Election 2010 - Con/Lib Government

[Emasher]

I'm not sure why some of you would want a hung parliament. In general it just keeps the government from doing their job, as a lot of important bills don't end up getting passed.

[Raining_again]

I'm not sure why some of you would want a hung parliament. In general it just keeps the government from doing their job, as a lot of important bills don't end up getting passed.

 

like the DEB, lol! (although I do get what you mean)

 

 

Lol at the "debate", get yer handbags out boys. Looks like they wanted to smack each other.

 

I vote they wrestle for the win. lol. (not that a northern irish vote even matters )

[Will]

I'd say Clegg came off best by far. Gordon is totally screwed. Currently my vote is sitting with Lib Dems, I think they have a pretty good chance right now.

[dazzybee]

Education improved? My arse it has.

 

 

You cunt.

 

I'm sorry. How hasn't it?! What have you got to base that on exactly?

 

How anyone can vote for that slimy fuckwit Cameron is beyond me. People thought he was impressive, I thought he was fucking useless as always; absolutel NO SOLUTIONS whatsoever, just attacks the current problems with labour. It's infuriating. He's even stolen Obamas 'CHANGE' mantra. They are so fucking Talented Mr Ripley...

 

It's frightening times....

[Supergrunch]

I'm sorry. How hasn't it?! What have you got to base that on exactly?

Grade inflation, too many jobless graduates, and the failure of the comprehensive system? I can't actually think of any ways in which it's better.

[nightwolf]

Grade inflation, too many jobless graduates, and the failure of the comprehensive system? I can't actually think of any ways in which it's better.

 

^

 

This, even I can see just how it hasn't improved, all I do is watch the news from time to time. This matter has been around for a while, too many students come out of long degrees to find themselves completely jobless and end up working in greggs.

Edited April 15, 2010 by nightwolf

[Fierce_LiNk]

Grade inflation, too many jobless graduates, and the failure of the comprehensive system? I can't actually think of any ways in which it's better.

 

There is more than one reason for that, though. Lack of jobs out there being one of the reasons.

 

The Primary system definitely has improved, in my opinion. It's also really fun to teach in it, and the kids just seem to enjoy learning. Sadly, it seems to turn to shit when they reach Secondary School. When people talk about the failure of the education system, they usually refer to Secondary Education. I just find it very impersonal. The kids have so many different teachers and so many things going on. There's this consistency in Primary which I think does them a world of good.

 

I've recorded this as I was out, so I'm going to watch it tomorrow. I've caught little bits and bobs from the news and radio, but I want to see it in full.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Fierce_LiNk

[nightwolf]

Was it actually worth watching? From the sounds of you lot it was mostly a slanging match? Which doesn't appeal.

[Will]

I think if your eligible to vote then you should watch at least one of them over the next few weeks. It will give you a better idea on the parties view points than just reading up on them.

[dazzybee]

Grade inflation, too many jobless graduates, and the failure of the comprehensive system? I can't actually think of any ways in which it's better.

 

Do you know how many MORE graduates there are under labour? This is one factor. The recession being another factor. Fact is, anyone can go to University now. Anyone. My sister couldn't go to Uni because my family couldn't afford it and we fell in that awkward barrier within the grants system. I had to wait 2 years before going to Uni for the system to change.

 

The failure of the comprehensive system? How is this? Grades are going up year on year... which I presume is why you said grade inflation. WHich I don't agree with either. It's better because there are more money in schools, more activities, some fantastic schemes for schools, the new academies are fantastic; doing shit loads more vocational subjects....

 

Labour have done many things wrong, but this is one area that has improved dramatically....

[nightwolf]

I think if your eligible to vote then you should watch at least one of them over the next few weeks. It will give you a better idea on the parties view points than just reading up on them.

 

Then I might have to.

 

I haven't actually signed up to vote yet, given that I don't know how. Nor do I understand any of the parties. Well I know some of the history, but nothing current.

[Will]

Do you know how many MORE graduates there are under labour? This is one factor. The recession being another factor. Fact is, anyone can go to University now. Anyone. My sister couldn't go to Uni because my family couldn't afford it and we fell in that awkward barrier within the grants system. I had to wait 2 years before going to Uni for the system to change.

 

This is so true, I think back in the day I wouldn't have been anywhere near smart enough to go to uni, as it is I fucked around for 4 years doing anything but work and still came out with a degree. From an academic education point of view it was a total waste of time.

