Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Dutch Uncle on August 01, 2014, 10:16:44 pm
-
My daughter has just received her University results and I could not be more proud. She has a first, a high first even, in English at Oxford. She was second in the University in her specialism (Medieval), and she has won a prestigious (although monetarily modest) prize.
Now the anger. Despite being the second best student at the best University in the Country for her subject, the second best University in the world according to the Times Higher Education ranking, she is unable to get funding for a Masters. It seems Humanities subjects have received a drastic cut at the Masters level - indeed there were only 10 open funded places for about 1000 Masters places at Oxford University this year - there were some more for students from families in poverty. It seems there is still plenty of funding for PhD level, and plenty of funding for Scientific subjects at both Masters and PhD level.
My daughter does not qualify for any loan - we/she were non resident in the UK when she started her Bachelors course, although we are now back in the UK. The only way is for the bank of Mum and Dad to see if we can extend the mortgage to pay her through one year and hope she can get funding for the PhD - we certainly can't cover that.
By having plenty of funding at PhD level and virtually none at Masters level ensures that only the very rich or very poor get to pursue their studies. My daughter has a real passion as well as talent, and her dedication to study was quite remarkable - she worked every single 'vacation' over the last 3 years. By the way Oxford University made her sign a contract allowing no term time paid employment and no more than 4 weeks paid employment during the summer, so working to pay her way through is not an option.
As a scientist myself I can see why scientific research budgets have fared much better than humanities, but surely the balance is wrong when probably the second best student in the country cannot get Masters funding (by the way the top student decided not to apply for a Masters course).
Welcome to the real world you say. Well I feel lucky in that we will probably be able to see her through to at least having a chance of PhD funding. But my goodness have we broken a brilliant University system over the last 40 years. :headbang:
-
Dutch,
I can tell you right now, if you were to start some sort of fund on here I would contribute.
-
I've just pulled one bit out of your post DU
By the way Oxford University made her sign a contract allowing no term time paid employment and no more than 4 weeks paid employment during the summer,
Thereby ensuring ordinary "plebs" (expression DU not aimed at you or your daughter) can't really afford to go to Oxford
-
Oxbridge isn't part of the British educational system anymore.
They are successful global brands. Like Harvard, Princeton and Berkeley.
They are open to the best... But being the best is easier if you happen to be wealthy.
-
Hi Dutch,
I am currently coming towards the end of my PhD. I am (luckily) an ESRC funded student in the social sciences (I really enjoy spending UK tax payers money) at a London university. I paid for my masters through a combination of a small award I received and the rest through a career development loan. It worked out alright for me in the end as I found supervisors who basically guided me through the application for a PhD.
I presume when you say she is not eligible for a loan you mean a career development loan?
My question would be this. Why does she want to do a masters? If it is simply for personal interest or personal development then my advice would be forget about it and pursue something different. If it is to enhance her employment chances then, again, I would say forget about it. The only two reasons, IMO, for someone to do a masters in today's university system is for a very specific job/career path or as a progression to a PhD.
Does she want to do a PhD? If so, forget about the masters per se and find a supervisor(s) in her area who's willing to put the time and effort in to write an application for funding (and hopefully advise on awards to get through the masters). Don't go through official application systems, contact professors directly - most are killing for motivated students who have gone through the British system.
Thirdly, Oxbridge, in most fields, means absolutely nothing at postgraduate level. It's all about finding an institution that has researcher/research capabilities in your respective fields. Broaden your horizons to other Unis in the UK and Europe.
Unfortunately, the Masters' level education system at the moment is one big money making machine. It's designed to attract foreign students who pay stupid amounts of money to get a British university name on their CV. Staff numbers of being cut and the quality of courses is going down while universities are constructing new buildings and acquiring stupid amounts of property.
I can't really say the class system is noticeable at postgraduate level when talking about domestic students. I grew up on a council estate and managed to get through the system.
If you need any help Dutch, let me know.
-
Whilst it would be a good 'bragging' point to have a masters/PhD, my view is that generally it's a bit of a waste of time and creates large debts so people are starting out on the back foot. So many people I see who have gone through higher education only to find they can't get a job or get one they don't want, which has nothing to do with their studies.
