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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Holy hell...

    Speaking as someone who grew up in an incredibly poor (and very, very large) family, in a deprived area, I must say I find this absolutely disgraceful.

    Nothing - absolutely nothing - about your financial background stops you from getting places. It is all about how hard you are willing to work, how determined you are, and how able you are to achieve. While students from poorer backgrounds may not have the mindframe that those from the higher classes do, it is down to them to change.

    Just because someone is poor, does not mean they are unintelligent. The assumption that a student from a poor background needs a grade boost is, frankly, patronising and disgusting. What happened to meritocracy?

    Out of 8 of my siblings, 5 have attended university, with myself and the others currently at university, or headed there. One is now Head Oracle DBA at a multinational finance company, as well as a qualified media & IP lawyer; one runs his own computing and networking company; one is a technology consultant at a major Ministry of Defence contractor; one is a mineral and mining engineer; one is a parisitologist. They are all, in their own rights, perfectly successful in their chosen fields. Maybe not world-leaders, but respectably employed in above-average roles. They received no grade-boosts, no special attention and no preferrential treatment. They got where they are through hard work. And, that is the way it should be; suggestions otherwise are nothing short of insulting.

    New Labour enrage me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Solution: universities interview more?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jammythedodger)
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8192234.stm

    I'm not sure if there is already a thread about this, but I am furious at the idea. I've just finished school at 18, but how is this right?

    They say it helps social mobility. It was the Labour Party who abolished grammar schools which actually helped social mobility (facts and figures I'm afraid, not just personal opinion). Some people are left behind, but the majority are do worse because they don't put the effort in or just simply are not acadmeic - neither of which are a reason to give them a "head start".
    They shoudl work on improving students grades through helping them actually do better on their own merits than just introducing state sactioned grade-cheating.

    Opinions? :p:

    I will put your ignorance of the old grammar school system down to the fact that you are very young. Grammar school provision was at the expense of the vast majority of children who were sent to Secondary Modern schools, where they were not allowed to take O levels. Fact not personal opinion. Furthermore Grammar school provision was different in different authorities. You obviously are unaware that in the whole of Cheshire for instance there were only ever 2 grammar schools. Thus a very small number of pupils went and the vast majority of children wre condemned to secondary moderns. Your supposed data is wrong anyway. There were only ever a tiny numberr of working class children who passed the 11 plus. Oh and finally, The Tories abolished more Grammar schools under Thatcher than any Labour administration!
    Offline

    10
    this is making me so angry that i've had to post this in bold.
    this is the most STUPID and ******* idiotic idea i have ever heard.
    whoever came up with it must be the biggest loser ever ... arrrrghhh im sooo annoyed !! so instead of making people work harder they're saying that if a student is poorer then they are advantaged - how the **** is that fair??!!! if this actually happens then im going to hate the education system ..
    we'll end up with dumb students in univercities whilst the clever ones are going to be unable to get in... this is crazyyy
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nelie)
    I go to a grammar school. One of my friends is very very poor. Shes managed to achive [predicted] ABB.
    120 students out of the 130 there are going, hopefully to uni this year, and their IS a very wide range of incomes.
    If your pooor, it doesnt affect your ability to learn. This story made me sick, its all about giving thr poor more chance, why should we reward the benifit frauds just so thie kids can go to uni, hmm, people who work so hard for thie grades, and I know im gonna be gettting BCC at the max, and i dont even get the stupid grants to go to uni! -.- so they are saying if your poor and thicck, you should get a place over someone who is rich and clever? hmm thats great thinking by the labour GOv... I can see a lot of students predicted A*a*a* [next year] not going out of protest... it is distgusting. utterly. I cant think of the words to describe it.

    My God, how did you get into a Grammar school with that level of English?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bright.Inspiration.)
    they're saying that if a student is poorer then they are advantaged
    Which is more fair than what we've got now, that if a student is richer then they're advantaged? It's just balancing out both sides.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jammythedodger)
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8192234.stm

    I'm not sure if there is already a thread about this, but I am furious at the idea. I've just finished school at 18, but how is this right?

    They say it helps social mobility. It was the Labour Party who abolished grammar schools which actually helped social mobility (facts and figures I'm afraid, not just personal opinion). Some people are left behind, but the majority are do worse because they don't put the effort in or just simply are not acadmeic - neither of which are a reason to give them a "head start".
    They shoudl work on improving students grades through helping them actually do better on their own merits than just introducing state sactioned grade-cheating.

    Opinions? :p:
    This is possibly the fail of the year from the government.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    But:

    Will Cameron mean what he says about "Education, education, education", or is just using that to be PM?

    and

    Why do people still vote Labour if it's so bad?

    in conjunction

    Why do people say something like "you haven't experienced the Conservatives, so I will always vote Labour"

    so

    What's so bad about the Tories?
    This isn't Question Time. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chris king)
    Has it never occurred to you that because people have different qualities there will always be inequalities?

    There will always be class differences and no social engineering, no matter how unfair and ridiculous, will ever change that I'm afraid.
    Obviously people have different abilities . I'm not trying to deny this. BUT the current education system means that people don't get judged on their abilities, but on their background. Which was my point all along.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm from a low paid background. I find this insulting. I still topped the class in two subjects! And my income was low. And I'm from a crap area!
    They don't understand!
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by Marsha2112)
    Which is more fair than what we've got now, that if a student is richer then they're advantaged? It's just balancing out both sides.
    no its not.
    what about us people who are not 'rich' or 'poor' .. we're in the middle and therefore have no advantage whatsoever. so even if we are more talented and harder working than the others we may still not do as well as them due to their 'head start'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paxdax)
    Only in Britain.
    amen
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That level of english?
    I'm sorry it's not up to your standards.

