-
Lol, but you often use Arts subjects as your examples. A pattern, no? :)
As humans, we are able to impugn motives, collin. As innocent as Brendan wishes to seem, let us think for a second.
Brendan INCESSANTLY repeats these "summary statistics" to the point where it is CLEAR that he has a vested interest. When he's posting these Arts articles at a proportion significantly greater than that of other faculties, it is indicative of a VESTED INTEREST.
Now, what would Brendan's vested interest be? He's not an Arts student! I impugn this interest as a condescending bias that has become a pathetic exercise in trolling.
-
* Moderator Action: Topics merged!
-
His motives aren't important. There's no need to call him out on something which you can't solidly call him out on. It'll just get shut down.
The mature course of action is to recognise that statistics do not lead and instruct your life - instead, as an individual, you have the power to lead and instruct statistics! Realise that the evidence that he is being the messenger of is not necessarily binding to you as an individual, and may even be irrelevant to your passion to do Arts (if this applies to you - do you do Arts because you want a nice job, or because you want to study a passion?).
If he "thinks on the inside" that Arts is a bad degree, so what? We all have our own values and preferences. He hasn't made them public so there's no need to call him out for that.
-
Lol, but you often use Arts subjects as your examples.
I did use Arts subjects as an example in an thread about Arts.
-
meh, it's just (not eriny) and all the other arts fanatics who see them as an attack, you guys need to lighten up. science degrees dont really lead to anywhere glamorous and high paying, and some people like to criticize them aswell, but i still have them as one of my options.
-
meh, it's just eriny and all the other arts fanatics who see them as an attack, you guys need to lighten up. science degrees dont really lead to anywhere glamorous and high paying, and some people like to criticize them aswell, but i still have them as one of my options.
Sorry? What makes me a fanatic? When did I see any of this stuff as a personal attack? I enrolled in an Arts degree knowing about these statistics and I'm not insulted by any of this. As coblin said, statistics merely describe the trend - I tried to give an explanation of the trend earlier (which I feel that I have enough knowledge to do) and I will overcome the trend in order to gain meaningful employment as well as a good education in an areas that interests me and where I'm most valuable, not just to myself, but to everyone else. These statistics further don't even apply to me because hopefully, when I get a job, I won't be an 'Arts graduate', I'll be a PhD, and thus, I'll hopefully have qualifications which differ from those described in Brendan's articles.
-
:) peace love and happiness (if you're not convinced read my hippy posts and quotes)
some crap like "individuals influence statistics, not the other way around."
-
meh, it's just eriny and all the other arts fanatics who see them as an attack, you guys need to lighten up. science degrees dont really lead to anywhere glamorous and high paying, and some people like to criticize them aswell, but i still have them as one of my options.
Sorry? What makes me a fanatic? When did I see any of this stuff as a personal attack? I enrolled in an Arts degree knowing about these statistics and I'm not insulted by any of this. As coblin said, statistics merely describe the trend - I tried to give an explanation of the trend earlier (which I feel that I have enough knowledge to do) and I will overcome the trend in order to gain meaningful employment as well as a good education in an areas that interests me and where I'm most valuable, not just to myself, but to everyone else. These statistics further don't even apply to me because hopefully, when I get a job, I won't be an 'Arts graduate', I'll be a PhD, and thus, I'll hopefully have qualifications which differ from those described in Brendan's articles.
ok, i'll fix my post ;)
-
You can make statistics mean anything you want.
Apparently, even the fact that 60% of Arts graduates being employed after graduation in graduate-level jobs means that Arts students in general are "not likely" to get a graduate level job.
-
no-one cares about this information except for you apparently
The length of this thread, including your own response, might suggest otherwise.
Brendan INCESSANTLY repeats these "summary statistics" to the point where it is CLEAR that he has a vested interest. When he's posting these Arts articles at a proportion significantly greater than that of other faculties, it is indicative of a VESTED INTEREST.
Now, what would Brendan's vested interest be? He's not an Arts student! I impugn this interest as a condescending bias that has become a pathetic exercise in trolling.
So my vested interest is not being an Arts student?
So rewriting your post, replacing "vested interest" with "not being an Arts student" yields:
Brendan INCESSANTLY repeats these "summary statistics" to the point where it is CLEAR that he is not an Arts student. When he's posting these Arts articles at a proportion significantly greater than that of other faculties, it is indicative that he is not an Arts student.
I think the post that coblin made earlier is an important one:
these statistics are not 'biased' or 'condescending'. They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
It would be contradictory to hold that both:
(1) my posts are "anti-Arts" or are "negative" regarding arts, and
(2) that employment outcomes don't matter.
The articles I posted on the labour market outcomes of Arts graduates can only be interpreted as "negative" or "anti-Arts" by the reader, if employment outcomes actually matter to them (the reader), but that would of course contradict point (2).
-
Gee.. is arts that bad!?
-
The Struggle for Thought: Arts Degrees and University Micromanagement
by Andrew Norton
http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter00/polwin00-9.htm
Andrew Norton is a Research Fellow with The Centre for Independent Studies and Director of the Liberalising Learning programme. He works at the Vice Chancellor’s office at The University of Melbourne. This is taken from a recent Issue Analysis paper entitled Degrees of Difficulty: The Labour Market Problems of Arts and Social Science Graduates.
Arts degrees are touchy subjects as Andrew Norton found upon the release of Degrees of Difficulty, a CIS paper examining the labour market problems of humanities and social science graduates. Yet the criticism has missed the real theory behind the paper.
In Australia, student places are allocated to universities according to a government quota. Fortunately for the universities, though not for the students who annually miss out on places, this quota is set well below actual demand. Getting into university in Australia is like a giant game of musical chairs, in which when the music stops there are always many more children than chairs. If you want a place, you are wise to grab one, even if it is not your first choice. A survey of first-year students showed that 32% of them did not get into their course of first choice, and of this group nearly a quarter received their fourth or fifth choice.
While not all students will get into their preferred course in a completely deregulated system either, this figure of a third missing their first preference, plus those who get into no course at all, suggests that a quota-based system, as opposed to a student choice based system, has trouble matching universities and students.
More mismatch is caused by the way student places are funded. Universities get a subsidy for each student within their quota, and no direct funding from students or other sources. The HECS charge goes to the government, not the universities.
A decade ago there was some relationship between the subsidy and the cost, but this has since broken down. New student places have generally been funded at an average rate, and universities have been able to adjust the proportions of their students they have in the various disciplines. Effectively, universities now get an average subsidy, rather than one weighted according to cost.
My theory in Degrees of Difficulty is that breaking the link between subsidy and cost affects the distribution of student places between courses. As universities have come under severe financial pressure they have had to cut costs, and one way to control expenditure is to concentrate growth in cheap-to-provide courses. In the last decade, growth in annual commencing places in cheap-to-provide courses has been more than 67,000, compared to less than 38,000 in relatively expensive-to-provide courses. Of the 67,000, around 24,000 were in Arts. The growth patterns may well have been different if top-up fees could be charged, making internal course decisions more cost neutral.
A genuine choice?
Some contributors to forums on this issue say that the growth in Arts simply reflects student demand. While nobody forces students to study Arts, I believe that that the distortions in supply are feeding back into student preferences, to the point that we cannot tell to what extent they represent students’ real choices.
