Perhaps it was too much to hope for that students would be granted a well-earned reprieve from the tireless onslaught of smear campaigns and foam-flecked witch-hunts in the press following the infamous Millbank Protest over tuition fees.
After all, they've had their tuition fees trebled by a government that promised to abolish them altogether, they're facing in excess of £22,000 in debt and the job market's drier than a tinder box in a drought.
To top all of that, the right-wing media and the fool-hardy work mules up North are now practically queuing up to put the boot in to these 'incompetent, work-shy liberals' who test public opinion in that most pernicious of ways - by spending their 'hard-earned' tax money on education and self-betterment. As if the drive to succeed at anything other than a farm or office job is a character flaw in this day and age!
Almost every week it seems, there's a new study conducted by a nameless, self-important 'researcher' that aims to shed some light on the many and varied problems caused by undergraduates in the currently disastrous economic climate.
The findings of these egregious reports are almost always contradictory, and are seldom flattering. Students are either over-qualified or under-qualified; know-it-alls or know-nothings; too specialist or too broadened; too desperate or too lax.
Theirs is truly a story of disaster, for they can do no right. Everything and nothing is their fault, and all at the same time. If they immerse themselves in their degrees and achieve standout grades, they are accused of lacking life experience and 'people skills' - that's flowery PR talk for flashing a mega-watt smile and treating customers like autistic children.
If they choose to balance their degrees with part-time bar work or volunteering, they're summarily accused of not trying hard enough academically.
It's a catch-22 of sorts, and thousands of students are now emerging on the other side of education with a myriad of unrealistic and unrefined prospects. Furthermore, their qualifications are rapidly losing gravitas in a society bent on the work ethic and the quick starter. The future for graduates looks bleak indeed.
But whose fault is that, exactly? It surely cannot be attributed to them. They work hard, for the most part, and leave University with a genuine desire to make an honest living and get by in the world.
The pressure they face upon graduating is often crippling, as thousands apply for similar positions in an over- saturated job market. Couple that with the tens of thousands of pounds they are burdened with in debt, and you've got a recipe for absolute disaster.
In this instance you'd expect the big employers to display some compassion and sympathy. Of course a three year degree in Business Management isn't going to cut it alone. Everybody needs hands-on experience, and this is where they could step in to help and shoulder some of the burden.
Yet many of the industry giants are now giving graduates the cold shoulder and are opting for the younger school leavers instead. Their reasons - that leaving education at 16 demonstrates a desire to work and a recognition of the need to start early in business. They appear to have nothing but searing contempt for those in Higher Education, who they see as wet and work-shy.
It's perplexing to say the least. At my old comprehensive school, situated in one of the poorest regions of the UK, the only ones who were short-sighted enough to leave full-time education after the GCSE examinations were the bone-idle bruisers with learning difficulties.
To me, it was utterly preposterous to even contemplate leaving education behind at such a young age and settling for a dead-end job or a hands-on apprenticeship that didn't lead anywhere. Graduates earn on average three times more than their peers who did not attend college or University - so we're told - and that seemed like the more profitable route to take.
But then there's the tired and pejorative assumption that only bleeding-hearts liberals will apply to University in the first place. Those with double-barreled surnames who come from large red-brick Manor houses in London and Sussex. Those who are so dreadfully terrified of dirtying their manicured nails or Ralph Lauren polo-shirts in an actual (whisper it!) job that they'd rather spend John Q Tax-Payer's money on a bogus degree in Social Studies.
To those who are stable and smug in their employment, students are endlessly and unthinkingly grouped under the umbrella of 'left-wing elite', and are vilified instead of revered for a whole plethora of shortcomings that are largely fabricated by those who don't possess a single shred of intellect to smear those who do.
Among these imagined slights is their apparent inability and unwillingness to work. They are frequently told to stop prancing behind the glittery curtain of educational make-believe and get firmly in the real world. They are also chastised for 'wasting' tax-payers money. This, despite the fact that many of these 'dithering half-wits' and 'wasters' will go on to lead the fight against Cancer and keep us safe from harm in the legal professions. As if spending tax money on this is the equivalent of pissing money up a wall instead of investing in a secure and stable future!
For these people who have never known the enormous burden of academic debt and who grew up when jobs were in plentiful supply, to go to University is to cop-out. Instead of demonstrating intellect and a willingness to achieve, it is seen as a way of ducking vocational responsibilities for a further three or four booze-saturated years.
The long term victims, though, are the employers. Although they may not think it or admit it now, they will soon be left with a sea of under-qualified job candidates who will cost thousands of pounds to train and discipline.
In their tireless pursuit of the young, the dumb and the gullible, eager graduates are being cut down mercilessly before they can even begin to put back in to the national money pot.
Very soon we'll be witnessing the ugly fallout, as employers stamp their feet, burst in to tears and accuse the nasty students of not playing along in their dangerous game of double standards, in which the best candidates are allowed to slip through the net because they're entering employment at 21 instead of 16.
This slight difference of 5 years gives University graduates the edge over under-qualified job applicants who believe themselves, somewhat mistakenly, to have had a head start in the working world. A student's commitment to further learning, and subsequent higher earning, should be attractive to employers. Instead they face public humiliation and vocational alienation as employers and big industry bosses bite the hands that feed them.
Universities are places where people go to better themselves and strive for the top-end careers and vocations, not dire blue-collar holding pens for life's victims. We should lay off the counter-productive critique and give them a chance to prove their worth in an economy that can't afford to do without them.
