Print

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

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

When I was a lad, the clever ones went to grammar schools and the others went to comprehensives. The clever ones got the best jobs and the others went on to do manual work in factories and the like. It's the natural order of things.
This system didn't debar people who failed at eleven from going on to great things. Nor did it mean that all who went to university were successful. Different people mature, intellectually, at different times and, if you are a go-getter, you will succeed no matter what.
When I look at a lot of young people who go to university these days, I wonder wtf has gone wrong. They are just not university material and have only gone there because 'it's everybody's right'.

And also because a certain Mr Blair wanted everyone to go to university in order to get the unemployment figures down. The result is that today you need a degree in anything in order to get a job doing anything. This means that just having a degrees is almost meaningless, you need a relevant degree from a "good" uni not a polytechnic "newer" university.

Both my kids went to Uni in the Blair years. Cost me an absolute fortune. Both got degrees, neither are using those degrees in what they now do. However, there is no doubt that "going to Uni"  is a great life experience and get them out of home 

And. I completely agree with STEMO and the "order of things".

When I left school the take up rate for university was about 4%.

Today the figure is closer to 50% .....which means that everybody including the cat's mother goes to 'Uni' these days.

In my opinion a University education has been devalued.

[amazonian]

When I was a lad, the clever ones went to grammar schools and the others went to comprehensives. The clever ones got the best jobs and the others went on to do manual work in factories and the like. It's the natural order of things.
This system didn't debar people who failed at eleven from going on to great things. Nor did it mean that all who went to university were successful. Different people mature, intellectually, at different times and, if you are a go-getter, you will succeed no matter what.
When I look at a lot of young people who go to university these days, I wonder wtf has gone wrong. They are just not university material and have only gone there because 'it's everybody's right'.

Stemo hits the nail on the head with the above,  I went to grammar school myself, coming from a very poor family it gave me a chance to llearn a bit more than I would have done in the 'normal' school.

 

[TD]

When I was a lad, the clever ones went to grammar schools and the others went to comprehensives. The clever ones got the best jobs and the others went on to do manual work in factories and the like. It's the natural order of things.
This system didn't debar people who failed at eleven from going on to great things. Nor did it mean that all who went to university were successful. Different people mature, intellectually, at different times and, if you are a go-getter, you will succeed no matter what.
When I look at a lot of young people who go to university these days, I wonder wtf has gone wrong. They are just not university material and have only gone there because 'it's everybody's right'.

And also because a certain Mr Blair wanted everyone to go to university in order to get the unemployment figures down. The result is that today you need a degree in anything in order to get a job doing anything. This means that just having a degrees is almost meaningless, you need a relevant degree from a "good" uni not a polytechnic "newer" university.

Both my kids went to Uni in the Blair years. Cost me an absolute fortune. Both got degrees, neither are using those degrees in what they now do. However, there is no doubt that "going to Uni"  is a great life experience and get them out of home 

And. I completely agree with STEMO and the "order of things".

When I left school the take up rate for university was about 4%.

Today the figure is closer to 50% .....which means that everybody including the cat's mother goes to 'Uni' these days.

In my opinion a University education has been devalued.

nobody has mentioned cost of going to university...

My bothers oldest son is about to finish university....and will leave with about 40k of debt around his neck
His youngest is about to start and will leave with about 60k of debt....

Gone are the days off free university .....

[Mister Rog]

Universities are big business, VERY big business, dependant upon cash from students, student loans, parents, and overseas students.

My son was accepted immediately and without any conditions or grade requirements etc at Edinburgh. Why ? Scottish students don't pay, he was from London so he would be paying. He didn't go. My daughter got almost pestered by Coventry to go there. Why ? 'cos nobody else wanted to go there and they needed the money. She didn't go.

