Design a new college system

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 18

Topic closed

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Design a new college system

2012-04-04 03:56:17

#126

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

Oh and not to mention the new hijacked funding guidelines that assess every application's chance of getting funding on a bunch of government-politicized criteria, spurious requirements such as 'relevancy', according to the current-govt's fancy... lots of English PhD's being submitted looking at global warming in Dickens, free-market economics in Robinson Crusoe, riots and riotous behaviour in Shakespeare... etc. Basically the concept of academic merit and 'worthiness' is completely divorced from a candidate's excellence for postgraduate funding here. You get accepted to your institution based on your academic strength and record, but then after that your idea itself is very much at the mercy of a separate funding body with a modern-day political agenda. How crushing it must be to know you've been accepted to one of the world's top universities but then there's no way you can afford to go, because your work interests are not in line with the government's buzzword of the month. This is very depressing and very true.

It is also why the paradoxical financing at the heart of US education still, in some ways, works for the better. You have a massive debt-bill to pay off nationally but individual private institutions get a lot of choice where to allocate their money. Which very much means much better funding opportunities with no Federal-level 'initiatives' or 'criteria' being handed down to judge a worthy Doctorate.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 04:29:21

#127

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6893|Canberra, AUS

Is this financial tightness at postgrad level across the field in the UK, Uzique? Do you have any word on how research science, for example, is being affected? Just out of interest

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2012-04-04 04:44:17

#128

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

Cuts across the board but there's always more money in science because it's linked to industry. I'm talking about pure academia. If you wanted to do a PhD in Theoretical Physics I'd imagine you'd have the same difficulties. I mentioned the figures a few pages ago but just in case you weren't aware, for my intending-DPhil there are 1,500 applicants, 80 acceptances, and 10 funded spots. And Oxford has more funding allocated it than any other UK university (the main reason for my application - it's sheer numbers). Cambridge has 4, in comparison.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 04:49:20

#129

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|6893|Canberra, AUS

Yeah, I was thinking less about the grant-based fields (which will always do well regardless), I was thinking more maths-mathematical physics where the "benefits" are not so immediately obvious and the articles in Guardian Science far fewer.

Those numbers are pretty fucked up though. Are there fears of a "brain drain"?

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2012-04-04 04:57:59

#130

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

Plenty of people are going abroad already, yeah. It is very dire. It would help if it was even merit based or based on academic potential/promise, i.e. award the funding to the up and coming star Professors of tomorrow... but it's not. As I said, the funding is handled by a different body than the universities who have their own agenda. All the universities can do to that end is 'nominate' several students from those that they accept. But even then only 1-2 of those nominations will be selected... and the funding body can politely ignore nominations altogether. The "brain drain" is what I was talking about with America's college system seeming so good because the funding is so plentiful (if you're willing to do 5 years incl. 2 more years of repeated taught-level work, which takes some feat of patience I imagine). Mostly, though, people are just being put off the academic career-path period. In 20 years time all of the Professors are going to have PhD's and careers in research into bullshit politically-approved areas, and the whole idea of learned, erudite dons will be lost. That's the fear, anyway. Higher-education reforms and funding cuts over here are going to have disastrous results in 10-15 year's time when the current brood of 1970's Oxbridge dons retire.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 10:19:13

#131

Cheeky_Ninja06: Member; +52|6951|Cambridge, England

Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't think the old UK system was so bad, the smartest X% get to go for free, regardless of background, costs are held down and standards are maintained by the govt.

When was that?

2012-04-04 10:41:40

#132

SEREMAKER: BABYMAKIN EXPERT √; +2,187|6787|Mountains of NC

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't think the old UK system was so bad, the smartest X% get to go for free, regardless of background, costs are held down and standards are maintained by the govt.
When was that?

if you have to ask .......

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/17445/carhartt.jpg

2012-04-04 10:54:25

#133

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't think the old UK system was so bad, the smartest X% get to go for free, regardless of background, costs are held down and standards are maintained by the govt.
When was that?

In Thatcher's time university education was (mostly) free.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 11:27:10

#134

HITNRUNXX: Member; +220|6928|Oklahoma City

Only comments I would really like to make on this thread (directed at the general OP, since I am not going to sit and read this all):

I went to a private college and was about 80% covered under scholarships. I made up the rest with loans. Tuition at the the time was about $10,000/year (late 90s). The previous year it had been about $7500/year. Because it was so expensive (state schools were around $3500 at the time), a lot of students quit. Because a lot of students quit, they had to make up the money. My second year started at $7500/semester. My scholarships did not go up, so now I was only about 55% covered and had to make up the difference with loans. A larger number of students left, so they had to make up the money. The second semester of my second year was $10,000. Now I was only 40% covered, and got more loans. The third year they were raising it to $15,000 and laying off some faculty and cutting some programs to make up the mass exodus of students. (They kept all their sports teams, facilities, faculty, scholarships, and equipment though).

