Author |
Message |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
The numbers who go to university should be based on ability, truly on merit. Then there is the subject of academic subjects that do not have a commercial value, like archeology. These are still worthy subjects but loading the student with a debt for a course that is unlikely to have any personal payback is going to kill that subject. Course where there is a need such as for teaching, should be supported through free education when people become teachers. TBH I think that the old system of free education and far fewer students is a better route.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:20 am |
|
 |
rustybucket
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm Posts: 5836
|
As much as my socialist leanings ache to disagree with you, I think you're correct. Academic performance is drastically affected by economic circumstances and increasing the university intake was seen as a way to equalise this. The trouble is that it doesn't equalise anything. Equality in academic performance is something that can only be equalised in the pre-school, primary and secondary stages. The intervention needs to happen at 3 years old, not 18.
_________________Jim
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:15 am |
|
 |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
We need to give everyone a decent start in life. So that means better education at all levels even if the majority do not go on to university.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:05 pm |
|
 |
bobbdobbs
I haven't seen my friends in so long
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm Posts: 5490 Location: just behind you!
|
imagine if they hadnt signed those deals how many more schools hospitals or Tridents systems you could of got instead?
_________________Finally joined Flickr
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:13 pm |
|
 |
jonbwfc
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm Posts: 17040
|
+1. Having a better educated population as a whole is better for all sorts of reasons. Even if only say 25% of the population (figure off the top of my head) make it to University. In the end University is only one type of education, suited to a certain type of person following a certain type of career path. The problem the last government got the idea into it's head that putting people into University was somehow of itself better than any of the alternatives when as a functioning society we have just as much, if not more, need for people who have learned other skills as people who learn to be academics. Jon
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:33 pm |
|
 |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
PFI was a government accounting trick to allow the government to build schools and hospitals, and defer the cost to the next parliament. The Tories started it. They called it something else. It would have been far better for the government to be upfront and borrow for the buildings projects and not have any contractual ties to these companies. As it is it costs a fortune to make a single change to any of the contracts which defeats the savings reason for the schemes in the first place.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:37 pm |
|
 |
jonbwfc
What's a life?
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm Posts: 17040
|
Public Private Partnerships. Note how even those partnerships turned out to be.
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:41 pm |
|
 |
Amnesia10
Legend
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am Posts: 29240 Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
|
Yes they are no better. Though another factor is that many of these companies have been relocated offshore so there is no tax paid on what are rock steady earnings.
_________________Do concentrate, 007... "You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds." https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTkhttp://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21
|
Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:50 pm |
|
|