Forum menu
There are specific "return to nursing" courses - perhpas its that. I think they were subsidised but bot sure
As a previous registered nurse you don't have to retrain at all.
Um, relevance kimbers?
Just a cheap dig? Your life must be dull.....
just right wing conspiracy nut glenn beck assosciating the tuition fees demonstrators with wikileaks
reminded me of your consipracy theories about assange yesterday
cheap, yes
dull, never!
I was only being mischievous about cannon fodder
Ha! I thought I was going to attract no end of abuse! I'm not sure of the precise percentage of grads at sandhurst but my point is that, because I arrived naive and arrogant to think my degree made me more capable, for a year I stood in awe of what some of the 19 year old nongrads could do and it made me realise that having a degree is not the be all and end all.
As for it being the only example, like I said, I'm an ex consultant and banker and the same applies re grads v non grads. But maybe they were exceptions rather than the rule...I don't know.
As for jobs where a degree IS essential, then go to university and get that degree. I just think that there are too many students (and this applies to many many friends of mine) who do a degree without asking themselves why they're doing it. Maybe this will get rid of the students who do degrees because they are putting off getting a job or who are just there for the nightlife, whilst enabling those who are determined to get a degree to do just that.
At the end of the day, the govts making cuts because it has to, not because it wants to screw over a load of students. Every single sector is taking a hit at the moment...why should students be ring fenced? (Ooooh, contentious!) To those who say it enriches society, I'm pretty sure investing the money in increasing the level of state education wood benefit the majority a whole lot more...
Whatever. Feel better?
I just think that there are too many students (and this applies to many many friends of mine) who do a degree without asking themselves why they're doing it. Maybe this will get rid of the students who do degrees because they are putting off getting a job or who are just there for the nightlife, whilst enabling those who are determined to get a degree to do just that.
I agree with the first bit, but it's also going to put off students who are academically bright but poor - getting into massive debt is a different proposition for well off middle class families who know ultimately they could probably find the cash to pay it back if they really had to.
At the end of the day, the govts making cuts because it has to, not because it wants to screw over a load of students. Every single sector is taking a hit at the moment...why should students be ring fenced?
Well, as you're a banker I can see why we're in this mess then with an economic brain like you've just shown.
How will lending 9k pppa save the skint treasury right now? It's no different than subsidising the fees and lending 3k pppa. Only there's at least a chance they may eventually get most of that 3k back and can budget accordingly. As has been pointed out - most will never pay back the full new loan, leaving a later government with a nice big extra black hole in its finances, just when it's scratching its head on how it's going to pay all these pensions too.
As for jobs where a degree IS essential, then go to university and get that degree.
Since when did a degree become vocational training?
Reducing university education to simply something you do to get a job, cheapens and degrades the wonderful institution of Education as a whole, and is very blinkered, ignorant and narrow-minded.
My view is that you go to university to learn how to [i]learn[/i]. The educated mind, like an exercised muscle, is a more capable and healthy mind.
zokes - Memberthe new system is a huge improvement.
How, precisely?
low-to-average-ish earners will pay back a lot less (tens of thousands of pounds)
higher earners (around £40k-ish and above) will pay back a lot more (tens of thousands of pounds)
you are right, this seems to have little to do with 'the economy' and 'the deficit', and quite a lot to do with 'stuff the tories wanted to do anyway' (reducing treasury spending)
paraphrasing you (cos i'm feeling cheeky):
"As hasn't been discussed at length, the new system will massively increase the personal wealth of low-to-average-earners"
To those who say it enriches society, I'm pretty sure investing the money in increasing the level of state education wood benefit the majority a whole lot more...
Please tell me the spelling mistake was meant to be ironic.
low-to-average-ish earners will pay back a lot less (tens of thousands of pounds)higher earners (around £40k-ish and above) will pay back a lot more (tens of thousands of pounds)
I'm not sure if that's true, because high earners will pay it off quicker and this pay a lot less in interest. Often lower earners are only paying the interest for quite a while.
My view is that you go to university to learn how to learn. The educated mind, like an exercised muscle, is a more capable and healthy mind.
That's fair enough but it's a luxury put that way. I see no reason that the UK taxpayers should foot the bill.
grumm - i've lead people through the maths several times already - go back and read my posts please!
