Why Aren't Uni Courses Scrutinized by The Government before HECS Loans Are Given?

luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 09:44
Last edited 24/04/2024 - 10:27

Bought an apartment with my boyfriend recently and the loan check process was very intense, like making sure we could afford it still if we lost our jobs, any current debts, spending habits, the value of the apartment and area if it needed to be repossessed or sold. Which got me wondering, why is HECS debt so easy to get into, and why aren't courses checked for their validity on getting a suitable job after, or completion rates, or the experience of the students and the actual content of the course.

Why can you get a huge loan for a course that's essentially never going to get you a job that allows you to pay it back? Seems extremely predatory considering the ages of most students entering uni

Edit: I think I have to remember that people on the internet just want to argue against whatever they read, so whatever opinion I want to have agreed with I should write the opposite and I'll have people scrambling to agree with me

Education & Work University

Comments

  • Fredfloresjr on 24/04/2024 - 09:53
    +18

    This is the sole reason why Gov't loves international students and why these students are overtaking/dominating the work sectors.

    • autolux on 24/04/2024 - 10:31
      +6

      exactly. gov backed ponzi, propping up all the other ones…

      • Ace26 on 25/04/2024 - 23:44
        +5

        Gov doesn't apply a filter on HECS eligibility based on any course, You can't call that a ponzi scheme, when students get qualifications to becomes lawyers, doctors, teachers etc. Some thought was a co-contribution to stop students from signing upto courses that don't guarantee jobs but then it would be unfair on those who can't afford to pay that contribution. Perhaps there should be an awareness program in high school that teaches students about the inner workings of HECS.

    • TightAl on 25/04/2024 - 11:37
      +9

      International students don't compete with domestic students for most jobs. Stop making an issue where there isn't one lmao.

      • R4 on 26/04/2024 - 10:50
        +4

        They shouldn't be competing full stop. There should be no graduate work rights for international students. They should go home, get experience and then apply for skilled migration. Remove this work right and the number of international students coming to Australia would plummet - doing everyone a favour.

          • R4 on 26/04/2024 - 11:52
            +8

            @sauce2k: Utter nonsense. There's zero racism in my post. I don't care where they come from - there's too many international students in Australia. This huge number has zero benefit for most of our society. The only winners are the University sector and government (positive GDP figures). Our rental market is crazy - and hundreds of thousands of international students competing for properties is really not helping. Why should graduates have work rights? Few other countries offer this perk - and it's the main driver for students to come here in the first place.

            Trying to stop debate on the issue by accusing people of being racist is pathetic and childish. Fortunately, that won't wash with me.

              • sakurashu on 26/04/2024 - 12:45
                +6

                @sauce2k: While they may be allowed to study here when paying for a course - why should they automatically be entitled to an extended visa with work rights? If they have the right skills on our skills list after graduating to be accepted for an ordinary visa then they should use that and follow the same process as others? If they don't then we are explicitly saying they don't provide value as their field of expertise isn't on our skills list….

                Does Australia need fresh graduates with no experience? Or do we need workers who already have skills and experience in the sector?

                Bringing racism or discrimination into this is nonsense; Australians should want good and effective migrants in sectors where we need workers. Maybe Australia isn't as racist as you think - nobody is against giving Damien Guerot or Muhammad Taha citizenship….

                • sauce2k on 26/04/2024 - 13:06
                  -3

                  @sakurashu: @sakurashu First of all, no idea where you are coming from but I clearly didn't say every Australian a racist. I commented based on what that person said.

                  • "Automatically be entitled to an extended visa with work rights?" As far as I know you will need to apply for a visa with work rights.
                  • Does Australia need fresh graduates with no experience? Ok there's a reason why it's called a graduate position and nowadays more and more companies would hire a graduate based on their work experience during uni e.g. internship. International Students while on student visa, far less chance in getting an internship because again most places are after PR/Aus citizen.
                  • Ok telling international students should have no right after studying and to go home etc isn't racism or discrimination? Move on, you are in the same category as the other person. What about international students who wish to stay and become a PR/Citizen to contribute towards our country's growth?
                  • sakurashu on 26/04/2024 - 23:07
                    +5

                    @sauce2k:

                    What about international students who wish to stay and become a PR/Citizen to contribute towards our country's growth

                    What about them? They can apply for an ordinary visa like anyone else; allowing students special dispensation is basically allowing people to purchase a backdoor. My core question here is why do you think international students who have studied here deserve better treatment over other immigrants?

                    As far as I know you will need to apply for a visa with work rights

                    Yes but there are special visas (see the 485) that allow students to stay after graduating that others can't apply for

                    • sauce2k on 26/04/2024 - 23:22
                      +2

                      @sakurashu: @sakurashu what pot are you smoking? I never said international students deserve better treatment ?? Read the comments. The person I replied to basically said send them home wtf lol.

                      • sakurashu on 27/04/2024 - 19:08
                        +1

                        @sauce2k: Lol if they only have a student visa and they don't get a 485 (which is better treatment) then they get sent home; that's also what op of this thread said. That they shouldn't have work rights just for studying and should be sent home where they can then apply for a work visa like anyone else.

                        Maybe you try reading it again - I don't smoke

                        There should be no graduate work rights for international students. They should go home, get experience and then apply for skilled migration

              • Assburg on 28/04/2024 - 11:29

                @sauce2k: I hate all ethnicities of international students equally, Canadians, Brits, Americans, Chinese, etc.

                Get rid of them.

                Now which part of this is discriminatory?

            • May4th on 27/04/2024 - 11:17
              +4

              @R4: if you are losing jobs to international students who has a foreign looking name (let's not pretend it doesn't make a difference), may not speak english well or has an accent, doesn't have any networking connections local experience and can't even talk footy/MAFS or whatever chit chat with the recruiters you probably need to have a good hard look at yourself.

              • R4 on 27/04/2024 - 16:19

                @May4th: I never said that, so you're replying to the wrong person turbo

              • Assburg on 28/04/2024 - 17:44
                +2

                @May4th: I have known a few competent Australians who've been let go from their legal jobs for leaving at 5pm… similarly I know highly incompetent internationals working at the same places who stay at work until 8pm every day, literally just twiddling thumbs..

