Students must fight the marketisation of education! Watch

Jaager
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#1
All but the most right wing of people would agree that education is a right, not a privalege. Infact, our right to education is enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights. However, our right to education is under attack.

Globally a process of mrketisation and comercialisation of education has been taken place, spearheaded by the world trade organisation (an unelected body whose function is to further the needs of global corporations around the world.)

In the UK this process of comercialisation has taken on many forms, from acadamies and trust schools, to the introduction of fees in higher education, the democratic control of education is being eroded.

Why are acadamies and private funding a bad thing?

The idea behind acadamies is that in order to fund more schools in the public sector, thilanthropic businessmen with enough money can fund the building and running of a school. Sounds good? Well what this means for communities is that the schools are taken out of the hands of local authorities, this means that these schools are no longer accountable to the community, no one elected the corporate sponser, and no one can hold them to account. Another thing is that any school that is privately funded through such schemes as PFI (private finance initiative), is leased back to the public sector, eventually this will cost the public more than if the schools had been wholey funded by the local authority.

Why is commercialisation of higher education a bad thing?

In higher education, a process of marketisation will lead to increased compitition between departments seeking funding. Only those departments which are economically viable, or those that have corporate sponsers will survive. This process can already be seen in many universities with departmental closures.

Why does this effect the democracy of the country?

Many of the departments that are effected by marketisation are in humanities and social sciences, these are the types of courses that encourage critical thinking, without courses such as socialogy, people wouldnt understand the social structures that make up society, without psychology there would be no understanding of what makes us do what we do. In the end the majority of courses, would be those that simply prepare us for a life as obediant workers.

What can students do?

The National Union of Students has failed. It has reduced itself through undemocratic internal reforms into a weak lobying organisation. They recently proposed a funding blueprint that they say would break up the consensus on fees, but what this blueprint really does, is further marketisation, and hand over more power to large corporations and businesses.

Students must act at a grass roots level, and coordinate with teaching unions, and local community groups in order to present a fighting resistance to the marketisation of education. By taking direct action, and showing the universities, the government, and NUS that we dont want higher fees, that we dont want debt, and we dont want acadamies, we can reclaim our education.
0
quote
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 9 years ago
#2
(Original post by Jaager)
Infact, our right to education is enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights.
Where in article 26 does it provide for free higher education?
0
quote
reply
Gordon_Brown
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 9 years ago
#3
:awesome:
0
quote
reply
Dan011
Badges: 0
#4
Report 9 years ago
#4
I couldn't be bothered to read all that, but no fees yay :woo:
0
quote
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5
Report 9 years ago
#5
(Original post by Jaager)
All but the most right wing of people would agree that education is a right, not a privalege. Infact, our right to education is enshrined in the UN declaration of human rights. However, our right to education is under attack.

Globally a process of mrketisation and comercialisation of education has been taken place, spearheaded by the world trade organisation (an unelected body whose function is to further the needs of global corporations around the world.)

In the UK this process of comercialisation has taken on many forms, from acadamies and trust schools, to the introduction of fees in higher education, the democratic control of education is being eroded.

Why are acadamies and private funding a bad thing?

The idea behind acadamies is that in order to fund more schools in the public sector, thilanthropic businessmen with enough money can fund the building and running of a school. Sounds good? Well what this means for communities is that the schools are taken out of the hands of local authorities, this means that these schools are no longer accountable to the community, no one elected the corporate sponser, and no one can hold them to account. Another thing is that any school that is privately funded through such schemes as PFI (private finance initiative), is leased back to the public sector, eventually this will cost the public more than if the schools had been wholey funded by the local authority.

Why is commercialisation of higher education a bad thing?

In higher education, a process of marketisation will lead to increased compitition between departments seeking funding. Only those departments which are economically viable, or those that have corporate sponsers will survive. This process can already be seen in many universities with departmental closures.

Why does this effect the democracy of the country?

Many of the departments that are effected by marketisation are in humanities and social sciences, these are the types of courses that encourage critical thinking, without courses such as socialogy, people wouldnt understand the social structures that make up society, without psychology there would be no understanding of what makes us do what we do. In the end the majority of courses, would be those that simply prepare us for a life as obediant workers.

What can students do?

The National Union of Students has failed. It has reduced itself through undemocratic internal reforms into a weak lobying organisation. They recently proposed a funding blueprint that they say would break up the consensus on fees, but what this blueprint really does, is further marketisation, and hand over more power to large corporations and businesses.

Students must act at a grass roots level, and coordinate with teaching unions, and local community groups in order to present a fighting resistance to the marketisation of education. By taking direct action, and showing the universities, the government, and NUS that we dont want higher fees, that we dont want debt, and we dont want acadamies, we can reclaim our education.
Would you like to remove the fees for HE then? Why would you like to lower university funding?

Don't you think protests were made before the introductions? Why do you think they failed?

Would you write off the inccurred debt if fees for future students was removed - if so where would the money come from?
0
quote
reply
Jaager
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#6
(Original post by Quady)
Would you like to remove the fees for HE then? Why would you like to lower university funding?
Yes i support the removal of fees for HE. Currently despite fees rising since they were introduced, the standard of HE has fallen, this is because the majority of funding is lost in the managerial beurocracy of the university, it is ridiculous that university management recieve up to 7 times more than a lecturer, when departments are facing closure and lecturers are facing pay cuts.

(Original post by Quady)
Don't you think protests were made before the introductions? Why do you think they failed?
Protests were made before, however they failed to mobalise more than students, the student movement has to be actively involved with community groups and teaching unions, this is not simply a student problem, this is something faced by the whole of society.