Take for example the effect growth in the number of student places in a particular course will have on the scores required for admission. Beyond a certain point, the scores do not reflect the difficulty of the course, but supply and demand. Holding demand constant, an increase in supply will depress the score required, and vice-versa. Therefore, a system like this will, all other things being equal, make Arts easier to get into, relative to the courses growing more slowly.
Prospective students, about 45% of them in one survey, adjust their study preferences according to their likely Year 12 results. For students who are going to do only moderately well, this means that the relatively easy entrance requirements of Arts are an attraction, and so they will rank Arts highly if they want a university education. In this way, the distortions of supply structure the stated preferences of students, creating a spurious appearance of universities being responsive to student demands.
The quality consequences of little competition
Arts faculties do not claim that their degrees are directly vocational, but they do say that they teach employable skills. For example, at the University of New South Wales they say that an Arts degree provides Ôskills of research, analysis, and the ability to write clearly and consistently.’ It would be hard to disagree with the benefits of all those skills.
While these skills can be learned in humanities and social science degrees, they are generally not systematically taught. They tend to be learnt indirectly by observing others, by practice in researching and writing essays, and through feedback on assessed material. WithÊ resourceful students and teachers who have the ability and time to provide guidance, these skills will be learned and enhanced. But an employer would be unwise to assume that the graduate had high level thinking and writing skills. Indeed, a survey by ACNielsen found that employers thought their Arts graduates had below average literacy skills.
A private university like Bond ensures that all graduates have the generic skills employers would expect. All students complete units in communication, information technology, values and organisations. Employers cannot be so assured that a graduate from universities without similar systematic teaching and testing of general skills does in fact possess them.
At the moment, Bond has a huge price disadvantage, but with real competition other universities are likely to develop innovative schemes to improve their graduates’ employability.
The employment consequences
The cumulative effect of government regulation of the universities has, I believe, been to produce a lack of connection between the skills graduates have and the skills needed in the labour market.
Since the mid-1970s Arts graduates have in each decade been experiencing a more difficult transition from study to work, to the point where more than 30% are still looking for full-time work four months after graduating. While their labour market position improves substantially over time, they never come close to matching their peers in some other degrees. People with degrees in what the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls Ôsociety and culture’ have unemployment rates about 50% above those of graduates generally. Wages too remain well below average, probably partly because some graduates are working in jobs for which degrees are not required.
Given that many Arts graduates are people of above average intelligence, who have invested three years or more in studying, this is a waste of talent and ability.
Is a liberal arts degree worthless?
No, of course not. I spent six years studying liberal arts subjects, and found it a worthwhile experience. However, I also believe that those who want to enhance their employability and make themselves eligible for high skill jobs can legitimately expect to do so through a university education. I do not share the intellectual snobbery of some Arts academics who look down on the grubby business of making money.
A deregulated system would probably see a lower proportion of students studying just Arts, though with added growth in double degrees and access to the pool of prospective students excluded from higher education by the quota system, probably not a drop in absolute numbers. Added revenue from fees would ease the chronic financial problems of most Arts faculties.
The tragedy of the Arts faculties is that the principal victims of their stubborn opposition to change is their own students. No wonder so few Australians feel inclined to give money to their old university.
-
Doesn't Andrew Norton have an arts degree?
-
Doesn't Andrew Norton have an arts degree?
I recall in a conversation with him, that he did a combined LLB/BA degree.
-
Man up and actually declare your vendetta against arts degrees/students instead of passively-aggressively antagonising people with your constant bullshit.
What bullshit? The articles? I am just the messenger.
It says more that people like you choose to make unsubstantiated accusations against the messenger rather than address the message.
Brendan, you can play the innocent self-victimising "WHAT, ME?!"
It's more like people making unsubstantiated accusations. If a person is going to make an accusation then they better stand ready to provide some evidence.
Oh come off it, Brendan. Our assumptions aren’t unsubstantiated.
Our behaviours can determine what our attitudes are, as our attitudes can be used to predict our behaviours.
For example, just say I created a thread that contained a link to an article which stated that the crime rate amongst Sudanese Australians was considerably higher than the rest of the population. That would be fine. Members might rebut some of the points raised in the article, point out flaws in research methodology and share their anecdotes etc.
But, if I were to start creating threads every time I stumbled across an article that contained all sorts of negative statistics or articles about Sudanese Australians (as well as posting different articles, yet with the essentially the same information twice or thrice), it would be easy to deduce that I had a bias/negative attitude towards Sudanese Australians. The thing people ultimately find offensive wouldn’t necessarily be the articles, but my actions of posting the articles repeatedly and being very selective about the ones I choose to post.
Conversely, if I were to create threads every time I found a positive article about Sudanese Australians, you could assume that I felt positively towards Sudanese Australians. If I were to post a mixture of positive and negative articles, you could assume I felt ambivalent towards Sudanese Australians.
Behaviours reflect our attitudes. I may say, “I’m allowed to post what I like, I post lots of things on VN, I’m just the messenger. You just can’t handle the information about Sudanese Australians, it's the reader who thinks they are negative articles”, however I would have to accept that what I posted (repeatedly) reflected upon me, as well as my views. Actions do speak louder than words.
It’s not the articles; it’s your actions of posting these so frequently which I find pathetic.
Disclaimer: I don't actually have a prejudice against sudanese Australians at all, I just used that as an example.
-
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
-
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
Yeah, I know. I mean he is only the facts? Why are you restricting him? lol
-
I like this quote from a different thread on wages:
This whole debate has been spurred from extremely defensive people who have imagined arguments made by imaginary straw-men rather than actual claims by actual people.
-
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
Being unemployed/in a low-paying job is viewed negatively in our society (especially by you?), and you KNOW that. So stop with the "OMG HOW IS THAT NEGATIVE?!?!" act.
I like this quote from a different thread on wages:
This whole debate has been spurred from extremely defensive people who have imagined arguments made by imaginary straw-men rather than actual claims by actual people.
But most of the "defensive people" don't do Arts. What reason do we have to be defensive? i.e. we're not.
Anyway, people often criticise when jealous. Just putting that out there.
-
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
Being unemployed/in a low-paying job is viewed negatively, and you KNOW that. So stop with the "OMG HOW IS THAT NEGATIVE?!?!" act.
To paraphrase coblin:
They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
-
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
Being unemployed/in a low-paying job is viewed negatively, and you KNOW that. So stop with the "OMG HOW IS THAT NEGATIVE?!?!" act.
To paraphrase coblin:
They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
Then answer me this: Do you think employment is good?
If yes, you view Arts negatively.
If no, I doubt you're being truthful, and view Arts negatively.
-
The articles did not say that all Arts graduates will be unemployed/in a low-paying job:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/11/15/1226319000858.html
Graduate Careers Australia executive director Cindy Tilbrook said while the pain might be eased by vacancies due to an ageing workforce and an continuing skills shortage in areas such as health and engineering, those with a "less defined" career path from humanities or generalist degrees were more likely to struggle to find work.
"They are the ones who feel it even in good times because their outcomes are not as good as those in skill-shortage areas," she said.
http://andrewnorton.info/2008/11/over-qualified-workers/
26.3% of graduates were working in jobs that the ABS occupational classifications system says require vocational or no post-secondary education rather than higher education. That’s only .2% lower than last year. Work I have done on data from the 2006 census suggests that it is the generalist degrees, and particularly arts (with the exception of those with degrees in ‘philosophy and religious studies’), that drag down the average. About 40% of other Arts graduates are in jobs that don’t require higher education.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2007/02/07/UUKfulltext.pdf
One of the first analyses to consider the economic benefits of higher education subjects found that men in possession of an undergraduate degree achieved an earnings premium of approximately 15% over individuals in possession of A-levels.The corresponding estimate for women was 19%.