Far better I think to get into the working world early, learn a trade or start your own business building those important business and life skills along the way.
Having said that though, best of luck Dutch to you and your daughter.
-
Whilst it would be a good 'bragging' point to have a masters/PhD, my view is that generally it's a bit of a waste of time and creates large debts so people are starting out on the back foot. So many people I see who have gone through higher education only to find they can't get a job or get one they don't want, which has nothing to do with their studies.
Far better I think to get into the working world early, learn a trade or start your own business building those important business and life skills along the way.
Having said that though, best of luck Dutch to you and your daughter.
While I do agree with your point to an extent, Masters' and PhDs are two completely different things. Next to no people enter a PhD without some degree of funding - so they are generally not accumulating debt. Even at Master's level I would suggest close to half of students have some degree of funding.
As I said in my previous post, there are certain career paths where a Masters' is a prerequisite but if she is not interested in one of these then there is no logic to doing a Masters'. If she wants to get into academia then having a PhD is nearly always required. I have also worked as an intern at the Welsh Government and was told to get a job as a civil servant there you increasingly need a PhD.
As for bragging, let me tell you, most PhD students will avoid talking about what they are doing.
-
Many thanks all for the comments above. I have calmed down a little today, but my main beef is not just because of my daughter - I feel very lucky that with some belt-tightening we can at least get her through one year and see if she can then win the supposed more plentiful PhD funding. I am sad to see the UK University system of 40 years ago being destroyed. IMHO too much has been spent on creating more university places than are really required and more importantly far too little spent on vocational education and training.
River Don - I am very touched by your comment but IMHO any funding raised on this board should definitely be either for DRFC or a DRFC related charity like the Louis Sharp fund.
Daggers - not sure I agree with you. I was fortunate to go to Oxford University 45 years ago funded by a Doncaster Local authority grant with my father (a teacher) paying a contribution. I received Science Research Council funding for my own Masters. In those days there were a very small minority of very rich people that I hardly ever saw, and a large number (I reckoned about 50%) of northern (or other regional) Grammar School oiks like me. Since then Oxford has continually and repeatedly launched campaigns to attract students from the state school sector, but never at the cost of lowering academic standards. Through my daughter I have the feeling that the 50% state sector entrants of my day is now nearer 60-70%. Private schools are still over-represented of course, but there is a clear majority of students from non rich backgrounds, and of course like all students they are saddled with debt when they leave. The contract signed was to ensure that all vacation assignments can be fully performed, and failure means risking being thrown out. I can clearly attest that the academic pressure on Oxford students now is significantly more than in my day, and I reckon this is down to the official (Norrington) table comparing colleges' academic results - b***dy league tables and education!
Copps/Ian - thank you for your very interesting posts. My daughter is desperate to study for a PhD (the Masters is only a necessary stepping stone) and she is in constant contact with the right teachers in the History and English departments. Her Masters proposal is a sort of medieval multi-media (my phrase) by researching and comparing tales, concepts and styles of Old English manuscripts with the stories depicted in stained glass windows of the time. Her supervisors are very enthusiastic about it, say there is little work already done in this area, and say it is also a clear and worthy PhD area of research. They are also world experts in the field and with the exception of one person at Cambridge (who also offered my daughter an unfunded Masters place) they are the very best she could have anywhere for Medieval English. They also said she was unlikely to gain one of the 10 funded Masters positions, but that PhD funding would be much more likely. How many promising students might have to give up at the Masters level through lack of funding, and only those fortunate to afford it (like my daughter I have to say), or those from poverty backgrounds where there are quite a few (certainly more than the 10 open to everyone) extra places available. It is people in the financial middle that are getting squeezed yet again.
For what it is worth my own Masters in Mathematics directly led to a job in Operations Research for a large International Organisation - I ended up working well over 30 years for them.
Sorry that was a bit long folks.
-
Congratulations to your high achieving daughter, I wish her well for her future.
Why not advise her to complete her PhD and skip the Masters as Copps suggests? She'll probably find employment for the college whilst doing it too.