At this point I left, went to state school part time, finished off both my degrees by paying cash. I didn't pay off the student loans until this year.

The amount of increase is insane if you think about it. In 3 years they totally doubled their costs.

So other than the fact that I met my wife and a number of great friends there, I wish I would have just gone to a state school to begin with.

2012-04-04 13:33:40

#135

Cheeky_Ninja06: Member; +52|6951|Cambridge, England

SEREMAKER wrote:
Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
I don't think the old UK system was so bad, the smartest X% get to go for free, regardless of background, costs are held down and standards are maintained by the govt.
When was that?
if you have to ask .......

its not been true in the last 20 years...

Uzique wrote:
In Thatcher's time university education was (mostly) free.

Didnt realise it was apportioned to the top x% with the costs and quality maintained by the government though. I was not aware that people from rich backgrounds were refused entry because they weren't in the top %.

2012-04-04 14:00:23

#136

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6371|what

Don't think they were refused entry if they were smart enough.

Aus had the same thing for awhile too and my dad took advantage of it.

2012-04-04 15:09:01

#137

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

I really wish I was born before the New Labour era, it was a much better time for academia and a much better time to be an academic...

The current situation is really depressing, no other way to describe it, really. It's probably the hardest profession to get into now. I don't know any other career path that has these odds and opportunities: law, top City jobs and even competitive stuff like journalism has better rates of acceptance / more vacancies available for young aspirants. Academia's funding for doctoral study and beyond really is a joke when you compare it to any of our neighbours. Unless one of your close relatives has died and cashed in a life-insurance scheme worth $100k, chances are you're probably not going to enter the academic career path any time soon... and there's nothing you can do about it.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 15:13:19

#138

Pochsy: Artifice of Eternity; +702|5761|Toronto

So UK students aren't offered research positions or taught degrees to help pay for their education, generally? How can the university get by without hiring a vast number of post-grads to help keep the university operational?

The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families

2012-04-04 15:16:15

#139

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

A person undertaking a PhD will lecture and guide undergrads (normally first years) for certain term modules, and will do a lot of the mule-work of paper marking and tutoring shit. But you have to get accepted for the PhD first before you can be offered any of the supplementary 'graduate work' that will help you cover your overheads and weekly food/drink budget. Accepting a PhD is basically accepting 3 years of study that will cost £60,000, minimum. If you're not one of the 0.5% to be awarded funding (on pretty arbitrary award criteria), you've got to 'prove' before you even accept an offer that you can pay £60k over the 3 years, i.e. you need the financial proof in advance. I don't know many freshly-graduated 21-22 year olds with undergraduate fees/debt behind them that have £60k hanging around. Do you?

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 15:17:02

#140

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6718|so randum

yes they are, but it's generally rare and dictated by what the university wants to research, ergo what is the government throwing money at. so for me and uziques 'generation' that equals an awful lot of people looking into climate change for example. it ends up with a net amount of polarised and often not generally applicable graduates.

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2012-04-04 15:19:46

#141

Pochsy: Artifice of Eternity; +702|5761|Toronto

Uzique wrote:
A person undertaking a PhD will lecture and guide undergrads (normally first years) for certain term modules, and will do a lot of the mule-work of paper marking and tutoring shit. But you have to get accepted for the PhD first before you can be offered any of the supplementary 'graduate work' that will help you cover your overheads and weekly food/drink budget. Accepting a PhD is basically accepting 3 years of study that will cost £60,000, minimum. If you're not one of the 0.5% to be awarded funding (on pretty arbitrary award criteria), you've got to 'prove' before you even accept an offer that you can pay £60k over the 3 years, i.e. you need the financial proof in advance. I don't know many freshly-graduated 21-22 year olds with undergraduate fees/debt behind them that have £60k hanging around. Do you?

Ah, I see. The missing piece of the puzzle was that you have to present proof of the ability to pay the fees in full before starting. Over here you can kind of wing-it, stopping 1/2 way through to work to pay for the degree, or make the money while doing the degree (the most popular option).

The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families

2012-04-04 15:21:57

#142

FatherTed: xD; +3,936|6718|so randum

one of the best options for a post-grad over here is leaving after grad, and finding an employer that will fund you through - ironically the public sector is the best way to do this. f.ex one of my mates dads did a law degree on manchester CID's roll, my mum did a business dr's on the DWPs bill

also a dumb post

Last edited by FatherTed (2012-04-05 02:34:57)

Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella

2012-04-04 15:25:32

#143

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|6890|UK

my employer offered to pay for my MBA but the condition attached was to be locked to the firm for a period of 6 years on completion.

nah i'll pass.

