Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    To a socialist perhaps. But your system of education has clearly failed so lets try something different.
    You do know we don't have a socialist system of education, right?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    To a socialist perhaps. But your system of education has clearly failed so lets try something different.
    I went to a comprehensive, have an Oxford degree, and am doing a PhD in history funded by the state (the odds of getting a funded PhD in history are pretty slim) so to be honest I disagree. The size of comprehensives in inner cities is the problem not the style of education. My school was 1200. I was a person to my teachers. In a school of 3000 or more that's not so possible is it! Those who want to buy and sell education disgust me.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    Mr Mosley?

    I suggest that they travel to the nearest country of refuge. They would be safe in Spain, France, Italy, Greece, Turkey etc. I'm not saying we should refuse all asylum seekers and we should definitely take a proportion of the refugees but other countries closer to Libya and with greater space who have the broadest shoulders for this process should play their part.

    Would you not agree?
    Not really but I'm not that interested in the subject at the moment. The burden should be spread by those bombing the living daylights out of the place and that means we need to take our place in the countries offering refuge.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    Yes and no

    Technically its not allowed but I was working in the Café so it was all underhand and wink wink

    A keen manager will come in about once every 15 minutes and the rest will come in about once every hour or so unless we call for them so its a free reign to eat/drink
    Oh. Theft. I see. To be honest, I can't talk considering how many Microsoft, Samsung, Sony, and bing pens I've got at home, but I forget that I'm carrying them on me!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Metrobeans)
    Oh. Theft. I see. To be honest, I can't talk considering how many Microsoft, Samsung, Sony, and bing pens I've got at home, but I forget that I'm carrying them on me!
    I prefer to call it employee benefits
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    The point is under the above scenario there wouldn't be a system as such. The pupils (and there parents) would choose an education suitable for them. If a suitable system wasn't in place, under a free market, someone would fill that niche and create one.

    In this way every pupils need would be catered for.
    I have had this debate many times, probably with Simon at least once.

    Students are still restricted to schools they can afford to commute to which can reasonably mean only one in some cases. Also, just because the parents/educational specialists or whoever set up X doesn't mean that the community as a whole want X. Even if we assume that this is the case, then what if nobody does fill the gap left by the wants of Y? What if nobody wants to?

    I also don't particularly agree that parents in many cases A) are the best people to decide what is right for their child and B) possess the knowledge to actually effect any change. Such a system would still be dominated by an elite (the educated) the difference is that there would be more flexibility to prejudice one group over another.

    Would you be ok with schools being set up with any selection procedure? What safeguards would be in place to ensure provision for the children thrown out of school, and all those with special needs? The fact is that there needs to be safeguards. In my opinion, of course.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adorno)
    Not really but I'm not that interested in the subject at the moment. The burden should be spread by those bombing the living daylights out of the place and that means we need to take our place in the countries offering refuge.
    This is not like Iraq or Afghanistan though. Yes we are bombing Libya, but we are bombing Gaddafi and his men; most of the citizens and rebels support our action because we are stopping them from being persecuted by that dictator and allowing the rebels to push forward and in the long-run, form a democracy.

    Yes we must offer some refuge but most should be given to the nearest countries.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    This is not like Iraq or Afghanistan though. Yes we are bombing Libya, but we are bombing Gaddafi and his men; most of the citizens and rebels support our action because we are stopping them from being persecuted by that dictator and allowing the rebels to push forward and in the long-run, form a democracy.

    Yes we must offer some refuge but most should be given to the nearest countries.
    Is that Jacquie Smith in your avatar?

    Really? :curious:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilzman)
    Is that Jacquie Smith in your avatar?

    Really? :curious:
    Yes. It will all make sense soon
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    This is not like Iraq or Afghanistan though. Yes we are bombing Libya, but we are bombing Gaddafi and his men; most of the citizens and rebels support our action because we are stopping them from being persecuted by that dictator and allowing the rebels to push forward and in the long-run, form a democracy.

    Yes we must offer some refuge but most should be given to the nearest countries.
    It's a civil war which doesn't mean anything like the sort of position you're putting forward here. You're a typical blairite: create a mess and then give it over to other people to sort it out.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    Yes. It will all make sense soon
    Well yes, I know that.