                They'll get let go of eventually too, but they just create the illusion of hard work and a higher standard resulting in poor outcomes for people who live Australian values.

        • FlyingMiffy on 26/04/2024 - 11:59
          +5

          Anyone looking to recruit is looking for someone with the rights skills and attitude… if local students are missing out to others… the problem might not be the international students..

        • p1 ama on 26/04/2024 - 13:51
          +2

          Thought you were a "libertarian" mate, let the market sort it out then. If Australian graduates are not competitive with international ones, then isn't the libertarian position to just let the Australian graduates sort it out, upskill, make themselves more attractive to employers, "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" so to speak?

          Or is it just "libertarian" when it suits?

          • infinite on 26/04/2024 - 22:41
            -1

            @p1 ama: The core basics of Libertarianism include the doctrine of individualism and inalienable right to self-ownership and competition in a marketplace with your own citizens.

            Allowing foreigners (students or not) to flood any marketplace distorts the ability to maintain personal individualism, as those economic migrants will always bring their third world attitudes, beliefs and practices they are escaping from & demand they be able to do the same thing here, which caused the very problems they are escaping from. This obviously encroaches on our personal freedom, freedom to associate, freedom of speech, freedom of choice and freedom of thought.

            Allowing foreigners (students or not) to flood any marketplace also distorts the ability to compete in a marketplace with your own citizens, as cheap foreign labour allows large companies to kill off all small to mid sized competition. Most large companies are already part or wholly owned by foreign interests, which distorts the market even further when foreign labour enters it. On top of that, temporary foreign labour also reduces both the average wage for workers and profitability of SMB's. It's a lose-lose for everyone in Australia except for the CEO's of those large companies. Especially given we have a welfare system supporting hundreds of thousands of physically capable working aged individuals, who simply choose not to work, when they are perfectly capable of doing so.

            • May4th on 27/04/2024 - 11:23
              +1

              @infinite: that's bs.. did you just google the definition and then added on "own citizens" yourself? excluding international grads from job market is pure labour force protectionism distorting market forces which is the opposite of libertarianism, you can't have it both ways.

              no one is saying they are entitled to a job on graduation, they are subject to the same visa requirements as anyone else and compete in the same job market as everyone else. what you are basically saying is australian born adults are entitled to a job and foreign labour should be banned from the job market, even IF local grads are of lesser quality in terms of education training and aptitude.

              let's face it the people on welfare are not going to go for those jobs on offer as they aren't willing or able to do those jobs. your thought bubble would be a single stroke that will increase labour costs 200% and contribute to soaring inflation. let's see how you like those policies when your milk and bread for the week cost $20+ and your morning coffee cost $12

            • rumblytangara on 27/04/2024 - 14:06
              -1

              @infinite:

              The core basics of Libertarianism include the doctrine of individualism and inalienable right to self-ownership and competition in a marketplace with your own citizens.

              How to say that you don't have a clue about politics without saying you don't have a clue about politics.

          • R4 on 27/04/2024 - 16:29
            +1

            @p1 ama: Nothing to do with libertarianism.

            Being against massive numbers of international students flooding Australia is not a radical view - and it's a viewpoint held by many in the community.

            • p1 ama on 27/04/2024 - 20:13
              -1

              @R4: Yes, but my question is why does the government need to get more involved than it already is?

              The idea that international students are somehow "taking the jobs" of locals implies that just by being local that you are somehow more entitled to a job than someone who is not. Why does this necessarily have to be the case?

              Why should businesses and employers who are looking to hire the best people be forced to look within a smaller pool, and hire sub-par people if it is the case that an international student / graduate would be more suitable for the role?

              Not saying this is necessarily my view, just that your view on this issue is inherently contradictory with your stated political views. Hence my statement, that you lot have no consistent political ideology - small government and less intervention for things you like, big government and more intervention for things you don't.

              That's all.

              • R4 on 27/04/2024 - 20:30
                +1

                @p1 ama: 'The idea that international students are somehow "taking the jobs" of locals'

                I never said that.

                The main driver for students to study here is eventual PR and then citizenship. That I don't agree with. There should be no work rights for graduates - they should return home, get experienced and apply for skilled migration like everyone else. Skilled migration should be the only avenue to PR in Australia - limited to a maximum of 100k visas a year. No family reunion. No graduate visas.

                That's all.

                • ripesashimi on 28/04/2024 - 13:54

                  @R4: Not even partner visa? Whats your plan for half the country to reproduce?

    • HeWhoKnows on 25/04/2024 - 15:38

      "why aren't courses checked for their validity on getting a suitable job"

      Because NOT everyone does degree to get a job or earn income.
      Some are just furthering their education in a fierld on interest.
      So its not up to anyone to check on what students are studying -
      That would be a major invasion of privacy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Its up to the person to check job prospects arising from any course if paid employment is the required end result.

      Now when it comes to international students:
      - most do courses that get them into well paying jobs.
      - others do courses to justify a "study" visa so they can live in this beautiful country.

      • Kangal on 25/04/2024 - 17:35
        +3

        Same arguments can be made for home loans.
        I think OP initial point still stands.

        • serpserpserp on 25/04/2024 - 19:43

          Same arguments can be made for home loans.

          What do you mean?

      • infinite on 26/04/2024 - 22:45
        -1

        Because NOT everyone does degree to get a job or earn income.
        Some are just furthering their education in a fierld on interest.

        That's literally why a system should be in place to ensure the country isn't taking on billions of dollars of debt to support the personal interests of people who have no interest in working and contributing to society.

        HECS shouldn't be made available for courses and study that won't lead to gainful employment.

        The fields of study can still be made available for people to undertake, but they should be paying for it themselves. Not taxpayers.

        • HeWhoKnows on 27/04/2024 - 12:10
          +2

          I think you dont understand the system

          HECS is a student loan scheme.
          The HECS loan must be repaid with interest.

          Its not tax payer funded scheme as you claim

          Hence matters not who uses it or for which course.

