*raises hand*

"Performers need to pay their dues, and not expect to be treated as 'special' because they've done a course, however good it may have been."

I have to say, I haven't encountered that attitude amongst the Newcastle students. But I have noticed that a lot of the older generation of folkies are rather chippy about the whole concept of the degree. There seems to be an attitiude that the degree is "anti-folk" in some way, and a bit of the "Eeeeh, when I were a lad we didn't need no degrees. We played the circuit, took our knocks, learned the hard way..."

And if anything, I think some of the students from the degree course actually have a tougher time gaining acceptance, as a load of old folkies with their arms crossed, sucking their gums, stand in front of them thinking "Okay, let's see why you're so bloody great then. Let's see what you learned on this so-called folk degree..." The expectations of them are higher, and there are some people I've met who are actually quite smug if kids from the degree trip up, or have a bad night, or don't set the world on fire with their between-song patter.

I certainly think that the degree should be scrutinised - there's nothing wrong with healthy criticism, and if constructive it can only help the degree to get better all the time. But as far as "needing" a folk degree...well, lots of great young performers are getting on very well without it, others are benefitting hugely. Horses for courses.

Is the degree a Good Thing? Is it anti-folk? Well, lots of countries who take their folk music far more seriously than England does - the Scandinavian countries, for instance - have incorporated folk music into university study for years. It stands alongside classical music in terms of status. That can't be a bad thing.