Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Education. Show all posts

Saturday, 10 December 2011

The 'yoof' of today

I would just like to entertain fellow readers by showing them the following remark, issued by a privately-schooled relative of mine, a young lad in his late teens. The sort of person who, unfortunately, is the future of this country.
Hate dikheads that think there all big but clearly there not!!
Now I believe that if my analysis is correct, what he was trying to say was

'I hate dick-heads, that think they are all big, but clearly they are not!!'.

Thank you Labour. Well done.

Saturday, 9 April 2011

Thick as a Brick and still getting a degree. Welcome to the UK.

How long before someone musters the balls to say what everyone is thinking; Not everyone is clever enough to go to university. The sooner they realise this the more money they can save by stopping people studying mickey mouse degrees. And instead stick them in real vocational courses which will actually benefit them and their intellect. Oh yes I did go there; lo and behold, only a very tiny cohort of the population are clever enough to study STEM subjects. The rest are not. Do you know why? Because they are hard, very hard; it is not a coincidence that every great scientist and inventor hitherto had an intellect the size of Belgium. It is not a coincidence that all our literary works and historical accounts are written by people with an almost bizarre flare for language. History, Maths, Physics, Classics or what have you require commitment. Scholarship for the masses? Pull the other leg. How many people between 20-25 years of age, do you think are prepared to spend four years of their lives writing a thesis? Very few because it is very hard, very arduous, strenuous, nerve wrecking, stressful, harmful, damaging to your health. The only reward you get is a semi-pamphlet with your name on it written in golden letters, and a title - a title which only a handful of people in the world know enough about to provide informed judgement. That is the reward for scholarship.

But hey what do I know, why train scientists, engineers, writers, historians, musicians and doctors when it is clearly holistic therapists and puppeteers that Britain needs. We all know that they make enough cash to keep the welfare state going...

Update:

Having received two very incisive comments I thought I would share my experience of applying for bank internships this summer. Now before we go there I would just like to say that I am forced to apply to banks because my academic guideline (my tutor) is a complete moron. And for various reasons, best left undisclosed, I could not apply to what I really wanted to this summer. But such is life.

Banks have little time or regard for the politically correct liberal BS system that today is education in the UK. They do not believe in "soft" degrees such as Business Studies or Management. If you want to get a job with a top bank they will laugh at you if you present that. No, 9 out of 10 times the applicant has a degree in either Economics, Computer Science, Maths, Engineering, Physics or some combination or derivative of these. Naturally the banks are obliged to say that they do consider 'other' subjects as well. But this is largely smoke and mirrors. Very few if any interns have done any other degree that those stated above.

But it gets better.

On initial screening they effectively weed out all but people who are from 'target universities' - now there remains some uncertainty which these actually are. It is without doubt Oxbridge, LSE, Imperial and UCL. But then internet forums on this issue tend do disagree whether banks view Warwick and Durham as target universities as well. Safe to say only a very small number of people from non-target universities get through the initial screening process. Naturally some do, and good on them for theirs is an uphill struggle.

Then they move on to grades.

They are very blunt in this regard; top grades or nothing. They have a section where you can write about your special circumstances should your grades not be up to scratch [some banks - not all]. They look at your extra curricular, your societies, your charity support - they even have a special section for this, i.e. it is assumed that you do charity work. Naturally a lot of applicant make this section up for most do not do charity work. But it just goes to show what kind of people they expect to recruit.

Then they go on to psychometric testing.

To ensure that the applicant is not just lying on his application and CV (which they will check if you are successful) they make you do tests in maths and logic. These are timed tests. Typically it is a 20 minute test with 23 questions which require a lot of calculation. Rumour has it that the benchmark is quite low because they are so hard. The logic bit can be either reading and context or figure logic. Fun but demanding. Naturally you could get a friend to do this for you but they make you retake these tests at the assessment centre should you be invited.

Then there is a telephone interview.

This is to ensure that you are not Mr. BS and actually know a thing or two about banking and that you are who you say you are. This is quite easy most of the time, some people manage to fail it which is rather amazing, but most who have got to this stage pass it (so I am led to believe). They tend to ask mostly competency based questions and few technical, mostly because it is usually administered by the HR department of the company. Hence they know of nothing technical.

Then there is an assessment centre if you have got this far.

These tend to start at 0830 in the morning and end late in the afternoon. Where you are subject to two to three interviews by senior management, ranging from competency to technical interviews. Group discussions to test your ability to interact, presentations before managers, more psychometric testing. Also you tend to get lunch which is nice.

Depending if you suck or not they give you an offer. Mind you, they usually invite about 20 people to an assessment centre but only 30% of those get offers. But this differs from bank to bank.

Such is life in the sector which does not care about the government's multicultural targets, its diversity objectives and political correctness. Equality? They laugh at the word. They want the brightest people and will go through any length to get them.

Tuesday, 29 March 2011

My Emails with UK Uncut

Email Nr 1, almost entirely lifted from George Pitcher

Dear UK Uncut,

Further education is hardly worth the Government investing in, if the standard of research behind Saturday’s student demo against spending cuts is anything to go by.

