Jump to content

Students revolting again - France? No UK


just john
 Share

Recommended Posts

No degree for me, no possbility even, I had to work from the age of 15 to pay for my lodgings.

I worked 40 hours per week including Saturdays to be able to be able to do day release and evening classes, I did this for 8 years until the age of 24.

Two years into my apprenticeship the company offered me a scholarship to put me through university but without the financial and moral support of parents let alone having somewhere to stay during the holidays when I would have worked in the factory thee was no way that I could have taken up the opportunity of a lifetime.

I had never even met any graduates until I was 24 and working as a design draughtsman for the same company, they were the new intake of young professionals who were being fast tracked into management positions, I was amazed to learn what they were able to have done during their university years, most had travelled the world, some had crewed on yachts, all had been ski-ing etc etc, and I was still struggling to pay rent on a bedsit working every evening and weekends as a mechanic/welder and had never had a holiday.

It does seem automatic hese days to expect a university education regardless of academic ability, I watched my neighbours both work two jobs to put their boys through education, they ended up paying the deposit and rent for a flat for the first son to live together with his girlfriend (another student at the same uni) at an age when he really wasnt mature enough, when they finished uni they moved in as a couple with his parents against their wishes, neither could initially find a job and of course had run up large debts in excess of their student loans.

Then came the coup de grace, they both informed their parents that they wanted them to pay for them to have a gap year and travel the world like all their friends were doing grace à their parents, it was a formative moment in the future of the boy next door, for the first time his parents said no, they were after all struggling to put his younger brother through uni, the older brother found a job with the inland revenue, has risen through the ranks like a meteor and now is a supertax inspector, just to keep his hand in he also advises me [;-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote user="Mr Coeur de Lion"]What I don't understand is that people are saying it will affect the poor. Why? The loans don't have to paid back until the student is working and earning sufficient money to pay back the loan. While I disagree with the rises (I think there's a better way of doing it), it doesn't change anything up front as far as I can tell.[/quote]

It depends how you look at it I suppose. A student loan is towards the fees of a student but they need more money than just the loan so their parents fund them. If the fees go up then the shortfall will have to be found somewhere, will the student loans increase to make up the difference, probably not so my guess is it will be the parents. Where as the parents could just about fund their children with the current fees raising them may mean they can not afford the extra money.

As to the value of a degree well like anything in live its supply and demand, we now have a massive supply but little demand. To put it bluntly if you advertise a job that will require a degree you will have thousands of applicants. Some argue that this over supply has somewhat devalued degrees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have very little if any sympathy for the plight of university students. Their case is weak and unsustainable.

 

I have no problem with the use of violence by people in extreme circumstance such as the establishment of a Republic, Democracy (real not the current pretence) and bringing to account war mongers.

 

The anti Iraq war rally should have ended in my opinion with Blair and his allies hanging ala Mussolini.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the moment they will need to earn GBP21K before they can start paying back. As my daughter says, Daddy (she calls me Daddy...or Papa sometime.....) you did not pay for my studies for me to earn less that 21k when i start working..it is still nevertheless a life long loan (that will yearly go up by the cost of living) those kids will be burdenned with and something those A** H*** in charge of the country don't have to pay as for them it was still free.

- Let charge through the nose for foreign students to attend UK Unis

- Stop paying Millions to Scotland as part of that silly whatever his name graph (Scottish kids attend their Uni free and EU Nationals too but British born kids as in our eldest daughter's case the one at LSE had to pay 1.8k / year to go to Edinburgh ),

- Look at reducing the number of Nuclear submarines (or share those of the French Navy)

- Put some order in the NHS

- Avoid bureaucratic wastage at government level

...and we might find ourselves with sufficient cash to pay those fees and allow our kids free University placements.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On today of all days, I find it quite deplorable to read PPP's comment descibing what I presume to be his actions as; "Heroic & memorable times in London."

I wonder if the 'brave' individual featured on yesterday's news, dropping a fire extinguisher off the roof in the direction of the police, also considered his actions to 'heroic'.

Just a thought!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with all of the cost cutting measures that you mentioned and much more. Assuming that we ever get back to some financial stability then I think that an on demand three or four year university placement fully paid for out of taxation remains a weak and questionable use of public resources

It is a career option and as such the decision as to whether to attend should be made on all available information by the individual and their family. I do not see why the much maligned shelf stacker (or anyone else) should be paying tax to subsidise those in further education.

