People like Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes continue to show they just don't "get it". They keep going on about these measures that only a few, top universities will be able to charge the maximum £9000 - but if anything, that's just going to make things worse. Having effectively a two-tier university system is going to be disastrous for social mobility. If you have a kid who's top of the class in a comprehensive school but from a poor background, and they get an offer from a Redbrick charging £9000, and an offer from a Metropolitan charging £5000, they're going to take the Metropolitan. In the circumstances we're in now, I'd actually prefer it if all unis across the board charged £9000 (although it would've been even better if the government hadn't chosen to cut teaching grants by 80%, thus requiring tuition fees to rise, in the first place).

People like Nick Clegg and Simon Hughes continue to show they just don't "get it". They keep going on about these measures that only a few, top universities will be able to charge the maximum £9000 - but if anything, that's just going to make things worse. Having effectively a two-tier university system is going to be disastrous for social mobility. If you have a kid who's top of the class in a comprehensive school but from a poor background, and they get an offer from a Redbrick charging £9000, and an offer from a Metropolitan charging £5000, they're going to take the Metropolitan. In the circumstances we're in now, I'd actually prefer it if all unis across the board charged £9000 (although it would've been even better if the government hadn't chosen to cut teaching grants by 80%, thus requiring tuition fees to rise, in the first place).

 

Hmm I'm not so sure...I don't think a lot of people will think like that. It's all about guidance at college/sixth form I think. Sixth forms are much better at dealing with guidance and helping people make good University choices compared to sixth forms though. If it was going to cost me £9000 to study History at Oxbridge, and £5000 to study history at Leeds Met, and chose Leeds Met over Oxfbridge then I'd have no right in going to University in the first case - it's a common sense choice! Surely people from worse off backgrounds will be able to see the bigger picture for the future?

Hmm I'm not so sure...I don't think a lot of people will think like that. It's all about guidance at college/sixth form I think. Sixth forms are much better at dealing with guidance and helping people make good University choices compared to sixth forms though. If it was going to cost me £9000 to study History at Oxbridge, and £5000 to study history at Leeds Met, and chose Leeds Met over Oxfbridge then I'd have no right in going to University in the first case - it's a common sense choice! Surely people from worse off backgrounds will be able to see the bigger picture for the future?

 

Problem is, most students aren't going to look at details of repayment schemes when they're applying to university - they're going to see the headline figure of £9000 a year and be put off. It's just too much of a psychological barrier for people who've grown up seeing their parents literally only have about £30 to buy food for the week. And society generally conditions people to think any debt at all is bad (and that perception's being made worse by the government claiming we need to get rid of the whole deficit immediately because all debt is evil... so Clegg's made his own bed on this one).

Now Oxford are point-blank refusing to take in more people from deprived backgrounds... so much for Clegg's claim that universities charging the full £9000 will be forced to broaden their student base... but, after all the lies he's told over the last year, who can really be surprised?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/m...equirements-row

Now Oxford are point-blank refusing to take in more people from deprived backgrounds... so much for Clegg's claim that universities charging the full £9000 will be forced to broaden their student base... but, after all the lies he's told over the last year, who can really be surprised?

 

It is morally wrong that students with AAA who come from a wealthy background should be shafted by a queue jumper with inferior grades just because they are poor.

 

What sort of message does that send out to those that slaved day and night to get AAA ? university entrance should be purely on the basis of academic ability and nothing else.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is morally wrong that students with AAA who come from a wealthy background should be shafted by a queue jumper with inferior grades just because they are poor.

 

What sort of message does that send out to those that slaved day and night to get AAA ? university entrance should be purely on the basis of academic ability and nothing else.

 

As I understand it, it's more that poorer students who get the same or similar grades as the richer ones are getting shafted and the plans to reverse this are getting scrapped.

It is morally wrong that students with AAA who come from a wealthy background should be shafted by a queue jumper with inferior grades just because they are poor.

 

What sort of message does that send out to those that slaved day and night to get AAA ? university entrance should be purely on the basis of academic ability and nothing else.

 

It's morally wrong that students from wealthy backgrounds are favoured over students from working class backgrounds too, but Oxford seems to have no problems doing this... I dont even know what AAA is mate, is that Australia/New Zealand qualifications...? Over here it's A or A* for A-Levels.... And A-levels are so ridiculously easy these days anyway that you can pretty much get an A pass without really breaking into a sweat.... In fact, the English education system so ill-prepares students for university standards generally that the drop-out rates and amount of people who rely upon re-sits is pretty shocking.... I agree that education standards have to be the ONLY criteria for uni entry, but seeing as how getting 9 A* passes at A-Level is so p***-easy anyway, then something has to be done about that first of all, school standards seriously need to be beefed-up, school exams need to be a lot tougher, IMO. Put it this way, when I was at school in Scotland doing my highers, my marks were all Bs and Cs, and those were considered above average grades... So, things were clearly a lot tougher at one point...

 

As I understand it, it's more that poorer students who get the same or similar grades as the richer ones are getting shafted and the plans to reverse this are getting scrapped.