The breakaway group that headed for Piccadilly had evidently chosen their target, or “secret location”, well in advance: the grocers to Her Majesty, Fortnum & Mason. This target presumably represented to you, the inheritors of the finest traditions of direct action everything that was Cameronesque, fat-cat, exploitative and privileged.

To which the only reasonable response is the one that students might most readily recognise: “Duh!”

Fortnums is owned by the Weston family, which probably ranks third behind the Wellcome Foundation and all the Sainsbury trusts added together in the amount of money it gives away – yes, gives away in addition to the tax it pays – to exactly the causes that are close to the heart of UKUncut and the services that it was supposedly marching to maintain.

Now, pay attention at the back, especially the youth that I spotted in the Fortnums atrium holding a sign saying “Share the Wealth” without any apparent sense of irony. The Garfield Weston Foundation owns nearly 80 per cent of Wittington Investments, a company registered in the UK, which is the ultimate holding company of Associated British Foods, Fortnum & Mason and interior stylist Heal’s. Dividends flow upwards to the Foundation, principally from ABF given that retail is having a tough time and Fortnums has just been through a major investment programme, which then distributes grants (a word students may still be familiar with).

Typically, the Foundation distributes about £40 million a year, though in good times much more. A glance at the trustees’ report – I presume UKUncut’s organisers know how to use the internet – would reveal that the Foundation gives grants to schools and universities, as well as to hospitals and housing associations. The Weston Foundation gave £25 million, for instance, to Oxford University last year alone for the development of the Bodleian Library, so I hope any Oxford students who “occupied” Fortnums will honourably refrain out of shame from using that facility for the remainder of their studies, out of respect for the Westons.

There is barely a new college benefactors’ plaque in the country that doesn’t bear the Weston name. So much for “Share the Wealth” (you muppet). And it’s difficult to think of an institution more likely to step in to the gap left by Government funding. The trustees’ in their latest report explicitly say that they have prudently made some reserves because they “have also been mindful of the possibility of requests for urgent funding being made by charities which have had their funding from other sources cut due to the difficult economic conditions”.

So well done, you students. Of all the locations you could have picked, you’ve actually chosen to bite one of the hands that promises to feed you – and one of the most generous hands at that.
Not that these were particularly hungry protesters. Not exactly in the Jarrow tradition. I hear these sons and daughters of our bourgoisie made their way through the food halls to loot the fine wines and Champagne. Clearly close to the the harsh realities of the 21st-century.

Incidentally, I also hear that afternoon tea was served throughout on the fourth floor, with AndrĂ© undisturbed at the piano. Which I suppose means that it really was a thoroughly middle-class riot throughout – while the children played downstairs, their mummies and daddies were properly “kettled” upstairs.

So all I can say is 'thank you' for having comprehensibly pulled off one of the dumbest protests ever, and I must say I do not think I have ever seen such a pathetic spokesperson as was on BBC tonight – she was even more evasive than a real politician and that is saying something. You never even got a flying start, shame really, perhaps next time when you have learnt a thing or two about economics your impact might be more sustainable.

Kind Regards

XXXX XXXX

PS. Again I must just marvel at the sheer incompetence of the whole operation. I do not think I have ever seen anything quite so stupid.


Email Nr 2


Further I just noticed that you have put up a blog post titled 'Why Fortnum & Mason' http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/blog/blog-why-we-sat-in-fortnum—mason

Presumably you did this to screen yourselves from the incompetence you have shown in not doing ANY target research, seeing as the date of the blog is dated the 28th. It would have increased your credibility if you had posted it during the protest rather than after; retrospective defence is rather vacuous (google that word if you do not understand it, and I trust you understand how to use google), particularly since people like me and others have since the protest informed about the actual roots of F&M.

But again, thank you so much for the comedy it's been pleasure, truly.

Kind Regards

XXXX XXXX

UK Uncut Reply (who would have thunk it)


Listen XXXX, it is a little hard to post up blogs during a protest, and after it everyone got arrested and was in jail for over 24 hours. We did it as soon as we could.

We released a press released on the day, and there were also speeches inside F &M which explained our prior research with tax experts.
D


You see UK Uncut is such an organised gathering of intelligentsia (read: rag-tag random gathering of wannabe marxists on benefits with private education) that even its press officers get arrested. It is mighty funny that they did not ask their "experts" how to not get arrested in the first place. This of course being the same experts who told them to attack a charity...

I think I will have to extend them a big fat wet kiss if I ever see them, this really is priceless comedy.


(back to applying to banks.)

Tuesday, 8 February 2011

Privatise universities, or they will do it themselves

This kind of bullshit social engineering is what will lead to widespread privatisation of Britain's top universities.

Thank god this is already in the pipeline for most of the ones still worthy of calling themselves universities.


To have the cheek to even mention the word "fair" and HE in the same sentence, from minsters who have almost exclusively only ever attended private schools and Oxbridge, is quite frankly beyond belief. What fucking hypocrisy.