On a practical level I also think that the current structure is archaic and in desperate need of reform. During my career dozens of my teams have achieved degrees on day release while holding down their full time job. Overall my experience is that these part timers are more useful and progress more quickly than our graduate intake

I do not buy the loss of formative year’s contact and interaction development argument. If you want the social aspect pay for it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Salty Sam"]

On today of all days, I find it quite deplorable to read PPP's comment descibing what I presume to be his actions as; "Heroic & memorable times in London."

I wonder if the 'brave' individual featured on yesterday's news, dropping a fire extinguisher off the roof in the direction of the police, also considered his actions to 'heroic'.

Just a thought!

[/quote]

No sense of direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few points.

Universities and Academic Standards:

Thatcher's government thought up the clever wheeze to massage youth unemployment by opening up hosts of previous technical colleges and the like to degree standard for HFE. They were called Polytech Universities.

In order to accommodate the vast numbers of new undergrads, new subjects were dreamed up: many having little relationship with the real world outside the groves of aspiring academe. I saw aspiring, since the "lecturers" were mainly ex-tech college teachers with delusions of grandeur: and increased salaries 'cos they were thereafter "Lecturers".

Since then the game has expanded: in order to ensure a continuum of this game, foreign students, recruited on the "Bums on Seats" basis were sought from all over the globe. Since they were fee-paying.

To make the game worthwhile, as with GCSE, standards had to be downgraded: otherwise too few would "pass" and the scam would be revealed.

The net result was to drive down standards of both universities and degrees: unless the degrees were honestly awarded by upper echelon real universities.

Additionally, the whole charade became a social game: "My young Chardonnay is going to Uni!"

Today, students don't "Read" a major; they are "Doing" it.

Bottom line: the gap between subjects and their applicability to the real world outside academe has never ever been wider.

If one is fortunate enough to be born to wealthy parents then one has, by chance of birth the facility to study whatever worthless subject one so chooses: and parental connections will inevitably root out some sinecure in media, a  museum or as a politician in waiting.

As an ex University External Moderator and Examiner (BSchool, mainly at MBA level), I saw far too many foreign students being feather-bedded, since their grasp of English was far too poor to follow an MBA course. Fee culture again.

Abusing education as a political weapon and for social engineering and worse, to massage unemployment stats are all responsible for this utter mess.

I spent considerable time trying to build bridges between academe and business, to try and galvanise the two groups to work together and set an agenda to ensure graduates would be qualified in something which stood a good chance of finding them a job, post graduation.

Wasted cause.

Personally, I would like to see the old concept of Sandwich Courses re-established, where a would be grad must first secure corporate sponsorship for a work-specific subject and the employer defraying a large part of the costs of study on the clear agreement they hold the grad captive for a minimum work period.

I have met many grads in the USA who ALL worked full-time, to pay their own college fees: and then went on to take a Masters and then a PhD. NO gap years and playing silly asses in the pub: they were too busy working and studying.

Way it should be.

When one evaluates China, India and even Pakistan, one sees hordes of computer scientists, electronics engineers, mathematicians and etc, graduating each and every year.

Tell you something?

The arts and humanities are fine: if one can afford it.

It is not, if they want me to afford it!

The Riot:

Unfortunately the same interconnected group of Trots are involved with this and the G20 riots and many others.

If one takes the time to examine the members and organisers of UAF and various other apparently altruistic organisations associated with it, then the same rather unpleasant and dubious subversive characters emerge, time after time.

Most worrying of all, NuLab and many far left politicians were and are involved.

In the same way that ladies of rather dubious reputation seem to describe themselves as "Models" and "Actors" (used to be actresses, in more correct days of grammar), there are many members of Rent-A-Thug describing themselves as "Students"

Rather ironic that Call Me Dave was a founding signatory of UAF!

He who sups with the Devil perforce must use a long spoon!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Braco says:

On a practical level I also think that the current structure is archaic and in desperate need of reform. During my career dozens of my teams have achieved degrees on day release while holding down their full time job. Overall my experience is that these part timers are more useful and progress more quickly that our graduate intake.

Braco, you must have been talking to my OH!  Every time the subject of higher and university education comes up, this is exactly what he tells me.