However, men in possession of mathematics degrees achieved a 25.7% earnings premium over those with A-levels as their highest qualification, while corresponding women achieved a 38.6% earnings premium. In contrast,the premium for men in possession of undergraduate degrees in the arts was 4% less relative to those individuals with A-levels,whilst women achieved a 17% premium. Irrespective of the subject of study,the financial benefit of completing a degree is much greater for women than for men, but this may be due to the relatively low earnings of non-graduate women.
http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter00/polwin00-9.htm
… a survey by ACNielsen found that employers thought their Arts graduates had below average literacy skills. …
Since the mid-1970s Arts graduates have in each decade been experiencing a more difficult transition from study to work, to the point where more than 30% are still looking for full-time work four months after graduating. While their labour market position improves substantially over time, they never come close to matching their peers in some other degrees. People with degrees in what the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls ‘society and culture’ have unemployment rates about 50% above those of graduates generally. Wages too remain well below average, probably partly because some graduates are working in jobs for which degrees are not required.
-
Wow, I care so much I bothered to waste time reading them all ::)
By the way...how did that answer my previous question? You have a habit of dodging questions.
-
Wow, I care so much I bothered to waste time reading them all ::)
So you made claims about what I posted, without even bothering to read them at all? Good way to enhance the credibility of your argument.
What is it about the articles you find so "negative"?
Being unemployed/in a low-paying job is viewed negatively, and you KNOW that. So stop with the "OMG HOW IS THAT NEGATIVE?!?!" act.
To paraphrase coblin:
They are mere numbers, and averages compiled from empirical evidence. They are facts. Read my post. They only become "negative" when you attach your own meaning to it. That requires your own value-input, something like "employment is good", before it becomes bad.
Then answer me this: Do you think employment is good?
If yes, you view Arts negatively.
If no, I doubt you're being truthful, and view Arts negatively.
No need to re-write what has already been said well enough:
Let me just reiterate my point in my earlier post that this debate has been driven by those who are imagining claims that have never been actually said.
If you believe you can infer values from what Brendan is saying, let me remind you that they are your words, and not necessarily his.
As for the evidence that he is posting regarding Arts, it is empirical evidence - a statement about the world. It is a positive statement. However, this has little to no implications without a normative statement. An example of a normative statement is: "money is important," and hence combined with the positive statement, if valid, then it argues that arts is not important. However, that normative statement is not something that Brendan has argued for, and so it is up to you decide for yourself how to use the positive statement, according to your own personal values - your own set of normative statements.
-
Why are you arguing? Sure he MAY not like Arts. But all he's doing is posting articles that are freely available on the net. If you don't like these articles then don't read them.
He hasn't expressed an opinion on it. All he's done is give you links to potentially inform you and I don't see harm in that.
-
Why are you arguing? Sure he MAY not like Arts. But all he's doing is posting articles that are freely available on the net. If you don't like these articles then don't read them.
He hasn't expressed an opinion on it. All he's done is give you links to potentially inform you and I don't see harm in that.
Well put.
-
This is all getting very boring. You can all argue as much as you please, but nobody's opinion is going to be changed, so we may as well end the futility. As a potential Arts student, I don't take offense to any of the articles posted, I enjoy reading them in fact, and don't see how whatever opinion Brendan may have regarding said degrees should be such an issue.
-
Brendans usual cheerleaders come into bat
Brendan is anti-arts. He can deny it, but its pretty simple to see the facts. He can post whatever he likes, but Brendan, don't hide your real agenda behind posting the articles.
-
Brendan is anti-arts. He can deny it, but its pretty simple to see the facts.
Where have I ever said I am "anti-Arts"? If its so simple, go quote me. How are the articles even anti-Arts?
That you will still hold the view that I am "anti-Arts" even if I outright deny it, suggests that you think that you know me better than I do myself - the height of arrogance.
It seems that you either don't like the message, or simply can't handle it, so you attack the messenger instead.
-
Brendans usual cheerleaders come into bat
Brendan is anti-arts. He can deny it, but its pretty simple to see the facts. He can post whatever he likes, but Brendan, don't hide your real agenda behind posting the articles.
This. All of it.
No need to re-write what has already been said well enough
Lol! But I'm not asking COBLIN what YOUR opinion is. I'm asking YOU..!
-
My point is that it is simple to see through your bullshit, you claim not to be anti-arts even though you continuously post articles that have an anti-arts prejudice/bias. You haven't stated that you are specifically Anti-Arts and therefore I can't quote you, but it's pretty simple to tell. I don't know you better then you know yourself, but honey, baby, I know a liar when I see one.
-
post articles that have an anti-arts prejudice/bias.
How are any of these articles "anti-Arts"?
http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,7719.msg96113.html#msg96113
-
Troll. :)
-
blah blah blah i'm not bashing arts blah blah blah
I AM JUST THE MESSENGER!! I AM JUST THE MESSENGER!! PLEASE SIR!!! I'M INNOCENT!!
no one would freely allow themselves to be appointed the messenger of news that does not support their opinions.
-
blah blah blah i'm not bashing arts blah blah blah
I AM JUST THE MESSENGER!! I AM JUST THE MESSENGER!! PLEASE SIR!!! I'M INNOCENT!!
no one would freely allow themselves to be appointed the messenger of news that does not support their opinions.
Well, if it makes you happy, I do believe the following to be true:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/11/15/1226319000858.html
Graduate Careers Australia executive director Cindy Tilbrook said while the pain might be eased by vacancies due to an ageing workforce and an continuing skills shortage in areas such as health and engineering, those with a "less defined" career path from humanities or generalist degrees were more likely to struggle to find work.
"They are the ones who feel it even in good times because their outcomes are not as good as those in skill-shortage areas," she said.
http://andrewnorton.info/2008/11/over-qualified-workers/
26.3% of graduates were working in jobs that the ABS occupational classifications system says require vocational or no post-secondary education rather than higher education. That’s only .2% lower than last year. Work I have done on data from the 2006 census suggests that it is the generalist degrees, and particularly arts (with the exception of those with degrees in ‘philosophy and religious studies’), that drag down the average. About 40% of other Arts graduates are in jobs that don’t require higher education.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2007/02/07/UUKfulltext.pdf
One of the first analyses to consider the economic benefits of higher education subjects found that men in possession of an undergraduate degree achieved an earnings premium of approximately 15% over individuals in possession of A-levels.The corresponding estimate for women was 19%.
However, men in possession of mathematics degrees achieved a 25.7% earnings premium over those with A-levels as their highest qualification, while corresponding women achieved a 38.6% earnings premium. In contrast,the premium for men in possession of undergraduate degrees in the arts was 4% less relative to those individuals with A-levels,whilst women achieved a 17% premium. Irrespective of the subject of study,the financial benefit of completing a degree is much greater for women than for men, but this may be due to the relatively low earnings of non-graduate women.
http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter00/polwin00-9.htm
… a survey by ACNielsen found that employers thought their Arts graduates had below average literacy skills. …
Since the mid-1970s Arts graduates have in each decade been experiencing a more difficult transition from study to work, to the point where more than 30% are still looking for full-time work four months after graduating. While their labour market position improves substantially over time, they never come close to matching their peers in some other degrees. People with degrees in what the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls ‘society and culture’ have unemployment rates about 50% above those of graduates generally. Wages too remain well below average, probably partly because some graduates are working in jobs for which degrees are not required.
