NL discriminating against graduates?!?

[snaw]

Not saying I necessarily agree with the policy, but I do agree that kids from middle classes will tend to do better than kids from poor backgrounds. I wouldn't say this is because they're inherently more intelligent, but more to do with the environment they're brought up in and most probably exposure to a better quality of education. They're not any dumber, and I'd personally say probably more intelligent than the people with equivalent marks (Think of it as a bell curve).

It's not unreasonable to take this into account, but then again it seems harsh to deny someone with better grades a place because their family is better off than someone else's.

On the other hand, the whole DP line of dismissing them as thick is a little blinkered IMO. Unfortunately when the playing field isn't level sometimes you have to try other way's to even it out.

[Troll]

I disagree that well educated parents should be a deterrent against their kids going to university - otherwise why bother trying to do well at all?

However, I do agree that working class kids, those who are genuinely able and bright and can cope with the rigours of an academic career, should be encouraged to apply to university. It does the country no good at all for whole classes of kids to be held back just because their parents "didn't talk proper, like" and got their hands dirty for a living. This is precisely what has happened in the past because these kids didn't go to the right schools or get the right encouragement or didn't live in the right catchments.

Don't forget that a kid who is held back is likely to turn into a mastermind of criminal activity at worst if they are discouraged to do well through the mainstream channels. Otherwise they will simply coast through life underachieving and being bored and paying fewer taxes than they otherwise could. Ultimately this impoverishes us all.

My parents didn't go to university and I am the only one in my family who has. No doubt NL would have supported my application to go, in that case, but thankfully the university I applied to were already thinking along those lines in the first place. Otherwise, I may not have succeeded in getting my place.

Fecking socialist... NL stopped the assisted places scheme which took away yours and others from poor backgrounds the chance of going to better schools.

[DimPrawn]

I love the Socialist mind.

Every little imbalance in the universe can be put right by carefully drafted legislation. That's it, if we add more to that, take that away, monitor those, put a quota on them, tax those a lot, give credits to them, have a national database on those, it all becomes equal and "fair".

Idiots.

[DodgyAgent]

Not saying I necessarily agree with the policy, but I do agree that kids from middle classes will tend to do better than kids from poor backgrounds. I wouldn't say this is because they're inherently more intelligent, but more to do with the environment they're brought up in and most probably exposure to a better quality of education. They're not any dumber, and I'd personally say probably more intelligent than the people with equivalent marks (Think of it as a bell curve).

It's not unreasonable to take this into account, but then again it seems harsh to deny someone with better grades a place because their family is better off than someone else's.

On the other hand, the whole DP line of dismissing them as thick is a little blinkered IMO. Unfortunately when the playing field isn't level sometimes you have to try other way's to even it out.

genetically thick people are less likely to produce bright kids. However what is appalling is that if they are not bright they are abandoned and left to rot in some tulipe state school. The whole attitude is wrong. It should not matter how bright a child is, the less academic child should if anything go to a better school with smaller classes and more sport facilities than those afforded to bright children.

The very fact that schools and children are measured according to academic success and achievement is entirely wrong. Children and schools should be measured according to how they develop in the context of their abilities. This I know is hard to measure, but no one is even debating the point.

The education system is a disgrace, it serves the people who run it above all else, secondly it serves those who work in it, thirdly it is the battleground for class war. Serving the needs of children is very very low on the scale of priorities.

[zeitghost]

I love the Socialist mind.

Every little imbalance in the universe can be put right by carefully drafted legislation. That's it, if we add more to that, take that away, monitor those, put a quota on them, tax those a lot, give credits to them, have a national database on those, it all becomes equal and "fair".

Not to mention adding everyone to the DNA database for picking their nose whilst driving...

[Denny]

Fecking socialist... NL stopped the assisted places scheme which took away yours and others from poor backgrounds the chance of going to grammar.

I don't come from a poor background. I come from a middle class background and went to a good comprehensive school - only my parents didn't go to university.

[Troll]

I don't come from a poor background. I come from a middle class background and went to a good comprehensive school - only my parents didn't go to university.

How are you defining "a middle class background"?

[Denny]

Fecking socialist... NL stopped the assisted places scheme which took away yours and others from poor backgrounds the chance of going to grammar.

Your other comment isn't entirely correct either. One of my best friends was brought up on a council estate in Preston (unlike me) but passed his 11+ and went onto grammar school and university. This was highly unusual for someone from his background. However, his parents encouraged him which I think had a lot to do with it.

I didn't need to go to a grammar school. I did OK going to a comprehensive with a good reputation for exam results and personal development. In fact, I felt at the time that the school was in favour of streaming and seemed to look down at kids who didn't come from a middle class area like most attendees there. It was every bit as snobbish as a grammar school - if not worse.

[Troll]

Your other comment isn't entirely correct either. One of my best friends was brought up on a council estate in Preston (unlike me) but passed his 11+ and went onto grammar school and university. This was highly unusual for someone from his background. However, his parents encouraged him which I think had a lot to do with it.

I didn't need to go to a grammar school. I did OK going to a comprehensive with a good reputation for exam results and personal development. In fact, I felt at the time that the school was in favour of streaming and seemed to look down at kids who didn't come from a middle class area like most attendees there. It was every bit as snobbish as a grammar school - if not worse.

That's quite a chip on your shoulder

[Denny]

How are you defining "a middle class background"?

Owner occupied, semi detached or better, white collar salaried dad with promotion prospects, mum at home or in part time work for pin money.

Not council or rented, blue collar waged and insecure jobs with few prospects and usually manual labour with wife having to work to make ends meet or go on benefits.

The categories I understood as defining the Labour voting working class -v- the Conservative voting middle class divide when I was growing up.