Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[theolodian]

I have been following this thread closely as it touches on many political aspects of interest.

To enter this debate, stating that I understanding much of what has been said and why, and to give another angle on it, I will just add a few, probably yet again, contaversial points:

Our education system in the UK is NOT a meritocracy; the best most potentially talented pupils do not necessarily get to the top of the educational system and job 'pile', as what really counts is the money your family possess, their access to facalities for the child to enjoy such as a private bedroom with books unlimited, computer, etc, a good family 'environment' and the right connections, such as through a public / grammer school education.

If the UK is ever to achieve a situation whereby ALL children are given an opportunity to excell and reach their full potential, so that our country truely competes with the rest of the world, then ALL children, regardless of class backgound and culture must have full unhinderd access to a good, trouble free family environment, an unbiased educational system where just 'having money' does not count, computer facilities, and unlimited books, writing materials, along with any other needs.  In addition no child with potential should 'have' to leave school because their family require them to earn money asap.

The current Government have encouraged far greater numbers to attend university, which should be applauded, but only those with families who can afford the fees and the situation of them attending, actually can, and anyway by then the damage of their "family situation" / the established "system" has already been done.  This is not a meritocracy!

Issuing computers is one step towards the above goals by a so called "socialist" government, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to what is really required; fully equal opportunities for all children in our society.  This initiative is a vote winning scam, will be wasted resource in so many cases because of the environmentally connected negatives already described and goes no where near achieving what should be a 'socialist' goal.

The aims I list are pie in the sky for at least the next 20 years?  Maybe!! But we, the citizens of Great Britain, have to start somewhere!

I am strongly against the current governments view that everyone should have degrees, simply its devaluing the qualification.
I also dont necessarily agree that kids with lazy parents should have their fees paid.  Further Education should be paid for by those benefitting from it, whether up front, or afterwards.


The key to sorting it is to get the lazy people into work.

I think that there is too much onus on academic qualifications and not enough ‘practical training’ for those who are less academically but mote practically minded.  

Like Bill Gates?    All these tests and targets, including degrees, are a load of BS.   Uni can be a great experience, but not automatically the best way to start a career.

[Vamps]

I have been following this thread closely as it touches on many political aspects of interest.

To enter this debate, stating that I understanding much of what has been said and why, and to give another angle on it, I will just add a few, probably yet again, contaversial points:

Our education system in the UK is NOT a meritocracy; the best most potentially talented pupils do not necessarily get to the top of the educational system and job 'pile', as what really counts is the money your family possess, their access to facalities for the child to enjoy such as a private bedroom with books unlimited, computer, etc, a good family 'environment' and the right connections, such as through a public / grammer school education.

If the UK is ever to achieve a situation whereby ALL children are given an opportunity to excell and reach their full potential, so that our country truely competes with the rest of the world, then ALL children, regardless of class backgound and culture must have full unhinderd access to a good, trouble free family environment, an unbiased educational system where just 'having money' does not count, computer facilities, and unlimited books, writing materials, along with any other needs.  In addition no child with potential should 'have' to leave school because their family require them to earn money asap.

The current Government have encouraged far greater numbers to attend university, which should be applauded, but only those with families who can afford the fees and the situation of them attending, actually can, and anyway by then the damage of their "family situation" / the established "system" has already been done.  This is not a meritocracy!

Issuing computers is one step towards the above goals by a so called "socialist" government, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to what is really required; fully equal opportunities for all children in our society.  This initiative is a vote winning scam, will be wasted resource in so many cases because of the environmentally connected negatives already described and goes no where near achieving what should be a 'socialist' goal.

The aims I list are pie in the sky for at least the next 20 years?  Maybe!! But we, the citizens of Great Britain, have to start somewhere!

I am strongly against the current governments view that everyone should have degrees, simply its devaluing the qualification.
I also dont necessarily agree that kids with lazy parents should have their fees paid.  Further Education should be paid for by those benefitting from it, whether up front, or afterwards.


The key to sorting it is to get the lazy people into work.

I think that there is too much onus on academic qualifications and not enough ‘practical training’ for those who are less academically but mote practically minded.  

