thankyou for trying to balance the discussion Luigi - can you explain more about how this relative paradise is better than your own beautiful country?

He he! In my current state of stressdom the thought of a science gossip magazine with paparazzi makes me chuckle. Thanks for that comment! Cheered me up no end ;o) There's certainly plenty of gossip and within dept or subject incest to write about in my area! I'm afraid I haven't got the energy to argue about the state of education in this country - though by no means perfect (& I moan about it!), we're lucky. My Mum always envies me the opportunities I have that she never had, and though I have few job prospects and sometimes feel like this PhD is going to push me over the edge - I feel lucky to be able to do something that I love. Something nice and positive to think about when I'm feeling rather battered and bruised writing up

Just one point. I notice that when people bemoan the fact that there are too many graduates, and that many are not of sufficient calibre, they usually position themselves to be in the percentage that "should rightfully be there".

My current ongoing thought is "What if we belong that percentage that shouldn't..."

I am a postgraduate student on not much more. I feel miffed that I am on such a low wage when I have a PhD under my belt most of the time. It seems the norm for people to start on circa 20k it seems regardless of qualification.

ex-postgraduate student even. I know what I meant even if know one else does.

it's a quite complicate matter. In Italy 95% of people doesn't know what is a Ph.D. and there is a strong devaluation of the appellative "Doctor" because of a social situation that I explained in another discussion. Example, in Italy after a Bachelor you are a Doctor!!!!! So the situation is that companies don't want to employ a Ph.D. because they should pay an higher salary (managerial level)and because 90% of companies in Italy are small medium companies, not interested in research and development. The result is that they employ bachelor's owner so they can pay them less.

on the other side, in the public sector we have the so colled "concorso" that means an exam. It should be a meritocratic system but in the reality the concorsi are made ad hoc, I mean winners are known before of the exame date. This is true in particular for universities and public research center. having a Ph.D. don't help you at all, because the difference between you and a guy without Ph.D. are not enough to influence the exam result.

After my master's degree I worked for 1 year for free in an Italian University, waiting for "something" and looking for jobs in all the country.......NOTHING!!! the only proposals were stage done for free or with a ridicolous salary or training period, bu the problem that I was too much qualified. During an interview in a private lab of biological analysis, the guy told me..."you are too much qualified,I can't employ you because i should give you a too high salary, I prefer a fresher unexperienced graduate"

The truth is that private companies use an hole in the low, so that they amply you for a training period of generally 6 month with a very low salary, but they are not forced to employ you at the end, so they throw you and take another desperate and so on, having for years workers with a very low cost. At the end of my story...I applied in two Univ in UK and both offered me a Ph.D position! End of suffering!!! the same happen with a lot of friend looking for post-doc or jobs in the private companies. So, don't complain so much about UK, it's a great Country!

so the grass isn't always greener on the other side...

in a conversation with an old friend of mine who successfully stayed in academia, he tried to also tell me that the perceived value of a phd doesn't match the reality. although it has all worked splendidly for him (and he's brilliant so he deserves it), many of our friends took their skills into the private sector - even those that initially did get research posts. i'm letting the winds blow me around at the moment - we'll see what happens... but i think the bubble is about to burst.

"Why then, does the proportion of students gaining 2:1s or higher every year remain more or less static (except for the ex-polys who dish them out like confetti)?"

Sorry to get slightly off topic but I've just been struck by this comment while reading the messages left so far and I feel I must defend the 'ex-polys'. I believe this is a rather sweeping statement which is extremely unfair. Coming from an 'ex-poly' myself, I can certainly say that my university did not hand out the top grades like confetti, my friends and I worked extremely hard for our degrees and I know that I gained my 1st as a result of a lot of blood, sweat and tears. It really annoys me when people believe that ex-polys are all glorified sin bins for the educationally inept. My uni provided me with an excellent education and I am proud to be undertaking my PhD in the same institution.

I'm sure there is a wide variation in standards between old/new/poly universities/departments, as well as between new/new universities, not to mention international differences.

The PhD system is a great leveller though. To write and have accepted a paper in a good international journal means you are good at the international level.

The real proof on the old/new/poly debate is the amount of PhD students passing, the amount of funding, the number of journal publications and the RAE rating. Just have a look on the EPSRC website for example and you'll see who the big players are in the UK in science.

However if you are at an ex-poly and have 2 international journals published during your PhD, you are probably as good as a new/old uni PhD student with 2 international journals published.

However students in the US often get 5+ journals during their PhDs, so maybe we're not that bright in the UK afterall?

The point about American PhD scholars publishing more papers may be attributable to the fact that our PhD's are supposed to be 3 years in duration and theirs are over 5 years, which gives you more time to publish. Also there are probably more American journals that are considered international standard to publish within, which gives them a slight edge.

I wouldn't put it down to greater intelligence or ability.