          • May4th on 27/04/2024 - 12:16

            @HeWhoKnows: Lots of commenters in this thread who doesn't know the difference between CSP HECS and HELP

            • HeWhoKnows on 27/04/2024 - 12:20
              +1

              @May4th: Typical of all threads
              People shooting off comments without having any idea.

              And neg-voting ":the facts" because they dont like them….like that will change things.

          • Gina Rinehart on 27/04/2024 - 12:19
            +2

            @HeWhoKnows: The problem people like the person above you have is that many of these "personal interest" courses don't lead to employment opportunities and the people end up not paying the debt.

            That said, it's a very fine line on who gets to dictate what a "personal interest" course is that won't lead to gainful employment. Because there are plenty of science, arts etc courses that are very niche and unlikely to lead to a career in those subjects, but it doesn't mean it's impossible and we shouldn't just start excluding people from studying those types of courses (or making the barrier of entry impossible). You need to invite people to study all kinds of fields to have a diverse society.

            This all seems like a ridiculous distraction anyway. We should be taxing natural resources (mining, gas etc) properly and then the minimal costs associated with HECS/HELP would be a drop in the bucket of massive surpluses.

            • HeWhoKnows on 27/04/2024 - 12:23

              @Gina Rinehart: Personally I think with the huge education fees that overseas students are paying, these should be used to subisde Australian citizens tertiary education costs.(in a big way)
              Such funding can be subject to family income and asstes tests and also subject to the student obtaining satisfactory passes,
              ie A repeated subject due to a failure is not funded again

            • HeWhoKnows on 01/05/2024 - 10:22

              @Gina Rinehart: or maybe change the HECS system all together

    • Brianqpr on 26/04/2024 - 10:59
      +5

      Higher education has been completely monetised. You need a (pointless, such as business or economics, stuff you'd learn on the job anyway and would start learning 3 years sooner) degree to get a foot in the door for a lot of jobs that were fine to apply for without one 20 years ago.

      You only had to see the meltdown when the borders closed during the covid lockdowns, unis have become completely dependent on this overseas money.

      The whole thing is an enormous scam.

    • whatgift on 28/04/2024 - 11:12

      That's based on the flawed assumption that Australians would actually be skilled or willing to take those jobs.

  • CodeXD on 24/04/2024 - 09:54
    +5

    Banks' main goal is to make money, government is not.

    Are you suggesting that courses that students cannot get a job from after completion should not have HECS?

    • bobbified on 24/04/2024 - 09:59
      +16

      Are you suggesting that courses that students cannot get a job from after completion should not have HECS?

      Yes.

      • serpserpserp on 25/04/2024 - 19:44
        +2

        You don't pay it back. That is the beauty of HECS.

        Until you start earning money you don't pay it back compulsory.

        • bobbified on 25/04/2024 - 20:15
          +3

          Then it's taxpayers that end up footing the bill. The government needs to be more responsible in how they spend our hard-earned money (and that's not just HECs).

        • smalltime0 on 26/04/2024 - 11:31

          Its cheaper just to frack the countryside for oil and gas

        • field1985 on 26/04/2024 - 18:27
          +1

          That's a complete lie. The threshold of $1000pw is barely above the minimum wage of $882.

          You are not "earning money" on the minimum wage, you are barely surviving in this economy.

          Students were sold lies you wouldn't have to repay until you made a DECENT income and it would ALWAYS be the cheapest debt. HECS is a deceptive system built on lie's told by universities (that get the money) to gullible 17 year olds on masse to entrap them in a life of debt for the government.

          It is an absolutely perverse system that has shattered the egalitarian nature of Australian society.

          Thanks boomers… is it any wonder there are shortages of workers? We can't afford the risk of study and huge debts.

          And you lot have the gall to refer to it as "BEAUTY"? wow, just wow. Let me guess, you used it in the 90's before it went to sh!t?

          • serpserpserp on 26/04/2024 - 19:43
            +2

            @field1985: No I used it 15 years later. Then again in 2013-2014. Took me a very long time to pay it off, there were years and years of 4-5% indexation.

            I do agree they made it worse. The Liberals couldn't stop tinkering with it and believe that people that can't afford to pay it off are somehow freeloaders on society.

            By the way. Paying back 1% of your wage when you start earning 52k a year is hardly going to make or break you.

            • field1985 on 26/04/2024 - 22:47

              @serpserpserp: I agree on most points. But my experience varied. Were you earning $52k when it happened? Did your pathetic graduate take home pay go backwards?
              Did your job require a degree but not pay enough to repay HECS?
              The whole system is a scam at this point. It has been so optimised for money extraction by Uni's, Governments and business benefit that the students are just meat to feed their debt machine.
              These are debts that are not even dissolved by bankruptcies. They haunt people to the grave.

              • serpserpserp on 27/04/2024 - 13:03

                @field1985:

                Did your pathetic graduate take home pay go backwards?

                Everyone's pathetic graduate pay goes backwards when you get over 52k, but do you really notice it? Not really, not until you are earning up towards 150-200k. Then the difference when you finally pay it off you notice quite a bit.

                I don't know why any indebtedness people take on these days needs to be a "scam". Car loans, scam. Home loans, scam. Leasing, scam. HECS, scam. You can get into a lot of jobs without degrees, even with just Tafe. People might thumb their nose at it, cause every young kids wants a 100k+ job straight out of uni, but that just isn't reality. If you need a degree for the career you want, this is the price you pay. But there are so many other well paying professions that require zero degrees.

          • infinite on 26/04/2024 - 22:49

            @field1985: How is repaying a debt you incurred willingly from somewhere between 1% and 2% of your $50K+ income a problem?

            That's an absolute bargain.

            An even better idea is to stop voting in morons who jack up your income tax and cause inflation, so you'll have the capacity to repay the debt even faster.