Like Bill Gates?    All these tests and targets, including degrees, are a load of BS.   Uni can be a great experience, but not automatically the best way to start a career.[/quote]

I was 39 when I went to Uni

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I have been following this thread closely as it touches on many political aspects of interest.

To enter this debate, stating that I understanding much of what has been said and why, and to give another angle on it, I will just add a few, probably yet again, contaversial points:

Our education system in the UK is NOT a meritocracy; the best most potentially talented pupils do not necessarily get to the top of the educational system and job 'pile', as what really counts is the money your family possess, their access to facalities for the child to enjoy such as a private bedroom with books unlimited, computer, etc, a good family 'environment' and the right connections, such as through a public / grammer school education.

If the UK is ever to achieve a situation whereby ALL children are given an opportunity to excell and reach their full potential, so that our country truely competes with the rest of the world, then ALL children, regardless of class backgound and culture must have full unhinderd access to a good, trouble free family environment, an unbiased educational system where just 'having money' does not count, computer facilities, and unlimited books, writing materials, along with any other needs.  In addition no child with potential should 'have' to leave school because their family require them to earn money asap.

The current Government have encouraged far greater numbers to attend university, which should be applauded, but only those with families who can afford the fees and the situation of them attending, actually can, and anyway by then the damage of their "family situation" / the established "system" has already been done.  This is not a meritocracy!

Issuing computers is one step towards the above goals by a so called "socialist" government, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to what is really required; fully equal opportunities for all children in our society.  This initiative is a vote winning scam, will be wasted resource in so many cases because of the environmentally connected negatives already described and goes no where near achieving what should be a 'socialist' goal.

The aims I list are pie in the sky for at least the next 20 years?  Maybe!! But we, the citizens of Great Britain, have to start somewhere!

I am strongly against the current governments view that everyone should have degrees, simply its devaluing the qualification.
I also dont necessarily agree that kids with lazy parents should have their fees paid.  Further Education should be paid for by those benefitting from it, whether up front, or afterwards.


The key to sorting it is to get the lazy people into work.

I think that there is too much onus on academic qualifications and not enough ‘practical training’ for those who are less academically but mote practically minded.  

Like Bill Gates?    All these tests and targets, including degrees, are a load of BS.   Uni can be a great experience, but not automatically the best way to start a career.[/quote]

I was 39 when I went to Uni

...and I am 35, alright 55, currently in 2nd year at Uni!!

[TheBoy]

I have been following this thread closely as it touches on many political aspects of interest.

To enter this debate, stating that I understanding much of what has been said and why, and to give another angle on it, I will just add a few, probably yet again, contaversial points:

Our education system in the UK is NOT a meritocracy; the best most potentially talented pupils do not necessarily get to the top of the educational system and job 'pile', as what really counts is the money your family possess, their access to facalities for the child to enjoy such as a private bedroom with books unlimited, computer, etc, a good family 'environment' and the right connections, such as through a public / grammer school education.

If the UK is ever to achieve a situation whereby ALL children are given an opportunity to excell and reach their full potential, so that our country truely competes with the rest of the world, then ALL children, regardless of class backgound and culture must have full unhinderd access to a good, trouble free family environment, an unbiased educational system where just 'having money' does not count, computer facilities, and unlimited books, writing materials, along with any other needs.  In addition no child with potential should 'have' to leave school because their family require them to earn money asap.

The current Government have encouraged far greater numbers to attend university, which should be applauded, but only those with families who can afford the fees and the situation of them attending, actually can, and anyway by then the damage of their "family situation" / the established "system" has already been done.  This is not a meritocracy!

Issuing computers is one step towards the above goals by a so called "socialist" government, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to what is really required; fully equal opportunities for all children in our society.  This initiative is a vote winning scam, will be wasted resource in so many cases because of the environmentally connected negatives already described and goes no where near achieving what should be a 'socialist' goal.

The aims I list are pie in the sky for at least the next 20 years?  Maybe!! But we, the citizens of Great Britain, have to start somewhere!

I am strongly against the current governments view that everyone should have degrees, simply its devaluing the qualification.
I also dont necessarily agree that kids with lazy parents should have their fees paid.  Further Education should be paid for by those benefitting from it, whether up front, or afterwards.