 

Anyway, why the hell shouldn't graduates be unemployed? There seems to be a view that a degree is a free ticket to an instantly great job, the fact is you still need to be better than every other applicant. Something that the current system just doesn't allow on a consistent level.

[Raining_again]

This is so true' date=' I think back in the day I wouldn't have been anywhere near smart enough to go to uni, as it is I fucked around for 4 years doing anything but work and still came out with a degree. From an academic education point of view it was a total waste of time.

 

Anyway, why the hell shouldn't graduates be unemployed? There seems to be a view that a degree is a free ticket to an instantly great job, the fact is you still need to be better than every other applicant. Something that the current system just doesn't allow on a consistent level.[/quote']

 

about time someone said that tbh. Your certificates only land you an interview. Your skills and experience land you a job.

 

Uni seems like more a lesson on social skills and surviving on your own, than anything else...

[The fish]

I just saw a YouGov/Sun poll on the ticker at the bottom of Sky News that put Nick Clegg at 51%. As much of an outlier as it is, it's rather cool to see.

 

Shazam:

Edited April 15, 2010 by The fish

[nightwolf]

about time someone said that tbh. Your certificates only land you an interview. Your skills and experience land you a job.

 

Uni seems like more a lesson on social skills and surviving on your own, than anything else...

 

It also seems like a nice way to lose an awful lot of money.

 

I'm incredibly disappointed with university, anybody who reads the HWYD thread will be able to know that.

 

I don't think any mature student will think that a degree = job, but really why should I come out of university feeling like I've wasted 20grand, when I could have done the same job without it?

 

I'm mostly arguing about how university needs to do more rather than degrees = jobs here. Haha.

[Daft]

I'm sorry. How hasn't it?! What have you got to base that on exactly?

 

The fact that my course has had it's budget slashed meaning they were forced to fail 40% of students. I don't see how that's fair on the students, they paid the same £3,275 I did to complete the year.

 

The devaluation of GCSEs (GCSE Textiles, you joking?) and A-levels.

 

The very practice of exams is a shambles. Time restrictive exams are ludicrous. Exams should have word limits and non-restrictive time limits.

 

Labour are making it harder and harder for for foreign students to attend universities. My university gets a fair chunk of its funding from foreign students.

 

The 50% aim of attendance for higher education is devaluing degrees. The emphasised importance of degrees is elitist (and not in a good way), they are not for everyone. Why not look to Japan where universities and colleges are different, the former is more academically focus whereas the other is more technically focused (attendance of higher education in Japan is over 90%).

 

This expanded networks of universities is spreading financial support thin. Universities should be about quality not quantity.

 

Tuition fees are also laughably self-destructive. Students should be seen as an investment, as MJ said "The children are our future."

 

The UK is one of the few countries cutting funding for education and by up to £2.5 billion. There's been an investment of €11bn in higher education in France. Germany pumped a total of €18bn into promoting world-class research alongside university education, whilst Barack Obama ploughed an additional $21bn into federal science spending, as well as announcing a decade-long budget doubling $42.6bn for science, technology and energy.

 

The whole notion that wealthier students should pay more is absolutely outrageous. What exactly does the parent's income have to do with how much money they need? How are students meant to learn to be independent when they are being means tested according to what their parents earn? I might be asked to pay more to go to university but I got no support whatsoever from my mother - what am I to do? At the age of 18 men & women are considered adults capable of making their own way in life, why should they be dependent on their parents. They are able to vote, marry, make their own choices. Is there a law that says parents must donate a % of their income to their child?

 

 

 

Education. Education. Education indeed.

[Raining_again]

It also seems like a nice way to lose an awful lot of money.

 

I'm incredibly disappointed with university, anybody who reads the HWYD thread will be able to know that.

 

I don't think any mature student will think that a degree = job, but really why should I come out of university feeling like I've wasted 20grand, when I could have done the same job without it?

 

I'm mostly arguing about how university needs to do more rather than degrees = jobs here. Haha.

 

Yeah it sucks, i'm not blaming students by any means, but it is a bit pointless. And i've seen you mention how pisspoor some of the lecturers actually are. Doesn't make me want to have a degree at all.

 

I've got 5 years experience under my belt, with a reasonable job.

