Saturday, October 20, 2007

Some good no-degree jobs

Sure, college is a good idea. Over a lifetime, a college graduate makes, on average, $1 million more than someone who only has a high school diploma, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But despite what parents and teachers would like teenagers to believe, college is not essential to making a decent living.

Indeed, some no-degree jobs will have you earning more, and earlier in your career, than your average college grad with a liberal arts degree. If you're focused enough to know what you want to pursue, you can get on a non-college career track at 18 and earn more than your contemporaries--and keep out-earning them 10 years down the line.

We've compiled a list of 10 jobs that can pay more than $85,000 a year at the top end, no degree required. But beware, just because no college is required doesn't mean you'll be able to slack off. Many of these jobs require extensive training, either on the job or in a vocational school.

Take being an elevator mechanic: With mean earnings of $61,930 a year and a possible annual income of $87,660, these jobs are more secure and pay better than many in construction. But new elevator mechanics, who install and repair elevators, escalators and moving walkways, have to undergo a four-year training period. And that's after being admitted to an apprenticeship program, run jointly by the International Union of Elevator Constructors and employers. Getting in is competitive, and the field has low turnover.

On the other hand, some of the highest-paying jobs in the U.S. have no barriers to entry other than hustle. Plenty of billionaires have made it on talent and entrepreneurship alone, perhaps most famously Microsoft's Bill Gates, a college dropout.

For many sales jobs, technical knowledge is less important than powers of persuasion. Sales reps for wholesale and manufactured goods, not including technical and scientific products, make a mean of $58,540 and $101,030 at the top end. Real estate brokers--who must be licensed but don't necessarily need a college degree, make a mean of $80,230, with their earnings at the high end limited only by effort, salesmanship and the hours in the day.

In fact, there are very few jobs that require a bachelor's degree. You can even become a lawyer without ever setting foot on a college campus, though you still have to pass the bar exam. But official requirements are one thing, and career reality another. In many competitive fields, recruiters use a college degree to filter applicants. Even aspiring artists and writers usually get master's degrees these days. Nobody cares about your diploma when you're selling a manuscript or a piece of art. But at the beginning of your career, when you're trying to develop your talents and make connections, school can be a useful pit stop.

Most career paths have multiple entry points. If you want to become a talent agent, you'll probably need a college degree if you want to start out with a big company. On the other hand, plenty of actors' agents were one-time actors themselves, who built up contacts among casting directors and others in the industry. In the end, the mean annual income of all agents and managers for artists, performers and athletes is $84,070 a year. Among the top 25% of earners, the average income is $114,400 a year. At the top end of the wage scale, the sky is the limit. And once you get to the top, no one cares whether you went to school.

Source






Britain's hopeless "NEETs"

No discipline means no education for the less able

More than 200,000 young people aged 16 to 18 have virtually no hope of getting a foot in the door to the world of work after leaving school with no qualifications, the Chief Inspector of Schools said yesterday. Christine Gilbert, head of Ofsted, said the fate of these young people, known as Neets (not in education, employment or training), highlighted the enormous challenge facing society in closing the gap in educational attainment between rich and poor.

Publishing her annual report yesterday, Ms Gilbert said the barren prospect facing these young people, who represent more than ten per cent of all 16 to 18-year-olds, was “alarming and unacceptable”. Her predictions for their immediate future were even more gloomy. It was hard, she said, “to find encouragement from inspection evidence” that things would get better for young people on the cusp of adult life.

In a bold attempt to widen the public debate about educational standards beyond the school gate, Ms Gilbert focused her attention on the “stark” relationship between poverty and educational achievement. “It cannot be right that people from the most disadvantaged groups are least likely to achieve well and to participate in higher levels of education and training,” she said.

Overall, Ofsted reported that just 51 per cent of secondary schools were judged to be good or outstanding, up from 49 per cent last year. Ten per cent of secondaries were classed as inadequate, down from 13 per cent. In primary schools, the proportion of good and outstanding schools rose from 58 to 61 per cent.

