Wildcat Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 You are looking at data from over 30 years ago as if it's relevant today. The reason will be parental support, middle class families (and higher) value education, lower class ones don't and they don't encourage or support their children (as a broad generalisation, there are many that break that mould). Grants don't solve it, the poor would still not encourage their children to achieve academically. Cost is not a limiting factor (it's less that today than it was 30 years ago), today ambition and attitude are the limiting factors, and the government can't wave a wand and fix that. The data is from a few years ago. The dates are the birth dates of people. You have completely missed the point. Over a period where access to Higher education has tripled and increased by 40% for poorer families access to higher education has just gone up by 3%. Our Social mobility has gine down to the same levels as the USA, and unlike them, our trend is downwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 Your donation could help a budding scientist to discover cures for a disease, Then sod off to America! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 Wow, I know there's the possibility that you're all joking but I couldn't help feeling (especially in Fareasts 2nd post) that there's some bitter attitudes towards students...and judging by a lot of comments they're ignorant and stereotypical. Thanks. Shut up and get a part time job you scrounging tit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 The data is from a few years ago. The dates are the birth dates of people. You have completely missed the point. Over a period where access to Higher education has tripled and increased by 40% for poorer families access to higher education has just gone up by 3%. Our Social mobility has gine down to the same levels as the USA, and unlike them, our trend is downwards. No, he's got the point spot on. There was a report out recently saying that the most underachieving group in our schools was white boys from poor areas. As it has been since the year dot. This is cultural and in part, self-defining - their parents and their communities don't believe in education, overwhelming numbers leave school at 16 with no qualifications because they have no interest in staying on. All that's happened with opening out higher education to more is that there's a benefit for thick middle class kids to slog their way through A levels, squeeze into somewhere on 60 points and get a third pretty much for turning up to lectures. If you made higher education completely free, there is no reason to expect those same 15/16 year-olds from poorer areas to change their decision in any great numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 1. You seem to think students are abundant with money. I'd like to know where this has come from? 2. I go to the pub rarely because of lack of money. I eat fresh food - not takeaway etc. 3. Have you ever though students get degrees because they enjoy learning etc. Not just for jobs? 4. A long christmas holiday? Yeh I suppose you're right I get 2 weeks off. Problem is, in that time I've got 4 essays to write composing of 11000 words, to afford living costs for next year I have to work full time too. Sounds great. Just because you see a few students in the pub over lunchtime out of the many thousands that attend uni doesn't mean everyone goes there. I'd love to. This was meant as a bit of a joke thread, but it's nice to see the bad and unjust opinions people have on students. You get a least 4 weeks off over Christmas and if you have any other work to do appart from revision for end of semester tests then you've left it to the last minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 This was meant as a bit of a joke thread, but it's nice to see the bad and unjust opinions people have on students. The replys were in keeping with the context of your OP (i.e. having a laugh and a bit of a wind up). If you can't take it, don't give it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 I just guessed that while people are willing to pay the benefits for scroungers who sit on their bum all day doing nothing, they might want to think about people who actually need money. We are not willing to, we are forced to! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrNM Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 You really have a vain opinion dont you?? you generally believe that because another forumers opinion is the same as yours its not right maybe if you had a little more understanding of what a opinion is you wouldnt be so grumpy its not stupidty its a opinion its pure stupidity for you to believe its wrong because you dont share that opinion what do they teach you at uni? how to get drunk and scoff fast food?? Mate, why do you quote back to front (i.e. type above the post your quoting). Given the extra effort it must take it's non sensical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hallamton Posted December 16, 2008 Author Share Posted December 16, 2008 4 weeks off over Christmas? I get 2 weeks and 3 days, in which I have to work. In that time I've got 11k words to write. This hasn't been an ongoing piece of work, since before then my previous hand-in dates were early december. I'm all for joke posts in return...if they were jokes, which they weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted December 16, 2008 Share Posted December 16, 2008 No, he's got the point spot on. There was a report out recently saying that the most underachieving group in our schools was white boys from poor areas. As it has been since the year dot. This is cultural and in part, self-defining - their parents and their communities don't believe in education, overwhelming numbers leave school at 16 with no qualifications because they have no interest in staying on. All that's happened with opening out higher education to more is that there's a benefit for thick middle class kids to slog their way through A levels, squeeze into somewhere on 60 points and get a third pretty much for turning up to lectures. If you made higher education completely free, there is no reason to expect those same 15/16 year-olds from poorer areas to change their decision in any great numbers. The fact that over the period the educational achievement of low income children in further education has increased more than that of other groups, increasing 3 fold. Suggests otherwise and that their barriers to higher education is related to their poverty not ability. Without subsidies we cannot and do not have a meritocracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.