elite abilty, not elite money. you northern, working class pleb.
i went to cambridge, but only for a day.
i'm not part of the elite, far from it. check my credentials. hell, check my bank balance! i'd say i was working class, as are lots of my mates, including those who did well at university.
i think the problem is that youngsters, and i include myself and peers in this, are given ideas above their station. university is seen as a gateway to great things, but it isn't. not any more.
my little cousin is sitting at home now unemployed after having completed her studies last year. i'd be very surprised (and happy) if she got a jobin her chosen field (publishing, think she got good marks in Eng Lit).
we'd rather less people went to university to do more meaningful degrees
Why would you want less people to go to University?
Who are you to decide if the degree is 'meaningful'?
Surely the acquisition of knowledge and a better educated workforce is in itself a benefit to society as a whole?
Do we abandon the study of the classics, art, the humanities, philosophy etc?
Should we only allow degrees in subjects which produce a clear economic advantage for our economy, and if so how do we ensure that people who graduate in Britain don't take their skills abroad?
you northern, working class pleb.
If that was intended as an insult, it failed. 😀
It says far more about you than it does about me.
it's interesting though, In an ideal society, It'd be normal that everyone was entitled to education, to the highest degree, for free, if they could show the ability. It just goes to show how far away we are from an ideal society.
Why would you want less people to go to University?
Because too many go at the moment. More than our society actually needs educating to that level.
Who are you to decide if the degree is 'meaningful'?
Where did you get the idea I was deciding? I can't believe it's so difficult to decide though.
Should we only allow degrees in subjects which produce a clear economic advantage for our economy
If our economy is going to pay for them, yes. Feel free to do a degree in meeja studies if you want, but don't expect society to pay for it.
how do we ensure that people who graduate in Britain don't take their skills abroad?
The same way we do at the moment - or indeed did when degrees were fewer on the ground and therefore more valuable. There wasn't any greater brain drain then.
Surely the acquisition of knowledge and a better educated workforce is in itself a benefit to society as a whole?
not if it drops people into a vicious circle of debt that they have to live with for years.
no need to abandon classics, arts, the humanities or any of the other degrees. just let those who have a real passion for such things pay for it themselves. if they are good at it they'll recoup their money.
i'd rather pay for people to study degrees where the ratio of personal financial gain is inverse to the value they bring to society. nurses, teachers, scientists.
and you could say "look here, if you skip off in the next 8 years you'll be expected to pay back x% of your studies that the people of this nation paid for". doesn't seem unreasonable to me. you benefit from the people, you give something back.
--------------
edit:
"you northern, working class pleb."If that was intended as an insult, it failed.
It says far more about you than it does about me.
was meant as a joke. don't take it personally.
no need to abandon classics, arts, the humanities or any of the other degrees. just let those who have a real passion for such things pay for it themselves. if they are good at it they'll recoup their money.
I wouldn't go that far. Some proportion of people with those degrees are valuable for society in jobs which do require generic degree education. Just maybe not so many as we have now, and such things should also be pruned back to the harder core of subjects.
It's worth bearing in mind that a lot of the higher paid "graduate" jobs don't actually require a degree education at all, it's just the easiest way of doing the first screening of ability.
ok then, if they end up with a job that is beneficial to society the people help pay back part of their studies.
i like this politics malarky... dead easy.
aracer, I'm not disagreeing with you. But what do you do?
Why would you want less people to go to University?Because too many go at the moment. More than our society actually needs educating to that level.
I disagree. I see a better educated and more knowledgeable workforce as an asset to any economy - knowledge is liberating and empowering.
It can be an end in itself, not necessarily the means to one.
Who are you to decide if the degree is 'meaningful'?Where did you get the idea I was deciding? I can't believe it's so difficult to decide though.
Define meaningful. You seem to be juxtaposing it with economically beneficial. Again, I argue that a well educated workforce benefits society and the economy as a whole. It leads to happier, more satisfied and productive human beings.
no need to abandon classics, arts, the humanities or any of the other degrees. just let those who have a real passion for such things pay for it themselves. if they are good at it they'll recoup their money.