🙂
in summary; most people will never clear the debt - and i'd rather pay £40/month for the next 30 years, than £90/month for the next 40 years
stick the difference in an ISA = £40,000 (maybe more)
Why should it be seen as a luxury? Why shouldn't taxpayers foot the bill? I'm more than happy to help contribute towards the education of others, in the same way I've enjoyed an education because of the contributions of others before me.
Why shouldn't we, a a 'Society', be prepared to support each other more? Isn't that an ultimately good thing?
Do we not ultimately all benefit?
Or is there no such thing as 'Society'?
this is basically a graduate tax - in everything but name
in the same way I've enjoyed an education because of the contributions of others before me.
So, what's the difference in terms of [i]your[/i] expenditure, between paying for someone else's education on the one hand, and on the other, your own?
Mainly because we can't afford it. It'd be nice if we could, but it's not anywhere near as important as improving schools and hospitals (maybe some more riot police 😀 )
Well if students are being charged for the same education I got for 'free', then my taxes won't go towards paying for their education. The taxes we pay now pay for things now, rather than in the past, what have been paid for by people then. I spose.
Begs the question, where will the bit of our taxes what would've bin spent on education end up?
Hmm...
The real issue affecting the less well off isn't tuition fees, it's the scrapping of EMA. Without that there's not much chance of my kids having the chance of running up huge debts at university or getting A levels or getting other educational training.
As for jobs where a degree IS essential, then go to university and get that degree.
The other problem here is that a lot of jobs, especially in the public sector, have had a university degree "invented" as a passport to the job.
Forestry, twenty years ago, you needed a 3 year BTEC ND sandwich , now the "minimum qualification" is a degree - do we think that the people coming out from degrees are any more able at the job? the people I know in the field say less so, as there's a lot of theoretical book learning and a paucity of practical experience?
Nursing? t'was only fairly recently that we introduced university degrees, are nurses now any more capable than before? many would say less so, as they've not had to "get their hands dirty" to the same extent whilst learning
We've already seen degree courses crop up for potential police officers, what's next, a degree in plumbing instead of time served apprenticeships?
we have a serious problem about separating thinking from doing. We're so hung up on dualism that we can't stop ourselves dualising. And when we do that, we have to label one as being "better" "superior", and the other as being "worse" "lower".
"Thinking" is seen to be upper, worthy of university status, and "doing" is not only "lower" but unworthy of being taught - So we then have to invent degrees that theoretically qualify people to "do" a job, but in reality only teach them to think about it.
The result that as a society we end up with shit loads of "thinkers" but a complete lack of "doers" - which is why we then have to ship all our manufacturing jobs to china, as jobs like that are "beneath" someone who's done a degree.
Why shouldn't we, a a 'Society', be prepared to support each other more? Isn't that an ultimately good thing?
Do we not ultimately all benefit?
It depends if you think those studying what many would consider as "soft" degrees enrich society. Or those that graduate then take relatively low paying jobs that dont require any of the skills they have learned over the previous 3 yrs contribute to "society", or those that graduate then go on to do additional degress and PG study, how many of them never seem to exit the world of academia? I know of a few!!!
Since when did a degree become vocational training?
My point was in reply to someone who claimed that without a degree there would be no teachers, lawyers, doctor etc where apparently having a degree is a prerequisite for that profession so in a sense, certain degrees have become vocational.
My view is that you go to university to learn how to learn. The educated mind, like an exercised muscle, is a more capable and healthy mind.
Exactly! But to really benefit society and make us all better off, this should be done at school which would effect far more people.
Ha ha, and no, that spelling mistake was not meant to be ironic - I'm typing on an iPhone whilst in a truck with what seems like no suspension, damn predictive text!
we have a serious problem about separating thinking from doing. We're so hung up on dualism that we can't stop ourselves dualising. And when we do that, we have to label one as being "better" "superior", and the other as being "worse" "lower"."Thinking" is seen to be upper, worthy of university status, and "doing" is not only "lower" but unworthy of being taught - So we then have to invent degrees that theoretically qualify people to "do" a job, but in reality only teach them to think about it.