Most of the whole university circus is now more about money than producing those special people for the future.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Grammars were almost completely abolished by small minded, left wing political dogma.
In my view it was one of the most criminal acts, politicians have commited in the last century.
They were convinced it was elitist and went against the grain that we are all the same and should have the same treatment.
This Socialist dogma always results in the same thing. Everyone is equally poor - poor in knowledge, finance, personal freedom. You name it.
Social mobility in this country has almost stood still since the attack on Grammar schools.
Previously, academically bright kids from ordinary backgrounds could work hard and use them as a springboard to give them selves a better future.
We were fortunate to live in one of the few areas where a few Grammars have survived for some reason.
We had no money for tutors, I was a forklift driver at the time,but it was obvious that our kids were bright, so their mother bought all the relevant material and taught herself it, and then taught it to the kids. They both passed their 11 plus and went to Grammar school.
The eldest (daughter) was a bit of a rebel and didn't want to go to university, and instead started right at the bottom in banking and grafted incredibly hard until she worked her way up onto the trading floor. She changes employers as often as I change my socks, but earns a 6 figure salary and is more or less set up for life.
The son, also a bit of a rebel in a different way,was determined for a long time to make his way in life without a degree, or working for anyone else but himself. A few lessons have been learned along the way and a recent change of heart means that he has been unconditionally accepted to take a degree in his chosen subject, starting next month.
If it weren't for the good fortune of living in an area with Grammars, they would both have been taught in a system which concentrates on those with less academic ability and bringing them up to the average, while allowing the bright ones to get bored, lack stimulation, lose interest and often drop down to the average. All for the sake of political dogma.
Life isn't equal. We aren't all the same. Adult life is competitive. Children cant be immune from all of this until they are 18, and then be thrown in at the deep end.
It isn't about elitism, or one child being better than another. Its about teaching them appropriately for their needs.
Everyone can excel at something, and the education system should recognise what that something is, as early as possible in a childs life and help them to grow in that direction. Whether it is academia, sport, practical aptitude - whatever it is.
Sorry for the long winded rant, but Im passionate about this.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

I fear though, that the hundreds of unelected, gravy train travellers in the House of Lords, will kill it before it gets off the ground. 

[Bigron]

migv6, you have produced the perfect summary of the situation. I went to a Grammar school in East London (Coopers, if there are any Londoners reading) and the teaching was excellent and geared to University entry - we even had to learn latin, since back then it was a requirement. Not essential for life, of course, but a hoop to go through to prove worthiness.
Standards have certainly dropped throughout the edication system and has as its imperitive the saving of costs and gaining income from "bums on seats".
This priority held good for my employment as a Lecturer at a College: my colleagues and I despaired at the things that we were forced to do by management in the interests of cost-cutting and getting the maximum number of students to pass final exams for the least teaching time.
"Teaching to the Exam" was a way of life. Most unsatisfactory.
I could join you an a major, full-blown rant over a pint or three sometime, but I'll shut up now!

Ron.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Well  Ron, Im currently about 2 miles away from you, so if you start shouting I will probably hear you. 

[Bigron]

Hello!

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Yep. It echoed through the trees up Spring lane and I just about heard you. 

[Bigron]

Can you really be as daft as I am?

Ron.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Probably moreso. 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

If your still ranting Ron, I cant hear you. You must be facing the wrong direction now, and the noise is disappearing along Newland street and out onto the A12. 

[Bigron]

No, I went to shout at the telly instead - and help a recorded Columbo solve a murder! 

Ron.

[TheBoy]

I think that selective education was, and remains, a good idea.  The idealisms of non selective clearly are utter 'dangle berries', as its the clever ones getting dragged down to lowest common denominator, rather than the slower learners getting dragged up to a higher level. Every child should have the most suitable education for them. Some kids thrive on academic work, others might be better at more practical tasks.

I should point out, I was lucky enough to go to a Grammar school. Aylesbury Grammar School. I possibly didn't deserve to go as I'm wasn't particularly bright, but the 12+ (year later in Bucks) was basically solving logic problems,  which is what I'm good at.


I'm not sure Aylesbury Grammar was the best place for me, as although I was good at the science type stuff, the arts were difficult, particularly languages.  The headmaster, Mr Smith, was an arse (little things like purposely slamming doors in your face), and once it became apparent I had no interest in going to Oxbridge, I was virtually given up on.

I was bullied a fair bit (and not just by pupils), which my defence mechanism was to retaliate, which meant I was always up before one of the deputy heads, Mr Roe (the hardnut) in particular, on at least a weekly basis.

I could of got good O and A Level results, but I was already finished with the system by then.  I only stayed on to A levels because Mum insisted, and there were no jobs at the time.

On my very first day I got a detention within minutes as Mum hadn't had chance to sew on the school badge to my (2nd hand) blazer.  Also, as a naïve 11yr old, I also went for a piss, and saw a new starter and an older boy leave the same cubicle. The new boy was crying and didn't look happy. I never went for another piss at that school again.  Even now, I don't go often, possibly being one of the causes of my gout.


So, when I say its important that kids go to the "right" school, its not just a case of going to the academically best school. They need to be able to fit in, and grow at this important age. Just like Uni v apprenticeship, Grammar v Comp shouldn't be classed as success or failure.