 

The problem is though, when you have about 90% of students overall achieving A passes at A-levels how the hell does a university use that as a barmometer for academic excellence... Answer, it cant... I hear EU students complain all the time that they're being held back because most English students have to catch up to the proper level of academic quality, the first year at uni doesn't count in terms of marks, which is pretty ridiculous IMO....

 

Personally, I dont think it does any good to mollycoddle kids and tell them that they're achieving a level that in reality they're not, a hell of a lot of school-leavers who enter into uni get a massive culture shock when they go into uni because the academic standards are so much higher in terms of expectations and workload.. Clearly, the school system is not preparing them for this.....

 

In my experience my degree really hasn't been any harder than A-Levels were, the first two years especially...

In my experience my degree really hasn't been any harder than A-Levels were, the first two years especially...

 

Depends on the degree I guess... And the individual uni... I have been hearing some rather disturbing rumours about some universities "dumbing down" their academic standards purely to get the fees... Some universities are even making up false degrees (eg, LSE who have been getting into so much trouble recently over money they took off of Ghadafi's son in return for a false diploma..)

The new system is much easier to pay back than the old one. id rather have the new one than the one I paid

It's morally wrong that students from wealthy backgrounds are favoured over students from working class backgrounds too, but Oxford seems to have no problems doing this... I dont even know what AAA is mate, is that Australia/New Zealand qualifications...? Over here it's A or A* for A-Levels.... And A-levels are so ridiculously easy these days anyway that you can pretty much get an A pass without really breaking into a sweat.... In fact, the English education system so ill-prepares students for university standards generally that the drop-out rates and amount of people who rely upon re-sits is pretty shocking.... I agree that education standards have to be the ONLY criteria for uni entry, but seeing as how getting 9 A* passes at A-Level is so p***-easy anyway, then something has to be done about that first of all, school standards seriously need to be beefed-up, school exams need to be a lot tougher, IMO. Put it this way, when I was at school in Scotland doing my highers, my marks were all Bs and Cs, and those were considered above average grades... So, things were clearly a lot tougher at one point...

 

I don't pretend to be an expert on the British education system as I never went to university. I left school at 16 to go and work in the family business so never even did 6th form when I was in Britain but the article that was posted talked of AAA at A level being the requirements for consideration for Oxford so I posted AAA as that is what the article stated.

 

A uni degree from my understanding has been seriously devalued in recent years to the point that it is practically worthless in the employment market unless you have a Masters degree whereas in my day getting a degree meant you could almost pick your own job so I think a major shake up of the uni system is needed to again make getting a degree as something special.

 

Would this mean less people getting into uni and the dumping of all the worthless courses ? you bet

It's morally wrong that students from wealthy backgrounds are favoured over students from working class backgrounds too, but Oxford seems to have no problems doing this... I dont even know what AAA is mate, is that Australia/New Zealand qualifications...? Over here it's A or A* for A-Levels.... And A-levels are so ridiculously easy these days anyway that you can pretty much get an A pass without really breaking into a sweat.... In fact, the English education system so ill-prepares students for university standards generally that the drop-out rates and amount of people who rely upon re-sits is pretty shocking.... I agree that education standards have to be the ONLY criteria for uni entry, but seeing as how getting 9 A* passes at A-Level is so p***-easy anyway, then something has to be done about that first of all, school standards seriously need to be beefed-up, school exams need to be a lot tougher, IMO. Put it this way, when I was at school in Scotland doing my highers, my marks were all Bs and Cs, and those were considered above average grades... So, things were clearly a lot tougher at one point...

 

Hold on a second... the bits in bold are complete bull$h!t, I don't know what you're basing this on at all. Have you looked at A-Level papers recently? The idea that you can get an A without breaking sweat is ludicrous, I'm in Year 13 at a fairly top state grammar school and most of the people in my year are fighting tooth and nail to get AAA. I won't get there (admitedly I probably would have if I hadn't done Art, which is a bitch) and in the latest January exams marks of DDDE for people who actually put some decent work in weren't unheard of.

 

This idea that exams have goten easier is complete rubbish, as any long-serving teacher will tell you. The truth is that we're just better at passing exams (note how I deliberately didn't say more intelligent, no matter how much I want to) that previous generations.

Hold on a second... the bits in bold are complete bull$h!t, I don't know what you're basing this on at all. Have you looked at A-Level papers recently? The idea that you can get an A without breaking sweat is ludicrous, I'm in Year 13 at a fairly top state grammar school and most of the people in my year are fighting tooth and nail to get AAA. I won't get there (admitedly I probably would have if I hadn't done Art, which is a bitch) and in the latest January exams marks of DDDE for people who actually put some decent work in weren't unheard of.

 

This idea that exams have goten easier is complete rubbish, as any long-serving teacher will tell you. The truth is that we're just better at passing exams (note how I deliberately didn't say more intelligent, no matter how much I want to) that previous generations.