            • field1985 on 26/04/2024 - 22:58
              +2

              @infinite: Incurred willingly? "You wont get a job without this"… "Do you want to live in poverty your whole life?"… "You have to go to uni, pick a course!" The social, educational and familial pressure put on 17 year olds to chose a course and debt that will determine their lives is absolutely perverse.
              What choice do young people really have? They are force fed through school that they must go to uni to succeed. Then they are sold lies by uni's selling their half-baked courses delivered by overworked and unpaid post-docs (who also do all the research/course work preparation/marking) while tenured professors just waft around adding their names to PhD's work to increase their citations to increase their pay grade while VC's chase international student $$$ around the sub-continent like sex workers on ice. They act like it's 100% you will get a job when they pitch their courses to 17 year olds that have NEVER had a debt.

              It's destroyed universities purpose, to educate. It's destroying young lives before they begin.

              I've repaid my debt. It doesn't mean the system isn't corrupted beyond repair and needs to be completely torn down and rebuilt (eg Trade Schools)

    • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 10:01
      +9

      I'm suggesting that the government should scrutinize the courses more so people CAN get jobs after instead of having degrees that dont help, currently it feels like some weird scam where the universities just make up a price and dont really have to fulfill anything and can pocket the money. Maybe not giving a loan for someone wanting to do "interpretive dance" might not be the worst idea either, or at least laying out the potential lifelong ramifications of the loan.

      • nomoneynoproblems on 24/04/2024 - 11:33
        +2

        I’m pretty sure if the government sponsored only STEM subjects, the collective left would revolt demanding that their useless arts degrees be covered under HECS.

        • Crow K on 24/04/2024 - 17:42
          +16

          useless arts degrees

          No novels or movies for you, hey

          • Yukari Yakumo on 25/04/2024 - 13:57
            +1

            @Crow K: I don't recall hearing any anecdote of a world-renowned author or director who had their ideas rejected by a publisher or distributor because they didn't have the right degrees.

            Now compare that to becoming a pharmacist, or joining a graduate program at an engineering firm, or becoming a solicitor. Sure, someone extremely talented may be able to get into their dream white-collar profession without a degree (personally I know two such people, one being a DBA who describes himself as being degreeless and "straight outta Woolies", and another Java developer who was previously a real estate agent), but in the vast majority of cases that would be an uphill battle as these listings almost always are very insistent on the applicant holding a degree, especially for entry-level positions where most applicants don't yet have much demonstrable experience.

            • Crow K on 25/04/2024 - 16:49
              +4

              @Yukari Yakumo:

              I don't recall hearing any anecdote of a world-renowned author or director who had their ideas rejected by a publisher or distributor because they didn't have the right degrees

              Luckily for the rest of us, the real world isn't based on what anecdotes you've heard?

              But I'm happy to be proven wrong on my point, how about you stack up some lists of movies that had no one on the cast attend a university or some higher form of education?

              I'll wait (an awful long time, because you're wrong)

              • Yukari Yakumo on 26/04/2024 - 18:29
                -2

                @Crow K: Sorry, but I'm not playing this game by your terms, since it's more than clear that you are here for an internet fight, it's not worth my time. I'm engaging with you in the manner I see fit, whether you like it or not.

                Nowhere did I say that there were any films, well-renowned or not, that had "no one on the cast" attend higher education, you're putting words into my mouth. The reality of the situation is that there is, without a doubt, a lower barrier to entry for creative writing and the performing arts in relation to university qualifications. Sure, having an educated background certainly helps with writing better storyboards, scripts, and novels, but it's not a hard requirement. Having a background in history makes you better at writing good historical fiction, having a background in science makes you better at writing science documentaries, having a background in filmography makes you better at creating quality cinematic works. But these are not hard requirements, and those who are talented in their work are not rejected by publishers, financiers, and producers simply because they lack degrees. If someone without a degree creates a work that has obvious potential to become extremely profitable, no distributor would be stupid enough to reject their ideas on the basis of qualifications alone.

                Compare this with other professions: to join the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, you must have (at a minimum) a Bachelor of Pharmacy; look at any APS4 job listing for a business analyst or .NET developer and they explicitly state that applicants must have a Bachelor of Software Enginnering, Computer Science, or Information Technology. These are hard prerequisites that firmly limit you from getting your foot in the door, especially for entry-level positions.

                There really isn't any need to turn this into some sort of "vgh, my degree svffers more than your degree" competition. I'm not saying that the humanities are inherently worthless, I'm saying that humanities degrees are not hard prerequisites in the industries they often lead to, and those in such fields who are talented enough can still thrive and prosper without a degree. I'm close friends with an Austrian Croat who writes erotic smut novels for middle-aged women in German and sells them on Amazon DE, and he's doing financially quite well for himself despite being degreeless.

                • Crow K on 27/04/2024 - 11:34
                  +1

                  @Yukari Yakumo:

                  I'm close friends with an Austrian Croat who writes erotic smut novels for middle-aged women in German and sells them on Amazon DE, and he's doing financially quite well for himself despite being degreeless.

                  You really do love your anecdotal "evidence", don't you?

                  It's a pity you hadn't heard any anecdotes about some scientific organization that took on someone without the required degree or I'd be able to refute your cherry-picked "something I heard about or imagined once"

                  • Yukari Yakumo on 27/04/2024 - 14:06
                    -2

                    @Crow K: So yes, my suspicions are confirmed, you are just here for the dopamine hit of an internet fight. You make low-effort responses that never actually address the key points I bring across, and only hyperfocus on one sentence I make as your epic "gotcha". If you're not willing to have a good faith discussion like I am, then I'll leave you to it.

                    • Crow K on 27/04/2024 - 18:20
                      +2

                      @Yukari Yakumo: Alright, let's weigh up the value of your contribution to this discussion.

                      NoMoney: (some things and) arts degrees are useless
                      Crow: Actually, NoMoney, arts degrees gave us novels and movies.
                      Yukari: Actually, Crow, pharmacists find it much harder to get into their chosen profession

                      ?????

                      How is your response somehow a meaningful rebuttal to the one thing I said, which is "arts degrees allow us to have things like novels and movies"?

                      I'm not a keyboard warrior who wanted a dopamine hit, I was telling you your non-sequitur was pointless, and to take your feeble anecdotal musings and trot off.