Wednesday, 19 January 2011

EMA

You think someone who actually wants to be in education is going to drop-out because they are not getting a state handout of £30/week? Labour you are having a fucking laugh, really, you incompetent mongs.

Do you know what we did before EMA? We worked, we took part-time jobs, we earned our way, now I know this will seem like a foreign concept to many of my younger compatriots in this country, but alas such was the awful state of affairs back in the dark ages. 16-year olds were forced to work, the sheer horror I can see on some people's faces when announcing this. The thought; 'Me work? Never, I might get dirty I might actually have to push myself, someone will tell me what to do - oh Lord why did the evil government scrap my "lifeline" that is the EMA'.

Here is some inside information for you, coming from someone who grew up in one of the worst parts of London (no not me); the EMA was used almost exclusively for leisure. Never anything even remotely relevant to study such as pens, books and software (most of which the school gives you anyway and kids these days are so IT savvy that they download anything they need illegally if so needs be - schools tend to have computers by the way, if they don't that's not the EMA's fault). It really would do well if the government just once in a fucking while figured out where all the money went. You know, just have a peak, just a sneak peak, maybe a little market research perhaps? Maybe see if those billions upon billions of pounds are actually having a tangible difference upon British society. Or worse, if they are having a detrimental effect upon the youth of today, who apparently now believe that you can glide through to the top, on the back of a BA in Media Studies (no really).

The worst part of this is not the grant in itself, it is the mere notion/concept that someone should need financial incentive to stay in school. There is something seriously fucking wrong with society if such is the case, where you instead of making the case for further education bribe pupils, in the hope that some will realise for themselves the benefits of knowing more than nothing, the nothing which is currently provided by the GCSEs (I taught GCSE maths last year and it was a bit of a joke lets just leave it at that).

If you could not be bothered to read the above and decided to skip to the end, then my views can be summarised as such; give a man a fish and you will feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish you will feed him for a lifetime.

Tuesday, 14 December 2010

Very unfair

You will find no one who is more against the current "student" protestors, but introducing water cannons is cheating in my opinion.

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

Of spies, students and universities

The newly announced spy in the House of Commons is most certainly not alone, she is joined by some 1,000 other pass-holders, who are not British citizens, who also are free to roam the halls of our "sovereign parliament" (I hate when they say that, because anyone who ever does instantly displays that he is an academic cock). British security at its finest would you not know.

Now our little spy studied at the 'University of Bradford' that bastion of academic starlight founded in our year of the lord 1966. I happen to know a fair bit about that university, not because I have studied there (roll on academic arrogance and elitism), no because one of my friends has. My friend is very bright. So bright in fact that he got royally ticked of with Bradford and applied to our current university because, lo and behold, Bradford was shit. As it turns out his equivalent course at our university covered the same and more material than they do in one year at Bradford, in three months in London.

Dare I say it? If we introduced a more rigorous academic framework would we be able to weed out all the phonies who seek only to abuse the system? Perhaps that is to autocratic for the liberal-left and socialist-workers-party-supporting people? Nay, I strongly maintain that university is but for the brightest and that only a small proportion of the population should be able to go, as to help the rest of the people who were not served with brilliance at birth. Granted, this would probably result in my not being able to go either (I am most certainly not clever), but that is a small price to pay for a functional and proper higher education system, which incorporates governance of people actually coming here to study under the right premises. This would thus exclude potential russian spies, it would exclude the bogus students from all over the world who come to the UK to study english, it would include the brightest foreign students who should be encouraged to come here and study and funded to that end as well.

Think how productive a craftsman really can be, some of them manage to turn out absolute works of art be it chimneys or glassworks. Think instead how productive a craftsman with a real degree could be - call him an entrepreneur if you will, his economic prowess would be relatively endless seen from the Treasury compared to the current lock, stock and barrel, who are apparently going to drag us all out of recession with their brilliance.

Certainly, one might ask, what cannot 30,000 media-studies graduates do?

There are now roughly 2 million British students at UK universities, and some 0.5 million foreign students including EU students. This is why there is no money left to fund the whole damn higher education system; there are too many fucking students and most of them are not doing anything remotely productive.

Why do we always do it? Why do we always fiddle with the system? We KNOW what the successful system is, we used to have it here before we gave a few dozen politicians the chance to play God with our kids futures. Remember the following:
  • Posh Independent
  • Grammar
  • Comprehensive
  • Technical College
  • Polytechnic
  • University
Put bluntly, the brightest kids went to Eton, smart kids went to Grammar and the mongs went to the Comp.

Brainboxes went to University, technically good kids went to tech and normal kids went to Poly. It worked.

Industry and commerce knew exactly where to find the people it needed and we flourished (and if you think that just because the government has decided that everyone should go to university that means the same for industry, you are utterly wrong. Basically it works like this now; some companies recruit people solely from the G5* universities and some exclusively from the Russell Group - they are blissfully aware that most other universities produce shit graduates because you cannot artificially make the population clever). We made things. Ships, cars, aircraft. We produced scientists, engineers, creatives and entrepreneurs. The rebels could study art and many of them did exceptionally well at it. We ruled the world in fashion, music, photography, film making and art.

