Should effort/ability matter?
Their has been a pernicious attitude on the left which really sickens me and that is the idea of equality of outcome.
So I want to tackle some continuous conversations that come up in these forums again and again from a new angle.
I am not asking whether education matters whether your A level grades matters the university you go to matters or whether your degree type, or even if your degree grade matters.
I think time is the ultimate Judge of this.
I am beginning to believe that with this new generation coming up people like me are doomed to degradation and relegation humiliation and failure regardless of their abilities effort attainment or attitudes. However that is another topic.
Instead I am asking should it matter? Should it matter that someone worked harder to get into a better university? to do a harder degree? or that they were/are just more able? should that matter or should we have equality of outcome regardless?
In fact should people be punished for excelling?
So I want to tackle some continuous conversations that come up in these forums again and again from a new angle.
I am not asking whether education matters whether your A level grades matters the university you go to matters or whether your degree type, or even if your degree grade matters.
I think time is the ultimate Judge of this.
I am beginning to believe that with this new generation coming up people like me are doomed to degradation and relegation humiliation and failure regardless of their abilities effort attainment or attitudes. However that is another topic.
Instead I am asking should it matter? Should it matter that someone worked harder to get into a better university? to do a harder degree? or that they were/are just more able? should that matter or should we have equality of outcome regardless?
In fact should people be punished for excelling?
I think you misunderstand the ideas of equality in society and the concepts of meritocracy. The injustice in this world is not that the "work hards" have it all, it is that despite working every hour sent and being the most able in the world, some people are still turned down in favour of someone else who gets the job because they went to such-and-such a school, or whose dad works at such-and-such a company or they are wearing the correct tie.
So working hard is a good thing and industries like IT and software will respect your ability over your grades. But in the world of business, finance and law, it is who you know, not what you know that ultimately counts. Just look at Trump, Clinton and the Bushs in the US. All handed life on a silver platter.
So working hard is a good thing and industries like IT and software will respect your ability over your grades. But in the world of business, finance and law, it is who you know, not what you know that ultimately counts. Just look at Trump, Clinton and the Bushs in the US. All handed life on a silver platter.
Original post by ByEeek
I think you misunderstand the ideas of equality in society and the concepts of meritocracy. The injustice in this world is not that the "work hards" have it all, it is that despite working every hour sent and being the most able in the world, some people are still turned down in favour of someone else who gets the job because they went to such-and-such a school, or whose dad works at such-and-such a company or they are wearing the correct tie.
So working hard is a good thing and industries like IT and software will respect your ability over your grades. But in the world of business, finance and law, it is who you know, not what you know that ultimately counts. Just look at Trump, Clinton and the Bushs in the US. All handed life on a silver platter.
So working hard is a good thing and industries like IT and software will respect your ability over your grades. But in the world of business, finance and law, it is who you know, not what you know that ultimately counts. Just look at Trump, Clinton and the Bushs in the US. All handed life on a silver platter.
Well I can't comment on the American schooling system etc because in all honesty I know little about it. However in the UK Oxford/Cambridge/Imperial/UCL the four Universities in the UK ranked in the top ten in the world. I sometimes refer to the UK's big four. Do not select students based on the wealth of their family. They select them based on their grades.
I want to make a positive difference in my life so want to get into a prestigious university. The mentality of many at the moment is that if I go to the big four its just because I am more privileged. They don't seem to take into account that maybe I worked harder and or maybe I was more brainy. Degrees at top institutions for the most part are significantly harder then those at the bottom of the league tables.
Now hypothetically assuming that candidates coming from Southampton Solent, Anglia Ruskin and London Metropolitan really were as competent or more competent then their Oxbridge counterparts then absolutely they should be getting employed or other progressions at the same or better rate.
However this is very often far from the case, their may be the occasional exceptions comparing the very best from these Universities to the absolute worst from the big four, however in the vast Majority of the case the Big four are going to have completed harder degrees and be more talented, when they needed higher grades to get onto the course.
Under the emerging climate it does not matter what grades you get what university you go to etc people will assume you exactly equal to those that partied at school and partied at university and made little to no effort.
Due to been autistic my social skills are poor so I don't interview well, a few people said I was brainy but I thought they were patronizing me. So I got myself officially tested and scored very high. So I want to work hard and focus on my talents.However because of this emerging attitude in the future someone like me could be 8 standard deviations above the average IQ work their absolute ass of doing everything right and will never no matter how hard they work try or achieve ever manage to be equal to the majority of less able and less hard working students. How is that fair?