                      Your continued output hasn't convinced me you have suitably ordered thoughts that meaningfully address the discussion, so thanks for showing up but it's a pass from me

                      • Yukari Yakumo on 28/04/2024 - 19:50
                        -1

                        @Crow K: Let's not forget the original point that you brought up:

                        No novels or movies for you, hey

                        The implication here is that, without art degrees, there would be an absence of novels or films, as art degrees are absolutely essential to the creation of novels and films. I muse, in passing, that I've never heard of a successful author or director who has had their good ideas rejected purely because they lacked a degree. Those without degrees can still create successful works. Then you proceed to move the goalposts:

                        how about you stack up some lists of movies that had no one on the cast attend a university or some higher form of education?

                        There is no benefit to me playing by the rules that you set out to wall off any rebuttal. What's the point when you'll just move the goalposts again? Say that hypothetically I did directly answer this question of yours, you'll then say something like I cherrypicked it, or that it's "something I heard about or imagined once", or that it doesn't count because of some arbitrary criteria, or something else. This is like someone randomly inventing new game rules while playing Monopoly, and then getting surprised that nobody wants to play with them anymore.

                        Following back to the original point of there being "no novels or movies" without arts degrees, if I felt like you were arguing civilly and in good faith, I would have happily retorted that authors such as Nisio Isin and Isuna Hasekura are both Oricon Chart bestselling authors that are degreeless. But why would I do that when I know you're not going to respond in good faith?

                        Luckily for the rest of us, the real world isn't based on what anecdotes you've heard?

                        You really do love your anecdotal "evidence", don't you?

                        More than once now, you've repeated "anecdote bad" as a key point, but it doesn't appear that you actually understand why anecdotes are bad. Just like with case studies, anecdotes are a poor way of proving a point as they're easily subject to the confirmation bias of whoever brings them forward, so they're not a strong form of evidence compared to something like a peer reviewed trial. But last I checked, I'm not submitting an research paper, I'm posting on an online forum.

                        For the purposes of informal discussion, there's nothing wrong about using anecdotes to illustrate ideas or draw parallels to one's personal experience, and if individual anecdotes are faulty then they can certainly be picked apart individually. But throwing out all anecdotes outright is a fallacy in itself.

                        pharmacists find it much harder to get into their chosen profession

                        That's a mischaracterisation of what I wrote.

                        A dentist needs a dentistry degree to practice their profession. A physiotherapist needs a physiotherapy degree to practice their profession. These are hard barriers to entry, there are no alternative ways in. A novelist or a director do not have such firm barriers to entry; while a degree can help them become better novelists or directors, there is no firm criteria gatekeeping them out, unlike the case with dentistry or engineering.

                        NoMoney: (some things and) arts degrees are useless

                        For the record, I don't agree with NoMoney, and I don't particularly care about what he wrote. I don't believe that they are useless. All of my musings are strictly and exclusively related to your comment about novels and movies.

                        an awful long time, because you're wrong

                        take your feeble anecdotal musings and trot off

                        I would like to point out that you're the only one who's been continuously snarky and confrontational. What have I done to you? I'm not sure if you have a chip on your shoulder due to the topic at hand, or if it's some other reason, but I'm really not sure what I did to attract such ire.

                        Your mind is clearly already made up, you don't want to discuss anything in good faith, you only want to shout from the rooftops, so like I said before there's simply no benefit in me playing by these rigged Monopoly rules.

          • lunchbox99 on 25/04/2024 - 13:58
            +1

            @Crow K: TV is 3hrs straight of someone performing titrations. Still better than Madame Web though.

          • infinite on 26/04/2024 - 22:53

            @Crow K: Novels were written far before arts degrees ever existed, movies are mostly made by technical crews with the actors/actresses/writers being the least important members of the production team & the current state of Hollywood proves it !

            • Crow K on 27/04/2024 - 11:16
              +1

              @infinite:

              Novels were written far before arts degrees ever existed

              Yeah, and physicians existed long before medical degrees existed? Dumb argument that just because we once didn't have something it's not relevant to working in the field now?

              movies are mostly made by technical crews

              Lol, so which non-arts, non-filmschool, actual-STEM degrees do you study if you want to be a Director of Photography, story boarder, sound mixer or matte painter? Look at all the scientists making the movie happen! Dumb.

              with the actors/actresses/writers being the least important members of the production team

              The actual actors on screen and the words they say are actually the least important part of the movie?? Do you just go to the movies and have a nap and wakeup to read the credits? Dumb.

        • infinite on 26/04/2024 - 22:50
          -1

          The government should just tell the left "no" - something all of their parents should have done at least once in their lives.

          • Crow K on 27/04/2024 - 11:24
            +1

            @infinite: Antivaxxers who are critical of the government running our lives, right up until it's time to tell "the left" something and then it's cheerleader tryouts.

            It's a shame to see a good mind go to waste but it's also sad in cases like these too.

            • infinite on 28/04/2024 - 12:47

              @Crow K: Why on earth would you conflate the government oppressing it's citizens with simply just saying "no, we aren't loaning you money you obviously won't have any capacity to repay".

      • Aneurism on 25/04/2024 - 11:07
        +2

        Waiting for someone to blame the patriarchy …

        • bobbified on 25/04/2024 - 20:23
          +1

          Seems like noone here has completed "gender studies".. lol

      • CalmLemons on 25/04/2024 - 19:42

        That sounds like a great idea to be honest, but this is the government we're talking about.

        They're mostly arts, history or lawyers with no specialty in any of the courses taught nor experience. Who they get to and how they would do this would be the biggest question.

  • MS Paint on 24/04/2024 - 09:59
    +3

    University education was free prior to HECS (so I've been told) so at least the government will get something back if students end up with a decent paying job.

    Banks are in the business of making money for shareholders.

    The government is in the business of providing accessible education to the masses.

    • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 10:07
      -7

      I guess I'm projecting a little too, i have 90k debt from 2 terrible courses that didn't prepare me at all for the industry I wanted to enter, and even had things like teachers just being absent for the whole semester in one class. At the time i just wanted to be out of the house from abusive parents and considered it the easiest way at the time so i wasn't really considering the debt i'd end up with. The three bottom tiers of wage repayments dont even keep up with the inflation indexing on the loan i have so i'm pretty much resigned myself to die with the loan.