IT WORKED.

The Germans have an excellent education system because Politicians can't get their hands on it. It is based on three types of school.
  • The Gymnasium is designed to prepare pupils for university education and finishes with the final examination, Abitur, after grade 12 or 13.
  • The Realschule has a broader range of emphasis for intermediate pupils and finishes with the final examination, Mittlere Reife, after grade 10
  • The Hauptschule prepares pupils for vocational education and finishes with the final examination, Hauptschulabschluss, after grade 9 or 10
See that? And what does Germany produce? Cars, ships, power stations, railways, aircraft, infrastructure. No fucking about in Germany. If you're thick, no WAY are you going to University to study to become a Nail Technician. You'll do an apprenticeship at 17 that will pay pretty much bugger all and then you'll get a job that will keep you and your family fed for life. We used to do the same here until the Socialists decided that was not the way to a progressive future.

And all because Germany has the courage to say to it's citizens
You're smart, you're average and you're thick. Don't worry, we have something for all of you.
And most of all, they keep their education system away from the clutches of Politicians. Their kids are far too important for a few dozen idiots to ruin. It's time we learned to be honest with our population again. We OWE it to them.

Whilst we import German cars, kitchens and machines because they are so fucking excellent, I can see no better argument for a return to sanity in our education system. Who knows, in 30 years, the Germans might be buying our cars whilst they push bits of imaginary paper around a banking system for a living.

* The G5 group of universities consist of: University of Cambridge, University of Oxford, LSE, UCL and Imperial College.

Tuesday, 30 November 2010

Third Time Student Protests

My parents both worked when they were at university. One of them worked in a pea factory and was a tutor, the other in a pub, as a tutor and a delivery boy. The spare time they had, they had to study. They both left with good degrees and no debt. I work as well during my degree, granted it is not enough but one does try.

Look at all the photos of today's protests and you will see that generally these are people from the 'Socialist Worker's Party' student section. I tore down their posters at my university because they were an incitement of violence. I speculated as to whether I should leave my email or not so that they could contact me, but I decided against it. Somehow I cannot see 'fair-play' being in their dictionary. Yes, I know it does not really square with my liberal tendencies but they are really starting to piss me off right now.

We are not all like this, do remember that, most fellow student bloggers that I know share my disposition and disgust towards our "comrades" who have taken to the streets. These "students" should just get over themselves. Most countries do not pay grants or give loans to students, so they have to pay their own way. Look at America, apart froma very few scholarships, students work their way through college/university, usually at menial jobs. Like my parents, mine is not menial at all, I quite enjoy my job actually, and they are not hard to come by what I do.

What these "students" protestors all have in common is that most of them have probably never done a single days worth of honest labour in their lives. Yet they have the stomach to call for free education. Why they fuck should it be free? If you want it you pay for it.

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

"We are the future"

You are the future of this country? Then god help us all I say. Are you going to attack the taxman when he comes to collect as well? Or the bin man for not properly aligning your garbage? Perhaps the NHS for not giving you treatment ahead of the line?

I am ashamed to be a student yet again. People will now treat me with the same deserved disrespect with which they will approach the rest of the fucktards that today have soiled the good name of academia yet again. University used to be for clever people as you can clearly see there is no differentiation nor meritocracy now, just shit.

I am going to stuff so many 'EU-referendum' leaflets down your neck when I get them, that you wont be able to spew out your socialist-workers-party bullshit for a fortnight. And when you have cleared your throat again and think you are ready for the next round don't forget to look behind you; for there I will be with my leaflets...

Where were the student protests when Labour introduced tuition fees? Oh I forgot, students vote Labour. You hypocritical fucking scum, if mine would have been the generation of WW1 and WW2 we would have lost.

Saturday, 20 November 2010

'Xenophobic' British students shun foreign universities


There you have it, bang on the head, we are all xenophobic for wanting to stay at home. I really don't know what to say, the above conclusion is so inherently stupid it does not require further commentary.

Wednesday, 10 November 2010

Well done fellow students


You well and truly fucked that up didn't you? What is the name of Chancellor of the Exchequer now again? Eh? Perhaps if they got their basic spelling right before going on a parade, supposedly, in the name of education people would take them a bit more seriously. What is more, they storm the Tory HQ. Who was it exactly who introduced fees in the first place? I guess the socialist and self-righteous fuckers who unfortunately share the same denominator as myself, conveniently and appropriately ignored that little piece of history and focused on the "nasty Tories" instead. Fucking idiots you are, the lot of you.

Who is going to pay for your free-education then you reckon? The state? You see we are spending £200bn on welfare and another £100bn on NHS. But if we try to slice some of those then you are all up in arms as well. How the flying fuck are we supposed to conduct our business then if you fucking little socialist utopia does not satisfy every boundary condition?