 

It sickens me a bit to see grads working in shops and doing menial office work... It seems the only viable degrees out there are health professionals, which take many many years to complete.

[nightwolf]

Yeah it sucks, i'm not blaming students by any means, but it is a bit pointless. And i've seen you mention how pisspoor some of the lecturers actually are. Doesn't make me want to have a degree at all.

 

I've got 5 years experience under my belt, with a reasonable job.

 

It sickens me a bit to see grads working in shops and doing menial office work... It seems the only viable degrees out there are health professionals, which take many many years to complete.

 

I did it because I saw how easily it is for experince working gets destroyed. My dad did it and because of the recession it all got took away and now instead of earning a lot of money he works in waitrose.

 

Its just very depressing, truly, its not even a case of 'oh that makes me feel abit down' its truly awful to watch my money disappear to these people. If the government wants to improve education again they need to focus on much higher education, you've sorted primary school, come help me out will you?

 

I have tutors who are business people first, who have no qualifications teaching me, this isn't just my university either, many others have this exact same issue, not all, but it seems more and more likely as I talk to a variety of university students.

 

/rant

 

I'm going to stop, education makes me so angry.

[dwarf]

Amen to no time limits in exams. They infuriate me. I don't care how much that would cost on top of how it stands now, neither do I care about early finishers complaining, people should be able to put down answers they are happy with, ones that aren't sub-par because of time restrictions.

 

The benefits of doing so would be great, plus there are ways of getting around the issues the above brings up. Extending the exam time you get by a couple of hours would suit me to the ground. Extra time doesn't mean you can cheat more than usual.

[Will]

I've never understood exams at all to be honest. Is there ever a situation in real life where you have 3 hours and only what's in your brain to do something? I actually quite hope there is, but I really doubt it.

[Guy]

I think it depends heavily on what you are studying at university whether or not you step out and quickly find work. The country is being saturated with degree educated students, often doing the same or similar courses in fields that aren't particularly hungry for hundreds of new additions to the workforce.

 

I remember back so many years ago in college at the induction our tutor, a horrible little ginger haired gnome of a man, stood at the front of our class of computer students and flat out told us we were wasting our time with his course and should be learning a trade.

 

Looking back he was right, so long as you can work cheaper than the Polish in a trade you're guaranteed work. Beans on toast for dinner every night then?

 

There do seem to be a lot of degrees not even worth considering anymore. I certainly wouldn't go to university to do anything unspecifically computer related nowadays and art is a popular area of study too for a lot of people who really have no idea where it's all going. You have to be certain and have a plan. Even then you have to be fucking lucky.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Guy

[Daft]

Amen to no time limits in exams. They infuriate me. I don't care how much that would cost on top of how it stands now, neither do I care about early finishers complaining, people should be able to put down answers they are happy with, ones that aren't sub-par because of time restrictions.

 

The benefits of doing so would be great, plus there are ways of getting around the issues the above brings up. Extending the exam time you get by a couple of hours would suit me to the ground. Extra time doesn't mean you can cheat more than usual.

 

Exams have NOTHING to do with academia.

 

You are completely removed from discussion with fellow students. They take your books away. They give you a time limit. There are other enforced pressures. They are very rarely about thinking, more about constructing regurgitated information. This is not what academia is about.

 

As Seneca said - it is one thing to remember, another to know.

[dwarf]

That's true across every exam I've taken bar maths. It has made some subjects seem more hard at GCSE and A-Level literally just because of content. People usually rate subjects harder either because the text-books they learn from have more pages or because the words are complicated and hard to learn.

[dazzybee]

 

The fact that my course has had it's budget slashed meaning they were forced to fail 40% of students. I don't see how that's fair on the students, they paid the same £3,275 I did to complete the year.

 

Bloody hell one minute you're saying it's not fair yet later you say eductaion is being devalued. Make up your mind.

 

I will say that please don't use one example a s case to say EDUCUCATION IS SHIT. Because that's just ridiculous and you know it. There will always be examples of bad shit happening in EVERYTHING!

 

The devaluation of GCSEs (GCSE Textiles, you joking?) and A-levels.

 

How are A Levels devalued? And I think it is great that more creative subjects are taken more seriously. I'd be positively pissed off I wanted to work with textiles. I did a drama GCSE is that a load of bollocks as well?