The result that as a society we end up with shit loads of "thinkers" but a complete lack of "doers" - which is why we then have to ship all our manufacturing jobs to china, as jobs like that are "beneath" someone who's done a degree.
I think thats a good argument
Well said Zulu-Eleven.
Woppit - the usual load of cant. Takes no account for the fact that in a recession GDP falls and benefit payments rise so in a recession % of gdp in state spending will always rise unless you go for draconian cuts which makes trhe recession worse.
Compare us to Germany - where public spending is higher but you still have to pay for your health insurance on top of your taxes.
Zulu - don't let facts get in the way of your rant. On nursing you clearly know half of naff all. There is a massive improvement in the understanding and the use of evidence based practice.
Of course those who long for an imaginary past of nurses as Drs handmaidens and in stockings are sorry to see this.
we have a serious problem about separating thinking from doing. We're so hung up on dualism that we can't stop ourselves dualising. And when we do that, we have to label one as being "better" "superior", and the other as being "worse" "lower".
I think that's a very good point actually. I think they key to this is to make access to Higher Education available to all regardless of economics, so that having a degree isn't seen as a 'luxury item', or the Social Divider. I believe people should be educated to a standard of which they are capable. And I believe that the cost of this should be borne by the society which benefits from more educated minds.
The father of a mate of min was once arguing about his son going to university, in the pub with some other blokes.
[i]'What's he wanna go an do all that poncy stuff for? Why can't he get a proper job? What's he gonna do when he's finished?'
'Don't matter what he does; could be a lorry driver, could be a brickie, could be a doctor. What matters is that he gets a decent education, cos without one, then he'll probbly end up having to scrape a living like us lot. If he gets an eduction, then hopefully he'll have options what we never had'.
[/i]
Best argument for education I think I've ever heard.
grumm - Member
Csb your faith in market forces is touching but has very little basis in reality. And backhander, yet again, is science and engineering the only thing of value to society?
OK Grumm here's an poorly evidenced example. (Not sure market forces is the correct term, which is why I used 'market forces'. Perhaps democratic forces is a better term?)
Local Authority can't find any graduate social workers because there are none coming through the system (because everone is on a law course). Electorate are asking for social care to be a top priority locally. So Local Authority are forced to raise the salary offered to compete with other authorities in attracting the few candidates that are coming through the system. Social work becomes a better paid career and thus more attractive degree option.
Not sure how reactive the system can be.
a degree in plumbing
From the amount they charge, I'd expect them to be PhD graduates.
And backhander, yet again, is science and engineering the only thing of value to society?
Of course not, they were examples of which there are many.
Zulu - don't let facts get in the way of your rant. On nursing you clearly know half of naff all. There is a massive improvement in the understanding and the use of evidence based practice.
But some would point you towards a massive increase in infection rates due to poor hygiene standards... Family friends who "cut their teeth" on the wards under matron shake their heads in shame at the hygiene and bedside standards of supposedly qualified "shake and bake" nurses!
I long to see TJ in stockings.
But then, I've not been very well lately...
Nurse!
I think they key to this is to make access to Higher Education available to all regardless of economics, so that having a degree isn't seen as a 'luxury item'. I believe people should be educated to a standard of which they are capable
Arent they two potentially mutually exclusive points? If people are to be educated to "a standard of which they are capable" then for the vast majority vocational studies would be most appropriate and a degree may be superfluous.
If access is available to all then who would bear the cost and how exactly would society benefit from a glut of graduates with degrees in surfing for example?
Elfin
I think they key to this is to make access to Higher Education available to all regardless of economics
Why do we think that "Higher" education is so much better than "medium" or "lower" education?
the important factor is whether education fulfills our needs, both as individuals or as a society - the argument against Degree courses as currently being pushed towards 50% of the population is that they don't do that!
Nurses hygiene is far better than it ever was. Fact. HAI is down to multiple factors none of which are nurses hygiene
As someone who has worked in nursing over this time modern nurses are incomparably better educated and it shows. Yes they are not the same and are not rained to do things by rote but to work on evidence based practice.
Of course many old-fashioned folk wail for the days of deference and unquestioning nurses but those days have gone,. This is the 21st century
Ignorance and cant from you as ever
TJ - you are the only nurse I know (and I know quite a few) who has anything good to say about the drive to have degree educated nurses.