      • soan papdi on 24/04/2024 - 10:22
        +1

        By this logic, you’d be without qualifications right now. Would you be okay with that? Are you employed at the moment and is it in any way related to the qualifications you got earlier?

        • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 10:33
          +6

          Yes i would be okay with that, i wish I'd entered the unskilled workforce immediately because the problem is i ONLY got qualifications and nothing else useful from the degree, All my previous jobs haven't used anything i learned from the courses, and i dont have the skills to get a job in the industries i wanted because it simply wasn't taught in the course. Now i just have a portion of my salary going towards my student loans which even at 700k a year doesn't stop indexation from increasing the loan every year

          • soan papdi on 24/04/2024 - 10:40
            +1

            @luminousfox: I can see your logic but this then falls into the government telling people what to study purely for commercial skills. Fields like humanities will struggle. Arguments can be made for both sides and there no easy answer.

            What were your qualifications that left you without anything job-worthy at the end of your degree? Did you have a choice of picking other streams?

            • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 10:56
              +6

              @soan papdi: My first degree out of Highschool was a Bachelor of Games design at RMIT, at the time the Australian government was pushing additional funding to build the Australian games industry and it was meant to be the next big thing. 1st Semested the programming class had a 90% failure rate and was taught in incredibly basic "drag and drop" boxes style. 2nd semester they cut the funding and the courses was altered to not included anything to do with programming and the name was changed to "Games graphics design" to reflect the change. Exited the course with pretty much a very basic understanding of 3d modeling (which has helped in my personal life and hobbies but not in the workplace)

              Not a single person in a class of around 30 has entered the industry or made a game in a small team or by themselves in the 15 years since finishing.

              Second course i thought id "guarantee" that i was doing something useful and did computer systems engineering again at rmit. The course basically involved being given worksheets on commands to set up a server and given no real knowledge on what they did. I was hoping this is the time i could finally try programming, but the course content was altered to remove programming in replace of maths and physics (i still remember trying to figure out a question along the lines of "if someone fired a compound bow on ice, how far would they slide back), i was interested in a HTML class but that was the one where the teacher quit and there was no replacement for the entire semester. So also just exited that course with a fancy sounding degree and no skill.

              As i said at the time i just wanted to be out of the house, now i wish i just got a retail job or unskilled labor job and put myself 5 years ahead in savings instead of 5 years behind. I wish i campaigned for myself more and got more angry over the lack of content and how the courses was run, or simply just left the course, but yeah wasn't in the best headspace at the time. Now i'm older and wondering why rmit was able to get away with all these things essentially being funded by the government with no one checking on what the course content actually contains.

              • soan papdi on 24/04/2024 - 11:24
                +8

                @luminousfox:

                Now i'm older and wondering why rmit was able to get away with all these things essentially being funded by the government with no one checking on what the course content actually contains.

                Education is one of Australia's biggest exports and universities are addicted to the easy money. Recruitment agencies overseas dangle the permanent residency carrot (which the universities cannot promise or deliver on) and students are attracted the living in a western country. VIC even doesn't allow international students to get discounted Myki cards, that's how deep the addiction runs.

                Count yourself lucky you didn't enter the games industry. It's possibly one of the worst sub-fields in IT - extreme work loads and relatively poor pay all for the "glamour" and "glory" of video games. IT and Programming are relatively easy to learn on your own and get an entry level job. It's still one of the few industries where the lack of a degree doesn't prevent career growth. Plenty of free courses on Udemy/Coursera/EdX, Khan Academy, etc. Give those a go.

                • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 11:41
                  +6

                  @soan papdi: Thanks for hearing me out and being comforting and kind!, I'm so used to getting told I'm stupid and trying to dodge blame. In hindsight you're totally right about the games industry but i wish i came out with the confidence to start something solo at least. Thanks for the suggestions!, I deviated a bit and have been learning a lot about excel formulas and been enjoying doing that which makes me think i'd have enjoyed doing programming too. Have a good week!

                • Gareth on 25/04/2024 - 01:27

                  @soan papdi: This is the funny thing - it seems there is almost an unlimited number of potential students for games programming, but no jobs.

                  If unis offer a proper programming degree focussed on system design and databases - where there traditionally has been a range of opportunities - lucky to get enough enrolments to run the course.

                  Most unis seem to be focussing on networking or cyber security these days to get interest in the courses.

                  Irrespective of what you learn in a CS field, much of it will be obsolete in 5 years anyway - always need to be learning the new thing.

                  • derrida derider on 25/04/2024 - 14:33
                    +2

                    @Gareth: Any worthwhile Computer Science degree, even one emphasising fashionable topics, covers system design and database design thoroughly - they are after all the bread and butter of most people working in IT. That is especially so as both networking and cyber security skills need a proper foundation in software and database design anyway.

                    Plus of course the fundamentals of design, databases, numerical analysis and programming paradigms are the things that do NOT become obsolete every five years. These days you need to include neural networks as a fundamental (for AI).

                    Still, IT is an industry that does require lifelong learning - which for those who fear boredom more than change is a feature not a bug.

                    • miicah on 25/04/2024 - 14:43

                      @derrida derider: Exactly. The Data Structures subject from 1994 is probably not much different from one in 2024.

              • Ughhh on 25/04/2024 - 14:57

                @luminousfox: Is programming one of the skills/jobs that can only be learnt at Uni? Is it one of those jobs where a certificate/license is required to be employed, like Doctors and accountants?

                • luminousfox on 25/04/2024 - 19:09
                  +1

                  @Ughhh: My idea of university is someone helping you learn and teaching you through the steps, giving homework, putting the class material in a logical learning order, as well as a lot of other things when done correctly. this is a learning environment that can be particularly help for some. If I wanted to learn at home by myself I would have just read a book.

                  • Ughhh on 25/04/2024 - 19:42
                    +3

                    @luminousfox: It sounds like you're expecting uni to be like high school.

                    If I wanted to learn at home by myself I would have just read a book.

                    Programming is something that can be self taught, having the paper(degree) does look a bit tad better.