Original post by Luke7456
I am not asking whether education matters whether your A level grades matters the university you go to matters or whether your degree type, or even if your degree grade matters.
I am well aware that PQ and Jneil believe none of this matters at all.
I am not asking whether education matters whether your A level grades matters the university you go to matters or whether your degree type, or even if your degree grade matters.
I am well aware that PQ and Jneil believe none of this matters at all.
Please link me to somewhere where I've said this or stop misrepresenting my opinions.
Equality of opportunity. It's not difficult to grasp the difference between that and equality of outcome.
Original post by Luke7456
However in the UK Oxford/Cambridge/Imperial/UCL the four Universities in the UK ranked in the top ten in the world. I sometimes refer to the UK's big four. Do not select students based on the wealth of their family. They select them based on their grades.
Indeed. And if you are well healed and wealthy, you will be able to pay for the schooling and tutoring that aligns your children so that they can pass the entrance exams to Oxford and Cambridge with ease. This is why only 59.2% of undergraduates in Oxford were state schooled compared to 6.5% of students in private schools nationally. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37250916)
This is why grammar schools don't work. Everyone wants their kids to get into a grammar school so those with the means tutor and train their kids to pass the 11+. Those from lower socio-economic backgrounds with high ability but little backing, will fall by the wayside, simply because they have not been tutored on the test.
In elite education, ability has little or nothing to do with anything. It is talking the talk and looking the part that matters.
And once outside education, it gets even worse. You only have to look at the makeup of the house of commons and the judiciary to see just how unrepresentative they are in terms of background and schooling compared to the population they represent.
Original post by Luke7456
should that matter or should we have equality of outcome regardless?
Original post by RayApparently
Equality of opportunity. It's not difficult to grasp the difference between that and equality of outcome.
There could be no such thing as equality of outcome, rationally. How could everyone have the same things in a capitalist culture? I completely agree with RayApparently, I don't think you've considered that distinction. Everyone should be entitled to the same opportunity to get into the 'big 4' you have listed i.e all should have access to good primary, secondary and post 16 education. Apart from things like institutional racism which can prevent some very bright kids from making it there, I don't think you have that much to complain about (since you're smart and doing well).
Original post by Luke7456
However because of this emerging attitude in the future someone like me could be 8 standard deviations above the average IQ work their absolute ass of doing everything right and will never no matter how hard they work try or achieve ever manage to be equal to the majority of less able and less hard working students. How is that fair?
However because of this emerging attitude in the future someone like me could be 8 standard deviations above the average IQ work their absolute ass of doing everything right and will never no matter how hard they work try or achieve ever manage to be equal to the majority of less able and less hard working students. How is that fair?
I don't see how that would be the case? If you are smarter and work harder, you'll get better results. The tests are standardised. If you're not going into an industry that favours experience over grades, what's the problem?
Original post by ByEeek
Indeed. And if you are well healed and wealthy, you will be able to pay for the schooling and tutoring that aligns your children so that they can pass the entrance exams to Oxford and Cambridge with ease. This is why only 59.2% of undergraduates in Oxford were state schooled compared to 6.5% of students in private schools nationally. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37250916)
This is why grammar schools don't work. Everyone wants their kids to get into a grammar school so those with the means tutor and train their kids to pass the 11+. Those from lower socio-economic backgrounds with high ability but little backing, will fall by the wayside, simply because they have not been tutored on the test.
In elite education, ability has little or nothing to do with anything. It is talking the talk and looking the part that matters.
And once outside education, it gets even worse. You only have to look at the makeup of the house of commons and the judiciary to see just how unrepresentative they are in terms of background and schooling compared to the population they represent.
This is why grammar schools don't work. Everyone wants their kids to get into a grammar school so those with the means tutor and train their kids to pass the 11+. Those from lower socio-economic backgrounds with high ability but little backing, will fall by the wayside, simply because they have not been tutored on the test.
In elite education, ability has little or nothing to do with anything. It is talking the talk and looking the part that matters.