Ms Gilbert said that a large proportion of failing schools were in the most deprived areas and that poorer children still had the “odds stacked against them” in education. The road to recovery would be a long one with “no quick fixes”, she added. On the gap between rich and poor, the figures show that only 12 per cent of 16-year-olds in care and just 33 per cent of pupils entitled to free school meals (FSM, the proxy measure for poverty) gained five or more good GCSEs last year, compared with 61 per cent of nonFSM children and a national average of 56 per cent. Among primary pupils, 61 per cent of FSM children achieved the expected level in English, compared with 83 per cent of nonFSM pupils. For maths the figures were 58 and 79 per cent respectively.

Ms Gilbert said that failures in leadership and management and poor practice in the classroom were the primary causes of school failure. But she was critical, too, of the lack of aspiration often displayed by teachers when it came to vocational education. Students often seemed far more enthusiastic about such opportunities than their teachers, she said, blaming this divide on a misguided tendency among teachers to associate vocational teaching with the least able students. Ms Gilbert added that she hoped that Ofsted, having taken over the inspection of children’s services and adult education in the last year, would now have greater leverage across a wide range of services to effect change.

Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, hoped that Ms Gilbert’s comments on the “poverty gap” would act as a rallying cry to those working with young people. “No child should be held back because of poverty and disadvantage, or deterred from going to the best school because of where they live or their family background, their ethnicity or their disability,” he said.

But teachers’ leaders said it was “totally unrealistic” to think that schools could tackle socio-economic disadvantage on their own. Martin Johnson, of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: “Schools cannot compensate for a child’s family background - financial or aspirational poverty – or a local culture of unemployment.” John Dunford, the general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said that it would not be easy in a society as divided and diverse as England for schools to overcome social inequality on their own. “It requires action from central and local government in areas much wider than education to make this task feasible,” he said.

The report also highlighted concerns over behaviour, which was “just satisfactory” in 29 per cent of secondary schools, and about the failure of schools to give children a clear understanding of “what it means to be British”.

Source






Australia: Government school unable to stop bullying

Good at bulldust, though



Dale Fitzhenry was a happy grade 4 student until he was picked on by a vicious school bully last term, his family says. Over 12 weeks Dale, 10, said he was repeatedly kicked, punched and pushed by a classmate. He claims he was assaulted so badly he suffered concussion one lunch time. His glasses were shattered in another playground attack at River Gum Primary School in Hampton Park.

His attacker, who was in Dale's 3/4 composite class, received a suspension, Dale's mother said. The school said the accused bully was moved to another class. It said every effort was made to settle a dispute between the students.

Dale now attends another school. His mother said her boy suffers nightmares and his doctor has recommended that he see a psychologist. Mum Melissa Fitzhenry believes the school did not do enough to protect her son. "I was going up to the school every second day, begging them to do something, telling them my son is coming home terrified," she said. Ms Fitzhenry said the school's decision to keep the bully in Dale's class made no sense. "I am so angry that I have had to pull Dale out of school while the bully remains in class," she said. "I think the bully should have been pulled out of the school."

Acting principal Joan Johnston said the school put strategies in place to deal with the situation and kept Ms Fitzhenry informed with letters and offers of further help. "Any bullying is taken very seriously at River Gum Primary School and is simply not tolerated," Ms Johnston said. "If any students or their parents have any concerns they are always encouraged to come and see me and we will take immediate and appropriate action. "I can assure parents that it was taken very seriously at the time by the school and dealt with promptly and appropriately."

Dale said he was disappointed with the school. "They just told me to stay away from him, but he kept coming after me," Dale said. "It made me very sad and angry, and I just wished they would have made him stay inside at lunch time like I asked, or I wished they expelled him." Bullying expert Evelyn Field said the school had failed Dale. "The situation always seems to end with the bullies staying and the victims leaving," said Ms Field, a psychologist.

Source

2 comments:

dissapointed said...

I would just like to say Joan Johnston's attitude towards the protection of children at river gum is non-existant. She doesn't give a rats and she is a lier.

Di Phillips said...

Previous posting to say say that Joan Johnston was very unhelpful when my son was extensively bullied at moorabbin heights primary school. She was principal. She is very slippery and allows bullying to continue while making all the right pc noises. She is a menace to children and school culture and should be drummed out of the education system.