                    • derrida derider on 26/04/2024 - 16:39
                      +1

                      @Ughhh: PROGRAMMING can be self taught but Computer Science is a lot more than programming. And without learning some of those other things knowing a programming language is useless at a professional level.

                      For a hobby - well that's different. Go for it.

                      • Ughhh on 26/04/2024 - 22:15

                        @derrida derider: @derrida derider

                        From Ops comment:

                        I was hoping this is the time i could finally try programming, but the course content was altered to remove programming in replace of maths and physics

                        Op wanted to learn more about programming, if like you said, programming can be self taught… It's never too late for op to start googling/udemy-ing/youtubing etc

                  • jrowls on 25/04/2024 - 22:15
                    +1

                    @luminousfox: you went in with the wrong idea then. as @Ughhh said, you're describing high school. some courses are not like this - eg nursing - and are more similar to what you describe, or how tafe courses run. but those are kind of their own thing.

                    uni has an element of that - pracs/labs/tutorials - but the main idea is independent learning. collaborating with your peers and using tutors and professors as resources is a key part of that, but in the main, uni is what you make of it.

                    lectures are there to break down the key theoretical elements of the topic, pracs/labs/tutorials are for discussion and practice with opportunity for questions and assistance, and the assessments are for you to apply the new things you've learned in combination with prior knowledge, and whatever relevant research/presentation/writing skills are required for the task.

                    if that doesn't sound like what you experienced, maybe your course sucked, or maybe you didn't engage with it properly. in general though, it's been proven a pretty effective way of teaching for hundreds of years…

                  • p1 ama on 26/04/2024 - 00:10
                    +3

                    @luminousfox:

                    My idea of university is someone helping you learn and teaching you through the steps, giving homework, putting the class material in a logical learning order, as well as a lot of other things when done correctly. this is a learning environment that can be particularly help for some. If I wanted to learn at home by myself I would have just read a book.

                    I have plenty of issues with regards to teaching quality at universities. However, what you're saying here makes absolutely no sense at all.

                    Every form of learning involves a huge chunk of "learning at home by yourself". In fact, that is the main source of learning, the role of everything else in a university is to help facilitate your learning. If you do not want to "learn at home by yourself", there's no way that you will be able to follow lectures, no way that you will be able to make use of practicals / labs or know what is going on, no way you will be able to engage with your peers, and no way you will be able to participate in tutorials and ask relevant questions.

                    Everyone at a university - your lecturers, your tutors, your peers, your lab demonstrators, they are all there to help you learn, the vast majority of which is done by yourself, with a book, with a pen and paper or on a computer, trying to figure things out, solving problems, and (often times) feeling like you want to tear your hair out, but getting the satisfaction once you've "figured it out". Nobody can go inside your brain and put the information there for you.

                    At the end of the day, learning is difficult - just think about playing piano, can you expect to play piano by just going to some classes and hearing people talk about it, or do you think it's a heck of a lot of practice by yourself?

                    You can be sold a university course, but you cannot be forced to learn. Of course, there are university courses of questionable academic value, and I'll always call that out, but you're just being delusional if you think you can learn things without putting in the hard work of "learning at home by yourself".

              • rumblytangara on 25/04/2024 - 17:34

                @luminousfox: It's all about incentives.

                As others have already pointed out, banks have a financial incentive to assess mortgage repayment ability as otherwise they get saddled with bad debt.

                The government has no such incentive. And universities have the incentive to drum up as much student count as they can- the more students, the more funding. Same with individual academics- the more postgrad students they have, the more they can publish.

                Whether the government even has a place gatekeeping tertiary education- are you seriously suggesting that students not be allowed to enter a course because some third party deems it economically 'wrong' for an individual student, or that the government should be in a position to sign off on the contents of a course? Both are a huge can of worms, and morally dubious in the extreme.

                I agree that 17 and 18 year old students are not in the best place to make long term career choices- it really sucks. I have a friend whose daughter is about to hit university, and one of her options is game design. I have strongly but politely presented an absolute slew of reasons why she should NOT do this (it's frankly a terrible idea- universities were promoting this as a FOTM bandwagon thing but Australia has no meaningful industry, and what industry that does exist globally is famous for being horrible. But she is a high school kid and doesn't have the contacts or industry knowledge to realise this- we are both hoping she doesn't go down that route.

                Seems like you didn't have the network available inform you that game design was unlikely to lead anywhere, but that's not really for the government to tell you that you're not allowed to do it, or that universities cannot offer it.

                • luminousfox on 25/04/2024 - 18:56

                  @rumblytangara: Why cant the government offer incentives for home ownership then or even loans in general, I'm sure a 90k loan towards a home with the only interest being indexation and a percentage of your salary on certain income thresholds would give a lot of people huge headstarts in life and help massively in the long-term.

                  If they're willing to give a university a loan for a degree that wasn't taught well enough to give me any meaningful advantages, why is that any less valid than a loan to buy an apartment or home.

                  (I've since become the network informing other friends and family that games design is not a good university choice)

                  • rumblytangara on 25/04/2024 - 19:02

                    @luminousfox: I've not really thought about tertiary education funding for a long, long time, but I don't think that the government should be providing loans for education or for loans for property.

              • p1 ama on 25/04/2024 - 18:52
                +2

                @luminousfox: Sorry, but your story just doesn't seem to add up for me.

                Exited the course with pretty much a very basic understanding of 3d modeling (which has helped in my personal life and hobbies but not in the workplace)

                Have you ever tried applying for 3D modelling jobs, or adjacent industries? For example, what if you took your 3D modelling skills as a basis, and developed skills in graphic design, advertising, or visual effects?

                The course basically involved being given worksheets on commands to set up a server and given no real knowledge on what they did.

                This sounds like pretty practical knowledge to me - the jobs of most sysadmins is basically to run various commands on servers.

                I'm a bit confused by what you mean when you say "given no real knowledge" on what those commands did - how did you expect to be "given" this knowledge? What did you do to seek out this knowledge? Did you do all of the assigned readings? Did you go to the library and seek out textbooks? Did you attend tutorials to ask questions? Did you discuss the materials with your peers? Did you do your own research and try to figure it out?