 

Well, come on, you explain how 90% can get A passes.... It cant possibly just be down to "oh, we've just gotten better at passing exams" like it's some kind of genetic hardwiring.... I mean, if your generation is so good at passing exams, how come so many are going back to do re-sit exams at uni every year...? I simply cannot see how it can be anything other than a general dumbing-down in education standards... Academic standards are a lot tougher in other parts of the world...

 

The problem with school education these days is that it seems to me that it's way too focussed on just passing exams and not really teaching you to think through the subject... At uni, you have to employ a lot more lateral thinking and you don't get spoon-fed by the lecturers....

In A-Levels my teachers who'd had years of experience teach you how to pass the exam just as much as they teach the subject, because they know exactly what's need to pass. People fail exams at uni because they don't turn up to anything.... Everyone I know who's failed a module at uni had about a 20% attendance record in it maximum.

Everyone I know who's failed a module at uni had about a 20% attendance record in it maximum.

 

And that wont be allowed to happen anymore.. Unis are getting pretty hard on non-attendance, miss two lectures of any module, you get a letter, miss another, you get excluded... They have to do this because there are a lot of fake "students" going around.... No, honestly, people coming in on student visas supposedly and basically taking the p***....

And that wont be allowed to happen anymore.. Unis are getting pretty hard on non-attendance, miss two lectures of any module, you get a letter, miss another, you get excluded... They have to do this because there are a lot of fake "students" going around.... No, honestly, people coming in on student visas supposedly and basically taking the p***....

 

They definitely are. If I miss a seminar I get an e-mail telling me it "could" result in disciplinaty action. HOWEVER I don't believe this to be true for a lot of Universities. My Uni is very strict on coursework deadlines, extremely infact. Yet I know people at Huddersfield Uni who can hand in their cwk 3 weeks later and have no penalties!!! But for lectures its impossible to keep up on attendance unless its a small niche subject.

 

A-Levels are very hard though. Still very hard. A lot of emphasis is put on the teaching, but you have got to put in the work in to get AAA. There's a trick to the exams (and the coursework too), but you've got to get it right. More people than not don't get AAA. There is no consistency with the exams though I found. My A2 exams were RIDICULOUSLY hard (the year before they changed all the structure) and I would have got AAA.

Now Oxford are point-blank refusing to take in more people from deprived backgrounds... so much for Clegg's claim that universities charging the full £9000 will be forced to broaden their student base... but, after all the lies he's told over the last year, who can really be surprised?

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/m...equirements-row

Your comment suggests a misinterpretation of the article. Oxford are saying they don't agree with the proposals. Well, Oxford, whatever this arrogant idiot says, are still subject to the law whether they like it or not. Of course, if he wants to spend the additional fees paying fines - if that sanction is available, then more fool him.

Your comment suggests a misinterpretation of the article. Oxford are saying they don't agree with the proposals. Well, Oxford, whatever this arrogant idiot says, are still subject to the law whether they like it or not. Of course, if he wants to spend the additional fees paying fines - if that sanction is available, then more fool him.

 

Do you really see this government forcing Oxford to pay fines? It's pretty obvious they (the govt) will back down. It'll be like the banks where they just say they've got "assurances" from universities that they'll do "all they can" to broaden their access, without REQUIRING them to do anything.

 

 

Well, come on, you explain how 90% can get A passes.... It cant possibly just be down to "oh, we've just gotten better at passing exams" like it's some kind of genetic hardwiring.... I mean, if your generation is so good at passing exams, how come so many are going back to do re-sit exams at uni every year...? I simply cannot see how it can be anything other than a general dumbing-down in education standards... Academic standards are a lot tougher in other parts of the world...

 

I wouldn't say A-Levels are "easy" as such... I had to work really hard "just" to get ABB, and I consider myself intelligent. But it's true that it's possible for teachers in the know to coach people how to pass them - and, invariably, the best teachers are at private schools - meaning people at private schools have an inherent advantage when it comes to exams. The chances are, broadly speaking (though not always), someone who gets ABB at a comprehensive is probably more intelligent than someone who gets the same grades at a private school - so I think it's reasonable that universities' admissions policies should reflect that.

Do you really see this government forcing Oxford to pay fines? It's pretty obvious they (the govt) will back down. It'll be like the banks where they just say they've got "assurances" from universities that they'll do "all they can" to broaden their access, without REQUIRING them to do anything.

I wouldn't say A-Levels are "easy" as such... I had to work really hard "just" to get ABB, and I consider myself intelligent. But it's true that it's possible for teachers in the know to coach people how to pass them - and, invariably, the best teachers are at private schools - meaning people at private schools have an inherent advantage when it comes to exams. The chances are, broadly speaking (though not always), someone who gets ABB at a comprehensive is probably more intelligent than someone who gets the same grades at a private school - so I think it's reasonable that universities' admissions policies should reflect that.

Whether action is taken will depend in part on who is in a position to do so. If it requires a minister to act, then it may well be that nothing will happen. If individuals can initiate action or it is left to the Office For Fair Access, then there is more chance.

 

On the subject of exams, the national curriculum has become increasingly prescriptive over the years which has made it easier to predict what questions will come up.