-
tl;dr
what makes you think the rest of the board even care what your beliefs are?
EDIT: OIC YOU EDITED YOUR POST.
-
tl;dr
what makes you think the rest of the board even care what your beliefs are?
EDIT: OIC YOU EDITED YOUR POST.
Where did I say that I thought the rest of the board care about "my beliefs"? You seemed to care enough about this thread to post.
-
it was implied when you opened a thread. you started countless threads, hoping no one would read their content?
of course i care. i wouldn't refer to myself in third person.
-
And too bad NO ONE CARES seeing as this applies to people in the UK. Way to make a point dude.
Not only that, but the article is from 2007, meaning that he actually went to search for this article. You can just imagine him sitting there typing in "arts degrees poor earnings" and his face lighting up with glee when he found what he was looking for.
It's pathetically funny :)
lol that just sounded hilarious
but yeah.. I never really liked arts.. but thats just me and my disinterests..
-
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Heckler/Degrees-of-difficulty/2005/04/24/1114281450827.html
Degrees of difficulty
April 25, 2005
Kim Smee defends her fellow arts graduates from the class of arse.
Sitting somewhere between the battle of public versus private school and white collar versus blue is the most irritating class war of them all - science graduate versus arts or bachelor of arse graduates, as some like to say.
As a graduate of two arts degrees, I take offence at science students' claims that I do not have real degrees. Like you pharmacological, veterinarian, molecular biology types, my years on campus ground were ones of sweat and tears.
Every day, or so, I had to crawl out of bed and sober up with a splash of cool water as the crack of midday sun pierced through the bathroom window. I had to drive to university only to discover that every parking space had been greedily snatched up by a science student hours before.
When you could quietly sit in the cafeteria corner and leisurely read your physics texts, I was forced to sit with a loud post-modernist clan of intertextual canonists and brainstorm for a group project on the symbolism of the white dove in the final scenes of Blade Runner, the director's cut.
Not to mention all those lavish parties you could attend. Law students had their law revues, medical students had cruises and so on. Arts students? We were still analysing what kind of party would be appropriate on our graduation day.
While my father was as proud as punch on that special day of black hats that make your hair look like a half-sucked mango, even he could not resist the urge to make a jibe.
"What's the difference between a science graduate, an engineering graduate and an arts graduate?" he asked. "The science graduate asks why it works, the engineering graduate asks how it works and the arts graduate asks if you would like fries with that!"
But dad's joke ran off me like water off a duck's back. What a completely untrue, ignorant thing to say. I brought him leftover food for almost two years and he didn't even know we called them chips.
But back to you left-handed brain drivers. In case you think you had to study harder than us to get to that special day, just remember that we slaved over pages of theories for 10 months, but your exams were over in an hour.
When you were asked a question in class all you had to do was answer it correctly, while we had to argue why the answer was not true but a subjective falsehood of truth, and relate it back to intertextuality and post-modernism. Or something.
And when the second Big Bang comes and the few remaining survivors are wandering this Earth, they are not going to want doctors to heal their wounds and scientists to figure out what went wrong. No! The question on everyone's lips will be, how does this relate to the climax in Blade Runner, the director's cut?
So ditch your scientific snobbery and go back to your high-paying jobs without uttering a word of arts degree criticism and let us get back to reading the jobs classifieds and scratching our heads.
-
No need to re-write what has already been said well enough
Lol! But I'm not asking COBLIN what YOUR opinion is. I'm asking YOU..!
And if you actually thought about what you quoted, then you would know that I think coblin said it well enough previously that there is no need for me re-write the same thing, that is, I agree with coblin's opinion.
You have shown well enough your complete inability to handle the message, so to make yourself feel better you choose to attack the messenger instead:
For the record, I'm not an Arts student. But I am vs. Brendan.
-
Man up and actually declare your vendetta against arts degrees/students instead of passively-aggressively antagonising people with your constant bullshit.
What bullshit? The articles? I am just the messenger.
It says more that people like you choose to make unsubstantiated accusations against the messenger rather than address the message.
Brendan, you can play the innocent self-victimising "WHAT, ME?!"
It's more like people making unsubstantiated accusations. If a person is going to make an accusation then they better stand ready to provide some evidence.
Oh come off it, Brendan. Our assumptions aren’t unsubstantiated.
Our behaviours can determine what our attitudes are, as our attitudes can be used to predict our behaviours.
For example, just say I created a thread that contained a link to an article which stated that the crime rate amongst Sudanese Australians was considerably higher than the rest of the population. That would be fine. Members might rebut some of the points raised in the article, point out flaws in research methodology and share their anecdotes etc.
But, if I were to start creating threads every time I stumbled across an article that contained all sorts of negative statistics or articles about Sudanese Australians (as well as posting different articles, yet with the essentially the same information twice or thrice), it would be easy to deduce that I had a bias/negative attitude towards Sudanese Australians. The thing people ultimately find offensive wouldn’t necessarily be the articles, but my actions of posting the articles repeatedly and being very selective about the ones I choose to post.
Conversely, if I were to create threads every time I found a positive article about Sudanese Australians, you could assume that I felt positively towards Sudanese Australians. If I were to post a mixture of positive and negative articles, you could assume I felt ambivalent towards Sudanese Australians.
Behaviours reflect our attitudes. I may say, “I’m allowed to post what I like, I post lots of things on VN, I’m just the messenger. You just can’t handle the information about Sudanese Australians, it's the reader who thinks they are negative articles”, however I would have to accept that what I posted (repeatedly) reflected upon me, as well as my views. Actions do speak louder than words.
It’s not the articles; it’s your actions of posting these so frequently which I find pathetic.
Disclaimer: I don't actually have a prejudice against sudanese Australians at all, I just used that as an example.
And what's the problem with him being anti-Arts?
-
As a proud arts student, I admit I do get a little defensive when the negative side of arts degrees are brought up so frequently - even though I do indulge in a bit of arts-bashing myself. Whenever I do something stupid, for example, I justify it by reminding everyone that I'm just a dumb arts student. :P
I don't mind when it's in jest. Jokes about McDonald's being my next employer just make me giggle. However, when someone repeatedly bashes me over the head with statistics and reports outlining every single negative aspect of an arts degree, it gets very annoying.
I admit part of my defensiveness comes from knowing that those articles state the truth - though the truth doesn't bother me as much as it might a pure arts student. My law degree will help me find a job. My arts degree is there to extend my knowledge of the world - of different cultures and languages, of international politics and affairs. People need to recognise that money isn't as important to some people as it may be to them. Some people learn for the pure joy of learning, and I wish that these articles would recognise that.
What really bothers me is, I guess, the continued focus on arts. I don't see any Science(criticism) threads, for example, even though they are also rather generalist degrees. (I recognise that Brendan is now seeking to rectify that, judging from his recent posts.)
I don't know if Brendan is anti-arts or not - I don't think anybody does except him. What I do know is that he is entitled to his opinion. He is perfectl entitled to endlessly post links to articles outlining how much harder it will be for my classmates to find a job when they graduate. Any protests against it are just going to lead to multi-page threads with arguments going round and round in circles - arts people protesting Brendan's seemingly anti-arts stance with Brendan fiercely maintaining his position as a mere messenger.