Begs the question, where will the bit of our taxes what would've bin spent on education end up?
Already been sent to Irish bankers, no?
BTW <pedant>"begs the question" doesn't mean what you think it means</pedant>
TJ - if you think nursing is better these days I suggest you don't bump into my sister who's just come out of hospital. Nil by mouth, drip ran out, nobody bothered to change it for days, ignoring women in next bed with problems with blood clot etc. etc
Sister-in-law is a nurse and she is horrified at nurses attitudes these days.
* not that I'm painting all nurses to be bad and I'm sure you look lovely in your nurses outfit 😉
Druidh - unfortunately in Edinburgh we have the Heriot watt trained nurses - its a very poor quality course.
I trained under the old style training. It was narrower and did not teach evidence based practice. There are flaws in the currant set up for sure - but the move towards a nursing workforce trained to a much higher standard is good.
Too many nurses want to hark back to a " good old days" that actually never existed.
Not just Edinburgh-based nurses TJ, although I'm sure there's a certain amount of rose-tinted glasses involved too.
Last time I was in hospital (following Avocadogate), I was treated by very friendly, professional staff who were intelligent and seemed well-educated. It was an experience made less unpleasant by well-trained hardworking staff.
Druidh - one of the issues is that because the system now teaches on a much wider range of areas that some stuff is in less depth. So some old-fashioned nurses decry this lack of depth not seeing the increased range. The lack of knowledge that you used to be able to qualify with was astounding and dangerous. You were not taught to think at all - it was all done by rote and this is how we do it because this is how we do it.
The newer training produces nurses with a differing skill set from the old apprentaship style training. Some folk only see what they have not got rather than what they have got instead.
The major flaw is there is no place for the less academic nurses - the old enrolled nurse. That is a pity
Nursing as profession is very very conservative. This is why the resistance to better trained nurses.
To be fair it's often not the nurses fault. The midwife pretty much told be to put in a written complaint as it would highlight their lack of staff on the ward rather than the quality of care from individuals.
Do all you right wing fan boys really think that people are going to uni to have a larf, muck about and party then leave with a degree that isn't any use?
There are a minority that are in for a free ride, but that's the same in society as a whole (people claiming benefits unlawfully etc.). Young people will go out and party whether they're at university or not- thinking back to Huddersfield town centre on any night other than a Wednesday and it's awash with young people who aren't students, who have jobs and are just out to get lashed and then go home. Even an average 2:1 student has to work their arse off to get there- I know I've not been to the pub for about 3 weeks. Similarly I've not ridden my bike for 2 weeks. I worked out I did an 80 hour week last week. While that is a bit of an exception, it certainly isn't the free ride a lot of you seem to think it is.
The majority of degrees are of high value to society. Chemistry for example- do you want the person mucking about with chemicals to go in your food, run your car on, power your batteries to not have as complete a knowledge of what they're doing as possible? Without having been taught all these things in a controlled environment first and having as much understanding as possible about what reacts with what there'd be an awful lot of mistakes.
Take what I do, Geology. If one of the guys examining the strength of the ground under a new motorway hasn't been trained properly then there will an awful lot to answer for if your motorway subsides because he'd just been fired into the job without proper knowledge of what he's doing. You'd also have people drilling for oil willy-nilly and wasting their time and money. Imagine what wasted time and money in an oil company would do to the price you pay for oil... And it's not like we spend 90% of our time sat in lectures thinking about geology. In fact, it's probably the opposite- I spend 2 hours in a week in a lecture, and then the remainder of the week is spent doing various practicals. Things like fieldwork, lab analysis, mapping, presenting and teaching.
Even arts degrees have value. You need a culturally rich society to keep your citizens happy and in a nice environment. Things like Philosophy are very important- for example, a philosophy student who's had a degree to understand all the ins and outs of ethics and morals can help decides ethics codes for the NHS without being affected by a medical background.
It's not as if the majority of students are doing things like David Beckham studies- most are doing things that are very important to things in your every day life and that you'd almost certainly struggle without.
There's no real difference between a degree in a vocational subject and some other vocational qualification.
Training just got renamed, that's all, and shuffled about a bit.