    I meant you really want her as your avatar? She did a terrible job as Home Sec. imho.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    This is not like Iraq or Afghanistan though. Yes we are bombing Libya, but we are bombing Gaddafi and his men; most of the citizens and rebels support our action because we are stopping them from being persecuted by that dictator and allowing the rebels to push forward and in the long-run, form a democracy.

    Yes we must offer some refuge but most should be given to the nearest countries.
    Well, the second part is true, but there's still not a huge amount of evidence that the majority of the citizens approve of what we're doing. Or even of the fact that we should be doing anything.

    (Original post by Wilzman)
    Is that Jacquie Smith in your avatar?

    Really? :curious:
    Disclaimer: TSR Labour is not affiliated with Jacquie smith.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ham and Cheese)
    I prefer to call it employee benefits
    Ha! When I worked in Kingston, the only 'employee benefit' I got was a slightly subsidised staff restaurant. Bad times.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Disclaimer: TSR Labour is not affiliated with Jacquie smith.
    But she is by extension of Ham and Cheese's avatar.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So, how do I block someone?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stricof)
    But Ham and Cheese is.
    ...

    Disclaimer: TSR Labour is not affiliated with Ham and Cheese

    :p:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stricof)
    But she is by extension of Ham and Cheese's avatar.
    What happened with our position vis-a-vis coalitions, we didn't get much relay of information...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilzman)
    Well yes, I know that.

    I meant you really want her as your avatar? She did a terrible job as Home Sec. imho.
    I think she was a good Home Secretary; her only downfall was expenses. I think her heart was in the right place but when she actually wanted to get things done she was a bit retarded.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Why has it clearly failed? Also, a socialist system of education is not what they country has.
    Basic literacy and numeracy rates are lower now than before the state took pretty much complete control of education. If the education system hasn't even got the basics right, then it is hardly a success.


    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    You do know we don't have a socialist system of education, right?
    Of course. To clarify it is more of a socialist system than a free one, or was until tuition fees, academies etc.

    (Original post by Adorno)
    I went to a comprehensive, have an Oxford degree, and am doing a PhD in history funded by the state (the odds of getting a funded PhD in history are pretty slim) so to be honest I disagree. The size of comprehensives in inner cities is the problem not the style of education. My school was 1200. I was a person to my teachers. In a school of 3000 or more that's not so possible is it! Those who want to buy and sell education disgust me.
    Congratulations on your academic achievements, they are very impressive. There was an interesting experiment by one school, I can't remember its name, in which classes were merged and what they did was had one teacher giving the lesson and the other teachers going around the class and helping the pupils with questions. It isn't just about class and school size but about its ethos and having pupils and parents that buy into that ethos.

    I understand your aversion to creating a "market" of schools as we have all been conditioned by the state to think this way. If the state had provided shoes to everyone for the last 60 years and suddenly someone said "maybe shoes should't be under the control of the state", we would have cries of " do you only wan't the rich to be able to afford shoes". Even though I don't see many people walking around barefoot just now.

    It's about creating a learning environment that works for each pupil according to their wants and desires not what the state decides what those wants and desires should be.

    What would your views be on a system similar to Sweden whereby parents are given vouchers and with these they can choose whatever school they like and people are free to set up their own schools, but the state still foots the bill?
    • PS Reviewer
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    Basic literacy and numeracy rates are lower now than before the state took pretty much complete control of education. If the education system hasn't even got the basics right, then it is hardly a success.




    Of course. To clarify it is more of a socialist system than a free one, or was until tuition fees, academies etc.



    Congratulations on your academic achievements, they are very impressive. There was an interesting experiment by one school, I can't remember its name, in which classes were merged and what they did was had one teacher giving the lesson and the other teachers going around the class and helping the pupils with questions. It isn't just about class and school size but about its ethos and having pupils and parents that buy into that ethos.

    I understand your aversion to creating a "market" of schools as we have all been conditioned by the state to think this way. If the state had provided shoes to everyone for the last 60 years and suddenly someone said "maybe education should't be under the control of the state", we would have cries of " do you only wan't the rich to be able to afford shoes". Even though I don't see many people walking around barefoot just now.

    It's about creating a learning environment that works for each pupil according to their wants and desires not what the state decides what those wants and desires should be.

    What would your views be on a system similar to Sweden whereby parents are given vouchers and with these they can choose whatever school they like and people are free to set up their own schools, but the state still foots the bill?
    Would everyone get the voucher regardless of income? If so then lol, no.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.