Probably the best thing to do is to take the path I have now decided to take - read the articles if you care, and move on. Or if, like me, you're bored by these articles now, just ignore these threads and remind yourself that not everybody appreciates the arts as much as you dp, just like you may not necessarily be a devotee of the mathematical or scientific fields. Everyone has the right to express their opinion, even if it's contrary to your own and expressed frequently and repetitively.
Nobody is forcing you to read these threads. You always have the choice to ignore them.
tl;dr - stop feeding the troll (that was dedicated to enwiabe. :P)
-
People need to recognise that money isn't as important to some people as it may be to them. Some people learn for the pure joy of learning, and I wish that these articles would recognise that.
These articles are merely statistics about graduate employment outcomes, they don't purport to tell people what to study and or why they should study X or Y. That's a matter for the individual to decide according to his or her own individual preferences and values.
I don't see any Science(criticism) threads, for example, even though they are also rather generalist degrees. (I recognise that Brendan is now seeking to rectify that, judging from his recent posts.)
For the record, they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
-
y halo thar trolly mctroll troll :D
-
y halo thar trolly mctroll troll :D
Why that is not a very nice thing to say of your girlfriend.
-
For the record, they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
I was referring to the thread specifically entitled "Arts (criticism) thread", or similar.
-
And I was referring to you, Brendan (AKA trolly mctroll troll). :)
-
And I was referring to you, Brendan (AKA trolly mctroll troll). :)
Good to see your immaturity and inability to separate the message from the messenger is still alive and well.
For the record, they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
I was referring to the thread specifically entitled "Arts (criticism) thread", or similar.
In that sense, where is rectifying?
-
Good to see that your cowardice in refusing to admit your anti-arts bias is thriving in the cess pool of elitism that you have created on this board :D.
-
For the record, they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
I was referring to the thread specifically entitled "Arts (criticism) thread", or similar.
In that sense, where is rectifying?
Pardon?
-
For the record, they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
I was referring to the thread specifically entitled "Arts (criticism) thread", or similar.
In that sense, where is rectifying?
Pardon?
Correction: In that sense, where have I been rectifying?
-
Well, with your "employment outcomes of *insert field of study here* graduates", instead of purely focusing on arts.
-
Well, with your "employment outcomes of *insert field of study here* graduates", instead of purely focusing on arts.
But they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
-
I didn't mean to say that they were criticism threads. I made that point in relation to my problem with the fact that until now there has been a total focus on arts. I'm glad that there is now discussion on the other fields of study.
-
Well, with your "employment outcomes of *insert field of study here* graduates", instead of purely focusing on arts.
But they are not "criticism" threads. They are simply information regarding the employment outcomes of graduates from certain fields of study. What the reader makes of the information is up to them.
Sigh, I think this is quite applicable to the Brendan train of thought:
(http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa249/a_mozart/CircularReasoning.gif)
-
There has always been discussion in the University section on other fields of study other than the Arts.
The purpose of my series of threads on employment outcomes has always been one and the same: to inform.
As a potential Arts student, I don't take offense to any of the articles posted, I enjoy reading them in fact, and don't see how whatever opinion Brendan may have regarding said degrees should be such an issue.
I didn't mean to say that they were criticism threads.
I was under the impression that you were suggesting that they were:
I don't see any Science(criticism) threads, for example, even though they are also rather generalist degrees. (I recognise that Brendan is now seeking to rectify that, judging from his recent posts.)
-
articles that have an anti-arts prejudice/bias.
Why are these articles "anti-arts": http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,7719.msg96113.html#msg96113
-
I didn't mean to say that they were criticism threads.
I was under the impression that you were suggesting that they were:
I don't see any Science(criticism) threads, for example, even though they are also rather generalist degrees. (I recognise that Brendan is now seeking to rectify that, judging from his recent posts.)
Lol, if you'll notice the time tag, it was 3am. Sorry my powers of expression aren't as clear at that time as you'd like them to be. I've already told you what I'd meant to say - what do you want me to do, turn back time?
-
what do you want me to do, turn back time?
If you could I would like to find out how.
-
Man up and actually declare your vendetta against arts degrees/students instead of passively-aggressively antagonising people with your constant bullshit.
What bullshit? The articles? I am just the messenger.
It says more that people like you choose to make unsubstantiated accusations against the messenger rather than address the message.
Brendan, you can play the innocent self-victimising "WHAT, ME?!"
It's more like people making unsubstantiated accusations. If a person is going to make an accusation then they better stand ready to provide some evidence.
Oh come off it, Brendan. Our assumptions aren’t unsubstantiated.
Our behaviours can determine what our attitudes are, as our attitudes can be used to predict our behaviours.
For example, just say I created a thread that contained a link to an article which stated that the crime rate amongst Sudanese Australians was considerably higher than the rest of the population. That would be fine. Members might rebut some of the points raised in the article, point out flaws in research methodology and share their anecdotes etc.
But, if I were to start creating threads every time I stumbled across an article that contained all sorts of negative statistics or articles about Sudanese Australians (as well as posting different articles, yet with the essentially the same information twice or thrice), it would be easy to deduce that I had a bias/negative attitude towards Sudanese Australians. The thing people ultimately find offensive wouldn’t necessarily be the articles, but my actions of posting the articles repeatedly and being very selective about the ones I choose to post.
Conversely, if I were to create threads every time I found a positive article about Sudanese Australians, you could assume that I felt positively towards Sudanese Australians. If I were to post a mixture of positive and negative articles, you could assume I felt ambivalent towards Sudanese Australians.
Behaviours reflect our attitudes. I may say, “I’m allowed to post what I like, I post lots of things on VN, I’m just the messenger. You just can’t handle the information about Sudanese Australians, it's the reader who thinks they are negative articles”, however I would have to accept that what I posted (repeatedly) reflected upon me, as well as my views. Actions do speak louder than words.
It’s not the articles; it’s your actions of posting these so frequently which I find pathetic.
Disclaimer: I don't actually have a prejudice against sudanese Australians at all, I just used that as an example.
And what's the problem with him being anti-Arts?
-
You guys are being blindly anti-Brendan, as BA22 put nicely in the other thread.
Here is the extremely bare executive summary:
* Brendan provides links and articles regarding the employment outcomes of Arts graduates (facts, evidence)
[End of story]
NOT this:
* Brendan provides links and articles regarding the employment outcomes of Arts graduates (facts, evidence)
* Brendan(***) then says that "employment is the only virtue"
* Therefore, the logical conclusion is that Arts is not virtuous.
(***) Brendan does not think this. In your mind it may be a straw-man, or yourself that thinks this.
Here is what I am telling you to do, if you love Arts but feel insecure about Brendan's posts:
1) Achieve higher than the norm. Statistics do not limit the individual's capability, rather it is the converse: the individual's capability limits statistics!
2) Understand that logically, if employment is not the only virtue (we should all agree with this - well actually, it's up to you), then Arts is not necessarily bad. If we only cared about employment we would be wise to take heed to Brendan's articles with much more than a grain of salt, but because there are other factors to consider (fun, passion, etc.), not to mention that your individual employment opportunity function is based on your own interests, then you may actually maximize the combination of your values and preferences by doing Arts. He never said this can't be the case. Note that he never gave any advice on whether you should do Arts or not.