And once outside education, it gets even worse. You only have to look at the makeup of the house of commons and the judiciary to see just how unrepresentative they are in terms of background and schooling compared to the population they represent.
few points in response to that firstly its true yes people with money will usually try to help their children, its unavoidable. For example suppose I am a millionaire and I have a child who is struggling in school guess what I am going to hire a personal tutor. When my younger brother was struggling and my mother tutored him she got told of by the tutor because it gave him an advantage over students that did not have parents who could/would help.
Now I need to be clear here my mother at the time did not do the homework for him she did not give him answers she taught him the material. He was like 13 at the time.
After this incident my mother pulled him out of that school and rightly so I would do the exact same thing as a parent Should I ever have a child and I got this reaction.
Now here is the thing I don't even have a teacher when I am doing A levels this time round not only do I not go to privet school I literally have no teacher. I am 100% self taught, not only that I am doing these on top of having to work. If i get stuck I have to figure it out myself or I am ****ed. I want to go to a prestigious university.
I think this is highly unlikely regardless of whether I get 100% in every single exam, plus entrance exa homs that I could get into any of the elites possibly Manchester but realistically none because I don't even have a reference on top of the autism thing so sucking at interviews.
However should I get into an elite university I will find that when I graduate they select someone from London Met over me because of privilege. And that is what is wrong with the whole system.
Sure the old way of doing things/ thinking meant people from richer backgrounds stand more chance but guess what anyone could succeed before provided they got the grades. Now grades are not enough because of privilege everyone is in the same boat. which literally means the only people that get ahead anymore are the ones that have the right contacts, are good socially or good looking.
Someone who is autistic like me, average looking and no contacts literally stands no chance no matter how able they are or how hard they work. I could literally get 100% in every single exam including the entrance ones and I would likely still be rejected from any decent university let alone Oxbridge because I will have no reference. However even better if by some weird fluke I somehow still got into Cambridge and got 100% in every exam whilst there, when I graduated I would still be buggered for finding work because people would say its just privilege and then some bimbo with social skills who spent their whole time partying at London met coming out with a third class honors would get a better job at me and look down their nose at me whilst if I am lucky i get to make her burgers or clean her office. Great new dawn we are emerging into.
Original post by btea
There could be no such thing as equality of outcome, rationally. How could everyone have the same things in a capitalist culture? I completely agree with RayApparently, I don't think you've considered that distinction. Everyone should be entitled to the same opportunity to get into the 'big 4' you have listed i.e all should have access to good primary, secondary and post 16 education. Apart from things like institutional racism which can prevent some very bright kids from making it there, I don't think you have that much to complain about (since you're smart and doing well).
I don't see how that would be the case? If you are smarter and work harder, you'll get better results. The tests are standardised. If you're not going into an industry that favours experience over grades, what's the problem?
I don't see how that would be the case? If you are smarter and work harder, you'll get better results. The tests are standardised. If you're not going into an industry that favours experience over grades, what's the problem?
I will get the grades I will be rejected from the big four regardless, If somehow I got into the big four and got a first from their I will still end up unemployed unless I get lucky and get work as a kitchen porter. I guess all I can Hope for is I am well trained with the maths so I can build up a roll from betting promos and online Poker. then use the Math to go into the trading but by then the entire market has probably crashed and if it hasn't its just a massive ticking time bomb.
Original post by ByEeek
Indeed. And if you are well healed and wealthy, you will be able to pay for the schooling and tutoring that aligns your children so that they can pass the entrance exams to Oxford and Cambridge with ease. This is why only 59.2% of undergraduates in Oxford were state schooled compared to 6.5% of students in private schools nationally. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-37250916)
This is why grammar schools don't work. Everyone wants their kids to get into a grammar school so those with the means tutor and train their kids to pass the 11+. Those from lower socio-economic backgrounds with high ability but little backing, will fall by the wayside, simply because they have not been tutored on the test.
In elite education, ability has little or nothing to do with anything. It is talking the talk and looking the part that matters.
And once outside education, it gets even worse. You only have to look at the makeup of the house of commons and the judiciary to see just how unrepresentative they are in terms of background and schooling compared to the population they represent.
This is why grammar schools don't work. Everyone wants their kids to get into a grammar school so those with the means tutor and train their kids to pass the 11+. Those from lower socio-economic backgrounds with high ability but little backing, will fall by the wayside, simply because they have not been tutored on the test.
In elite education, ability has little or nothing to do with anything. It is talking the talk and looking the part that matters.
