I HAVE observed with interest and concern the way that my grandchildren have taken their options regarding further education. Some have gone to university and some have decided not to take on the huge burden of debt that comes with a degree course. In theory, the graduates should be doing much better in finding a lucrative and rewarding career than the other young family members but in reality the opposite is the case.

A few days ago, a 21-year-old young lady asked for my help with her project on the fire service upon which she is engaged as part of her studies for a degree at Bournemouth University. She is a second year student and she volunteered the opinion that she is being ripped off by the university. This very bright and erudite young lady will probably graduate with a first class degree, which is her goal. However, she made it clear to me that if she achieves this it will be no thanks to the poor quality and extremely limited tutoring she has received from her lecturers. She feels cheated by the system because she is not getting value for money.

So disillusioned is she that she is strongly advising her younger sister to avoid taking a degree and seek an apprenticeship when she completes her sixth form studies at school.

Is this really good advice? An analysis of further education statistics throws up some interesting facts. Despite the fact that 43 per cent of young people are now taking degree courses at universities, only 20 per cent actually find employment in a job for which their degree is of any relevance and value.

In other words, they have been saddled with thousands of pounds of debt for nothing. If they never earn enough to exceed the threshold at which they start repaying the debt, it is the taxpayers that end up carrying the debt.

My student friend informed me that she can detect that commercial attitudes have overtaken the commitment to academic excellence that ought to be the priority of universities. In fact, turning back to statistical evidence, I was appalled to read that seven per cent of graduates leave university with ‘low basic skills’. Put simply, they can’t read, write or do sums very well.

This indicates that universities are so keen to protect their very high incomes that they are admitting many students that are unsuitable for degree courses.

Compare this with one of my granddaughters who in her early twenties is working in an international bank in the City of London. She was headhunted from another bank that is now trying to lure her back with a tempting salary and benefits package. She is now a manager and many of those she manages are graduates, yet my granddaughter has never been to university. She has established herself in her chosen career by her competence, work ethic and personal charisma. She is the living proof that a degree is not essential if you have what an employer needs.

I welcome the action taken by the Government to commence a review of further education. The Office for Students will conduct an investigation to monitor the value for money that students at university are receiving. As this commences, we see university lecturers on strike against changes to their in deficit pension scheme that most other pension schemes have already been forced to adopt.

I have a feeling that the Government will find that powerful and influential forces within the world of academia will fight hard to resist any changes that will benefit students but adversely affect them.

JOHN CRAIG