All that Brendan is relentlessly defending himself for is merely giving the facts that when all else is held equal, Arts gives a lower employment outcome than some other degrees. It is sad that it has come to an extremely lengthy debate and an irrational "counter-crusade" against some perceived "crusade" which never really existed. I endorse Brendan's quoting of one of my posts about straw-men:
This whole debate has been spurred from extremely defensive people who have imagined arguments made by imaginary straw-men rather than actual claims by actual people.
Personally, I am surprised that Brendan bothers to put up with it! I wouldn't.
-
But they're not imagined. Brendan is CLEARLY pushing an agenda, and I'm calling him for it. That agenda is made clear by the proportions in which he posts these articles about poor earnings and low job prospects for Arts students. You can spin it as 'OMGZ JUST POSTIN' DA FACTS' but he has a CLEAR editorial discretion in what facts he posts.
This editing power that he exercises has formed a viewpoint which he refuses to admit. And that is what irks me, and that is what I have been trying to get him to admit.
-
And that is what irks me, and that is what I have been trying to get him to admit.
Why do you need him to admit it so badly?
Satisfaction of victory or something?
-
But they're not imagined. Brendan is CLEARLY pushing an agenda, and I'm calling him for it. That agenda is made clear by the proportions in which he posts these articles about poor earnings and low job prospects for Arts students. You can spin it as 'OMGZ JUST POSTIN' DA FACTS' but he has a CLEAR editorial discretion in what facts he posts.
This editing power that he exercises has formed a viewpoint which he refuses to admit. And that is what irks me, and that is what I have been trying to get him to admit.
People push their agendas on this site all the time, i push several of my own from time to time
Why is it so important that Brendan be forced to admit his
-
It doesn't matter though. Whether he is pushing an agenda or not is irrelevant because they are still facts! The best response is to just state nicely that the evidence is biased, and counter it with other evidence (if this is so). Or say something like "employment isn't the only thing that matters" and I'm sure Brendan wouldn't disagree with that either.
Nowhere has Brendan said: don't do Arts. He may personally think that for himself, as I do, but he completely respects that others might want to, because of their own individual preferences and values!
-
Why is it so important that Brendan be forced to admit his
Because he may have an agenda of his own.
-
The reason why I want him to admit it is so that users can read what Brendan posts with a grain of salt. Not all of his links are to respected reuters/AP news articles. Some are to BLOGS and non-peer reviewed research work. In that case, what is being posted might not NECESSARILY be true but rather things that are manipulated by people pushing agendas. Once you know the viewpoint of someone, you can weigh it up with whatever "facts" are being presented to think critically for oneself. :)
-
Here is a better, and more diplomatic solution:
Here is what I am telling you to do, if you love Arts but feel insecure about Brendan's posts:
1) Achieve higher than the norm. Statistics do not limit the individual's capability, rather it is the converse: the individual's capability limits statistics!
2) Understand that logically, if employment is not the only virtue (we should all agree with this - well actually, it's up to you), then Arts is not necessarily bad. If we only cared about employment we would be wise to take heed to Brendan's articles with much more than a grain of salt, but because there are other factors to consider (fun, passion, etc.), not to mention that your individual employment opportunity function is based on your own interests, then you may actually maximize the combination of your values and preferences by doing Arts. He never said this can't be the case. Note that he never gave any advice on whether you should do Arts or not.
-
I care not about diplomacy in this situation. I care about lifting the cover off of a subversive agenda. :)
-
This explains the so-called "agenda" much better:
I have said this in another quote in a language that people didn't understand (normative statements and positive statements):
If you are annoyed by the facts (positive statements), it is not because the facts are annoying. It is because the conclusion is annoying.
But the conclusion comes from an extra input - it comes from yourself: that is your value-input (normative statement).
If A means B, that's a fact.
If B is bad (your value input), then now we can draw the conclusion:
A means B, and B is bad, so that means A is bad!
Brendan has only supplied the fact. The value-input, which is necessary for your conclusion, comes from yourself. You are only getting annoyed by your own values and preferences, not any "agenda" of Brendan's.
-
But this has clearly turned away from the topic at hand and become a case of you wanting to take Brendan on
You have to honest dan that you've wanted to take him on for a long time, you used to support Brendan's posting on this site, but ever since he targeted your welcome message on the homepage, you've gone a bit off him
I know i'm being antagonistic, but i can't shake the feeling that this is personal
-
I care not about diplomacy in this situation. I care about lifting the cover off of a subversive agenda. :)
Hardly. It's more like distracting people away from discussing the actual topic: http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,7719.0.html
You yourself even refused to dispute the actual data, rather you choose to go after the messenger, me.
-
Right, but why A means B?
Brendan ONLY posts about A means B in terms of Arts.
There are also some C's that mean D's, and some E's that mean F's! Why not post about the completion rates of Arts students? Brendan hasn't given us those figures!
Instead he REPEATEDLY drums in "A means B". And I impugn that as an agenda. :) And I wish to uncover this agenda for readers of his topics so that they can be more critical of what they're reading.
-
So what? Where did he say that his evidence is comprehensive and a world-view of all relevancies to Arts.
When you study a subject, you might want to find some information about one topic. You go to the library and look for that topic.
In a similar manner, if you want to find out about employment outcomes for Arts graduates, you come here to Brendan's thread. If you want to get information about Arts for something else, Brendan probably isn't your expert. Brendan is well-researched in employment outcomes for many fields of studies!
-
But this has clearly turned away from the topic at hand and become a case of you wanting to take Brendan on
You have to honest dan that you've wanted to take him on for a long time, you used to support Brendan's posting on this site, but ever since he targeted your welcome message on the homepage, you've gone a bit off him
I know i'm being antagonistic, but i can't shake the feeling that this is personal
That's an interesting thought. I do agree that he choosing to go after the messenger, instead of addressing the message.
-
This might have been lost in all the nonsense in this thread, but I will post it again:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/Heckler/Degrees-of-difficulty/2005/04/24/1114281450827.html
Degrees of difficulty
April 25, 2005
Kim Smee defends her fellow arts graduates from the class of arse.
Sitting somewhere between the battle of public versus private school and white collar versus blue is the most irritating class war of them all - science graduate versus arts or bachelor of arse graduates, as some like to say.
As a graduate of two arts degrees, I take offence at science students' claims that I do not have real degrees. Like you pharmacological, veterinarian, molecular biology types, my years on campus ground were ones of sweat and tears.
Every day, or so, I had to crawl out of bed and sober up with a splash of cool water as the crack of midday sun pierced through the bathroom window. I had to drive to university only to discover that every parking space had been greedily snatched up by a science student hours before.
When you could quietly sit in the cafeteria corner and leisurely read your physics texts, I was forced to sit with a loud post-modernist clan of intertextual canonists and brainstorm for a group project on the symbolism of the white dove in the final scenes of Blade Runner, the director's cut.
Not to mention all those lavish parties you could attend. Law students had their law revues, medical students had cruises and so on. Arts students? We were still analysing what kind of party would be appropriate on our graduation day.
While my father was as proud as punch on that special day of black hats that make your hair look like a half-sucked mango, even he could not resist the urge to make a jibe.
"What's the difference between a science graduate, an engineering graduate and an arts graduate?" he asked. "The science graduate asks why it works, the engineering graduate asks how it works and the arts graduate asks if you would like fries with that!"
But dad's joke ran off me like water off a duck's back. What a completely untrue, ignorant thing to say. I brought him leftover food for almost two years and he didn't even know we called them chips.
But back to you left-handed brain drivers. In case you think you had to study harder than us to get to that special day, just remember that we slaved over pages of theories for 10 months, but your exams were over in an hour.