On from the point Ian makes, I have come across a number of people with PhDs that have been unable to find employment in their chosen field anywhere and are very frustrated with life.
Good luck.
-
Many thanks Donny Dub, and the pride we feel at her achievement is enormous. Unfortunately Oxford will not allow her to take a 2 year PhD without a 1 year Masters first. She is in constant contact with her college tutors has been well advised along the away. But as for career options, well that is a whole different problem!
By the way do you ever venture north of the border Donny Dub? We are taking a short break down in Malahide soon.
-
I was in Strangford just today as a matter of fact Dutch and I'm often in Armagh.
I'd like to meet you in Malahide if you wish, please pm me your details and I'll let you have my phone number too.
Kind regards.
-
I for one do not think that funds should be available to students to study such an obscure subject at Masters or PhD level. There are limited funds to go around so the money should be used to best advantage for what a prosperous economy needs.
By all means let her do as she wants but it should not be at the expense of the taxpayer.
-
Out Here students take up Loans Willy nilly ,but as soon as they start earning a Wage monthly repayments kick in .
Everyone who is legal or from birth has a personal number ,which
Is the date Of Your birth 030814***** Followed by 5digits
This number is Your ID and Follows you everywhere.you Cant open a bank account without said personal number,buy a phone or car or house ,Get a job.
-
Congratulations to your daughter, and well done to her! Yes, sadly it seems merit scholarships for arts and humanities are on the wane here in the US as well, and have been for a very long time.
But I think your daughter should do what she loves and is good at, so hopefully the bank of Mom And Dad can help. I know we worked very hard to put our kids through uni and grad schools. I'm also very proud of my kids and for their hard work as well. They had to work while attending schools, but it helped them learn time management in addition to, literally, the true value of an education. Plus they didn't have time to party as much, so it was all good! Haha.
One of my friend's sons is pursuing a phD in Middle English and is writing his doctorate thesis on Tolkien. He works as a teaching assistant at the Uni of Maryland, so gets paid for teaching undergrads while getting his own doctorate level courses free. Did your daughter ever look into this kind of arrangement over there or in the US? I'm sure her credentials would make her a very attractive candidate at many universities. But as you say, there must be a masters degree first -here as well.
Anyway, again congrats to her and hope things work out, but I'm sure they will!
-
Out Here students take up Loans Willy nilly ,but as soon as they start earning a Wage monthly repayments kick in .
Everyone who is legal or from birth has a personal number ,which
Is the date Of Your birth 030814***** Followed by 5digits
This number is Your ID and Follows you everywhere.you Cant open a bank account without said personal number,buy a phone or car or house ,Get a job.
It's not different here, I have over 30k of student loan debt at the minute (I pay it back effectively as an extra tax). It's annoying to see it leave my salary every month granted, but it's my contribution to the education that got me this job, can't complain about that.
-
Congratulations to your daughter, and well done to her! Yes, sadly it seems merit scholarships for arts and humanities are on the wane here in the US as well, and have been for a very long time.
Quite right too. Arts and humanities aren't proper subjects. I'd much rather useful subjects like science and engineering were prioritised.
-
Congratulations to your daughter, and well done to her! Yes, sadly it seems merit scholarships for arts and humanities are on the wane here in the US as well, and have been for a very long time.
Quite right too. Arts and humanities aren't proper subjects. I'd much rather useful subjects like science and engineering were prioritised.
Utter b*llocks.
For a start, getting a degree/masters/PHD shows a depth of learning and understanding, an ability to write reports, make presentations, time management etc that is relevant to any further employment regardless of the subject studied. To an employer it is perhaps more about the skills and thinking ability more than the subject.
And what is wrong with having a bit of culture around to enhance our knowledge of the world around us and what has happened in the past? And who do we learn about such things from? From folks who have studied before in those areas!!
My degree is in engineering, so I am not from a humanities subject background but do understand their value.
-
Sorry I have to disagree. Humanities and arts degrees are virtually worthless in our fast moving and changing economy. Instead of spending years with their heads stuck in books, it would be far better if our young and brightest students entered the world of work with a useful degree.
