going to uni

[barlowj331]

Right, I'm a bit fed up of people saying Universities are no good, or they don't give you the right experience. (ok some do, but there are plenty that are C***)

I go to LIPA, yes I am more than happy to say its not perfect, even they admit its not, they are always trying to make it that bit better and as close to the professional world as possible.

One of the things I have picked up since September, is that you do have to put a hell of a lot in to get anything back. Since september I have worked on 2 shows and 2 exhibitions only one of which was actually assessed work and the rest were volunteer, so there is always plenty to do.

LIPA has fantastic links with local venues and companies, there are always emails circulating for work opportunities very often paid. I mean, so far outside of LIPA I have built a stage for Gok Wan's fashion show and been on local crew for Coldplay's secret christmas gig in Liverpool.

I'm enjoying it, and there is certainly some of the graduates doing pretty well for themselves.

 

 

Jon

[ramdram]

Consider yourself very lucky bj331, sounds as if your educational establishment are giving you plenty of opportunities for "hands on" work experience, without you having to flog round the stagedoors and ask yourself.

[cedd]

@barlowj331

I don't think people are saying universities are no good at all. Indeed only a few posts back somebody wasreccomending your very university as a good option. I know people on your course and know that the teaching is extremely good.

 

But this is also a place for discussion. The context of the thread is a simple oe "should I go to uni or not?". When somebody asks a question like that, both sides are going to chip in. Have a read at the first of my 2 prior posts in this thread to see my personal opinion - uni isn't for everyone, it wasn't for me, and seems very expensive, but equally has its' benefits.

 

It does seem like more people are saying "don't do it, get to work" but maybe that's just because in hindsight, that's actually what most people think? It may be that all of us who haven't been to uni have an axe to grind (I certainly do - more of that later) or maybe we're even jealous cause we don't have degrees (I'm not!). Who knows? The point is that people are expressing their personal opinions. If you see that as having a go, then I'm afraid there's not much we can do about it.

 

We're all friends, we all work in the same industry, but the OP wanted opinions on what to do. I think plenty have been offered!

 

Now, where was that axe? Oh yes. Until the education system stops putting expectations on people to go to university, and making out that they'll be failures if they don't (that's what happened to me, and lots of other people I know) there will always be degree dropouts by people who really shouldn't have gone. University is a very different place to school and it really isn't the right place for everyone. I know far more about myself now than I did when I was 18, and I know I'd have hated it. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm very happy and comfortable as I am. It doesn't mean I was too thick to go. So why can't schools start offering careers advice that includes apprenticeships?

[the kid]

 

Now, where was that axe? Oh yes. Until the education system stops putting expectations on people to go to university, and making out that they'll be failures if they don't (that's what happened to me, and lots of other people I know) there will always be degree dropouts by people who really shouldn't have gone. University is a very different place to school and it really isn't the right place for everyone. I know far more about myself now than I did when I was 18, and I know I'd have hated it. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm very happy and comfortable as I am. It doesn't mean I was too thick to go. So why can't schools start offering careers advice that includes apprenticeships?

 

Back on my post earlier we had a student who was ok .. not great but ok, he got a place at GSA full scholarship and a load of extras, he made a massive decision of not going because he knew he would not enjoy it, decided he was not mature enough(despite coming on massively in college) , and didn't want to be given a load of money drop out and have someone else struggling because of him.

 

He decided to apply for the army and didn't get in on medical issues, he now works in sainsburys HOWEVER he feels he was right.

 

I also know someone who finished GSA is joining the police.

 

Who is wrong is both those? the students ? or the system? I am going for system, both went in a direction and woke up at different times to what they wanted to do. I am fairly sure given a year or 2 the 2nd guy would of gone straight to the police.

[ramdram]

It may be this argument ref pros and cons of different routes into theatreland may be moot anyway. I gather nearly a quarter of a million of nippers hoping to enter Uni this coming year may be unlucky.

 

If I was in their shoes I'd be ringing around every theatre I could find asking for anything they could offer. I suspect you would have to be eighteen before you were even shortlisted so to speak. So if you were not eighteen I'd suggest you try every amdram you could get to.

 

It may be that some parents who would be funding their issue in Uni anyway give serious thought to funding living expenses if away from home say. I am not sure how EMA would work in that instance given the parents would have reasonably deep pockets anyway.

[Simon Lewis]

There are many issues to debate here, not least of which is how the whole tertiary sector will fare in the next 5 to 10 years.

- This year's University sector application numbers are up even on last year's high figures, as students scramble to be in the last cohort before the fee structure changes.

