You're obviously ignorant of the qualitative differences in the growth of the job market in recent times. Please look it up (I believe the ABS has the numbers). Almost all job growth in the last decade has been in sectors that require degrees or associate degrees. There has been almost no growth in the number of jobs for trades people. Thus the getting more people into university has been a good idea.

when you say that inexperienced people with a uni degree are no use to you, i wonder if inexperienced people with no degree are more useful.

employers want productive people from day 1. they don't care where they get their experience and training, "not my problem".

this is capitalism in a nut-shell: keep the profits, dump the expenses on society. the result is a government that starves education, and tries to supply a workforce with imported people. all the while complaining about useless young people- since employers have to be smart enough to know about basic cause-and-effect, i presume they are blinded by personal self-interest.

Considering the trade deficient, then universities have not been successful in reducing that.

The idea that trade work is satisfying is not necessarily the case, particularly if you find yourself in a trade that you may not particularly like, but an apprenticeship in that trade was the only one you could find at the time.

I have worked with numerous men who had a trade, but they left their trade because they did not like it or were not greatly suited to it.

Having a trade certificate is no longer sufficient in many companies, and at least an AD is required to do some of the interesting work and be paid more. Also greenfield type companies will seek a multi-skilled workforce, so having 2 or more trades or having many tickets is the means to be paid more, or be employed by those companies.

I’m also sure that the author knows that most trade work is being carried out by males. There are very few girls entering trade work, except for trades such as hair dressing or chef work. So if the boys do trades, then the universities are filled with girls, but they generally do not do science courses.

Higher Education is not Higher Education if ALL can pass the exams. At a university level perhaps on the top quartile should realise admittance, but ALL must have equal access at a reasonal cost. ALL should not be capable of university passing on statistical grounds alone. How can someone with an IQ of 95 perform calculus, if required.

Dawkins and Nelson have wrecked a good system by combining universities and Colleges of Advanced Education [D] and supporting the Commercialisation of Universitities [D]. Dumbing down papers towards textbook reproduction has not helped. How can school teachers who achieved TERs {UAI?} of say 60-70, deal the emergence of query based curricula, when they could not handle the "hard stuff", when they were students themselves?

Plagarism is not severely punished. Herein, I feel, unlike ACIC Commissioner, the University of Newcastle academics who covered-up international student plagiary incident should have been given their green slips.

The above said, continuing education has its valuable place in both the HE and VET sectors. The old AQF Advance Diploma level was a good VET guide. Basic achievement at university should exceed the highest AQF reqirments

Definitely not ! Univesity education, like singing contests on TV, should be the preserve of people with REAL talents.
AUSTRALIAN IDOL is to music what UNIVERSITY is to journalism.
Media owners have a neo liberal economics agenda which journalsits support to keep their jobs whilst outside election time these journalists are anti Catholic on social and moral issues the rest of the time. What a pact for those wh are second fiddle to the more intelligent place getters at University who become doctors, engineers and architects, eh.

In the dim past scholarships enabled the most dedicated although disadvataged students into uni. Employers offered cadetships when they required their employees to have a greater knowledge in a subject or study.
To expect only govt to supply the needs of industry does not work, industry must take equal responsibility.
I for one found a cadetship in mech engineering was not my bag, left the job and found aircraft engineering more acceptable, doing a job I loved and study supplied by a tech college one day a fortnight and nightschool to satisfy my ambitions, it kept me off the streets too.
Employers have expected uni's and techs to supply their individual emplyee needs, this not possible given that no industry is exacly the same as another.
Employer involvement in education of their workforce has many advantages, longer and more dedication being just one.
I agree with posters who say uni ed has much good to offer our society
and the past fifty years is proof of that, it is time to now redefine its purpose, not being able to get a plumber is a good reason to change something.
fluff4
excellent article and great posts