An academic and recruitment expert debate the age old

question. Whose side are you on?

With the rise of university placements comes the rise of qualifications, and it soon
started to seem like the only way to get your foot in the door was by having a string of
letters after your name.

But this wasnt always the case, and with the rising cost of education making some think
twice about pursuing higher learning, plus grumblings from some quarters
that university graduates arent prepared for the workplace is it time that work
experience becomes the preferred attribute for employers, or do qualifications still
highlight the best candidate?

We spoke with two experts to discover the advantages of each. But dont be shy, we
want to hear your opinions too. Is experience the only way to measure a candidate or
should qualifications be a fast-track to career progression?

Qualifications are more important

Andrew Main is an associate dean at Bournemouth University. He thinks

qualifications reveal much more about a person than just their academic
prowess.

Firstly, I would like to say that a degree is not just about getting a job/career. The
benefits affect all parts of life; intellectual, social, sporting, personal, artistic, ethical, and
so much more.

Recruiters often write job advertisements that specify that a degree is needed for the
job, thus the market decides on this point, and it values degrees. Additionally, there
are more jobs today than there were 50 years ago that involve working with your brain
and fewer jobs involving manual skills.

A degree is a start in working life, after all. Then experience, to give it its due place, will
increasingly provide opportunities for further development of the person.

Let us compare like with like, say a 21-year-old graduate compared with a 21-year-old
with industry experience, both of equal intelligence. Let me give due credit to
experience: it does not switch intelligence off (the way a few academics talk, one might
think that they suppose the opposite).

However, education changes you. Given the same elapsed time, a course of education
will bring a greater depth of understanding than experience can provide.
Thus experience may teach you that doing it that way does not work, but education
gives you the theoretical knowledge and analytical skill to show why it does not work.
Education develops your speed of learning and ability to learn at depth.

Thus the experienced learn new ideas processes or technologies, but the educated
learn them faster and more deeply.

The graduates who are best at delivering high graduate value come from sandwich
courses with a year in industry. They have a great combination of theory and rigour, with
a strong understanding of application of knowledge.

The courses I work on educate students for two years, place them in industry for a year
and bring them back to complete a final year of education. They are outstanding. They
gain jobs very easily and prove themselves quickly. The majority have very enviable
careers.

Is it harder for younger or older

jobseekers to find work?
Finding a new job can be tough, but can your age make it even more difficult?

Older jobseekers claim that the new generation of workers have it easier, while younger
jobseekers often argue back that actually they have it tougher. So is it easier for older or
younger jobseekers to find work? What do you think?

We wanted to settle the argument once and for all. We asked one young jobseeker and
one older jobseeker to battle it out and debate who has it harder on the job hunt.

The older jobseeker argument

Jackie, 55 has a solid career history but following a mass of redundancies at her
previous company she has found herself back in the job market.

Im at an age where some people might just consider retiring, but I have a good 8-10
years yet as thats much longer than some people might consider in a permanent role.

But unfortunately Jackie isnt having much luck getting another job. Im finding that Im
not getting interviews for jobs that I have actually done previously. Its annoying
because these are things I have experience in and I thought that was the golden ticket
for any role.

But it seems that assumptions could be being made, Perhaps they figure out my age
from the length of my career history and my qualification dates and decide against me
because theyd rather employ somebody younger that they can train as their own.
However if a job needs doing and I can do it, so why not let me?

Jackie asserts that being over 50 is a huge stumbling block. I really do think that being
over 50 or possibly even over 40 is a barrier to new opportunities.

Employers want fresh young blood with more varied and up to date qualifications and a
youthful approach to things, they think that somebody my age wont be able to adapt or
pick up new skills.

There are laws against age discrimination, but I think discrimination against the over
50s is alive and well, albeit well hidden behind closed doors.

And Jackie isnt the only senior worker who feels she is facing age
discrimination. Totaljobs survey revealed startling results about how senior
professionals are coping on the job hunt.

We discovered that 88% of 51-60 year-olds believe that putting their date of birth on
their CV makes it harder to get a job, while a further 73% believe they have been
rejected for a job purely because of their age.