The economy needs them. The last thing the taxpayer needs is to keep on funding these 'luxury' degrees.
-
You looking forward to Yeovil Mick? :)
-
IDM - many thanks for your comments - it is a shame that our most prominent WUM has chosen to add his contributions to this thread.
As a scientist myself I have no trouble that the lion's share of postgraduate funding should be in scientific subjects. But a civilised society also needs the humanities, not only for judges, translators/interpreters, economists, musicians, writers, etc but also those historians, archaeologists and old language experts to help us understand and learn from the past.
My beef over funding is not that scientists have too much, but rather that in this case the available humanities funding is clearly wrongly split between the compulsory Masters and follow-on D.Phil. (BTW this may be only in Oxford, although it does happen to be regarded as the best University in the country and perhaps the world for Humanities). Having funding open to competition for everyone for only 10 places out of about 1000 Humanities Masters places per year means only rich (or poor who have other funding options) can proceed to the D.Phil level where there is much more funding. My daughter is one of the lucky ones, but how many very bright and passionate students from the squeezed middle income families just give up. More of the D.Phil funding needs to be given out at the Masters level. My daughter's tutors would also seem to think this way.
Sandy - your reference to Tolkien is interesting. I was fortunate to get to know the wonderful man that was Prof Tolkien when I was at Merton College 45 years ago (long story). He was retired and had been offered accommodation in college for the rest of his life after his wife died. Unfortunately this turned out to be for only about 2 years. He was officially an Emeritus Fellow, and, typically self-effacing, his own words on this were "'Emeritus' - from the Latin 'e' meaning out of it and 'meritus' meaning deservedly so!"
His work in Old English is currently very popular with Oxford students, and my daughter bought, among other things, a deluxe copy of LoTR with her Prize (Book tokens), which happens to be exactly what I did 42 years ago - except I got my copy signed!
-
By 'eck, that must be worth a few bob if you've still got it!
-
PhDs are a waste of time for the majority of students. On average a PhD only slightly increases your earning potential to a Masters degree. For this you have to give up 3 to 5 years of your life. Not worth it.
If you want to do it then pay for it yourself. There is also the huge drop out rate to consider.
-
Can anyone point me in the right direction for a PhD in tupperware selling?
-
Taking 3 years extra out to study is surly costing a graduate about £75k in earning potential plus the cost of the course etc. that's plenty when you think about it like that.
-
Depends if it is funded Gaz.
One of my friends has recently completed a PHD at Cambridge in plant sciences. Her PHD was funded and she got a reasonable tax free 'salary' for doing it over the course of 3 years. It has increased her earning potential and she has earnt money whilst doing it.
-
Right. I'll say what the majority of readers of this forum are thinking. Why on Earth should the taxpayer be expected to pay for a masters or phD in a subject that involves reading ancient manuscripts and relating their meaning to windows? What benefit does this provide to the economy? What benefit does it provide to the person doing the studying? I'll tell you. Not a lot.
This time and money should be put to far better use. Just in case anyone has forgotten we are having to borrow this money to pay for such frivolities. The last time I checked every household in the country is having to find over £2k per year just to pay the interest on what we already owe. This figure is rising every year.
So get a grip and come into the real world. Such areas of study are a luxury and should be fully funded by the person that wants to waste their time doing it.
-
IC - would you sell the British Museum and convert it into appartments or business premises? That would certainly raise money for the economy.
If you think there is no value in having a museum this might be an option, but many might disagree with you.
Also the Government might start charging an entrance fee if they felt the Museum was of no value in itself.
-
Right. I'll say what the majority of readers of this forum are thinking. Why on Earth should the taxpayer be expected to pay for a masters or phD in a subject that involves reading ancient manuscripts and relating their meaning to windows? What benefit does this provide to the economy? What benefit does it provide to the person doing the studying? I'll tell you. Not a lot.
This time and money should be put to far better use. Just in case anyone has forgotten we are having to borrow this money to pay for such frivolities. The last time I checked every household in the country is having to find over £2k per year just to pay the interest on what we already owe. This figure is rising every year.