And once outside education, it gets even worse. You only have to look at the makeup of the house of commons and the judiciary to see just how unrepresentative they are in terms of background and schooling compared to the population they represent.
Grammar schools are the tip of the iceberg. The big issue here is private schools and catchment area selection in state schools. Both need to be abolished, ASAP.
Original post by Farchitect
Grammar schools are the tip of the iceberg. The big issue here is private schools and catchment area selection in state schools. Both need to be abolished, ASAP.
What exactly is wrong with private schools? If you are in the top intelligence bracket you deserve a better education.
The issue is it is impossible to avoid some people getting more advantage then others unless you want to go full draconian. If you abolish privet school etc then parents will hire tutors for their children. Grammar schools is meant to be the best opportunity for under privileged and yet some people want to get rid of that because parents can effectively hire privet tutors to prepare their kids for the exams.
What about parenting Diet etc, I mean it does not just come down to wealth Parents who are engaged with their children in the right way will improve their attitude to education. Diet actually significantly affects performance and growth.
How are you going to police it? Are we to actually make privet tutors illegal? What about parents self teaching their Children? are we to make that illegal and investigate for that too?
This is impractical and too draconian, but it also misses a major major point. Parents want to do their best for their children its half the reason people work their ass off in life to provide better for their children. MY family came to England during 1930s-1940s with literally nothing. Fleeing from the Nazi Regimes influence etc. My grandfather was determined that his children would go to university so he literally worked 60+ hour weeks to send them to university. If when I have Children my child is struggling why shouldn't I do whatever I can to help them?
bu dumbing down education and devaluing degrees we not helping the disadvantaged students catch up to their better performing colleagues we are holding back the better performing students, to match that of the under-performing.
That is asinine.
What about parenting Diet etc, I mean it does not just come down to wealth Parents who are engaged with their children in the right way will improve their attitude to education. Diet actually significantly affects performance and growth.
How are you going to police it? Are we to actually make privet tutors illegal? What about parents self teaching their Children? are we to make that illegal and investigate for that too?
This is impractical and too draconian, but it also misses a major major point. Parents want to do their best for their children its half the reason people work their ass off in life to provide better for their children. MY family came to England during 1930s-1940s with literally nothing. Fleeing from the Nazi Regimes influence etc. My grandfather was determined that his children would go to university so he literally worked 60+ hour weeks to send them to university. If when I have Children my child is struggling why shouldn't I do whatever I can to help them?
bu dumbing down education and devaluing degrees we not helping the disadvantaged students catch up to their better performing colleagues we are holding back the better performing students, to match that of the under-performing.
That is asinine.
Original post by #ChaosKass
What exactly is wrong with private schools? If you are in the top intelligence bracket you deserve a better education.
Private schools have nothing to do with intelligence. Most of the royal family aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the box. William got the best education money can buy and still came out with a 2.2.
As for the brightest - they surely will be fine whatever education they get. Why not give the best education to those with the most to gain? And anyway, how do you define bright? Someone who grew up in a loving family, surrounded by books and encouraged to develop a love of learning, or someone with exactly the same potential but who didn't come from a nurturing family?
Original post by #ChaosKass
What exactly is wrong with private schools? If you are in the top intelligence bracket you deserve a better education.
Exactly... So what about all the highly intelligent children from poor/average backgrounds who cannot afford to go to private school?
Original post by Luke7456
The issue is it is impossible to avoid some people getting more advantage then others unless you want to go full draconian. If you abolish privet school etc then parents will hire tutors for their children. Grammar schools is meant to be the best opportunity for under privileged and yet some people want to get rid of that because parents can effectively hire privet tutors to prepare their kids for the exams.
So I think it would be practical in the medium term to abolish all independent schools/nationalise them. If the richest parents want to pay to have private tutition or whatever outside of school then so be it, that is still a much better system than what we currently have. One of the main problems with the system at the moment isn't the quality of the education per se, it is about the kind of people you meet, and learning how to interact in the right way. One of the main advantages of private schools, especially the more pretigious ones is the old boys network it gives you access to. Another advantage is actually being used to interacting with very elite people, sso your best mate at school might be the son of an MP, or a famous Proffessor, Author Lawyer etc. you get the idea. By giving everyone access to this it would greatly reduce its overall influence on society.