But those who may have the greatest passion and ability in these subjects won't study them at all if they cannot afford to?
A society isn't purely valued in economic terms.
edit:"you northern, working class pleb."
If that was intended as an insult, it failed.
It says far more about you than it does about me.was meant as a joke. don't take it personally.
Well, it was aimed at me personally, how do you expect me to take it?
Thanks for pointing out the fact that it was a joke. I'm not sure which bit was supposed to be funny: Is it being Northern, working class, or a pleb?
You've really missed your true vocation - Jim Davidson wouldn't have had it so easy if you'd have taken up comedy.
Software/electronic engineering
I disagree. I see a better educated and more knowledgeable workforce as an asset to any economy - knowledge is liberating and empowering.
It can be an end in itself, not necessarily the means to one.
define knowledge. I've a more rounded knowledge on a number of diverse subjects, whereas my university educated cousin (and many of her uni mates) doesn't have a clue about many aspects of everyday life, politics or even what drives the earth's processes (not the one sitting at home with a degree, another one).
Wow, you've missed your true vocation - Jim Davison wouldn't have had it so easy if you'd have taken up comedy.
well, to be fair, he probably would have. he's a few years older than me and i'm not a rascist bigot so wouldn't have appealed to his fan-base.
I argue that a well educated workforce benefits society and the economy as a whole.
Even if you need a degree to be recruited for a job which plainly doesn't require or use any of the skills acquired during a degree? Where do you plan on stopping - should the binmen and cleaners need degrees (note I'm not disparaging those jobs at all - they need to be done, just don't require high levels of education)? Should even a car mechanic, a school secretary or a shop manager need a degree?
define knowledge. I've a more rounded knowledge on a number of diverse subjects, whereas my university educated cousin (and many of her uni mates) doesn't have a clue about many aspects of everyday life, politics or even what drives the earth's processes (not the one sitting at home with a degree, another one).
Well, if you had gone to Uni, you would have had the opportunity to acquire a greater depth of knowledge in a certain subject. This would obviously not have stopped you from acquiring the breadth of wider knowledge you have obtained from other sources. Maybe if your cousin hadn't gone to Uni he'd still not have a clue about everyday life. Your argument is spurious, there is no correlation between Uni attendance and a weaker grasp of politics and physics.
well, to be fair, he probably would have. he's a few years older than me and i'm not a rascist bigot so wouldn't have appealed to his fan-base.
I have no evidence that you're a racist, but you're certainly a bigot judging by what you consider to be humorous.
true, is't a numb point. but university doesn't prepare you for working life as well as going out and working does.
i believe the best form of learning is that of learning by doing.
many people i know with degrees are no happier than i am and are not in jobs related to their degrees anyway. some of them are unhappy due to the burden of debt they incurred. i know one of my mates wishes he never went. he's over 30K in debt, 28 years old and forced to live with his parents. he couldn't find a job after studying photography, wasn't good enough at photography to make his own way in the field and ended up quite depressed. he then went looking for an apprenticeship, but never got taken on as he was too old. he now works full-time at IKEA. whoopey-****ing-do. 17k a year. how long till his 30k is cleared? probably when his folks die.
I have no evidence that you're a racist, but you're certainly a bigot judging by what you consider to be humorous
🙂
forget about the word "degree", use the word "education".
I argue that a well educated workforce benefits society and the economy as a whole.Even if you need a degree to be recruited for a job which plainly doesn't require or use any of the skills acquired during a degree? Where do you plan on stopping - should the binmen and cleaners need degrees (note I'm not disparaging those jobs at all - they need to be done, just don't require high levels of education)? Should even a car mechanic, a school secretary or a shop manager need a degree?
I think higher education benefits everyone who wishes to obtain it.
As I've said previously, education and knowledge leads to a happier, more fulfilled workforce. How can this in any way be to the disavantage of our society?
