Bribed to stay at school

[Duke Malcolm]

I am approaching my non-compulsory years at school -- 5th year and 6th year. I have been given the option to leave, and refused, since I wish to achieve highers and advanced highers, and thence go on to university. Guidance teachers at my school has told everyone in my year thatif their parents earn less than a certain amount of money, then they should apply to get the EMA, education maintainance allowance. There are 2 reasons why I am not applying to get this:

1. It is a bribe to get children to stay at school, I am firstly against such a principle, and secondly am staying on at school regardless of any bribe...

1. My parents earn more than the amount...

Auntie Provides:

Link

No people in my school are staying on at school simply because of this money, they are merely milking the naivety of the system, and the left-handed Scottish Executive, who believe that the lower classes need money to stay at school. Also, they want everyone to go to university, but I fail to see the benefits in this.

Perhaps the people of the .Org could share their views on the scheme in the link above...

[Productivity]

It's just a Pigouvian subsidy. Perfectly rational behaviour in response to a positive externality.

[King Henry V]

Money for good behaviour? If someone doesn't behave at my school the get detentions for the rest of the year. If they don't do those then there's the Discipline Council, who decides upon expulsion or not. Between that there are a few little chats with the Headmaster, who was once an Army officer. Boy, nobody comes out of that office unshaken at the very least.

[BDC]

Yeah. It's a good idea, but flawed. Why should I not be paid the same amount for doing exactly the same amount as a someone else?

Plus whenever anyone complains at school about costs (free education my backside) the heads just go on about the EMA. The twats.

I don't get it either.

[Sjakihata]

Yeah. It's a good idea, but flawed. Why should I not be paid the same amount for doing exactly the same amount as a someone else?

because someone else havent got parents that can take them on vacation, buy them new school tools and the best books etc - it seems obvious.

[Duke Malcolm]

Money for good behaviour? If someone doesn't behave at my school the get detentions for the rest of the year. If they don't do those then there's the Discipline Council, who decides upon expulsion or not. Between that there are a few little chats with the Headmaster, who was once an Army officer. Boy, nobody comes out of that office unshaken at the very least.

The money is merely for attendance. A bonus is for good behaviour...

because someone else havent got parents that can take them on vacation, buy them new school tools and the best books etc - it seems obvious.

Yes, it is good if thought of like that, but the legal guardians already get money for school things. The EMA goes directly to the pupil for whatever he wishes -- drink, drugs, tobacco, and various fashion items, usually. Almost all the people who are going to try and claim the money in my school do not need it, it is merely extra cash in their pockets for the weekends...

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

because someone else havent got parents that can take them on vacation, buy them new school tools and the best books etc - it seems obvious.

As some have highlighted already, the main problem with this is that it goes to the students, not the parents. The last thing the vast majority of kids who get the subsidy are going to spend it on is textbooks.

[BDC]

because someone else havent got parents that can take them on vacation, buy them new school tools and the best books etc - it seems obvious.

Yeah, but they do. It's flawed. It doesn't take into account anything except income.

Assume person A's parents earn £20,000 but person B's earn twice that. So A looks much poorer, etc, gets the cash. Then take into account A's live in an ex-council house and pay hardly anything for it, whilst B's have a crippling morgage because of this country's staggering house prices. Who has more disposible income? Guess who! That's right, A. And they get £20 a week for going to school, whilst B has to work 4 hours at the weekend or whenever to earn that.

[ShadesPanther]

Is here in Northern Ireland. This year was the first time for it.

I have a friend who gets it but he really is quite well off. His Dad is retired and his mum works as a nurse I think (she just changed jobs so the income is a little low) and he gets it anyway. That is a very big problem with it. The other problme is that it goes to him. He freely admits that hes saving up for his own car and that will help alot.

[Papewaio]

Its called Austudy in Australia. The idea is that poorer students can afford to stay at school without having to spend a lot of time trying to supplement their income.

It is to give an oppourtunity to break poverty cycles. Obviously it is easier done if the parents are involved and helping. But we live in materialistic economies, so to expect people to stay at school when real world pressures abound is unrealistic.

The other side is the macro level, can your economy compete on numbers and low wages or a well trained small workforce? Or worse can you compete against massive numbers of well trained workers on low wages?

Either evolve and educate or say goodbye to any lifestyle advantages you have.

[JAG]

I will simply not allow anyone to get away with bashing the EMA, it is one of the best policies this govt has brought in and in fact one of the best policies any govt has brought in for a very long time. Many of my class mates and friends are on the EMA and I know for a fact that it not only is a huge motivator in helping them continue in higher education and achieve their potential, but the money really, really helps them. Whether it be money for books or fare, even leisure, the fact remains that the scheme helps those who have least and potentially could get left behind with certain material.

There is no problem with gearing this for those who are most needy, it is not simply an incentive to go and stay on at college but it is a financial aide. Those higher up the social ladder not only do not need the monetary aide but also do not need that incentive in most cases.