Idiots. Plain idiots. None of you will get a job because none of you have studied things which anyone else cares about, anyone who is on the productive sector of society. You cannot get hired by the state anymore because they are offloading 500,000 people for being utterly useless. Ergo you are all royally fucked and that makes me happy. Perhaps if you adopted some common sense once in a while and an ounce of economic literacy then you could maybe see what everyone else is seeing; we are skinned.

Why should your education be free anyway? In which great document of state does it say that the state must provide free education for its citizens? If you are so fucking passionate about Shakespeare's sonnets then you pay to study them. I pay to learn about science. Those who cannot afford to pay will get help from the state. What is all the fuss about?

Your party [Labour] started this mess. Take your blame game and shove it up your ass because as usual you have got it all completely wrong.

Tuesday, 24 August 2010

Time to bring back O-levels

'innit' ?

('innit' is slang or colloquialism for 'is it not' - it makes absolutely no grammatical sense but that is today what passes for a "hip" or a "chic" vocabulary)

I feel that the great plethora of degrees around today means that the degree itself has been devalued. This must impact on those students who choose to study those subjects with more gravitas, especially in a world where job applications are vetted through agencies rather than directly by the employer.

The very idea that 50% of the population could be of degree standard intellect when 25 years ago only around 5-10% were even considered to be at A level standard tells us much.

While fully supporting the concept of further education I hope the government will introduce a new criterion by which degrees can be recognized according to their true value. So many of today's degrees are really vocational rather than academic qualifications and should be tagged as such.

Monday, 5 July 2010

Imperialist Education?

We had an education system designed for the empire. Private schools to produce the rulers of the empire, grammar schools to produce the administrators of the empire and secondary moderns to produce the workers and troops of the empire.

Unfortunately we did not produce managers for our industries and they were administered until they collapsed under the weight of this bureaucracy.

We were good at running tea and rubber plantations though.

As the empire imploded the administrators came home and produced bureaucratic nightmares and found happy homes in socialised industries and government departments.

We are now ready to move on. It's been a long haul.

Wednesday, 16 June 2010

And thus we regress

Plans to take over 20 failing schools and turn them into new technology colleges for 14 to 19-year-olds were unveiled by the former Education Secretary Kenneth Baker yesterday.

So... he is going to create Polytechnics - again. The same type of fucking schooling removed by John Major's government.

It is good to see that the new administration is being 'progressive'.

In essence they might as well not have taken away anything at all then, 20 years ago, and then perhaps the entire system of education in GB would not be so hopelessly buggered.

Friday, 11 June 2010

World Cup

Football - A gentlemen's game, played by thugs.
Rugby - A thug's game, played by gentlemen.

And here is a very incisive piece from Old Holborn which I completely agree with.

With every government comes a new education system for our children as a few dozen Parliamentarians decide that their version of how to create a model citizen is better than the last version.

Millions of innocent lives are blighted forever as social experiments crash and burn, trillions of taxpayers money is thrown into the black hole of State Education with little or no regard for the outcome and Lordships awarded for the ones who do the least damage.

The latest Government is about to undertake another massive "experiment" with the lives of our children safe in the knowledge that they only have to pick up the glory if it works, not the blame if it fails. We'll have that to worry about if it does with unemployment, crime and poverty, not them. They'll be sitting in the Lords with a golden pension, bank account stuffed and CCTV on their expensive homes whilst we put bars on our own windows to protect ourselves from monosyllabic ferals with no hope of ever functioning as a rounded human being. No wonder Diane Abbott sent her kid to a private school.

So why do we always do it? Why do we always fiddle with the system? We KNOW what the successful system is, we used to have it here before we gave a few dozen politicians the chance to play God with our kids futures. Remember the following:

Posh Independent
Grammar
Comprehensive

Technical College
Polytechnic
University

Put bluntly, the brightest kids went to Eton, smart kids went to Grammar and the mongs went to the Comp.

Brainboxes went to University, technically good kids went to tech and normal kids went to Poly. It worked.

Industry and commerce knew exactly where to find the people it needed and we flourished. We made things. Ships, cars, aircraft. We produced Scientists, Engineers, creatives and entrepreneurs. The rebels could study art and many of them did exceptionally well at it. We ruled the world in fashion, music, photography, film making and art.

IT WORKED.

The Germans have an excellent education system because Politicians can't get their hands on it. It is based on three types of school.

The Gymnasium is designed to prepare pupils for university education and finishes with the final examination, Abitur, after grade 12 or 13.
The Realschule has a broader range of emphasis for intermediate pupils and finishes with the final examination, Mittlere Reife, after grade 10
The Hauptschule prepares pupils for vocational education and finishes with the final examination, Hauptschulabschluss, after grade 9 or 10

See that? And what does Germany produce? Cars, ships, power stations, railways, aircraft, infrastructure. No fucking about in Germany. If you're thick, no WAY are you going to University to study to become a Nail Technician. You'll do an apprenticeship at 17 that will pay pretty much bugger all and then you'll get a job that will keep you and your family fed for life. We used to do the same here until the Socialists decided that was not the way to a progressive future.