'Knowledge is power', as the old adage goes.
Or, to put it another way, knowledge enables people to empower themselves - leading to the social mobility the right wing often bleat on about but so rarely do anything to actually achieve.
Have you ever been a cleaner by the way?
Thinking about Ulysses or the deeper meaning behind the Sonnets whilst attempting to descale a particularly nasty U-bend may certainly help to break up the ennui, leading to a happier cleaner and a cleaner toilet. Everyone's a winner. 🙂
i believe the best form of learning is that of learning by doing.
Probably best that you didn't get into medicine or bomb disposal then.
Anyway, it's late and I really should be off to bed.
Happy to continue, but probably tomorrow evening before I get a chance to respond now - arses to wipe, toilets to clean! 😀
Like yer reality input Rusty.
Have you ever been a cleaner by the way?
Yes, actually.
I think higher education benefits everyone who wishes to obtain it.
Even those who like the idea, but aren't academically up to it?
Like yer reality input Rusty.
Reality? Idealism more like. He wants everybody to be able to go to university for free, because it will empower them. Not sure he's worked out who's actually paying for this.
so, can you not go to uni, learn stuff and work as a brickie, and learn stuff at the same time?
Yup, scrap the "University of Middle England and Associated Waterways" type universities, turn them back into polytechnics offering their M.Sc. in X-Factor studies with option nail polishing work placement years and let's get back to some proper elitist Universities!
😉
Have you ever been a cleaner by the way?Yes, actually.
And would you rather be an educated cleaner or an uneducated one?
I think higher education benefits everyone who wishes to obtain it.Even those who like the idea, but aren't academically up to it?
EVERYONE can benefit from the pursuit of knowledge, on a level tailored to suit them - what matters is that the opportunity is there.
Reality? Idealism more like. He wants everybody to be able to go to university for free, because it will empower them. Not sure he's worked out who's actually paying for this.
And where exactly did I say that?
When you consider the [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11511714 ] Gender Pay gap[/url], and crunch those numbers, is it worth women going to university?
EVERYONE can benefit from the pursuit of knowledge, on a level tailored to suit them - what matters is that the opportunity is there.
Yes, but we were talking about going to university to study for degrees. If that wasn't what you were referring to in all your comments above, please clarify.
And where exactly did I say that?
Just reading between the lines. I assumed from your first post that you're objecting to the raising of the cost of going to university. Meanwhile in subsequent conversation you seem to be supporting the idea that everybody should go. If I've got that wrong, please do explain - are you happy for people to pay lots to go to university, or do you actually think that we should be elitist and limit the numbers who go?
Or is it just the case that your ideology means you'd vote for a monkey with a red rosette?
These sort of conversations about Britain is either doing to little or too much of something, always seem to lack a bit of context.
Does anyone know what percentage of the population enter higher education in our nearest and dearest European neighbours are?
All well and good keeping all the donuts out of university, alternative is paying them dole money
This way it keeps them off the streets (and the unemployed total) puts some money back into local wineries/eateries etc and we might even get some of it back
Ideally University should be kept for the genuinely bright kids then it could be free for everyone, but for above reasons that ain't gonna happen.
The worst thing about the education process is that it trains people into thinking that money is to be made by working hard.
The reality is that it is made by being able to recognise an opportunity.
I had two recruitment jobs that "required a degree" to get - did they ACTUALLY require a degree? No they didn't. It was just so the company owner could boast all his "consultants" were graduates as far as I could tell.
Have to admit that I'm bloody glad I did my degree (1997) when I did - came out with a fraction of the debt that they have nowadays (with no parents financial help at all).