    Utterly. Forgive me please.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Marsha2112)
    Which is more fair than what we've got now, that if a student is richer then they're advantaged? It's just balancing out both sides.
    No it isn't!

    It's just a message from the government, to the people who don't give two ***** about education saying, "you've done bad in education. don't worry. you don't need to work hard. we'll simply give you a grade boost and let you into the top unis".

    money =/= advantage

    you can have ALL the money in the world, the best teaching, the best facilities - but if you don't give a **** about your education, trust me, you are not an advantage.

    likewise, if you grow up in a poor neighbourhood, bad schooling, no academic environment, if you really wanted to go to uni you would've worked hard REGARDLESS of anything else.

    ffs you can have everything in the world, but the only thing that's going to get you there is hard work. fact. don't tell me a private schooler can get in with no school, because 1) that's patronising to the private schooler, likewise it's patronising to say "oh you're working class, you're stupid, here, have AAA".

    it's not balancing both sides, but making things a hell of a lot worse. it's a stupid idea.

    has anyone seen How The Other Half Live? that's supposed to be the standard reflection of the average poor family - and let me tell you for a fact, they really are not.

    living in a bad area =/= poor

    likewise

    poor =/= stupid

    yes, if you're poor you may be disadvantage for obvious reasons, but do you think this system is going to make it any better? NO.

    if we want to balance out both sides - FFS IMPROVE THE DAMN EDUCATION SYSTEM!

    this doesn't start at secondary - HELL NO, it starts from the root of primary. because apparently I think it was a 1/3 of all 11 year olds can't do basic maths/read/write (apologies for wrong statistics) and tbh, 50% of school leavers can't get CCCCC inc. maths and english.

    you really think grade boost is going to solve this ******* problem?

    NO! Improve the damn schools because frankly, some 16 year olds atm can't do basic maths and english and Labour wants 50% to enter university.

    yeah right, what about funding for those places LET ALONE the standards in this country?

    it's true! exams are getting easier! look at any past paper from decades ago and you'll see how easier we got it today!

    yet still school leavers can't do basic maths and english?

    I tell you why, the system is ****** up and today's generation are more interested in getting: laid, wasted, high, going out.

    not academia or education. so stop giving these people a grade boost.

    and I bet you're going to say, "not all state pupils are like this". I KNOW that. because why? they don't NEED this grade boost in the first place because they are self-motivated etc etc.

    basically unis want the best people, the ones with potential - not a string of straight A grades. just go to the oxbridge forum to see how true that is.

    /rant
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...ty-places.html

    Daily M*** says that A level grades won't change, just the offer from the university.

    If you are outperforming the school's average by 60%, then your offer from your university will be two grades lower than a normal student (eg AAA to ABB or AAC). I think. Or that could be for passing an introductory course.

    But also, we have:
    'The standard offer for medicine courses is three As at A-level, but candidates can receive offers of two Bs and a C if they outperform their school average by 60%. This favours bright pupils at low-performing schools. '

    That must mean that the school's average is 175 UCAS points...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    i presume all 11 pages are all against this proposal but i am for it.

    two As and a A*** doesnt sounds totally awesome:awesome:
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by TheTallOne)
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...ty-places.html

    Daily M*** says that A level grades won't change, just the offer from the university.

    If you are outperforming the school's average by 60%, then your offer from your university will be two grades lower than a normal student (eg AAA to ABB or AAC). I think. Or that could be for passing an introductory course.
    Pathetic. It's been happening already! Just not the 60% bit.

    I mean Cambridge looks at your application holistically taking into account your background and tbh have the Cambridge Special Access Scheme if you feel you have a worthy reaso why your education was disrupted etc.

    Maybe we should introduce that, an SAS? :dontknow: It'd be more realistic because at least it gives a fair advantage to ALL pupils e.g. if you were a private schooler and got AAB, but had a reason for that (serious illness or whatever), then yeah, this'll be a much more fairer system than to just say "All poor pupils to get two-grade head start".

    Tbh, I'm in favour of the SAS as part of the UCAS application whereby necessary than this crap. However, yes it can be abused, but interviews and the like will see to that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why was the BBC article linked so bloody vague when The Times and The Daily Mail did so much better:confused:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jammythedodger)
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8192234.stm

    I'm not sure if there is already a thread about this, but I am furious at the idea. I've just finished school at 18, but how is this right?

    They say it helps social mobility. It was the Labour Party who abolished grammar schools which actually helped social mobility (facts and figures I'm afraid, not just personal opinion). Some people are left behind, but the majority are do worse because they don't put the effort in or just simply are not acadmeic - neither of which are a reason to give them a "head start".
    They shoudl work on improving students grades through helping them actually do better on their own merits than just introducing state sactioned grade-cheating.

    Opinions? :p:


    grammar schools were a disgrace, one test could put the smartest child into a school were he is expected to do bad. it was badly structured and the children are too young to be seperated. remember every child is born equal, apart from genes etc, for this reason there should be no separation, it IS societies fault that one child will later be imprisoned and another will be a binman, teacher, police, doctor, shopkeeper etc-all useful members of society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I went to the 14th worst school in the UK (9% of students in my year left with 5 A*-C GCSE's) I've worked my ass of to be predicted ABB for Uni this year. This proposal just makes all of it for nothing if someone can get there with less work. Out of all the people I know from my old school, only 1 other plans on going to Uni at all. So really the government needs to look at promoting Uni in poorer schools, to even make the proposal effective.

    Then there's just giving money to schools, my science department often had very little money which meant I couldn't up my grades in coursework cause they couldn't afford the chemicals. If they concentrate on these area's they'll see grades rise on their own.

    Plus there are people who just don't bother working for it or find that A levels just aren't for them. =/
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 13, 2009
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • 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.

  • 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

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