And all because Germany has the courage to say to it's citizens
You're smart, you're average and you're thick. worry, we have something for all of you
And most of all, they keep their education system away from the clutches of Politicians. Their kids are far too important for a few dozen idiots to ruin. It's time we learned to be honest with our population again. We OWE it to them.

Whilst we import German cars, kitchens and machines because they are so fucking excellent, I can see no better argument for a return to sanity in our education system. Who knows, in 30 years, the Germans might be buying our cars whilst they push bits of imaginary paper around a banking system for a living.

Sunday, 7 February 2010

Very good read

Here

Tuesday, 12 January 2010

Universities in the UK and Labour - the latter were too stupid to attend the former

I know that I post a lot of generally bad things on this site and I do apologise for this. But if you want to reign in ignorance and care little for the malice that rules this country I suggest you go to something a bit more jolly, such as Funny Dogs. In the meantime I going to cross post a thing I found on the Guardian which again demonstrate why needs to evacuate Parliament of this fuckstick government. This issue pertains to education and more specifically, Universities which I am currently attending why this issue really angers me.

It has taken more than 800 years to create one of the world's greatest education systems and it looks like it will take just six months to bring it to its knees. Britain's higher education system is superb – second only to the US, with 18 of our universities in the world's top 100 – and recognised across the globe as a gold standard.

But our gold standard system could be replaced with one of silver, bronze or worse, under swingeing cuts to the funding of higher education and science recently announced by the government. Exactly how much will be slashed and where the axe will fall is unclear, although it has been put at up to £2.5bn.

Such huge cuts in university budgets would have a devastating effect not only on students and staff, but also on Britain's international competitiveness, economy and ability to recover from recession. Research-intensive universities have been given some consolation; we certainly welcome the relative protection for research announced in December and the pronouncement that the needs of world-class institutions must be prioritised. But we are deeply concerned that cuts of this magnitude in overall funding will erode the sustainability of our research and affect even the most outstanding universities.

When Gordon Brown was asked if there was still money to spend on Labour priorities despite the public- sector deficit, he replied: "Of course there is." Perhaps the PM should consider what his international counterparts regard as priorities. Nicolas Sarkozy has just announced aninvestment of €11bn in higher education in France, stating he wants "the best universities in the world". Germany pumped a total of €18bn into promoting world-class research alongside university education, whileBarack Obama ploughed an additional $21bn into federal science spending.

Universities are not immune from this recession. But there seems to be a greater focus on cutting higher education funding than almost anything else. The health service, police and schools are all currently "protected", presumably due to their perceived importance at the ballot box. Not so, it seems, HE.

Some £600m of cuts to HE were identified in the pre-budget report, on top of £180m "efficiency savings" announced by the Higher Education Funding Council for England over 2009 and 2010. In December the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills announced a further cut of £135m for 2010/11.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies warns that additional cuts of 12.3% over 2011 and 2012 are needed if the government is to achieve its target of halving the national debt by 2013. This would mean another £1.6bn of cuts for the science and higher education budgets, bringing the grand total to £2.5bn – equivalent to a third of the current annual spend on higher education.

Conservative policy is unclear, but the party has indicated an intention to reduce the national debt more rapidly, which raises the spectre of even harder, faster and deeper cuts.

It is a mystery why we are being subjected to this. Students leave university equipped with skills that are an essential part of a successful knowledge economy. The UK is the world's second-most popular destination for international students, generating £2.9bn annually for universities, as well as off-campus expenditure estimated at £2.3bn.

With just 1% of the global population, we produce 7.9% of the world's research publications and 12% of all citations. The total contribution of higher education to the economy in 2007/8 was £33.4bn – equivalent to 2.3% of GDP. Our gross output exceeds that of either the pharmaceutical or the aerospace industry. Sadly, the UK can no longer claim to be world-leading in many fields of endeavour. What a great shame it would be to undermine one of the few spheres, namely our universities, in which we do actually still excel.

Some expect Lord Browne's review of higher education funding to solve the entire problem. This review was supposed to happen against a background of stable government funding. Browne's mission has become even more challenging and urgent against the background of the current proposed cuts. He needs to produce a rigorous assessment of how much each beneficiary of higher education – the graduate, employer and society as a whole – should contribute to the costs of this vital service to the nation.

Our politicians must take a responsible approach to the funding of higher education and recognise that it is one of the jewels in the country's crown, worthy of protection because of the extraordinary value that it brings to our society, international competitiveness and economy. We call on the government to state clearly that higher education will not be cut further and to seriously consider reversing cuts already proposed.

Steve Smith, the president of Universities UK, has warned that institutions face having to close hundreds of courses, with fewer academic staff and bigger classes. Reports suggest that as many as 30 universities may not survive in their current form if even minimal funding cuts are introduced.

We would go further than Smith's bleak assessment. We live in a world where ideas, innovation and entrepreneurialism are key to prosperity and wellbeing. Our universities are critical to supporting this agenda for the next 800 years. This is a defining moment. If politicians don't act now, they will be faced with meltdown in a sector that is vital to our national prosperity. They have been warned.