The key to sorting it is to get the lazy people into work.

I think that there is too much onus on academic qualifications and not enough ‘practical training’ for those who are less academically but mote practically minded.  

true. last time i was recruiting, loads of well educated people turned up, but all friggin useless, no common sense.  

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I have been following this thread closely as it touches on many political aspects of interest.

To enter this debate, stating that I understanding much of what has been said and why, and to give another angle on it, I will just add a few, probably yet again, contaversial points:

Our education system in the UK is NOT a meritocracy; the best most potentially talented pupils do not necessarily get to the top of the educational system and job 'pile', as what really counts is the money your family possess, their access to facalities for the child to enjoy such as a private bedroom with books unlimited, computer, etc, a good family 'environment' and the right connections, such as through a public / grammer school education.

If the UK is ever to achieve a situation whereby ALL children are given an opportunity to excell and reach their full potential, so that our country truely competes with the rest of the world, then ALL children, regardless of class backgound and culture must have full unhinderd access to a good, trouble free family environment, an unbiased educational system where just 'having money' does not count, computer facilities, and unlimited books, writing materials, along with any other needs.  In addition no child with potential should 'have' to leave school because their family require them to earn money asap.

The current Government have encouraged far greater numbers to attend university, which should be applauded, but only those with families who can afford the fees and the situation of them attending, actually can, and anyway by then the damage of their "family situation" / the established "system" has already been done.  This is not a meritocracy!

Issuing computers is one step towards the above goals by a so called "socialist" government, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to what is really required; fully equal opportunities for all children in our society.  This initiative is a vote winning scam, will be wasted resource in so many cases because of the environmentally connected negatives already described and goes no where near achieving what should be a 'socialist' goal.

The aims I list are pie in the sky for at least the next 20 years?  Maybe!! But we, the citizens of Great Britain, have to start somewhere!

I am strongly against the current governments view that everyone should have degrees, simply its devaluing the qualification.
I also dont necessarily agree that kids with lazy parents should have their fees paid.  Further Education should be paid for by those benefitting from it, whether up front, or afterwards.


The key to sorting it is to get the lazy people into work.

I think that there is too much onus on academic qualifications and not enough ‘practical training’ for those who are less academically but mote practically minded.  

true. last time i was recruiting, loads of well educated people turned up, but all friggin useless, no common sense.  

That is something I would never argue against .  The times I found that out in business!

But to me that is proof of an educational system not working as it should!

[albitz]

My tuppence worth on the education debate.the pinky/lefty/socialist elite who run education (and most other things)in this country,have for years refused to accept that not all children have the same acedemic ability. so they are all taught the same things in large groups .this results in the more naturally academic pupils losing out terribly. The less academically able do at times recieve help (special needs) to try to bring them up to the level of the average,but the more able are ignored (why cant they have tuiton for their special needs)so they often fall to the level of the average.they are effectively dumbed down.
This of course fills the socialist idea of utopia. i.e.-everyone is the same.
here in Essex we are fortunate that we still have a few Grammar schools and I would like to see them re-introduced across the nation.
they could be called speciaal needs colleges for the more academicaly inclined if need be. we could also have similar colleges for more practically inclined pupils, but we would be educating children according to their talents rather than a leftist political dogma.
both of my children passed the 11 plus ,the first one in the last year of the old corruption ridden system ,and the second in the first year of the new fairer system.
Despite the fact that their dad was a concrete shoveller,they both had the opportunity to go to uni , but neither of them wanted to go.
my daughter in particular said it was a waste of time as degrees arent worth much more than the paper they are written on these days,as the socialists are well on the way to doing to the worlds greatest universities what they have done to the countries schools.
She decided thar she wanted to be a city trader and that she would do it by dogged determination and sheer hard graft.
she got a back office job with Bank of America in Bromley and had to travel on god knows how many trains ,there and back,getting up at 4.50 a.m. and often getting home at 10.30p.m.
She is now a fully fledged trader in the city and loves every minute of it.
Forgive me if I sound boastful,but I cant deny that I am very proud of her,and the fact is that if she can do it from humble beginnings,then with the right attitude and hard work ,so could others.
you have to want it badly enough and work hard enough, and not think that the country owes you a living/computer/degree etc;
btw-In my 20,s I was a devout socialist.tgwu shop steward,thought Neil Kinnock was going to be a great prime minister.
someone once said -he who has not been a socialist before he is 40 has no heart.
he who is still a socialist after he is 40,has no head.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

