University of Glasgow blether thread

I mean, it's good the university is so popular and all that (if not among the kind of people who aspire to Durham/St Andrews when that devastating Oxbridge rejection letter comes through).

Umm, as far as I was aware, Glasgow did not have contextual factors, simply because in the past they did not have to. Nearly 70% of the university is Scottish, and over 80% is state schooled. At Edinburgh it was less than 40% Scottish and less than 60% state schooled, so it was a much bigger deal to work out who to make offers to. Infact, UCAS had a profile of applicants on the site for the 2008 session, and the applicant profiles of Glasgow and Edinburgh were remarkably similar in all but one respect: Edinburgh gets three times as many applicants from families in the top six out of seventeen social groups (so parents who do things like higher-supervisory positions and above) from England (I'd say the lion's share of that is to do with the stereotype the city of Glasgow carries in the south). Ergo, they had to have a think about not disadvantaging the locals (which shamefully was picked up on as being anti-English) because they could fill the university three times over each year with applicants from certain backgrounds, and thus the kind of people who come on TSR all get rejected and either become bitter or think the place is an ivory tower. But yeah, that could be the way we go in the next 2-3 years.

This is a good read: http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/socio-economic-disadvantage-and-experience-higher-education

Especially this quote: "I don't want to open my mouth in class because they're gonnae hear my accent and know that I'm no coming fae, you know, somewhere like that. That's why I chose [former-polytechnic university] cos' all the professors spoke like me, you know they all had this kind of a voice, and everybody that went there, was just like me."
(Evelyn, 20, degree dropout)

Sound like anyone?

If you can get a job, then the masters is unnecessary work IMO, esp if it's not tailored to get you into what you really want to do or go into academia. That being said, getting something else to set you apart isn't a bad idea... At this rate, a PhD doesn't sound bad, because we might be needing the lecturers in three years time.

I am myself wondering about doing the MSci (Work exp year). My advisor told me yesterday that he sees a 2.1 BSc as the same as a 2.1 MSc, And another lecturer has the same viewpoint. However the lecturer in the degree group seems to think it's the bees knees. I have a girlfriend and a close knit of friends, so i'm wondering whether it's worth it.

Then again, I might not even be accepted.

Is the work experience related to what you actually want to do? If so, I would do it. Part of my problem is that I don't actually know what I want to do.

can anybody mind when our first student loan payment comes in?
i know it's around the 15th or so but i'm not sure exactly

I'm so excited about the upcoming year and I'm going to try and find a society this year (last year I was too busy finding my way around everything to actually engage in any societies). Also, my schedule is pretty awesome.

2 pm - Sociology
3 pm - Economic & Social History (level 1)
4 pm - That European history course that I can't remember what it's called exactly which is a level 2 subject

It's pretty awesome, non?

I'm so excited about the upcoming year and I'm going to try and find a society this year (last year I was too busy finding my way around everything to actually engage in any societies). Also, my schedule is pretty awesome.

2 pm - Sociology
3 pm - Economic & Social History (level 1)
4 pm - That European history course that I can't remember what it's called exactly which is a level 2 subject

It's pretty awesome, non?

Not so awesome if those classes are at the other side of campus. Getting there a bit late every lecture gets annoying.

Bit of a slog, no?

(just saw that Sociology and History need to change slot, timewise - woops)

Well, E&S History and Sociology are in the same building, so that shouldn't be too difficult, and as far as getting from History to E&S History, I hope I'll learn. I just know I hated it when I had an hour between each lecture.


Not really because they're in the same building and Sociolgy is only twice a week and I have Fridays off too

Aye, but still, 3 hours of lectures! After two I'm well and truly in "can't be arsed" mode and tend to faff around. 4 hours of lectures on a Tuesday this year is going to be a killer, especially seeing as the more important lecture is the last two hours... plenty of coffee being consumed methinks...