So get a grip and come into the real world. Such areas of study are a luxury and should be fully funded by the person that wants to waste their time doing it.
Majority? My arse! If the majority feel so strongly about this they will post for themselves thankyouverymuch.
As to your point, you would expect that the individual receiving such funding to study would directly pay that back via income tax when they are working at a higher level of earnings because of their education. Also, if they work as teachers or lecturers or TV presenters etc they then inspire others to get better qualifications to themselves earn more money and pay taxes, so again, indirectly, the initial investment in funding gets repaid.
I don't know why I bother, you are so blinkered you'll not listen. As to claiming to represent the majority, do one!
-
The British Museum pulls in tourists and is therefore a national asset. Of course there should be an entrance fee. It is ludicrous that it is 'free'. Of course it's not free because the taxpayer pays for it's upkeep.
Try going to Paris and visiting their museums for free.
-
Majority? My arse! If the majority feel so strongly about this they will post for themselves thankyouverymuch.
No they won't. I am the voice of reason no matter how much it upsets the politically correct brigade. People on this forum don't express their true views because they are intimidated by the leftie bias that is prevalent around here.
Good job there are thick skinned people around like me to restore balance to a debate.
-
As to your point, you would expect that the individual receiving such funding to study would directly pay that back via income tax when they are working at a higher level of earnings because of their education.
You must read my posts more carefully. I've already informed you that a phD is worth only slightly more than a Masters. Combined with the huge drop out rate phD's on the whole are not value for money.
I'll tell you another thing. If I was looking to employ someone I'd take a very dim view of someone who had been in education into their late twenties. This is far too late to be contributing to the economy.
-
I'll say what most people really must be thinking.
Your life must be absolutely tragic to continuously troll a forum of a football team you don't even support over a number of years.
-
The leftie bias kicks in yet again. I'll say what most people already know. You contribute nothing to a debate.
Stop trying to change the subject. Try for once to let us know what your views are on the topic at hand.
-
I thought you liked it when threads were made all about you? :)
-
Majority? My arse! If the majority feel so strongly about this they will post for themselves thankyouverymuch.
No they won't. I am the voice of reason no matter how much it upsets the politically correct brigade. People on this forum don't express their true views because they are intimidated by the leftie bias that is prevalent around here.
Good job there are thick skinned people around like me to restore balance to a debate.
People are intimidated by your drivel, more like.....
"Voice of Reason" - you? Never as long as I have a hole in my arse...
-
Time for more reason. Let me ask a question.
When the country is suffering a chronic shortage of engineers, does it make sense that some of our top graduates (such as the one that this thread is about) are allowed at taxpayers expense to study a completely irrelevant subject?
Should the person in question be prodded gently by the system to study a degree that is useful to the economy?
When we have enough engineers, doctors, etc. and when we have paid off our national debt and have money to spare, then maybe we can start thinking about funding such courses.
-
I thought you liked it when threads were made all about you? :)
What are you on about? Just because I am the voice of reason does not mean I am trying to make this thread all about me. You contribute nothing and always make the fatuous assertion that I am trying to make the thread all about me.
For a change just let us know what your views are on the topic at hand. Why not pm your mate BST to ask him what your views should be?
-
I thought you liked it when threads were made all about you? :)
What are you on about? Just because I am the voice of reason does not mean I am trying to make this thread all about me. You contribute nothing and always make the fatuous assertion that I am trying to make the thread all about me.
For a change just let us know what your views are on the topic at hand. Why not pm your mate BST to ask him what your views should be?
But you do really don't you :) you come onto a thread and then just assume everyone thinks what you do and dismiss anything else. :)
That or you're a windup merchant - but then I'm no cynic. :)
-
Time for more reason. Let me ask a question.
When the country is suffering a chronic shortage of engineers, does it make sense that some of our top graduates (such as the one that this thread is about) are allowed at taxpayers expense to study a completely irrelevant subject?
Should the person in question be prodded gently by the system to study a degree that is useful to the economy?
When we have enough engineers, doctors, etc. and when we have paid off our national debt and have money to spare, then maybe we can start thinking about funding such courses.
