• The post you are reporting:
   
  Agreed, Ross and Barry.
  
  ...except for the idea that background has nothing to do with it.
  
  The amount of people I went to university with who weren't very 'good' but had lots of money, far outweighed those with accumulating debt but huge amounts of talent (not suggesting that the two are mutually exclusive). I would controversially suggest that it is easier to get good exam results in a class of 7 than it is in a class of 30 and that if this can be afforded then another 3 years makes little difference to ones bank account/pension etc.
  
  You are right, some people should not bother going to university, but the process is fast becoming merely a financial choice and not one of meritocratic suitability (the essence of individualism).
  
  I never ever promote Mrs Thatcher but my further education is one thing I am grateful to her for (I found that hard to type) the ideology adds up! If we are to promote social mobility we should not be implementing many of the decisions made by our current government.
  
  The 'bits of paper' you mention are the very same by which schools are measured, closed and taken over by people interested in making money, not educating. Let's be very clear Mr Gove is doing NOTHING to make secondary education any better, merely using it as the football Ross mentions. I suppose at least with football he is promoting the legacy of the olympics....now if only he hadn't told schools to sell their playing fields....another U-Turn required?

Report Post

Your Name

Reason