Original post by Luke7456
What about parenting Diet etc, I mean it does not just come down to wealth Parents who are engaged with their children in the right way will improve their attitude to education. Diet actually significantly affects performance and growth.
But richer parents are more likely to understand the importance of these issues. Half of the parents of state school kids are smoking and drinking whilst they're pregnant let alone anything else. That is speaking as someone is state educated, not as a snob.
Original post by Luke7456
How are you going to police it? Are we to actually make privet tutors illegal? What about parents self teaching their Children? are we to make that illegal and investigate for that too?
No, that would be impracticle, but just because that is impracticle doesn't mean we should just let it be. See my response at the start of this reply. It would be pretty simple to police independent schools though, in the same way that any other ilegal organisation is policed.
Original post by Luke7456
This is impractical and too draconian, but it also misses a major major point. Parents want to do their best for their children its half the reason people work their ass off in life to provide better for their children. MY family came to England during 1930s-1940s with literally nothing. Fleeing from the Nazi Regimes influence etc. My grandfather was determined that his children would go to university so he literally worked 60+ hour weeks to send them to university. If when I have Children my child is struggling why shouldn't I do whatever I can to help them?
That's great, and you were lucky then. But many kids are not blessed with such an ambitious family such as yours, why should the kid be punished?
Original post by Luke7456
bu dumbing down education and devaluing degrees we not helping the disadvantaged students catch up to their better performing colleagues we are holding back the better performing students, to match that of the under-performing.
That is asinine.
That is asinine.
Dumbing down degrees is irelevent. The problem for the most part is the inequality in the school system.
I think one of the most important steps the government should take is to abolish slection by catchment area in state schools. This makes it possible for affluent families to effectively buy their way into good state schools, and concentrates all of the **** families in certain areas, which just perpetuates the situation. I went to a state school which didn't select by catchment area, and it had a mix of people who were from really poor backgrounds (kids from council estates with both parents in prison etc.) and kids with millionaire families. It was the best state school in the city, so it obviously worked.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Farchitect
Exactly... So what about all the highly intelligent children from poor/average backgrounds who cannot afford to go to private school?
Easy - they are able to get scholarships and don't have to pay a penny.
Original post by #ChaosKass
Easy - they are able to get scholarships and don't have to pay a penny.
No no no no no.
Even if it was that simple, there are enough scholarships for the very very bright students, but students who are only very bright still get in if they're parents can afford it, whereas if they can't they are consigned to a state school (most areas, especially less affluent areas don't have access to grammar schools).
However it's not this simple. If you are born to a poor - average family, and go to an average state primary, at no point will the idea of applying for a scholarship (let alone having the resources to successfully apply) ever be suggested. The parents won't be aware, or very aware of it, and the teachers at the school won't be aware of it, and if they are their priority isn't getting clever kids into private schools.
Original post by Farchitect
So I think it would be practical in the medium term to abolish all independent schools/nationalise them. If the richest parents want to pay to have private tutition or whatever outside of school then so be it, that is still a much better system than what we currently have. One of the main problems with the system at the moment isn't the quality of the education per se, it is about the kind of people you meet, and learning how to interact in the right way. One of the main advantages of private schools, especially the more pretigious ones is the old boys network it gives you access to. Another advantage is actually being used to interacting with very elite people, sso your best mate at school might be the son of an MP, or a famous Proffessor, Author Lawyer etc. you get the idea. By giving everyone access to this it would greatly reduce its overall influence on society.
But richer parents are more likely to understand the importance of these issues. Half of the parents of state school kids are smoking and drinking whilst they're pregnant let alone anything else. That is speaking as someone is state educated, not as a snob.
No, that would be impracticle, but just because that is impracticle doesn't mean we should just let it be. See my response at the start of this reply. It would be pretty simple to police independent schools though, in the same way that any other ilegal organisation is policed.
That's great, and you were lucky then. But many kids are not blessed with such an ambitious family such as yours, why should the kid be punished?
Dumbing down degrees is irelevent. The problem for the most part is the inequality in the school system.
I think one of the most important steps the government should take is to abolish slection by catchment area in state schools. This makes it possible for affluent families to effectively buy their way into good state schools, and concentrates all of the **** families in certain areas, which just perpetuates the situation. I went to a state school which didn't select by catchment area, and it had a mix of people who were from really poor backgrounds (kids from council estates with both parents in prison etc.) and kids with millionaire families. It was the best state school in the city, so it obviously worked.