(Original post by Quady)
Would you write off the inccurred debt if fees for future students was removed - if so where would the money come from?
If we can bail out banks, we can bail out students.
0
quote
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 9 years ago
#7
(Original post by Jaager)
If we can bail out banks, we can bail out students.
The Treasury don't even know if we can bail out banks - I'm glad you have more faith
0
quote
reply
Spanghew
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report 9 years ago
#8
I don't want to pay more taxes so that a load of people I don't know can go and study sociology.
0
quote
reply
Jaager
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#9
(Original post by Spanghew)
I don't want to pay more taxes so that a load of people I don't know can go and study sociology.

How about thinking about it in a way that you pay more taxes so that your children can have access to free university education. Education benefits the whole of society, not just individuals...
0
quote
reply
Liquidus Zeromus
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#10
Report 9 years ago
#10
Definitely. The private sector isn't the exclusive solution to everything.

I don't mind tuition fees, though. There's a difference between having to pay and leaving education to the ruthlessness of market forces.
0
quote
reply
Trevor 12345
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 9 years ago
#11
Jaager, I like this thread and I like your views.
You are dead right, there should be no fee's for H.E.
Unfortunately there were no real protests against the introduction of fees and abolishment of Grants; in retrospect this was shocking, absolutely shocking.
The political speeches given at the time were sickening, given that every one of the graduate politicians had benefited from free education.

As it happens I am in favour of private schools anf grammar schools, I am not however impressed at all with the idea of state schools being infiltrated with private or corporate sponsors.
0
quote
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 9 years ago
#12
(Original post by Mrm.)
there were no real protests against the introduction of fees and abolishment of Grants; in retrospect this was shocking, absolutely shocking.
errrmmmmm I seem to remember wandering around London with a placard... or perhaps that was stop the war... was I dreaming it?
0
quote
reply
Nouvelle vague
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report 9 years ago
#13
On the topic of marketing, I hate the stupid learning techniques/styles that are forced upon us. Visual/active/kinetic/blah blah blah. This kind of business marketing has kind of slipped its way into the educational system.

Ofsted are the worse. A whole week of making posters and learning absolute nothing to satisfy the college a pass. What a waste. If there was a teacher just standing at the front of the class actually teaching, us then learning something and getting A/B grades, that would not bode well with Ofsted. Ridiculous
0
quote
reply
Trevor 12345
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report 9 years ago
#14
(Original post by Quady)
errrmmmmm I seem to remember wandering around London with a placard... or perhaps that was stop the war... was I dreaming it?
I really don't know what you were doing 12 years ago..... because thats when they went, although the rot had started to set in before with regards to loans.

If you would allow me to hazard a guess at your age then my best guess is about 25, so you would have been 13 at the time ......

Much more than Placards were needed at the time...
0
quote
reply
Joy Division
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 9 years ago
#15
What about fees of international students, surely if all humans have a right to education and a right to freedom of movement (UN), they should not have to pay anything either, according to your idea that education should not be marketised.


(Original post by Nouvelle vague)
On the topic of marketing, I hate the stupid learning techniques/styles that are forced upon us. Visual/active/kinetic/blah blah blah. This kind of business marketing has kind of slipped its way into the educational system.

Ofsted are the worse. A whole week of making posters and learning absolute nothing to satisfy the college a pass. What a waste. If there was a teacher just standing at the front of the class actually teaching, us then learning something and getting A/B grades, that would not bode well with Ofsted. Ridiculous
err "Marketisation" =/= 'Marketing' :no: :o:
0
quote
reply
Jaager
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#16
(Original post by Joy Division)
What about fees of international students, surely if all humans have a right to education and a right to freedom of movement (UN), they should not have to pay anything either, according to your idea that education should not be marketised.
They should recieve a grant from their government.

(Original post by Joy Division)
err "Marketisation" =/= 'Marketing' :no: :o:

However, much of what was just mentioned are a consequence of the marketisation process.
0
quote
reply
Juno
  • PS Reviewer
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#17
Report 9 years ago
#17
Fight the meerkatisation!

0
quote
reply
Svenjamin
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#18
Report 9 years ago
#18
You're after the holy grail here. You want higher education open to everyone for free, but you don't want the level of HE to drop. It's fairly obvious why that could never work.

Taxing everyone for HE will undoubtedly be unpopular in an age where students are currently getting in tonnes of debt. Expecting them to pay not only for their own degree, but for every graduate after them is a bit of a kick in the teeth. The only way taxation could work is the proposed plan for taxing students for their own education rather than taxing the whole of society.

Basic education is a right, but entering into higher education is a privelege. Saying HE is a right suggests that people should be able to study a degree regardless of their A level grades. Handing out mickey mouse degrees to people because it's their 'right' benefits no one, and is kinda condescending.
0
quote
reply
Trevor 12345
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report 9 years ago
#19
(Original post by Svenjamin)
You're after the holy grail here. You want higher education open to everyone for free, but you don't want the level of HE to drop. It's fairly obvious why that could never work.

Taxing everyone for HE will undoubtedly be unpopular in an age where students are currently getting in tonnes of debt. Expecting them to pay not only for their own degree, but for every graduate after them is a bit of a kick in the teeth. The only way taxation could work is the proposed plan for taxing students for their own education rather than taxing the whole of society.

Basic education is a right, but entering into higher education is a privelege. Saying HE is a right suggests that people should be able to study a degree regardless of their A level grades. Handing out mickey mouse degrees to people because it's their 'right' benefits no one, and is kinda condescending.
erm... it used to work just fine pre 1997.
0
quote
reply
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 9 years ago
#20
(Original post by Mrm.)
erm... it used to work just fine pre 1997.
Well fees must have come in for a reason... unlike the NHS at that time I know little about it. I agree with your other reply, I'm surprised things were more lackluster back then.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (157)
27.3%
No (418)
72.7%

Watched Threads

View All