Ten years before that, going to Uni was actually quite a cushy number.
the value of uni is 2-fold.
it's an education, and it's an experience.
as an education, degrees are worth less now every chuffer has one.
but it's probably good for our society that lots and lots of people leave their home-town at the age of 18 and go and meet other people (Geordies, midlanders, scousers, mancs, sarfners, overseas-students etc. yes, even the welsh).
a degree in Engineering / Medicine is still as important as ever if you wish to pursue a career as an Engineer / Medic.
but a degree in (insert less vocational degree of your choice)? - i know it's probably just as hard as ever, but it's no longer as distinctive as it once was.
if that's a problem for you, then point your finger at Nu-laber.
If you average the £33k out over all the things you get out of uni, it's pretty good value - works out about £1 per lecture and 50p a shag.
Does anyone know what percentage of the population enter higher education in our nearest and dearest European neighbours are?
The percentages are broadly the same as the UK with governments wanting around 50% to become graduates.
Our economy relies on up-skilling people, hence degrees are necessary & the more graduates the better. that said, some subject areas are more useful to the economy/society than others!
The elitist view of HE is long gone within the industry, with the possible exception of the odd Russell Group Classics lecturer. I completely disagree with Stoner & co.
Your chances of entering a top uni should be based on your abilities to successfully complete the degree & not on your ability to pay.
That's my tuppence worth
If you average the £33k out over all the things you get out of uni, it's pretty good value - works out about £1 per lecture and 50p a shag
Is this ex Pigface or another cunning SSBer?!
I think that the 100K over a lifetime is meaningless. I'm much more interested in how much a university graduate makes compared to a time served skilled worker. Also, how much both graduates and skilled workers make in relation unskilled workers over the course of a lifetime.
Personally, I went to university and ended up making a very very good living but the route to my eventual profession (oilfield worker) could have been achieved by going the apprentice route or even as a manual labourer so I don't think I'm the best example.
I'm now trying to become qualified as a skilled worker as I should have done in the first place but at the time (1997) it was never presented as an option to me as I had the grades to go to university and there didn't seem to be any other option at the time.
I presume SSB-UK didn't do a maths degree.
I enjoyed Uni, had a great time, made great friends and wouldn't have got the jobs I've had without a degree. However, I think it's overrated and a lot of people go these days because it's expected of them (by parents/peers/society) not because it will necessarily provide greater opportunities in life.
Maybe with less people able to afford to go to University we will see more successful British entrepreneurs popping up in future.
If it's gonna cost me £xx,000 to put each of my two kids through Uni, I think I will give them the option of going to Uni or me helping/financing them to start their own businesses. Fortunately, I won't have to worry about that for another 9 and 12 years respectively.
A friends 2 children both did 4 year degrees, finished only recently, in Chemistry and Physics. Both of them said there was no point at all in getting a standard degree as they would not even get job interviews for the better jobs as there were too many 'plain' degrees already in the market, so they were worth nothing to good employers.
- So an extra years tuition fees/living costs already on top of 3 years standard debt.
Where I work 10 years ago to do the bottom level jobs you needed just normal school exams. People who applied who had degrees were weeded out by the management and laughed at for being pathetic enough to have 'such low expectations', combined with the solid unmovable belief that graduates were too bright to do the bottom level work and would leave the job rapidly due to 'boredom'as they were special people, elite and above any ordinary job.
Today the same job is targeted at graduates and anyone without a degree is very rarely interviewed on the grounds they are not bright enough and would not engage fully with the job due to not being intelligent enough !!!!
Frankly, anyone with a moderate intelligence level could do the jobs perfectly well at any point from then to now as its only basic admin.
If it's gonna cost me £xx,000 to put each of my two kids through Uni, I think I will give them the option of going to Uni or me helping/financing them to start their own businesses.
As I understand it, there will be penalty clauses to stop parents with the means to do so paying fees up front.
While I don't necessarily agree with what the government proposes (and, for example, there is some debate about whether studying medicine is affordable if one qualifies with debts for fees alone of £35000), there are too many people doing soft degrees. Some Universities will not survive this.
However if the effect of needing to earn enough to pay back the fees is to increase places in science/engineering (the things the British economy needs and in which we have to bring in overseas graduates as there aren't enough of our own) at the expense of places doing David Beckham studies at the University of Fulchester, then is that really a bad thing?