Certainly with a lot of careers with a practical element, I am sure you are spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has gone wild and i cant be bothered to read it all HOWEVER with regards to the student revolt i have a few points to make (sorry if they have already been made):

As a student at LSE myself, the fee increase is a joke. For those students whose parents earn a minimal amount (remembering all those students from high school whose parents combined had to earn less than £30,000 to get the grant and there were a lot) the thought of their child leaving education with a minimum £27,000 debt is ridiculous, it is a psychological issue which anyone who earns little can agree with

Secondly, the poor may be affected little (grants etc but then again these are limited), the 'rich' can afford education (university is most likely a relief to parents who paid £25,000 a year for boarding school education) however those that are affected are the middle class whose parents earn a modest income and although may, at a push, be able to afford fees, will do so at much personal expense.

Finally, those who stormed the Millbank buildings seem to be those caught in the midst of the most political activity they will have ever seen in their academic careers. most never had any political activist experience, most joined in 'for the crack', none were 'uneducated, showing the decline in academia'. For a start, some of those students were from LSE and i doubt you can generalise those students as being 'uneducated'.

My point is that in a 'democracy' such as the UK everyone should have the right to further education and by increasing fees we are massively cutting out a huge skilled labour force that could contribute to the economy. This is both immoral and 'un-economically sound'.

Anyone who claims they have a degree pre-top up fees has little contribution as they never had to deal with the economic burden that comes with a university degree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="pachapapa"][quote user="Salty Sam"]

On today of all days, I find it quite deplorable to read PPP's comment descibing what I presume to be his actions as; "Heroic & memorable times in London."

I wonder if the 'brave' individual featured on yesterday's news, dropping a fire extinguisher off the roof in the direction of the police, also considered his actions to 'heroic'.

Just a thought!

[/quote]

No sense of direction.

[/quote]

Needs a GPS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Nad"]This thread has gone wild and i cant be bothered to read it all HOWEVER with regards to the student revolt i have a few points to make (sorry if they have already been made): As a student at LSE myself, the fee increase is a joke. For those students whose parents earn a minimal amount (remembering all those students from high school whose parents combined had to earn less than £30,000 to get the grant and there were a lot) the thought of their child leaving education with a minimum £27,000 debt is ridiculous, it is a psychological issue which anyone who earns little can agree with Secondly, the poor may be affected little (grants etc but then again these are limited), the 'rich' can afford education (university is most likely a relief to parents who paid £25,000 a year for boarding school education) however those that are affected are the middle class whose parents earn a modest income and although may, at a push, be able to afford fees, will do so at much personal expense. Finally, those who stormed the Millbank buildings seem to be those caught in the midst of the most political activity they will have ever seen in their academic careers. most never had any political activist experience, most joined in 'for the crack', none were 'uneducated, showing the decline in academia'. For a start, some of those students were from LSE and i doubt you can generalise those students as being 'uneducated'. My point is that in a 'democracy' such as the UK everyone should have the right to further education and by increasing fees we are massively cutting out a huge skilled labour force that could contribute to the economy. This is both immoral and 'un-economically sound'. Anyone who claims they have a degree pre-top up fees has little contribution as they never had to deal with the economic burden that comes with a university degree.[/quote]

If they did come from the LSE and inflicted the kind of damage I have seen, then they should be caught, tried and sentenced and also removed from their faculty. However, many of the worst were NOT students but professional troublemakers who come out on every occasion that they can cause damage.

You are right that the funding of HE is a big problem, but the taxpayer cannot go on paying the bills ad nauseam; the solution is NOT a one size fits scheme but for a very wide range of long term savings schemes for parents, tax rebates, sponsorship, part-time courses, grants and scholarships for the bright and relevant two and three year courses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woolybanana wrote, ''You are right that the funding of HE is a big problem, but the taxpayer cannot go on paying the bills ad nauseam; the solution is NOT a one size fits scheme but for a very wide range of long term savings schemes for parents, tax rebates, sponsorship, part-time courses, grants and scholarships for the bright and relevant two and three year courses.''

That is absolutely what is needed. We who received our HE with all fees paid need to be pushing for that to happen. I objected very strongly when those in that position in the Labour government went along with a fee structure without ensuring that others like them could hope to afford HE. I would never have gone on to college with the thought of huge debt ahead of me.

It seems as though the poor might be OK, the wealthy will continue so, and those in the middle will either give up hope of HE or end up deeply in debt. For them the Open University might be a good route to take a little later in life. But I fear they have been led to believe in a university education as a right. Many would be better off training to become plumbers, plasterers etc; good ones are very hard to find in many countries.  I have one son who went to university and has a maths degree; he chose to work for a charity, and isn't well paid at all. The other didn't want any more studying at the age of 18; he started working and has enjoyed more years of reasonably paid employment. Both are content with what they have. The one who didn't want to study further has done various evening courses and has recently embarked on learning Chinese, which seems worse than double Dutch to me!  [:)]

 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the sentiment that education is a right, let's not forget that it's a privelege as well, but not free, it costs the taxpayer.
For those who expect to earn big bucks as a result, surely will expect to pay for the tools of their trade?
if not well perhaps they should join a company that sponsors graduates, selected on the basis of appropriate academic achievement?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fascinating thread this.