No one is saying the emphasis should not be on subjects like engineering etc that have a more visible direct effect on the economy. All folks are saying is that there should be room for the others.
-
The British Museum pulls in tourists and is therefore a national asset. Of course there should be an entrance fee. It is ludicrous that it is 'free'. Of course it's not free because the taxpayer pays for it's upkeep.
The asset that is the British Museum (and I would not be against the introduction of an entry fee) needs passionate experts who know all about history, language, archaeology etc to be able to run the place, explain all the significance of the exhibits, organise new exhibitions, liaise with other national experts etc. It would be a good idea if some of these people could gain their education and training in this country.
There are a few more museums in the country in similar situations as well.
I am not talking about very much funding. It just seems to me that 10 out of 1000 places for all of Humanities subjects is on the low side.
-
No one is saying the emphasis should not be on subjects like engineering etc that have a more visible direct effect on the economy. All folks are saying is that there should be room for the others.
There should (by and large) only be room for 'the others' when we have got the rest of our house in order. When we have a serious lack of graduates for many professions it is ludicrous for a bankrupt country like ours to borrow money to fund degrees just because they are the degrees that people want to do.
We are not in a position as a nation to allow people to do whatever degree they fancy without a care in the world as to what the economy really needs.
If we need experts to run our museums we should poach them from the countries where we originally nicked most of the artifacts. That is a far better solution than poaching doctors, scientists, etc. instead.
Stop and think just for a moment. For example, when we poach doctors and nurses from India, we are doing that country a great disservice. Their healthcare is already in extremely bad shape and we feel it is OK to make it worse.
Many Indians are dying because we don't steer our young people into the medical profession. Instead we think it's OK for them to do whatever degree floats their boat. We should hang our heads in shame. This is morally reprehensible.
India is just one example. There are many others.
-
Right. I'll say what the majority of readers of this forum are thinking. Why on Earth should the taxpayer be expected to pay for a masters or phD in a subject that involves reading ancient manuscripts and relating their meaning to windows? What benefit does this provide to the economy? What benefit does it provide to the person doing the studying? I'll tell you. Not a lot.
If for example this study should lead to new insights and discoveries which eventually end up as part of a ground breaking new exhibition at the British Museum which draws in many extra paying tourists (and they do charge for special exhibitions) then that would benefit the country.
I am not saying this is even likely to happen, but many of the scientific research projects provide little or no benefit. It just needs a few gems for the funding given to all to be worthwhile, whether for science or humanities.
Again I have no problem with Science having the lion's share.
-
But you do really don't you :) you come onto a thread and then just assume everyone thinks what you do and dismiss anything else. :)
That or you're a windup merchant - but then I'm no cynic. :)
No I don't. This thread is about funding humanities and the case for and against. Others feel the way I do (the vast majority) but daren't go up against the lefties on this forum as they are very condescending and have an attack dog mentality.
Luckily I am the voice of reason putting the case against and am not in the slightest bit scared of going up against them. I am the only one doing so on this thread. By putting out my point of view I have opened up a few minds and we are starting to have a healthy debate.
Before I got involved in the debate the general tenor was that humanities should be funded at all costs and it was a crime that they weren't. I have given reasons why this should not be the case.
We are still waiting for your opinion on the subject (or has BST not got back to you yet?).
-
You are not the voice of reason though..
-
You are not the voice of reason though..
I think you'll find the silent majority think I am. It's just you lefties that don't. I can live with that.
Challenge. I am quite happy for a poll to be started asking the question 'do you think IC1967 is the voice of reason'. I am sure that due to the anonymous nature of the vote I would win hands down.
-
IC - from a technical capability perspective my daughter could easily have been an engineer, but her passion is language and history. To have forced her to study engineering would not necessarily have resulted in an engineer for life, but would certainly have lost the higher probability of a language expert. It would certainly have been a sub-optimal development of talent.
We need all disciplines. Would you force every last student to train in science and then poach e.g. Judges from abroad? Who can we trust to translate/interpret other languages for us in delicate political situations if we have no language experts (or even experts in foreign history and culture) of our own?