Tuesday, 5 January 2010

Higher (E)d(U)cation and student numbers - what an utter cock up. PART 1

UPDATE: After very good and thought provoking responses from readers I have decided to label this as part 1 of I do not know how many. Clearly it is an issue that needs debating which is why I will answer and considers points raised in the comments. Thank you for reading 13th Spitfire. Though let this be said, there seems to be a prevailing orthodoxy in Britain that e.g. Muslims may only criticise Muslims otherwise it is racism where the same analogy can be applied to students where the resulting feeling would instead be ignorance. I invite you all, young and old, students and non-students to have a crack at education policy because it is so fundamentally misguided anyone, with any remark, can make a positive contribution.

Have you ever stopped to wonder how many students there actually are in British universities? Perhaps it is not relevant for you who already have an education or simply cannot be bothered for others reasons (perhaps you have an education from the old days when it actually meant something unlike now when AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA is still only above average). I on the other hand find the subject truly fascinating mostly because I am a self styled intellectual who thinks very highly of himself with a massive stick up his arse (ohh the sarcasm...). Peter Mandelson recently decided to cut the Higher Education budget, this is good because then the make-believe university degrees that are not even worth the paper they are written on will slowly but surely die out. The abolition of the 11+, changing from O-Levels to GCSE's, labelling Polytechnics as Universities, reduction of standards in A-levels, and now the joke degree courses. "Everyone must win and all shall have prizes." In our Alice in Wonderland world everyone is equal and all shall have degrees.

Why? It goes well in hand with the trend that can be seen not only in the UK but in the rest of the world the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st were the "Inclusive" centuries were meritocracy became mediocracy and talent became tool. These days, certain campuses seem to get people off the streets to fill up their quotas on questionable courses. There are only a few British academic institutions today which have not become the laughing stock of the world, notably the Russell group. The lefties tend to call them "elitist" often because they were not clever enough to gain admission, most likely why they saw fit to dumb down the entire education sector including the national curriculum (in all fairness a lot of the dumbing down were done under the Major years but he sold us down the drain with the Maastricht treaty as well so you cannot expect hat anything as sublime as education to be defended by him). However there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel, notably the recent Mandelson ejaculations (though he also figured engineering degrees should be done in two years... They currently take 4 years to complete) and the fact (it is a fact in my book but I cannot back it up with any credible link I am sorry to say, so for now it will be anecdotal evidence of my hypothesis) people now realise what a load of garbage the last 20 years have been in terms of education - call it a generation lost if you will.

This is the domestic side of the issue there is however a foreign footnote as well. As university funding has been allocated on some very dodgy basis lately (this was changed from the previous system) the universities now set their own quotas for foreign students who pay astronomical sums to come to the UK and study. Naturally they universities want them more than home students because they pay more. Simple, quid pro quo. However they set their own quotas which means that the creme de la creme of the British student body will often not get a place at their chosen institution because of financial favouritism exercised by the body in question. Alas this is where numbers enter the equation. But even before we address those numbers lets look at the immigration issue related to higher education. Since the phasing out of embarkation controls in 1994 no Government has ever been able to produce an accurate figure for the number of people who have overstayed their visas, including those who entered on a student visa. Philip Woolas goes on to say that as part of the Government's 10-point plan for delivery, by 2010 over 95 per cent. of non-EEA foreign nationals will be counted in and out of the country, rising to 100 per cent. by 2014. This is part of a sweeping programme of border protection which also includes the global roll-out of fingerprint visas, watch-list checks for all travellers before they arrive or depart from the UK and ID cards for foreign nationals.

Which means -not- in newspeak; they do not have a bloody clue who is here and why.

Regular readers will know that I do not much care for the EU so I will start with those numbers - all data was sourced from UKCISA (it being a government department I would adjust those figured upward by at least a couple of percent due certain pesky Labour civil servants massaging the numbers, as they regularly do to withhold the truth).

Firstly there the number of UK students at UK universities fell from 1.97 million in 2007 to 1.96 million in 2008. That is a decrease of 1%, the first decrease since records began. However the number of overseas students increased by 5%. This broke down to a 6% rise in students from other European Union countries (total of 112,150 in 2008) and a 4% rise in those from non EU countries (total 229,640).

In total there are 341,795 non-UK students at British universities.

You might wonder what they study? Well, the full list is here but there are 8,935 non-UK students studying medicine and dentistry. Now you might not know this but the pressure to study medicine in this country is a best fierce at worst it is a blitzkrieg with the unlucky ones and crappy ones, going into something biological because they were not bright enough to go into medicine. However, the statistic does not brake down how many of those 8,935 are EU students - this is important because they pay the same fees as we do roughly £3,225 a year. Whereas a truly international students pays somewhere around £20,000 for en engineering degree and about £30,000 for a medical degree. But there is a very odd discrepancy here. The cost of medical degree...
Mr. Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the cost of training a (a) doctor, (b) nurse, (c) occupational therapist, (d) physiotherapist and (e) speech and language therapist; and if he will make a statement. [138404]

17 Nov 2000 : Column: 826W

Mr. Denham: In the period between entry to medical school and full registration, it is estimated that training a doctor costs between £200,000 and £250,000. Doctors generally continue training after full registration. As the duration and nature of post-registration training varies greatly and as service and training costs are closely related it is not possible to provide a meaningful estimate of the total cost of training.