My tuppence worth on the education debate.the pinky/lefty/socialist elite who run education (and most other things)in this country,have for years refused to accept that not all children have the same acedemic ability. so they are all taught the same things in large groups .this results in the more naturally academic pupils losing out terribly. The less academically able do at times recieve help (special needs) to try to bring them up to the level of the average,but the more able are ignored (why cant they have tuiton for their special needs)so they often fall to the level of the average.they are effectively dumbed down.
This of course fills the socialist idea of utopia. i.e.-everyone is the same.
here in Essex we are fortunate that we still have a few Grammar schools and I would like to see them re-introduced across the nation.
they could be called speciaal needs colleges for the more academicaly inclined if need be. we could also have similar colleges for more practically inclined pupils, but we would be educating children according to their talents rather than a leftist political dogma.
both of my children passed the 11 plus ,the first one in the last year of the old corruption ridden system ,and the second in the first year of the new fairer system.
Despite the fact that their dad was a concrete shoveller,they both had the opportunity to go to uni , but neither of them wanted to go.
my daughter in particular said it was a waste of time as degrees arent worth much more than the paper they are written on these days,as the socialists are well on the way to doing to the worlds greatest universities what they have done to the countries schools.
She decided thar she wanted to be a city trader and that she would do it by dogged determination and sheer hard graft.
she got a back office job with Bank of America in Bromley and had to travel on god knows how many trains ,there and back,getting up at 4.50 a.m. and often getting home at 10.30p.m.
She is now a fully fledged trader in the city and loves every minute of it.
Forgive me if I sound boastful,but I cant deny that I am very proud of her,and the fact is that if she can do it from humble beginnings,then with the right attitude and hard work ,so could others.
you have to want it badly enough and work hard enough, and not think that the country owes you a living/computer/degree etc;
btw-In my 20,s I was a devout socialist.tgwu shop steward,thought Neil Kinnock was going to be a great prime minister.
someone once said -he who has not been a socialist before he is 40 has no heart.
he who is still a socialist after he is 40,has no head.

Hell of a lot of common sense there Albitz, which is always a good base for debate in my humble opinion!

However, the basis of my argument is that we still need a true meritocracy within our education system, so that all children have a level playing field of opportunity, with equal resources available to them from the age of five years.

This does not mean an absolute desire to obtain paper qualifications and eventually degrees; no, this does NOT fit all children and all the comment on many needing practical training is absolutely correct in my humble opinion.

It is that just too many children never reach their full potential due to their social circumstances, which we should always attempt to address.  Yes, this is a utopian aim, but like all others that would make our society better is it not worth aiming for?

Remember many Victorians had the then 'utopian' aims of free, compulsary, education for all children, that only commenced with Foster's Education Act of 1870 to make available elementary education to all children, then the 1880 Act made it compulsary for all children to receive free education up to the age of 10, the 1902 Education Act abolished the old school boards and replaced them with LEA's to orginise better funding, and at last the 1918 Education Act finally made it compulsary for children up to the age of 14 to receive full, free, education.

So some form of 'utopia' does take a long time to transpire, and indeed it was not until the 1944 Butler Education Act that created the tripartite system did the teaching finally start to meet the needs of the country's children and begin to help them reach their full potential.

However it is, in my opinion only of course, that it still has a long way to go in the manner I originally touched upon.

[Marks DTM Calib]

I am not in total agreement here as its quite clear that very little is needed for children of a younger age other than time and commitment from a caring family in order to bring them on.

Sadly, if the family is not willing to commit to bring in money for the family group, what chance is there of them commiting the time to the children.

[cem_devecioglu]

I am not in total agreement here as its quite clear that very little is needed for children of a younger age other than time and commitment from a caring family in order to bring them on.

Sadly, if the family is not willing to commit to bring in money for the family group, what chance is there of them commiting the time to the children.

True..