-
The British Museum pulls in tourists and is therefore a national asset. Of course there should be an entrance fee. It is ludicrous that it is 'free'. Of course it's not free because the taxpayer pays for it's upkeep.
The asset that is the British Museum (and I would not be against the introduction of an entry fee) needs passionate experts who know all about history, language, archaeology etc to be able to run the place, explain all the significance of the exhibits, organise new exhibitions, liaise with other national experts etc. It would be a good idea if some of these people could gain their education and training in this country.
There are a few more museums in the country in similar situations as well.
I am not talking about very much funding. It just seems to me that 10 out of 1000 places for all of Humanities subjects is on the low side.
The last time I checked, we didn't have a shortage of experts. That said I would not be averse to some of the money charged for museum entry to go to help fund a very limited number of students such as your daughter. However it does go against my better judgement when intelligent ladies like her are needed in other parts of the economy. But I am nothing if not magnanimous and would be prepared to compromise on this issue.
-
IC - from a technical capability perspective my daughter could easily have been an engineer, but her passion is language and history. To have forced her to study engineering would not necessarily have resulted in an engineer for life, but would certainly have lost the higher probability of a language expert. It would certainly have been a sub-optimal development of talent.
We need all disciplines. Would you force every last student to train in science and then poach e.g. Judges from abroad? Who can we trust to translate/interpret other languages for us in delicate political situations if we have no language experts (or even experts in foreign history and culture) of our own?
You make some good points which I have given great consideration. Having done that, I have decided I was right all along.
I don't think we should just push students into certain disciplines just for the sake of it. I think we should push them into the disciplines that the country needs so we can get back to full employment and a thriving economy.
At the moment we are bankrupt and suffering serious skills shortages. Allowing students just to do whatever degree they fancy without regard for the rest of the economy is economic madness. We need to get our priorities right.
I am certain she could make more of a positive contribution to society and the economy by pursuing a more needed profession.
-
You are not the voice of reason though..
I think you'll find the silent majority think I am. It's just you lefties that don't. I can live with that.
You have disproved yourself. Accusing me (and others) of being lefties, when you do not know me, is not reasonable.
You have a voice, and opinions yes, but you almost always say that yours is the only correct one, occasionally being "magnanimous" in your words. But then you say "You make some good points which I have given great consideration. Having done that, I have decided I was right all along."
Reasonable? Really?
Anyway, back to the OP, I wish Dutch's daughter all the best with her future studies, and hopes she achieves her ambitions.
-
IC - from a technical capability perspective my daughter could easily have been an engineer, but her passion is language and history. To have forced her to study engineering would not necessarily have resulted in an engineer for life, but would certainly have lost the higher probability of a language expert. It would certainly have been a sub-optimal development of talent.
We need all disciplines. Would you force every last student to train in science and then poach e.g. Judges from abroad? Who can we trust to translate/interpret other languages for us in delicate political situations if we have no language experts (or even experts in foreign history and culture) of our own?
You make some good points which I have given great consideration. Having done that, I have decided I was right all along.
I don't think we should just push students into certain disciplines just for the sake of it. I think we should push them into the disciplines that the country needs so we can get back to full employment and a thriving economy.
At the moment we are bankrupt and suffering serious skills shortages. Allowing students just to do whatever degree they fancy without regard for the rest of the economy is economic madness. We need to get our priorities right.
I am certain she could make more of a positive contribution to society and the economy by pursuing a more needed profession.
Very strange. That to me looks very much like a left wing state denying individual choice stance :ermm:
-
No denying choice. There is plenty of choice. Just not unlimited choice and bugger the expense.
For the record I am no fan of democracy. Benevolent dictatorship wins with me every time.
If this country ever decided to go down that path, I am here here, ready and willing to sort things out.
-
You are not the voice of reason though..
I think you'll find the silent majority think I am. It's just you lefties that don't. I can live with that.
You have disproved yourself. Accusing me (and others) of being lefties, when you do not know me, is not reasonable.
You have a voice, and opinions yes, but you almost always say that yours is the only correct one, occasionally being "magnanimous" in your words. But then you say "You make some good points which I have given great consideration. Having done that, I have decided I was right all along."