 

The very practice of exams is a shambles. Time restrictive exams are ludicrous. Exams should have word limits and non-restrictive time limits

.

 

I practice that has been in place for yonks? (Yes I used the word yonks). I agree though, exams are bollocks full stop in my opinion, but I think that across the board - driving tests included. But It's not as simple as saying hmm I don't like them so lets scrap them or change them like that. These things take greats amount of time and diplomacy. MANY people would disagree with us about this. Some people would successfully argue that the time limit is a very useful tool, especially in the real life work enviroment which surely no one disagrees with the idea that education needs to replicate real life more.

 

Labour are making it harder and harder for for foreign students to attend universities. My university gets a fair chunk of its funding from foreign students.

 

Well then you're going to be even more fucking distraught when the blues get in because the matter will get very worse. I will say though that many many many people in higher education feel the opposite. That there are still too many. Peopl generally in this country feel there too many foreigners. And tonight, the tories were the most active in saying we need to stop it and cap it, it's getting ridiculous. I thought UKIP were speaking for a while.....

 

The 50% aim of attendance for higher education is devaluing degrees. The emphasised importance of degrees is elitist (and not in a good way), they are not for everyone. Why not look to Japan where universities and colleges are different, the former is more academically focus whereas the other is more technically focused (attendance of higher education in Japan is over 90%).

 

I'm sorry but you can't pull out one country as a comparison. Especially Japan who discipline in everything is absolutely renowned. Completely unfair. Fact is we do have degrees which are more academic and some which are more practical, why do we need to give them different names? And degrees are elitist? Fuck me. Did you know the University system before labour got in?!!

 

This expanded networks of universities is spreading financial support thin. Universities should be about quality not quantity.

 

I agree.

 

Tuition fees are also laughably self-destructive. Students should be seen as an investment, as MJ said "The children are our future."

 

NO THEY ARE NOT!!! If there wasn't this system I wouldn't have gone to University. Thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't be able to go to University and it would be the elitist system you seem to hate. But it needs to be paid for, we can't spunk money on everyone going to University. Be realistic. Where will that money come from? Fact is, people who really can't afford it get it all paid for anyway. The debt we get at Uni has no bearing whatsoever on our credit rating, we have to pay it when we earn over a certain amount at a level which will be pretty much unnoticed. Also, if it was all free imagine how many more would go to University? People go and fuck it up the wall as it is. People should go to University is they really want to go.

 

The UK is one of the few countries cutting funding for education and by up to £2.5 billion. There's been an investment of €11bn in higher education in France. Germany pumped a total of €18bn into promoting world-class research alongside university education, whilst Barack Obama ploughed an additional $21bn into federal science spending, as well as announcing a decade-long budget doubling $42.6bn for science, technology and energy.

 

This is complete fabrication. Only the tories are proposing cuts to education. I thought so anyway, I may be wrong on that.

 

The whole notion that wealthier students should pay more is absolutely outrageous. What exactly does the parent's income have to do with how much money they need? How are students meant to learn to be independent when they are being means tested according to what their parents earn? I might be asked to pay more to go to university but I got no support whatsoever from my mother - what am I to do? At the age of 18 men & women are considered adults capable of making their own way in life, why should they be dependent on their parents. They are able to vote, marry, make their own choices. Is there a law that says parents must donate a % of their income to their child?

 

I'm truly staggered by this... I really can't believe what you're saying. Of course it should be means tested. Do you not think wealthy parents DO DONATE INCOME TO THEIR CHILD!?!? Of course they do, that's why poorer families get benefits. You're not a socialist are you? Rich kids with wealthy families will get looked after by their families; if they don't, then this can be declared and means testing is not put in place. But I strongly believe in a system of the rich help the poor, I just do. A kid from a poor family needs more help, how can you not see this?

 

I will add that I do believe in taxing the rich more and the rich paying more for stuff like education. I will also add that I would be declared one of these rich, on a personal note I would be WAY better off under the blues, personally. I fall in to a higher tax bracket. But more than that I believe we need to close the class gap as much as possible and this is the only way to do that. Sometimes I get angry, and declare it's unfair with the best of them, but ultimately I believe in it.

[danny]

Christ I hate ITV. They somehow manage to cover everything in this sheen of cheapness.

 

40,000 less foreign students this year? That's not something to boast about.

 

It is when many of those students were coming to made up unis etc that dont really exist.