Hmmm... Gonna give this issue a bit of thought before committing much more than this to ASCII, however I often find it useful to think about the fact that it's a lot cheaper when only the intellectual top 5% of the population go to uni, than when the top 50% squeeze in. Money/wealth shouldn't really come into it.
But I'll give this a bit more thought and consideration before debating this any further I think :)
how you're supposed to be able to spot the best students in the current system is beyond me. an A right now just identifies a conscientious student, not necessarily a talented one.
i'd much rather see students get two 'grades' for each exam course do - one which shows what percentile they finished in out of all of the people nationally taking the course and the other showing their percentile within their peer group.
i've had an argument with mike about this on facebook but personally i'd be more impressed by a kid who finished in the top 10% but went to a school where on average their students didn't make it into the top 40% than one where everyone finished in that kind of position!
sure, student numbers should drop, but you shouldn't only be able to go because your parents are well off! can't really see the tories introducing means tested fees though.
Saw a programme on the Open University not long ago. They do teach Chemistry correspondence courses. They send you a kit with all the glassware and substances you need. Think a cost a bit more but not prohibitively expensive.
The current infrastructure can't take the huge number of pupils passing A levels. This seems like a way to meet demand to me. And it seems all the more urgent given the levels of youth unemployment.
i just don't want to see a two tier education system being brought back in where only the children of the rich get the chance of the best education - and that's what i fear this will do!
even if the fees don't shoot up there will still be the stigma where only the oldest child in a family gets to go to uni whilst all of his close siblings have to study at home*
it just doesn't seem fair to me - if everyone has to go into higher education the split should be purely on ability - not wealth!
* although i guess it's better than it is now where some kids can't go at all because their parents can't afford to support two or more kids away from home!
Comments 5
But I'll give this a bit more thought and consideration before debating this any further I think :)
Reply
i'd much rather see students get two 'grades' for each exam course do - one which shows what percentile they finished in out of all of the people nationally taking the course and the other showing their percentile within their peer group.
i've had an argument with mike about this on facebook but personally i'd be more impressed by a kid who finished in the top 10% but went to a school where on average their students didn't make it into the top 40% than one where everyone finished in that kind of position!
sure, student numbers should drop, but you shouldn't only be able to go because your parents are well off! can't really see the tories introducing means tested fees though.
Reply
Reply
The current infrastructure can't take the huge number of pupils passing A levels. This seems like a way to meet demand to me. And it seems all the more urgent given the levels of youth unemployment.
Reply
even if the fees don't shoot up there will still be the stigma where only the oldest child in a family gets to go to uni whilst all of his close siblings have to study at home*
it just doesn't seem fair to me - if everyone has to go into higher education the split should be purely on ability - not wealth!
* although i guess it's better than it is now where some kids can't go at all because their parents can't afford to support two or more kids away from home!
Reply
Leave a comment