Reasonable? Really?
Anyway, back to the OP, I wish Dutch's daughter all the best with her future studies, and hopes she achieves her ambitions.
When I say lefties I don't mean absolutely everyone on this forum, just the vast majority. As a hardline extremist rightwinger, I find that most of the people that disagree with me are invariably lefties. That said, there is no denying the heavy leftie bias on this forum.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30293964
Seems that the gap in Masters funding I was moaning so bitterly about has finally been recognised by the Government - but won't be fixed until 2016. University Dons have spoken to my daughter off record about the reality of this problem, and have commented that significant numbers of very bright potential Ph.D. students who could be expected to gain Ph.D level funding are not able to take the necessary intermediate step of a Masters because of lack of funding.
Too late for us but I am happy it will be fixed for many others.
-
Good luck Brian. Education in this country has never really recovered since the days when Jim Callaghan demanded an 'open debate' about its future. It's been a political football ever since. It's shameful when that process has resulted in it being used for social egineering, for political dogma and for wild U turns from government to government. It's no way to educate anyone.
And as for the fool who can't prevent his fingers typing out ever more arrant nonsense, I suppose the logic of his argument is that there's no value to be had from fostering sportsmen, as just one example, either. Shame that. Alex will be quite upset.
As an aside, I stopped in at Warwick a couple of years back whilst on the way to somewhere or other. Very nice. Even the fondly remembered dark, dingy and shitty Students Union. Lovely sculpture park. Tasteful car parks all over the place. Trees. And not one teeny little piece of graffitti. Not one poster proclaiming 'Anarchy Now'. Not one layabout idling his time away. Even the Student Union posters about union meetings were unpolitical, uncontroversial, middle class, well mannered and polite. For Gods sake!! Where did protest go? What have we done???? I can remember being woken up at 5 am, laying on the floor of the then brand spanking new Warwick Arts Centre, by over 500 burly, baton wielding plods intent on chucking out everyone involved in a protest sit in. October 1974 that was. I remember Kevin Gately and Red Lion Square in 1975. He was only a year older than me.
What have we done............? What has happened to none conformity? How much the poorer are we all in consequence? And how on Gods green Earth have we allowed people like 1967 to develop? I do not have any sympathy whatsoever with Voltaire in this particular case. I'm more Feliks Dzerzhinsky.
BobG
-
An update to the orginal post. It seems my daughter's idea of linking medieval manuscripts, plays, performances, stained glass and even graffiti has created a lot of interest - so much so that she has been awarded full funding for 3 years for a D.Phil in English at Oxford from the AHRC (Art & Humanities Research Council). Apparently this is a really big deal - her supervisor says she is the first student she has seen to win such an award. Looking at their website they give about 70 awards for English a year (many of which are only partial funding) across all Universities in the UK, so probably Oxford has only 3 or 4 max, and maybe even only the one.
To add to the earlier discussion on this thread about the utility of funding for Research in Humanities, and in Medieval Studies in particular, my daughter pointed out the following link to me, which I found brilliant. There are always lessons we can learn form the past, even in areas you might not expect. Modern day medicine brings along its own problems as well as solutions, and I love the fact that in this case medieval ideas might solve a modern created problem.
http://www.medievalists.net/2015/03/30/anglo-saxon-medicine-is-able-to-kill-modern-day-superbug-researchers-find/
-
Congratulations to your daughter Dutch and that does seem a fantastic thesis she has lined up. She might like to line in medieval wall paintings alongside the stained glass, but I suppose you could go on forever!
I have a BA in History and a Masters in Museum Studies, which was aquired at no cost to the taxpayer other than a mature students grant which Thatcher was giving out at the time to help the exminers and steelworkers retrain, so I feel well able to comment on Mad Mick's postings. Other than the fact that a number of people from both courses went on to study accountancy & law, because employers in those fields like humanaties students because they have research and analytical skills, the most appropriate comment to Mick is...
-
Good luck to your daughter. I hope it all goes well for her. She is obviously extremely intelligent and hard working.