Still, sounds pretty good and you can have plenty late nights, I'm not trying to run you down, honest

Yeah, that's perhaps true but in high school, all of my classes were 1 hour and 10 minutes long and I had about four of them and like 10 minute break between each. So as long as I get a decent amount of sleep and possibly some coffee at the start of the day, I should be fine.

Although I realized that the Swedish election is at the 19th of September so the first week of lectures, I run the risk of either being superhappy or in a major depression once the lectures start. Haha. I really hope for the first option. /random information that no one really needs to know but I feel like sharing anyway.

Yeah, I fell out of the way of studying after my last year of school, when I just arsed around most of the time, but yeah, coffee and sleep is a winner (I'm a good ol' caffeine addict from my days in a coffee shop...)

What's Swedish politics like? Has there been a nationalist party in power there for aaaaaaaages that can't be got rid of or I am way off?

I still can't drink coffee. I need milk, cream and chocolate in order to get it into my system these days. And sugar. I'm terrible with coffee. Tea on the other hand I can drink obsessively.

There's never been a nationalist party in power and there's only once been a nationalist party in the riksdag (I assume it's like your parlament) but that was during the Carl Bildt years of around '91 and they only had one mandate. Currently, we're having a right-wing collision government headed by the Moderates who are ******* the country over (pardon my language). They've adopted left-wing words because that's what swedish people vote for and wraped them slightly so that when they for example discuss the 'welfare system', they're actually discussing something else. What makes them scary other than the fact that they are attempting to completely change state system, is that they are doing it while openingly misleading the people.

We do have a racist/nationalist party that is in danger of entering into the riksdag, called the Swedish Democrats, but I highly doubt that they will be able to succeed, but I might just be naive.

Most of the time, Sweden has a Social Democratic government. This year, the election is superimportant because if the Moderates get another term, they will radically change the Swedish society and because our lowest legal wage is zero (because all wage negotiations are handled by the union and not stated expressively in a law) and we're generally ******. So yeah, if they get elected, major depression will happen. (to tell the truth, I'm more concerned about the Moderates still being in power than the Swedish Democrats getting in. If the Social Democrats win and SD gets in, they won't get any say-so because the Social Democrats have publically refused working with them regardless of situation, which the Moderates have not)

Sorry for the rambling but that is essentially the absolute basic of Swedish politics atm.

You can't take coffee

Cheers for the rundown, all very interesting I must've heard right-wing and thought far right-wing. Nevermind, seems almost as bad. Fingers crossed for the SDs then...

(just to clarify. SD = Social Democrats and not Swedish Democrats? :P Just realized that my explanation might've been confusing as they have the same initials in English )

haha. I know, but I have a feeling this year will make me more tolerant. If nothing else, I'll stick to tea. Speaking of tea, btw, I'm really surprised what a lousy selection of tea you can find in Glasgow. With the UK being the tea capital of the world or something like that, I had this idea that I would find lots of different teas, but all I can find are basically Tetley's and the classic Earl Grey etc. It makes me sad.

Aye! I've always referred to Social Dems as SDs anyway...

Even when I worked in a coffee shop we sold loads of different teas (like, Breakfast tea/Earl Grey/Green Tea/Blackcurrent Tea/Cammomile)? I don't drink tea, but I'm sure supermarkets and that will do different varieties. There's even a new tea shop opening in Buchanan Galleries so I'd be surprised if there's not one in the oh-so-Cosmopolitan West End. Sorry, I can't offer much beyond general shock.

Good It's scary when so much rides on an election. *keeps fingers crossed*

Breakfast tea/Earl Grey/Green Tea/Blackcurrent Tea/Cammomile are sort of the teas that I would describe as the basic ones. Then there's like Chai that can be difficult to find if you want a brand aside from Twinings (or how it's spelled) and there's like all of these like... chocolate or blueberry teas etc that I would love to try that I can find at home but I have yet to find in the West End. But maybe that new tea shop might be worth checking out.