Andy
What do you think Labour would be doing if they were in power, given they introduced tuition fees?
A fair point. But I would hope that, theoretically, a LibDem govt (I voted LibDem) would be considering something else. Fairness, equity, social mobility, classless-ness are important parts of Liberal thinking are they not?
On the value of a university education: Work does not prepare you for life IMO - Education is not training. Education is the inverse of Ignorance, something that advanced societies really need.
But we cannot afford to fully educate everyone to their maximum ability. How do we decide who pays and who gets our funding? It used to depend on real ability (for parents) to pay. Now it depends in [i]theoretical[/i] ability of the student to pay eventually.
But many degrees will not, in themselves, lead to higher-paid work. Also our industries needs graduates of some degree subjects more than others. Whilst I cannot deny the value of an "English Lit" graduate, perhaps a "Computer Science", "Accountancy" or "Fashion and Media" graduate is more valuable and deserves our funding.
As I understand it, there will be penalty clauses to stop parents with the means to do so paying fees up front.
Really? I've not seen that but have seen a stupid suggestion about getting those who pay off debts early to pay more.
A fair point. But I would hope that, theoretically, a LibDem govt (I voted LibDem) would be considering something else. Fairness, equity, social mobility, classless-ness are important parts of Liberal thinking are they not?
Anyone remember (or hear about) the Scottish LibDems key promise that they would abolish tuition fees if they were voted into the Scottish Parliment back in 1998? I voted for them and so did a lot of students purely on that basis. This was the first thing that went out the window as soon as Labour offered them a place in the coalition government.
I decided then that the only genuine policy the LibDems had was that they were for Getting Into Power and against Not Getting Into Power and that in actual fact they were the Scum of the Earth. Hell, even the BNP has an actual agenda.
University should be for the top 5% of highly capable talented people, not privileged toffs, or mediocre "also rans".
The problem with this model is that private schools are the best at getting their kids to float to the top no matter which criteria is used. On average, those kids don't do as well as those from state schools with the same grades. So with a high selection ratio we end up with lots of kids from richer backgrounds getting to University and getting the better paid jobs. That ain't (socially) fair
the expansion of university places was a good thing imho
as our economy has transformed from a blue collar to white collar we need more university trained professionals,
even silly degrees are all good, more students= more money = better facilities and international students are a cash cow and continue to come as the reputaion f UK universities is as high if not higher than ever
the explosion in the finacial sector, among others has required that we need more IT, a****ants, lawyers etc etc and salaries have risen to reflect this
sadly in the other areas we excel; science and engineering salaries have not risen, hence why midnightours friend feel their science degrees are not worth anything, they could get basic jobs but the starting salaries are a joke
the problem is not that degrees are worth less its that business does not reward them
although i believe nulab should have done something to encourage unis to focus on real degrees over softer subjects
raising tuition fees is a mistake it will massively reduce the number of people going to university at a time when we need to be investing in the future, we will be condemed to an educational dark ages
the libdems have sold their soul-
you expect torries to be against social mobility
but cable has shown his true colours hes as honest as castirondave and obviously just using a yellow badge to get into power
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
the libdems have sold their soul
Need to sell all sorts to clean this mess up.
Good photos. I may email them to my LibDem MP.
Getting Into Power
The primary agenda of political parties of all colours! Compromising policy is the nature of consensus politics - it does not make them bad people. While I'm frustrated by ConDem policy, I have to remind myself that it is the nature of the game. But it's hard when cherished policies are dropped.
[s]Compromising[/s] capitulating on policy is the nature of consensus politics
Fixed it for you.
This is not a compromise it is a reversial of stated policy as it was over the economy. They could have held frin over their beliefs and principles in asort of principled manner instead of propping up /enabling a Tory govt to do what the libs said they would not do and what they di dnot stand for...shamefull and they will pay an electoral price for this IMHO.