 

- Some institution's courses will be full, will stop accepting applicants and will not go into the clearing process.

 

- Paradoxically, some courses will be closed this year, as Universities try to work out where best to make savings and prepare for the expected drop in student numbers in AY11/12. For example, UWIC (for various reasons) is closing their Music Technology course.

 

- Humanities and Arts based subjects will be funded solely from what students pay, and I would imagine that unsustainable courses will be culled in order to protect those which will still attract funding through student applications and exhibit sustainability.

 

- The EMA mentioned above is now closed. Education funding may be "ring fenced" but they didn't say which bits of education were included!

 

- The government appears keen to introduce technical schools (with selection at age 14) in order for pupils to learn trades and to create technicians. Lord Baker is credited as saying, "‘If we are going to have high-speed rail, the fastest broadband in the world, new nuclear power stations, we are going to need technicians," (from the Daily Wail but corroborated elsewhere). I can see a fairly fundamental flaw here, but let's be charitable for the present...

 

- Many parents whose teenagers would go to Uni from 2012 will be considering keeping them at home whilst they work and save money for University, rather than have them borrow.

 

In short, the system is in flux, and few know what the future holds!

 

Simon

 

 

 

 

[Bobbsy]

Some very good points there from Simon. However, let me throw in another thought on the university vs. get a job debate.

 

I'm a product of a university course, albeit almost 40 years ago. In my case, my desired career was in TV and film rather than theatre (that came later) but the closest course I could find was in the university Department of Drama which had some film and TV courses available.

 

At the same time as I was doing my degree, I was lucky enough to have part time work at a local TV station and, for many years, I claimed (fairly accurately) that I learned a lot more on the job than I did at university.

 

However, as time went on I gradually started to get promoted, first to supervisory jobs then into management. Whether I would have been offered the management role without the degree on my CV, I don't know. However, I do know that some of the "pointless rubbish" from university started to come into its own when I had to interact with accountants, members of the board and some of our clients.

 

Beyond that, as some will know, as promotion to management started to take me farther away from actual operational duties, I started doing some theatre work (Amdram and local pro stuff) in the evenings to "keep my hand in". I rapidly found a niche because some of the more academic studies from my university days made it much easier to interact with directors and actors. Being able to understand the "arty" part of theatre rapidly got me into sound design as opposed to simply being an operator. There were other operators as good or better than me--but they were uncomfortable in the artistic-level discussions about "what it all means".

 

So anyway, I guess what I'm saying is that you also need to consider where you want to be in 10 years...or 20...or 40. While operating a sound or lighting board may seem the dream job for now, many of you may want to get into designing or management--and a broader background than a pure technical apprenticeship may serve you better in that regard.

 

Bob

[kerry davies]

Bob mentioning degrees forty years ago brings up the subject of devaluation of FE. In the mid-sixties I rebelled at becoming a teacher and went into industry from the 'academic stream' of the grammar school. My friends were split 80/20 with the 20 being among the 4% of school leavers in the UK going to Uni, 80% went into apprenticeships and technical college. Very few from secondary modern even got to the tech.

 

Today there are 13 times as many university students, by percentage, 13 times as many graduates competing for jobs and that raises questions.

1) Are 13 times as many people up to Bob's standard? I doubt it.

2) Are there 13 times as many graduate jobs? Nowhere near.

3) Are there 13 times as many capable university teachers? Simon can answer that one, I don't know.

 

Yes, a degree, like my Latin 'O' level (fail), is a great asset in life as well as work but only for those who will use it to their and its' full potential, like Bob. What the industry needs desperately are technicians. The industry drop-out rate is appalling because of low wages which are supported by the huge oversupply of young people fighting over jobs. Lots of young readers here will eventually go on to management positions, most won't even stay in the business, which is why I advocate getting a degree in a more widely applicable subject. You could always work in the business whilst studying as the LIPA guys have done.

 

One thing that is needed is some form of statistical measure of how many TT (technical theatre as a generalisation) students there are, how many TT job vacancies, what TT graduates are doing after 10/20/30 years and how many jobs are filled by non-TT graduates/non-graduates. I can't find anything that even gives the numbers of technical theatre degree schemes out there. The only research shows that 93% of employers think that applicants have adequate qualifications but 75% say that these applicants don't have sufficient skills or experience to employ. Something is wrong!

[abbotsmike]

It's a very personal area, and one where people's feelings, opinions and fact get blurred. I am doing an electrical engineering degree, and enjoy it. I also do a couple of part time jobs to keep myself ticking over. I live at home because it's cheaper, and I have Brunel on my doorstep. I may decide to go into theatreland at some point, as it really interests me (mostly noise) but equally, I have a job in a small IT firm that I am nurturing and would like to think that I will have some longer term prospects there.