If the system works - which it has been proved to do - why bash it? If we gain more people entering college, fulfilling their potential, contributing to society through better skilled labour, becoming more involved with the system rather than out on the streets everyday, what is the problem? There is a huge problem at college with motivation, I had it the first year I went to college, I dropped out, if I had been able to be on a system like EMA, I may not have bummed out. The fact remains that many people after they fail once do not try again, I did and I am glad for that fact, if the system not only stops people from failing first time but encourages people to come back into the system, then where is the negative?

This is the type of policy why I am a member of the Labour party and a passionate advocate of good old Gordon, it is significantly changing peoples lives, improving our society and economy all at the same time. A little social welfare in the form of an EMA is the new direction for the left and it proves to work. The EMA system, the tax credit system etc, it is significantly helping everyone and I really cannot understand why those who do not need the EMA system have such problems with those who do benefitting from it, it is complete and utter selfishness. Think long term, it only benefits you via an improved work force for the economy anyway and a better society.

he other problme is that it goes to him. He freely admits that hes saving up for his own car and that will help alot.

Damn right it should go to him and damn right if he saves for a care - is that not a significant benefit for him and an incentive to stay on and commit to the further education system? It just proves the point, remember you have to have very good attendance and behavior to actually get the cash from the EMA's they are no freebies.

BDC I have no sympathy for the case you outline, if someone has a morgage they do not need help, soon they will own property and be a fully paid up member of the middle classes. These systems should benefit those only who really need it and - funnily enough - drop out most.

[Don Corleone]

Actually, for the money-grubbing, cash register for a heart kinda guy that I am, this actually sounds like a good idea... provided there's a means test attached.

[Duke of Gloucester]

I won't add to JAG's eloquent defence of the idea, but I would like to add that the money is not just for attendance. There are bonuses for exam success as well.

[English assassin]

It's just a Pigouvian subsidy. Perfectly rational behaviour in response to a positive externality

This is EXACTLY what I was going to say. Look, I thought to myself, there goes one of those pigouvian subsidies again.

(Seriously though every now and again amongst the dross you learn something new here, don't you?)

Anyway Your Highness I think you are in a minority of one , although the conservative in me would demand (only partly to annoy JAG) that we review the scheme to see how much staying on rates have risen and relate that to the net cost of the scheme (net because EMA may well simply replace a benefit you would have paid if they had left school anyway), and also have a look at the cost of running the means testing.

But I don't seriously expect the scheme to show anything other than a good return on the investment.

[BDC]

BDC I have no sympathy for the case you outline, if someone has a morgage they do not need help, soon they will own property and be a fully paid up member of the middle classes. These systems should benefit those only who really need it and - funnily enough - drop out most.

Jag you know well enough that property is so staggeringly expensive here that even on a top professional's salary it will take decades to fulfil a mortgage, so is completely out of the timescale of children in school.

And it comes in too late for people who are going to drop out anyway. By 16 you can see clearly who is going to go on and do well academically and who isn't, ever, whatever the incentives.

[Duke Malcolm]

Actually, for the money-grubbing, cash register for a heart kinda guy that I am, this actually sounds like a good idea... provided there's a means test attached.

You put how much your parents earn on a form, and hand it in. It is quite easy to put in fraudulent amounts, though...

If the scheme is successful in getting more people to stay at school, and thence university, I still do not see the advantage. When too many people will go and get degrees, then the value of the degrees is decreased. Most of those who leave school after compulsory education go either to college to study highers and advanced highers or learn a manual trade to become a sparky, plumber, brickie, etc.. Those who don't might join the armed forces. Those who don't do that (a small minority, might I add) go on to stack shelves in Tesco. Now, if everybody goes on to get a degree, they will spend at least 3 years of their life studying, and come out the other end with a minute chance of getting a job in which to use that degree, and so will end up joining the armed forces, or stacking shelves at Tesco.

[Goofball]

No people in my school are staying on at school simply because of this money, they are merely milking the naivety of the system, and the left-handed Scottish Executive, who believe that the lower classes need money to stay at school. Also, they want everyone to go to university, but I fail to see the benefits in this.

Perhaps the people of the .Org could share their views on the scheme in the link above...

I think it's an excellent idea. It will help combat two different reasons why young people leave school prematurely:

1) Having never really had decent paying jobs before, they are lured by the seemingly high pay of full time, but (in the long term) dead-end jobs;

and

2) Their families may be putting pressure on them to start "contributing" to the household.

This may not solve the problems completely, but it certainly can't hurt.

[ah_dut]

Err most people I know on it (about 50) spend it on drinks, drugs and tobacco as outlined by BDC. They're smart people and were all going to stat on anyways. It's just an incentive to get some free beer/pot...you in favour? I am...laughs

[King Henry V]

IMO, the knowledge of a good job which brings on better living conditions should be enough of an incentive for people to study and work hard at school. If they only respond to having money dangled in front of their nose then they will not succeed for long in the real world.

[ShadesPanther]

I'm not saying it's a bad idea. I think it is a good idea for less privlidged kids. But as in the example of my friend it can be abused easily and go to people who don't really need it.
One way maybe would be to look at the tax forms and if a family falls into a criteria and has a child at school going on to do AS levels then give it to the child.