Printable View
Uhm.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
The average student gives up 750.000 NOK in lost income from the job they would otherwise have for a 3-year bachelor degree. I'll be giving up 1 million for my 4-year teacher education.
I think that's enough.
Also, "waste the resources of the college"? Hah, no problem, just throw another bag of oil money at them. Btw, the private schools here are inferior to the state-owned free ones...
The world does need ditchdiggers. If in real life he was as good as he says, he'd have a scholarship.Quote:
Originally Posted by drone
Except, that's not how it works here. I'm, frankly, quite tallented; I got nothing this year for my Master's degree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
So, learn about how much we already have to pay before you tell us how who would and wouldn't be priced out of education.
Also, this isn't just about "the best".Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
This is also about what society you want. Do you want one where those who already have money gets the best education, or do you want the smartest one, the most qualified one?
In my mind, it's obvious that the ones with the highest grades should get to pick first. Why do you(EMFM++) want those with money but no brains to pick first?
You think that I haven't paid for education?Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
That is exactly what we want, we just have a different method of assuring it. And we don't believe that everyone should be going to university.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Not what we said, was it?Quote:
In my mind, it's obvious that the ones with the highest grades should get to pick first. Why do you(EMFM++) want those with money but no brains to pick first?
Little Catrin spent a year in Germany, she told me two things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
1. Her German was better than the natives, and
2. You guys don't get out of university until the late 20's
I'm 22, I graduate with my Masters in January. I'm already taking one year out for my PhD, but I'd like to start work before I'm 30, thatnks.
So why require people to have money instead of brains in order to take higher education?Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
ROFL, what degree is that? It is from something like Thames Valley university on some left-over spot filler course no one wants. You can't compared such examples to real universities.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
As for degrees themselves ontop, a person with 2D's could not possibly even aim to achieve above a 3rd class degree (the educational equalivant of turning up to an exam, possibly sober) so they would be leave University with a just a debt.
That would be agricultural college, which is funded like a small university.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Agricultural College could be diploma's and foundation degrees, right?
If I am honest, if they are able to perform well enough to get the qualitications, I have no problems with it.
We're not. The whole point is that the less brains you have, the more you pay.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Nope, BSc, my sister decided to go to Bristol instead. She got 2 A's and a B, we're very proud.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Asking them to pay a fee is okay. Asking them to pay 10k or more a year is not. People shouldn't have to work a full time job to pay for the university, the rent and all the other thing a student has to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Is Uni really worth that amount of money?
I think most aren't, and they are just trying to get much money as they possibly get from students via courses, entry exams etc etc.
Uni here is tad over rated, but unfortunately, you have to graduate one if you want a decent job.
And a wife, am I right?Quote:
Uni here is tad over rated, but unfortunately, you have to graduate one if you want a decent job.
Make it free depending on your grades in college?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
In Canada, to continue my wonderfully long example (but also here in Germany), this isn't necessarily true. In fact, in quite a few Canadian provinces there is a large push to get students into apprenticeships instead (which often make quite a bit more money then, say, a BA).Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefy187
Hmm. I think scholarships do some of that, by making it less expensive if you do well. But I don't want the state giving a free ride to people getting A's in a communications major.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
CR
I'm curious, what percentage of the population going to university do people here consider should be the normal one? Obviously not 50% in most cases.
40%?
30%?
20%?
10%?
Remember that going to university on average gives a considerble salary increase after your education, with current numbers. That indicates that the market is not flooded as of yet (aka numbers can go higher than currently).
So.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Let's say we have two people then, the first is the 756th smartest guy with no money, the other is the 934th smartest but with lots of money.
Which one go to college? Which one should?
EDIT: Aslo, I'm completely opposed to the idea of grades and requirements anyway. To qualify for college, I had to take a some exams in order to qualify(actually all three years of high school at once, long story), which took me a year. I didn't do anything other than turning up at the exams, I didn't open any of the books or study at all. As such I did not become any smarter at all, I did not become more qualified than I was before I took them. Complete rubbish.... Also, I strongly oppose the idea of trying to get better grades. I want to learn more, I don't care what some random number says about me, somehow I think it's more important what I actually know as opposed to what grade I have...
20-30%, a quarter of the population seems sufficient. University should be about academic talent, not competancy. 50% (Labour's target) defines university as the difference between clever and stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Leaving aside that University is not merely about who is smartest, but also knowledge and drive, assuming that everything else is equal and there is only one place left the 756th should be helped financially. The other can of course pay to attend just like money can purchase almost every other service in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Far, far less than 50% of the population is clever. I'd estimate less than 10%.
~:smoking:
I have not seen one scholarship deal in the world that would help guy #756. Except in the countries where education is free.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Enjoy living in countries where your house is designed by some idiot with a rich dad. I prefer having someone with brains design it.
20-30% as mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
The reality of the UK education system is you need at least BBB at A level or equivalent to qualify on a course for a "good" university.
I'm pretty certain that statistically 30% of all A level students roughly earn themselves a B in a designated subject, obviously it varies per subject though. For example a B in something like History is always going to be worth more than an A in media studies.
Round about 20% will get themselves an A grade as well so yes, 20-30 sounds about right.
Almost 40% of the jobs in Norway require higher education according to SSB.Quote:
Originally Posted by tibilicus
So... Which professions do you believe is over-educated? Doctors? Teachers? CEO's? Please back your argument up with some numbers proving that 50% of the jobs currently requiring higher education can be done just as well without higher education.
kidding me? Most don't even end up in their field. How many historians are historians. How many law-students are lawyers.
Architects, Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, Nurses etc etc have exit exams. You might get into University from money, but in all but the most corrupt countries money won't buy you accreditation to practice.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
~:smoking:
Probably 20-30%. Maybe it's just me getting crotchety in my old age, but it seems that the quality of both high school and college education has suffered in the past 10 years in the States. High school diplomas have become worthless, universities are having to finish up what high schools should have taught. Which leads me to believe that it's all become a scam, since you have to pay for college, but not high school. :inquisitive:
Unless your argument is that everyone with a passed exit exam are equally good at their profession, I don't see the relevance.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
By the look of it, we've been past clever for several decades now. I think the frontline is called motivated nowadays (some educations excempted of course).Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Anyway back to my old post. All of you didn't think I've the question without checking the OECD data first did you? :logic:
These increased fees are intended to reduce the flimsy educations to get people more motivated for "good" educations. Like the US, where the huge investment surely will make sure that only the talented ones will go to university. This method have kept the Uni number steady for the last 30-40 years, while the numbers have increased in Scandinavia and UK during this time, to the same number as in the US.
Now what number do you think that is?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
So it will have a neglible effect on the amount of students (that will have a trend to increase anyway as Horetore noted). I get the feeling that all it will do is increasing the gap between those who can afford it (and for getting a decent job need to) and those who don't. Scholarships might help for the talented poor, but we're down to the average people now.