Don't quite know what I'm saying here, but I also applied for (and got) an apprenticeship, but I had zero help from the school in this. The problems is teachers went to uni, therefore what they know is going to uni. People who go into industry or do apprenticeships don't tend to go and be teachers.

[Shez]

I'll chuck my experiences in the pot here.

 

I went to uni to study electrical & electronic engineering. I went to uni because that was the done thing (school / family expected it) and also because it seemed the logical next step - I wasn't ready for the world of work. Whilst there, I became tech manager of the theatre society, staging ~10 productions per year. I became tech advisor to the student TV society, producing TV shows that went out on the local cable service. I built a radio station from scratch for the students' union and was chief engineer there for three years. My degree undoubtedly suffered as I spent far more time doing these things than I did on on my studies.

 

However, working on the radio station led to an offer of paid work experience at a large radio station elsewhere which led to regular freelance (the definition was a little more open in those days) work there during each holiday. Every other job I've had since is in some way related to those extra-curricular activities rather than the degree. I was being offered work because of my involvements there when I graduated - no need to even look for a job! The same can't be said for some of my friends who graduated with a degree and little else.

 

So my position is: If you want to work in medicine / law / etc. then get a degree and follow the traditional approach. If you want to work in a field where a degree isn't a requirement, then consider going to uni to study a subject that you're interested in and can fall back on but work your backside off when you're not in lectures, building up experience and contacts. That's where the work will come from. Although with the cost of a degree these days, (a friend of mine is now £33k in debt after finishing her masters) I would be looking very long and hard at other options. For a field like technical theatre, I think you'd gain more useful experience and knowledge from three years work in a few different venues and be a lot more employable at the end of it.

[ramdram]

UK theatreland.

 

Today's Daily Telegraph, page 6, column two, "45 students...job".

 

In short "many" employers are refusing to even consider graduates without relevant work experience. It cannot be made clearer; unless a graduate has worked in a theatrical environment, and can demonstrate this to a prospective employer...well you can work it out for yourselves.

 

It goes on to say that around a third of applicants would be employed by employers because they had worked for said employer on job experience as undergrads...and by inference an individual's "skillset" is known to the employer.

 

So to those who aspire to join theatreland on the degree ticket it is very desirable that you have worked your way through school play/amdram/casual at local theatre say, and, you can show some sort of skill (see the other threads in the forum apropos knots, pluggery, following rig diagrams etc, etc).

 

This is up to date gen it seems, so the previous experiences of degree holders gaining entry to the industry some years back may not necessarily be relevant "today".

[David Ripley]

It cannot be made clearer; unless a graduate has worked in a theatrical environment, and can demonstrate this to a prospective employer...well you can work it out for yourselves.

To clarify the above is not a quote from the Daily Telegraph it is the poster's opinion.

 

You can read the actual article here I'm sure it is undoubtedly true that if you are doing, say, economics and haven't interned in the City you may not have relevant experience. All of the CDS courses and most others by their very nature have a very large practical element as well as work placements and the industry is well aware of that.

 

I realise that there are arguments both ways but it is still a choice that exists (for a while at least) and each option suits different people - it is not an either or. There is also a large range in the academic content (or lack thereof) in the various degree courses, you cannot tar them all with the same brush and discount them.

 

BTW ramdram I presume your 'on the job' training was done at Wood Norton aka The BBC's own Uni funded by the public via their licence fees?

 

David

[ramdram]

Well David you would be correct on the first part, the quote was there for folk to read...the inference was mine, modified or expanded to embrace the theatrical technical world.

 

Nobody, to repeat ad nauseum, is knocking the university route to any career. I can appreciate folk who are involved in university education being alarmed at this view for obvious reasons. I can understand a robust defence of such institutions...I would defend the Wood Norton route, if you will, just as rigorously. It should be noted that even if new employees arrived into the BBC with a degree they still had to attend various courses specific to their job. Some of theses courses were residential.

 

However your suggestion that the DT article applied only to jobs not allied to theatreland is, in my view, slightly misleading. In any event new degree holders will soon discover whether or not previous experience is an advantage or not when they read the job ads.

 

Your last sentence is correct but only in part. The BBC had other "partners" in all sorts of ventures. The domestic BBC most folk saw and heard when I attended Wood Norton was only a part of the BBC entity. Funding did not rely exclusively on the Licence Fee.