War of Talent
The single, most pernicious, personal danger some university graduates will face is to develop an entrenched arrogant, and complacent, attitude. After getting a coveted degree of a particular discipline, these university graduates will expect to see employers going to such efforts to travel a long way to their universities and present themselves cogently while they lounge on their armchairs like a venerable king. They will also assume that they are valuable commodities and that employers are fighting among themselves to attract those snobbish graduates to their organizations. Even though that is a natural conclusion after studying for eons, it is completely inaccurate. What is counter-intuitive in some cases is that, because of their arrogance and complacency, they will never get their aspirational jobs.
Nowadays, in order to minimize loses and maximize profits, companies often go to elite universities and do presentations, attracting an audience of a staggering amount of students each time. However, they might have only 50 vacancies, so their on-campus activities could seem out of proportion to their needs. This implies that even if you have an exemplary academic qualification, you might never get the job. Some companies claim that as long as you have the minimum academic qualifications as stipulated, you are safe, except for the other so-called ''underachievers'' who deserve to have lowly-paid jobs. They are absolutely wrong. What make you stand out is not only your academic qualification, it is your contribution to the society that makes the difference. It is the popularity you will garner in the public that makes you shine more than the dour, patronizing university graduates who demands people for respect. Hence, being a smart but arrogant university graduate does not guarantee a good future.
Sure, you have studied for more than 10 years, and have gleaned a lot of knowledge, be it maths, science, or language. You have the academic qualification employers are looking for, but you are still a human, a being. There are students who could not achieve what others can due to financial or some other credible reasons. But if they aren't disabled, then why should they be overlooked by employers? Why should they not be given a chance to make a difference in companies and why must companies always go to elite universities to search for talent? Is it true that genuine talent exist only in the Times Top 100 best universities, and not in lower-ranked university? If there is no diversity, and only sheer perfectness, then will humans still have feelings, will humans still do voluntary work?
The major disadvantage of students who could not study in universities is, of course, the use of university grades as a pre-set deselection criterion. On the other hand, one advantage they have is that they are never arrogant or complacent, and they will never miss out any jobs, even if they are unpopular. The fact that some jobs are unpopular does that mean that they are demeaning. Their purpose is to make life better. Any jobs that can make one's life better, as well as bring improvements to the society overall, are meaningful enough. There is no need to study in a university or many universities worldwide. Anyone can study anytime. Studying is not a thing you have to do it at once (of course, basic education is necessary).
There is no need to feel so distressed for not getting a degree. You still have many other roads to success. All you need is to envision your future.
