Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
University fees 'could rise five-fold' 
Author Message
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
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/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:20 am
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:10 pm
Posts: 5836
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
Linux_User wrote:
How anyone could deny others the opportunity to improve their lives in such a manner is beyond me.

With all due respect it's called 'the real world'. We can't afford to send everyone to University nor in fact is it appropriate to do so. So we have to thin the numbers somehow. You can do that by making going to university horribly expensive. But that doesn't at all guarantee that the people who end up there will make best use of the resource. The simple fact is the best predictor of future academic performance is past academic performance.

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

Image


Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:15 am
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
rustybucket wrote:
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.

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/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:05 pm
Profile
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:10 pm
Posts: 5490
Location: just behind you!
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
rustybucket wrote:
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.

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.


Quote:
Treasury figures show the 106 NHS PFI schemes signed by September last year have a total capital value of £11bn, but unitary charge payments over the next three decades amount to another £58bn.

Of this, £7.1bn is due over the course of the next Parliament in the five years from 2010/11 – a major fixed cost at a time when public sector spending is expected to be harshly squeezed.

But an analysis by Public Finance of PFI schemes across the public sector – with a total capital value of £55.2bn – shows future unitary charges mounting up to £217.5bn over the lifetime of the deals, with a £41.6bn bill over the next five years.

imagine if they hadnt signed those deals how many more schools hospitals or Tridents systems you could of got instead?

_________________
johnwbfc wrote:
I care not which way round it is as long as at some point some sort of semi-naked wrestling is involved.

Amnesia10 wrote:
Yes but the opportunity to legally kill someone with a giant dildo does not happen every day.

Finally joined Flickr


Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:13 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
rustybucket wrote:
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.

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.

+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
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
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/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:37 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
The Tories started it. They called it something else.

Public Private Partnerships. Note how even those partnerships turned out to be.


Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:41 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
Amnesia10 wrote:
The Tories started it. They called it something else.

Public Private Partnerships. Note how even those partnerships turned out to be.

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/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:50 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.