40 years ago this year, my sister and  group of fellow students including Jon Snow (now a well-known journalist) and 40 or so others, occupied the senate builing at Liverpool University in opposition to apartheid in South Africa and its support by the university's then chancellor, Lord Salisbury.  

The students (my sister sadly not amongst them as she is now dead) held a reunion this year and there were several reports in the papers on this, plus a few papers written about the occupation, from various political standpoints.  10 of the students were sent down for varying lengths of time, some for a year, some for two or three and one indefinately.  Now, of course, everybody agrees that their cause was just, but it is still interesting to note that the same arguments for and against their action were put forward then, as are being discussed here, today, about the current student action. 

Even then it was being said that a number of the demonstrators weren't sincere, but were Trotskyite agitators using students who had a genuine opposition to the horrors of apartheid, to promote their own "dastardly" causes and aims.  I knew many of these people, and stayed with them in Liverpool both before and after the occupation and indeed some were raging Trots, but all were genuinely opposed to the South African regime,  although their policitcal affiliations did vary somewhat.

Although I believe that few thoughtful people would condone violence against people and dumb animals, I find it hard to condemn anybody who stands up for what they believe in.  In fact I find it admirable.

Re the LSE: Tony, were you there during the troubles the Economists' bookshop?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I believe that few thoughtful people would condone violence

against people and dumb animals, I find it hard to condemn anybody who

stands up for what they believe in.  In fact I find it admirable.

 But it only takes one to 'go to far' and it sullies the rest, and the guy who threw a fire extinguisher from the roof definitely overstepped the mark

 
Actually I think its open to question whether the two demo's are comparable, this raft of students want the country (ie us) to pay for their education, which in an ideal world would be great, but along with a whole lot of other things, the country cannot afford it.

 Why should students be exempt ? ( And I speak as the mother of a daughter with a student loan still paying after 6 years)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could not agree more, JE about standing up and being counted for a cause one truly believes in: makes even more difference if and when the cause is just and worthwhile.

Unfortunately, students always tend towards the left wing: we all, when young are arrogant enough to believe we have the solutions to all the World's ills and problems and such arrogance clouds the mind to enable holistic understanding of the true parameters and full ramifications.

it is all, hopefully a rich part of one's development and learning curve.

20th cent. social and political history shows us, unfortunately, just how certain extremist views so captivated the young and warped their perspective: consider the examples of such as Blunt, Philby, McClean et al.

Eric Arthur Blair, otherwise George Orwell, was a committed communist from a middle class background: public school and university.

With hands on experience (Spanish Civil War - he underwent a Damascene conversion: hence Animal Farm, 1984, etc.

There is proof beyond doubt, that genuine student demonstrators and many other groups of demonstrators have been infiltrated by a Fifth Column: there is even evidence that the Metropolitan Police have infiltrated various pressure and protest groups - as one would expect in intelligence gathering operations - however not for intel purposes but to strengthen government's case for greater police powers and less citizen's rights. They have been caught on camera acting as rioters and damaging property etc.

As so often, all is not as it might seem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, Animal Farm, although anti-communist and anti-totalitarianism, is hardly right wing either.  I am a great admirer of Orwell's (his essays and letters are fascinating) - not least his defense of the English language!  I would hardly call his reaction to his experiences in the Spanish Civil War as Damiscene, but he certainly reacted strongly against totalitarianism and extreme politics of both kinds.  Quite right too, imho.

If somebody damages property, then make them pay for and carry out the repairs.  If they harm people, then prosecute them for that.

Just because small numbers overstep the mark, it is no reason for gagging all the rest.  Deal with offenders acccording to the law - leave the others alone. Sadly, it is the kind of police tactics which you describe which leave me mistrustful of a service which is generally staffed by decent honest people.  But that is the way of things and something about which I know quite a lot, as it has affected members of my close family very deeply.

Funny, Gluey, my mother always told me that I would get over my leftie tendacies when I got older.  I'm happy to say that in fact I take after my father and the opposite has happened![:D]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...