But richer parents are more likely to understand the importance of these issues. Half of the parents of state school kids are smoking and drinking whilst they're pregnant let alone anything else. That is speaking as someone is state educated, not as a snob.
No, that would be impracticle, but just because that is impracticle doesn't mean we should just let it be. See my response at the start of this reply. It would be pretty simple to police independent schools though, in the same way that any other ilegal organisation is policed.
That's great, and you were lucky then. But many kids are not blessed with such an ambitious family such as yours, why should the kid be punished?
Dumbing down degrees is irelevent. The problem for the most part is the inequality in the school system.
I think one of the most important steps the government should take is to abolish slection by catchment area in state schools. This makes it possible for affluent families to effectively buy their way into good state schools, and concentrates all of the **** families in certain areas, which just perpetuates the situation. I went to a state school which didn't select by catchment area, and it had a mix of people who were from really poor backgrounds (kids from council estates with both parents in prison etc.) and kids with millionaire families. It was the best state school in the city, so it obviously worked.
I think your missing my central points, If you take Parents ability to be able to better their children's prospects away you take away core incentives which affects peoples motivations and hurts the economy.
If I want to send my child to a privet school or get privet tutors for my child that will be expensive I don't have those funds maybe I work my ass off to get those funds. isn't that a positive thing should we not encourage that? Also it does reduce the cost to the state.
Diet and nutrition has a permanent effect. As does smoking and drinking whilst pregnant. This will affect the babies growth most importantly their brain growth. That can't be reversed by modern medical standards. They will permanently be less intelligent then they would have been had they been given a healthier diet growing up and more responsible mother before they were born.
You can't fix that one, they will achieve less then their peers. trying to hold back other students because these students can never catch up is not the answer. Weaker universities will produce weaker quality graduates.
Trying to make all degrees from all universities equal does not work it devalues the degree. I barely put in any effort at all when for my first degree scoring 2:1 multiple people who did degrees at similar universities and courses have said the same to me. Maths students from Cambridge in their first year already report on here how hard they work and how difficult it is.
Should these people really have the same results and prospects?
You know I think the solution is to do what we can do to give those from less advantaged backgrounds the chance if they want it. Rather then hold back those that do well. Such steps could involve Actually making it illegal for parents to drink and smoke when pregnant. Seriously it has a permanent negative effect on their child's brain, I fully support that idea. I also think School meals is a good idea. and maybe government funding for educational websites and more educational support for those that need it are all positive things.
However at the end of the day Grades/academic credentials should be all that matters on been accepted or rejected from university. Students who do well and get into decent universities should have those efforts respected.
If decent university graduates have good prospects then students from poor back grounds have the chance to get ahead. By doing well in education and getting into a decent university. If the university does not matter and education does not matter because all good grades always = privilege never ability or hard work then these students never stand a chance.
You know I witnessed a girl who looks down on me like I am a piece of dirt who went to a crud university and got 2:2 get a decent job whilst I know likely if I had a 1st class honors from Cambridge I would likely be rejected from that job. My issues is autism not wealth I don't have the same social skills so do worse at interviews and I don't make friends to know people in the right positions. She knew the right person and slept around enough to get that job. I like to think that if I work hard I can get ahead this whole mentality means if i work my ass off and am 8 standard deviations of intelligence above this girl I will never get anywhere near the level of success she gets when taking the piss.
Same applies to poor students they may not have the contacts but now their degrees are not worth more anyway so they stand less chance in getting decent jobs.
Your mentality does not help disadvantaged individuals it hinders them.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- What is the point of SATs exams in year 6?
- Disappointed by a levels grades
- Why do people say that BTECs are **** easy?
- Anybody else sometimes feel guilty about having attended a private school?
- Coursework feels so dragged out
- Should I redo the year? (Engineering)
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- EPQ??
- how to cover all of gcse maths content in one month
- Do A level subjects matter (for degree apprenticeships) ?
- What A-Levels are best for PPL at oxford?
- Rules against using chatGPT or similar on TSR?
- Are people with 2.2s good PHD students?
- Cifas marker and renting
- is it possible to get grade 9 in gcse's in just 2 months?
- Advice for burnt out student just before alevel mocks
- Should I use Anki at A level?
- Possibility
- Gcse History paper
- What to do
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