The latest year for which figures are available show that in 1999-2000 the national average estimated cost of training a nurse was £11,000 per annum; an occupational therapist £7,000 per annum; a physiotherapist £7,200 per annum and a speech and language therapist £7,000 per annum. These costs are inclusive of tuition, bursary and salary support costs. Most courses are of three years duration.
Which means that there is a lot of money missing for the EU students and International students, studying medicine. Lets make some assumptions to ease the mathematical calculations required to determine how much money is being lost to this set up. Lets assume first that the cost of training a dentist and doctor is the same, in reality the cost of training a doctor is most likely higher but these are, like government figures, to be taken with a pinch of salt.

First lets make an underestimate, lets assume that all the 8,935 students are EU students and are alas on the same tuition fee as the rest of us lucky bunch.

A medical degree is 6 years long and the annual tuition fee is £3,225.

Maths: £3,225 x 6 x 8,935 = £172, 892,250 or roughly 172 million pounds is contributed by the EU students towards the funding of their degree.

The actual cost of training 8,935 doctors is (disregarding inflation and market imperfections)

Maths:

-Overestimate £250,000 x 8,935 = £223,375,000,0 or roughly 2,23 billion pounds.

-Average £225,000 x 8,935 = £201,037,5000,0 or roughly 2 billion pounds.

-Underestimate £200,000 x 8,935 = 178,700,000,0 or roughly 1,78 billion pounds.

Which means that there is a deficit of about 2 billion in the higher education budget because we are training foreign medical personnel who will go back to their own country. This is only for medicine of course, there are 45,515 international students studying engineering which also is a very cost heavy degree. Same story there, this is not an investment the UK is doing by funding their degrees for them because most of them will go home to their own countries anyway, most likely laughing at the supreme stupidity of the British government for being so bloody spineless. Hence, in reality billions upon billions are paid by the British government (and by extension the British taxpayer) for the upkeep of thousands upon thousands of international students who have no plans whatsoever to commit to this country. Even if they did commit to this country there would simply not be enough space or jobs for them to do so.

Now if we on the other hand assume that the 8,935 are all international students and are paying about £30,000 annually for their degree, then the picture is a bit rosier.

Maths: £30,000 x 6 x 8,935 = £160,830,000,0 or roughly 1,6 billion pounds is contributed by International students towards the funding of their degree. Though most are not international most are EU...

Now you like me probably know that this is political no-go waters and this will not be addressed under the Cameron government because it involves taking on the EU, something which he will not do. Simply because he likes it and on the strength of that (or at least the posters with HIM on them) so does the party.

Sunday, 3 January 2010

2010; you are back and so am I. Lets give these bastards a run for their money.

I intend to write a more intelligent post later tonight but this will have to do initially as my reintroduction to the world of political blogging. Good evening and a happy new year to you all, mine was very happy for I alas dreamt up a lot of ways to piss of our political classes and generally the people in power. I continue to send a few FoIs to my university, a week, and have thus far revealed a lot of interesting things, things they would rather I did not know. Apparently I have a separate folder with my name on it and my FoIs. Great, though I imagine the FoI 2000 law will be removed pretty soon as it is highly inconvenient for our masters - and ostensibly the only good thing to ever pass through the slipper soggy, blood ridden, hands of Tony Blair.

Hence, this is election year, and people will vote. How many students will vote and why are they so obsessed with left wing politics? All questions that demands an answer which will be provided later tonight.

Until then, ciao!

UPDATE: Bugger! Will have to post it tomorrow instead.

Tuesday, 15 September 2009

History


We do not teach history in schools anymore, well not at least compulsory. Fair enough both parties are to blame. From this article entitled 'Once upon a time there was a subject called history...' I read a very interesting comment

I have little sympathy. I have a Bachelor's degree, a Master's degree and a PhD, but I can't teach in schools unless I get a totally pointless PGCE. What nation on Earth could rank a year-long course above a doctorate? A joke from start to finish.

I was, to be frank, blissfully unaware of this. Apparently if you have a fucking PhD you need something as utterly useless as a bloody PGCE to teach when you are ten times more fucking qualified than the entire department to which you are applying? Oh dear... never mind the loss of national identity - the glue which keeps us together, if passionate over-qualified people cannot even be given a chance to teach without needing some BS qualification then surely, even the tories must see this, something is disastrously wrong. Mind you everything is completely coked-up in this country a result of decades of disastrous governments but that does not mean we cannot change it.

Apologists will say 'well highly qualified does not mean an inate ability to teach' no you can bloody well say that twice. But you do no require university lecturers to take fucking PGCEs now do you?