When you were asked a question in class all you had to do was answer it correctly, while we had to argue why the answer was not true but a subjective falsehood of truth, and relate it back to intertextuality and post-modernism. Or something.
And when the second Big Bang comes and the few remaining survivors are wandering this Earth, they are not going to want doctors to heal their wounds and scientists to figure out what went wrong. No! The question on everyone's lips will be, how does this relate to the climax in Blade Runner, the director's cut?
So ditch your scientific snobbery and go back to your high-paying jobs without uttering a word of arts degree criticism and let us get back to reading the jobs classifieds and scratching our heads.
-
I know i'm being antagonistic, but i can't shake the feeling that this is personal
Bahaha of course this is personal!! But I wouldn't bet that enwiabe will admit to that.
-
Yawn. This argument seems to go on forever.
My take:
- Brendan posts articles about Arts degrees and related employment statistics
- Many Arts students get annoyed about this and question his agenda
- Brendan (correctly) points out their own subjectivity in interpreting the articles
- Brendan does not declare his agenda
I personally would like to know Brendan's motivation for posting the articles. Certainly he is aware of the effect it has on many people on this board. But Brendan isn't an Arts student, so he doesn't really have any reason to have a personal interest in this topic. So why does he continually post articles about the employment opportunities etc of people with Arts degrees?
-
Yawn. This argument seems to go on forever.
My take:
- Brendan posts articles about Arts degrees and related employment statistics
- Many Arts students get annoyed about this and question his agenda
- Brendan (correctly) points out their own subjectivity in interpreting the articles
- Brendan does not declare his agenda
I personally would like to know Brendan's motivation for posting the articles. Certainly he is aware of the effect it has on many people on this board. But Brendan isn't an Arts student, so he doesn't really have any reason to have a personal interest in this topic. So why does he continually post articles about the employment opportunities etc of people with Arts degrees?
The purpose of my series of threads on employment outcomes has always been one and the same: to inform.
-
oh yes, the NOBLE brendan, who informs the masses... who informs us of arts employment figures in MUCH higher numbers than any other field including his own :)
-
Yawn. This argument seems to go on forever.
My take:
- Brendan posts articles about Arts degrees and related employment statistics
- Many Arts students get annoyed about this and question his agenda
- Brendan (correctly) points out their own subjectivity in interpreting the articles
- Brendan does not declare his agenda
I personally would like to know Brendan's motivation for posting the articles. Certainly he is aware of the effect it has on many people on this board. But Brendan isn't an Arts student, so he doesn't really have any reason to have a personal interest in this topic. So why does he continually post articles about the employment opportunities etc of people with Arts degrees?
The purpose of my series of threads on employment outcomes has always been one and the same: to inform.
Well that's fair enough. Though it must be noted that until yesterday you seemed only interested in informing people of the employment outcomes associated with an Arts degree, and predominantly highlighting high unemployment figures in Arts graduates or Arts graduates being employed in areas in which their degrees are unnecessary.
-
highlighting high unemployment figures in Arts graduates or Arts graduates being employed in areas in which their degrees are unnecessary.
"High" or "Low" is in the eye of the beholder, it's higher than other fields of study. Additionally, there is also wages, and employer perception of literacy skills:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/11/15/1226319000858.html
Graduate Careers Australia executive director Cindy Tilbrook said while the pain might be eased by vacancies due to an ageing workforce and an continuing skills shortage in areas such as health and engineering, those with a "less defined" career path from humanities or generalist degrees were more likely to struggle to find work.
"They are the ones who feel it even in good times because their outcomes are not as good as those in skill-shortage areas," she said.
http://andrewnorton.info/2008/11/over-qualified-workers/
26.3% of graduates were working in jobs that the ABS occupational classifications system says require vocational or no post-secondary education rather than higher education. That’s only .2% lower than last year. Work I have done on data from the 2006 census suggests that it is the generalist degrees, and particularly arts (with the exception of those with degrees in ‘philosophy and religious studies’), that drag down the average. About 40% of other Arts graduates are in jobs that don’t require higher education.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Education/documents/2007/02/07/UUKfulltext.pdf
One of the first analyses to consider the economic benefits of higher education subjects found that men in possession of an undergraduate degree achieved an earnings premium of approximately 15% over individuals in possession of A-levels.The corresponding estimate for women was 19%.
However, men in possession of mathematics degrees achieved a 25.7% earnings premium over those with A-levels as their highest qualification, while corresponding women achieved a 38.6% earnings premium. In contrast,the premium for men in possession of undergraduate degrees in the arts was 4% less relative to those individuals with A-levels,whilst women achieved a 17% premium. Irrespective of the subject of study,the financial benefit of completing a degree is much greater for women than for men, but this may be due to the relatively low earnings of non-graduate women.
http://www.cis.org.au/Policy/winter00/polwin00-9.htm
… a survey by ACNielsen found that employers thought their Arts graduates had below average literacy skills. …
Since the mid-1970s Arts graduates have in each decade been experiencing a more difficult transition from study to work, to the point where more than 30% are still looking for full-time work four months after graduating. While their labour market position improves substantially over time, they never come close to matching their peers in some other degrees. People with degrees in what the Australian Bureau of Statistics calls ‘society and culture’ have unemployment rates about 50% above those of graduates generally. Wages too remain well below average, probably partly because some graduates are working in jobs for which degrees are not required.
-
I don't think it matters whether or not Brendan himself is 'pro' or 'anti' arts, although we can certainly have our suspicions. Indeed, I'm guilty of having suspicions! This is evident in my first post in this thread:
You may well be a 'just the messenger', Brendan, I don't know, but I don't think that's it, you're probably too clever for that. But the quote you provided in the first post takes the article out of context. The article is not about 'arts students to have difficulty finding jobs', rather, it's another scare piece on the economic downturn and about how young people in general will find things more hard than the previous generation. The mention of people who do 'generalist degrees' just explores where the 'crisis' might hit. Note: Not all generalist degrees are also Arts degrees. So, in merely naming the topic as you do, you're providing us a reinterpretation of the entire article either explicitly or inadvertently. Perhaps you're trying to provoke some kind of response in people who are Arts students or are sympathetic to Arts students. Well done if you are, because look at how I'm responding.
Also, it's interesting to note that you don't post any 'pro-Arts' pieces, despite there being lots out there. Melbourne University's propaganda on why generalist degrees are a really good idea being one such case. Probably more importantly, the fact that last year Arts at UoM was the most popular course to do and required an ENTER of over 85, showed that not just people see the benefits of an Arts degree, but high performing students who are presumably quite smart see the benefits of doing an Arts degree.
