On 9 Sep 2011 14:03, "David Ansell" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Smith and Gorard's full paper is available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00071005.2011.578567#preview
>>
>> I had a good read yesterday - I feel there are indeed some claims and assumptions that are not backed up by the data that was used and analysis that was performed.
>> Here is what E4E (the profession-wide Education for Engineering policy group) had to say about it: http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/releases/shownews.htm?NewsID=683
>
>
> Yes, I don't really see what the news story is,
>
> of graduate engineers only 6 months after they graduate,
>
> from:
> http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2150&Itemid=161
>
> 70% go straight into a job
> 18% go onto further study
>
> 12% are assumed to be unemployed
>
>
> From the paper:
>
> Of those who are employed
> 46% go into engineering directly
>
> plus
> 20% go into graduate jobs which use their degree
>
>
> 25% are in non-graduate jobs, which after
>
> 10% go into 'other'
>
>
> So overall of engineering grads
>
> 32% go directly into engineering jobs
> 18% go into more education
> 14% go into related jobs
>
> 18% go into non-grad jobs
> 7% go into 'other'
>
> 10% are unemployed
>
> Which seeing as a lot of people don't start looking for a job until they
> graduate, some will have constraints on where they can get a job (like
> family, and friends), and some will just not be very good. So the figures
> to an untrained ear don't sound bad after 6 months.
>
> I am not sure why this was 'press released', the press release and to a
> large extent the paper are presenting a problem, and then don't really
> seem to back this up with any context.
>
> The release seems to be based on 3 paragraphs in the paper. It doesn't
> compare across subjects to take into account natural levels of people just
> changing their mind/life getting in the way/ not getting a job in 6
> months. It doesn't look at longer term outcomes etc. etc.
>
> Is this just another example of a dodgy press release taking a very very
> minor part of a slightly odd paper about something else, and blowing it
> all out of proportion? Just this time it is aimed at us rather than a
> particular scientific result.
>
> Dave
>
> **********************************************************************
> Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html
> You may also change your settings and subscribe/unsubscribe to psci-com from the web site.
>
> Psci-com is part of the National Academic Mailing List Service, known as 'JISCMail'.
> It adheres to the JISCMail Acceptable Use Policy: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/acceptableuse.html
> and to the JISCMail guidelines for etiquette: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/etiquette.html
>
> Email commands:
> 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example,
> send an email to mailto:[log in to unmask] with the following message:
>
> set psci-com nomail -- [include hyphens]
>
> 2. To resume email from the list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
>
> set psci-com mail -- [include hyphens]
>
> 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message:
>
> leave psci-com -- [include hyphens]
>
> Please allow up to 24 hours for these commands to activate.
> Remember that you will need to send commands using the same email address that you used to register on psci-com.
> To contact the Psci-com list owner, please send an email to: [log in to unmask]
>
> **********************************************************************