                At the end of the day, university is not primary school - there is an expectation that students are responsible for their own learning. Unlike in primary school, you won't be forced to do the readings, or to do your own research, or to ask questions when you don't understand something. It's up to you to do those things, and to make the most of the resources you have whilst you are at university.

                I was hoping this is the time i could finally try programming, but the course content was altered to remove programming in replace of maths and physics (i still remember trying to figure out a question along the lines of "if someone fired a compound bow on ice, how far would they slide back)

                I can't speak to your own personal experience, however, looking at the RMIT Handbook for the Computer Systems Engineering course (see: https://www.rmit.edu.au/study-with-us/levels-of-study/underg…), I can clearly see that there are plenty of core and elective subjects which cover "programming" - e.g. the Digital Fundamentals core subject in first year, Software Engineering Design in second year…etc., as well as plenty of other subjects which have practical applications

                So also just exited that course with a fancy sounding degree and no skill.

                What skills did you seek out within the course, and how did you go about trying to build those skills?

                Did you genuinely engage with all of your subjects? Did you seek out opportunities to apply your skills, e.g. did you actually pick up personal programming subjects, or set up your own servers? Did you seek out internships and other practical opportunities to build your skills? Did you enter a graduate program after finishing uni to bridge those skills into professionally relevant skills?

                As i said at the time i just wanted to be out of the house, now i wish i just got a retail job or unskilled labor job and put myself 5 years ahead in savings instead of 5 years behind.

                Ultimately, university is what you make of it. If you enter into a course with the attitude of just "wanting to be out of the house", and not having any real interest and drive to push yourself to excel, then you are primarily responsible for that.

                Your story seems to talk a lot about RMIT, but fails to address (in any way) anything that you did, no details on what exactly you did to further your education, no details on what you did after you finished uni, both of which are critical to leveraging the benefits of having a degree.

                At the end of the day, if you entered uni with the expectation of becoming a computer systems engineer, why are you not one today? If you feel that you do not have the skills, then why do other university graduates have the skills that you do not?

                • rumblytangara on 25/04/2024 - 19:44

                  @p1 ama:

                  I can't speak to your own personal experience, however, looking at the RMIT Handbook for the Computer Systems Engineering course (see: https://www.rmit.edu.au/study-with-us/levels-of-study/underg…), I can clearly see that there are plenty of core and elective subjects which cover "programming" - e.g. the Digital Fundamentals core subject in first year, Software Engineering Design in second year…etc., as well as plenty of other subjects which have practical applications

                  Yeah, something seems a bit odd here. Back when I did uni, CompEng was way OTT for anything that was done in Australia. It's not like there's a big chip design industry here (just like how there isn't a big games development industry). It was a crazy hard course, sometimes highly theoretical, but everyone that I knew who came out of it was very well positioned to become a developer. Most people I know who did it ended up realising years later that they could have saved themselves a load of work and an extra year just by taking CompSci instead.

          • us3rnam3tak3n on 25/04/2024 - 22:38

            @luminousfox:

            Now i just have a portion of my salary going towards my student loans which even at 700k a year doesn't stop indexation from increasing the loan every year

            Indexation technically doesn't increase your debt. It just ensures that you pay back the original amount rather than the nominal figure in future devalued currency.

            i have 90k debt from 2 terrible courses that didn't prepare me at all for the industry I wanted to enter

            I would usually say caveat emptor but maybe you have a point. Perhaps minors should not be allowed to enter financial contracts without parental consent (or even culpability).

  • Porker on 24/04/2024 - 10:13

    Seems like OP is trying to compare apples to oranges - one type of offering is Government, the other is from the Banks.

    If it's a case that OP is concerned that they've not gotten a job having gone through the tertiary education system, then is it the case that no one from that course got a job in that industry?

    The alternative situation could be that OP pays for course up-front and/or loans the money from a non-government body, in which case they'd possibly be worse off being unable to find a profession in that industry and with a debt they HAVE to pay back regardless of income statues.

    • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 10:16
      +1

      I'm just comparing the process, as in the government should confirm that the courses "hold value" in things such as their content, completion rate, course satisfaction, course quality. Just things like that. Right now if it existed I could do a 100k course on how to peel an apple and the government would fund it

      • CheapandUsed on 24/04/2024 - 10:43

        their content, completion rate, course satisfaction, course quality.

        "ASQA overview

        We are the national regulator for vocational education and training (VET).

        Our purpose is to ensure quality education and training so that students, industry, governments and the community can have confidence in the integrity of qualifications issued by training providers."

        https://www.asqa.gov.au/about-us/asqa-overview

      • Porker on 24/04/2024 - 10:51
        +1

        I see in your later responses that you mention failings in guidance at a younger age and/or critical juncture about deciding to attend university. This is likely to have life-long impact. However, I can't see how it's the Government's fault for one attending and completing a course they see no value in.

        I appreciate it's not nice to have a HECs debt with a degree you see no value in, but it sounds like you're finding someone/body to blame rather than take some accountability. As example, were you prevented from leaving the course - this would have reduced your debt (?). It sounds like you identified the issue at an earlier time than the course completion.

        The only advice I'd give now is to improve on yourself. Finding reason why you are where you are doesn't necessarily change your position.

        • luminousfox on 24/04/2024 - 11:11

          I responded to the user soan papdi with a bit of a better life story, my issue wasn't that i saw no value in the degree, its that i was told there was value, saw the value, but within the degree nothing was taught correctly to allow me to come out with any meaningful skills. Yeah in hindsight i probably should have left, but between family issues, and mind games of the sunken cost fallacy of the course "you're already a year and a half in, may as well finish to get the degree instead of nothing" I went through with them.

          More like the 100k how to peel an apple course was just a teacher showing up with a picture of an orange putting it on the table and leaving the room to go have a smoke for the whole day. I think I'm poorly trying to express that the degrees content can be anything the university wants, it doesn't matter they already have your money.

    • umoddbro on 25/04/2024 - 12:12

      Yeh I agree comparing apples to oranges, we all know governments are the real thieves they do everything to squeeze every bit out of you whilst delivering nothing.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join