Although, I suppose that last point is now technically incorrect with the advent of this thread (kind of...): http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,8136.0.html
But I don't really think this stuff is very interesting to talk about. I also have no real interest in 'shooting the messenger' anymore than what I already have. Like it or not, we are definitely dealing with approximations of 'facts', it's the interpretation of them that's getting spiky (we all have to admit though, job outcomes *do* matter to everyone, just to differing extents). In any case, if Brendan chooses to state his opinion, that's up to him, but as of yet no debate has developed which would really allow him to have an opinion. Most of this thread and the other thread have been about how he is so 'anti-arts' and all we've done is the equivalent of asking 'so are you anti-arts???!!!' then not believing him when he says 'no'. It would be a better method to each state what we think about Arts degrees and if he has something to say on the matter, then he would be free to do so. It's a shame that the debate has led itself down this vapid path and I'm afraid I'm partially responsible for having it go here (sorry...). But! To be fair, I wanted this matter to be peripheral to what I said later in that same post, which is what I find interesting to talk about:
Furthermore, a big 'duh', to the idea that degrees which are career specific or are in skill shortage areas will lead to a higher likelihood of employment than degrees which are not. But, it's important to understand that there are other outcomes in doing a degree than those that are employment specific. I remember one of the first speeches given to me and my Artsy cohort was in terms of career outcomes, 'it doesn't matter'. We were assured that we would get a job in the end, but more importantly, we were assured a good education. But, if you measure success in life in terms of employment, then you should not be disappointed with the outcomes one is provided by Arts. Arts students can expect jobs if they are good at what they do and if they can demonstrate the passion for what they do. If they can't, then they shouldn't have done Arts in the first place. In any case, just having a university degree can get you to a lot of places.
Often people pull out the figures in saying that Arts students have a lower employment rate than those of other degrees. This is probably quite true. However, many people also ignore the fact that 'Arts is the degree you do when you don't know what degree to do.' As a result, some graduates still aren't sure what to do, and are less motivated than other graduates. If you aren't a motivated person, it's much easier to do a career specific degree because the career path is easy and obvious. Those doing an Arts degree who want a job have to be reflective in regard to what they'd like to do with their lives and must be motivated. I would say that Arts might actually be the worst degree to do if you don't know what to do.
And later:
This 'anti-arts' thing is extremely peripheral (perhaps in the end, irrelevant?) to the point I was making.
What really counts is getting back to the original substance of all this. What are the reasons for being 'pro' arts? What are the reasons for being 'anti' arts? When you stack them together, which is the best? Or it it better to be apathetic if it doesn't concern you? I clearly think 'pro-arts' is best, but I'm insanely biased - just like everyone on this board. I think that learning for learning's sake is a great thing one can do for themselves and that the act of following the path that interests one is probably the best one can hope for in terms of total quality of life (and this includes satisfaction with life in general as well as employment outcomes). In this instance, I'm not just pro-Arts, I'm pro-education that leads one to the place one wants to be (as much as an education is actually able to do this - obviously other factors like personal ability need to be taken into account and this shouldn't be ignored). I think, and I don't think many people would dispute me on this, one should be able to choose the degree they want to do (and I recognise that the issue of taxpayers subsidising this education also comes into play here, which is really where Brendan has an opinion on the matter, I would say).
-
oh yes, the NOBLE brendan, who informs the masses... who informs us of arts employment figures in MUCH higher numbers than any other field including his own :)
So?
-
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by people obviously too insecure in their own interests to ignore the selective facts that Brendan has posted. Write a bloody letter to the editor if you have a problem about the articles, don't complain about the person posting it!
-
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by people obviously too insecure in their own interests to ignore the selective facts that Brendan has posted. Write a bloody letter to the editor if you have a problem about the articles, don't complain about the person posting it!
+1
-
I can sympathize with both sides imo. On one hand, it can be said that brenden is just trying to degrade the arts not by what he says, but by the constant posting of articles that show the negative side of the arts.
On the other hand, brenden is just the messenger and is just brining out the statistics.
My opinion, who cares. I can stay up all night trying to look up articles that degrade dentistry, law, economics, engineering etc etc but really it comes to the individual. If you're passionate about something forgot what some article/s has to say and think like an individual. Brenden may seem to be trolling or what not but i say if you disagree with his posts than ignore them or take action that will make a change, not posting your opinion on a FORUM.
-
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by people obviously too insecure in their own interests to ignore the selective facts that Brendan has posted. Write a bloody letter to the editor if you have a problem about the articles, don't complain about the person posting it!
+1
+1 hehe ^_^
-
degrade dentistry
I can help there
Highest suicide rate of any profession
Not a good employment outcome at all
-
This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by people obviously too insecure in their own interests to ignore the selective facts that Brendan has posted. Write a bloody letter to the editor if you have a problem about the articles, don't complain about the person posting it!
I'm not insecure about it, though. I'm not even planning to do an Arts degree.
-
degrade law
and I can help out there ^_^
All money-hungry, compassionless people with very high suicide, depression and divorce rates. Tut.
And costargh, does it look like I'm insecure about it? (see my sig)
Don't make generalisations.
-
trolling attempts.
Brenden may seem to be trolling
To those that claim so, just how and why is the simple act of posting the following set of facts “trolling” or “provocation”?
-
Why is everyone turning pro-Arts into some gay pride thing? (I'm noting the particular use of colours...)
-
Why not? That has always been in my sig. I've just made it more colourful now because I like colours.
-
Why not? That has always been in my sig. I've just made it more colourful now because I like colours.
that yellow hurts my eyes
-
don't look at it then. :P
-
I know they look like hippies screaming for change for some shit like hopeless fags :P [brutal truth]
-
I know they look like hippies screaming for change for some shit like hopeless fags :P [brutal truth]
Lol +1
-
Why is everyone turning pro-Arts into some gay pride thing? (I'm noting the particular use of colours...)
lmaooo I was thinking the same thing!
-
I know they look like hippies screaming for change for some shit like hopeless fags :P [brutal truth]
or land rights for gay whales
-
Right, but why A means B?
Brendan ONLY posts about A means B in terms of Arts.
There are also some C's that mean D's, and some E's that mean F's! Why not post about the completion rates of Arts students? Brendan hasn't given us those figures!
Instead he REPEATEDLY drums in "A means B". And I impugn that as an agenda. :) And I wish to uncover this agenda for readers of his topics so that they can be more critical of what they're reading.
So what? Where did he say that his evidence is comprehensive and a world-view of all relevancies to Arts.
When you study a subject, you might want to find some information about one topic. You go to the library and look for that topic.
In a similar manner, if you want to find out about employment outcomes for Arts graduates, you come here to Brendan's thread. If you want to get information about Arts for something else, Brendan probably isn't your expert. Brendan is well-researched in employment outcomes for many fields of studies!
-
Well put.
-
Don't make generalisations.
All money-hungry, compassionless people
-
All money-hungry, compassionless people with very high suicide, depression and divorce rates.
clearly tongue in cheek.
-
Clearly.
I was merely continuing what BA22 started. Geez can't a person make a joke anymore? ::)
-
Whoever said you couldn't make jokes..
-
ooo lala
-
So what? Where did he say that his evidence is comprehensive and a world-view of all relevancies to Arts.
When you study a subject, you might want to find some information about one topic. You go to the library and look for that topic.
In a similar manner, if you want to find out about employment outcomes for Arts graduates, you come here to Brendan's thread. If you want to get information about Arts for something else, Brendan probably isn't your expert. Brendan is well-researched in employment outcomes for many fields of studies!
He is providing what may well be helpful evidence [to Arts students as well as Arts-bashers] however has had a few sly digs at Arts, such as when he said "I do not think taxpayers should be funding *esoteric Arts subject*" without at the same time stating his view that taxpayers shouldn't be funding *any* uni subjects. I'm not too fussed at those jibes, but he does dish it out, so it's for him to "put up with" annoyed responses.
-
(http://home.exetel.com.au/brendan/gradstats.JPG)
Compiled from: http://www.graduatecareers.com.au/content/download/3869/16197/file/GradStats%202008.pdf
-
mining engineers rock! seems they're either employed or living life large!
-
cartel protected health professions