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2012-04-04 15:47:10

#144

eleven bravo: Member; +1,399|5477|foggy bottom

its cus you are hindu and not pakistani

Tu Stultus Es

2012-04-04 15:54:41

#145

Cheeky_Ninja06: Member; +52|6951|Cambridge, England

My employer is paying for my degree with no lock in term

2012-04-04 15:55:09

#146

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

Pochsy wrote:
Uzique wrote:
A person undertaking a PhD will lecture and guide undergrads (normally first years) for certain term modules, and will do a lot of the mule-work of paper marking and tutoring shit. But you have to get accepted for the PhD first before you can be offered any of the supplementary 'graduate work' that will help you cover your overheads and weekly food/drink budget. Accepting a PhD is basically accepting 3 years of study that will cost £60,000, minimum. If you're not one of the 0.5% to be awarded funding (on pretty arbitrary award criteria), you've got to 'prove' before you even accept an offer that you can pay £60k over the 3 years, i.e. you need the financial proof in advance. I don't know many freshly-graduated 21-22 year olds with undergraduate fees/debt behind them that have £60k hanging around. Do you?
Ah, I see. The missing piece of the puzzle was that you have to present proof of the ability to pay the fees in full before starting. Over here you can kind of wing-it, stopping 1/2 way through to work to pay for the degree, or make the money while doing the degree (the most popular option).

Well when you are applying for a Doctorate at a world-leading university where applicants are over-100 for every single person accepted... and when a doctoral project involves very close work with a permanent member of said world-leading faculty... of course they want some sort of proof that you're serious. They're not going to want to waste a highly esteemed academics' time (and the loss of a place for another eager applicant) by letting you sign-up for the course with no financial guarantees in place. Are you retarded?

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 15:55:55

#147

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

FatherTed wrote:
one of the best options for a post-grad over here is leaving after grad, and finding an employer that will fund you through - ironically the public sector is the best way to do this. f.ex one of my mates dads did a law degree on manchester CID's roll, my mum did a business dr's on the DWPs bill

Dumb post. This has nothing to do with academic-research PhD's (which is what we are talking about). No employer will sponsor you for a research-degree because no employer needs a person holding a DPhil or PhD in academic research.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 15:57:19

#148

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

m3thod wrote:
my employer offered to pay for my MBA but the condition attached was to be locked to the firm for a period of 6 years on completion.

nah i'll pass.

The downside of this is that you'll be taking an MBA. 6 years of your career to have to sit in a class of dumb cunts part-time for a year. Couldn't pay me the world to do it.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2012-04-04 16:03:45

#149

Pochsy: Artifice of Eternity; +702|5761|Toronto

Uzique wrote:
Pochsy wrote:
Uzique wrote:
A person undertaking a PhD will lecture and guide undergrads (normally first years) for certain term modules, and will do a lot of the mule-work of paper marking and tutoring shit. But you have to get accepted for the PhD first before you can be offered any of the supplementary 'graduate work' that will help you cover your overheads and weekly food/drink budget. Accepting a PhD is basically accepting 3 years of study that will cost £60,000, minimum. If you're not one of the 0.5% to be awarded funding (on pretty arbitrary award criteria), you've got to 'prove' before you even accept an offer that you can pay £60k over the 3 years, i.e. you need the financial proof in advance. I don't know many freshly-graduated 21-22 year olds with undergraduate fees/debt behind them that have £60k hanging around. Do you?
Ah, I see. The missing piece of the puzzle was that you have to present proof of the ability to pay the fees in full before starting. Over here you can kind of wing-it, stopping 1/2 way through to work to pay for the degree, or make the money while doing the degree (the most popular option).
Well when you are applying for a Doctorate at a world-leading university where applicants are over-100 for every single person accepted... and when a doctoral project involves very close work with a permanent member of said world-leading faculty... of course they want some sort of proof that you're serious. They're not going to want to waste a highly esteemed academics' time (and the loss of a place for another eager applicant) by letting you sign-up for the course with no financial guarantees in place. Are you retarded?

I didn't make any critical judgment of either system in my post, so I'm not sure why you had to end with that question...

There are merits to both approaches, of course. By not having to provide proof of the ability to pay up-front you allow more students the opportunity of attending grad school and having a chance of completing it despite not having all the money at once, but of course this comes at the cost of the security that each and every candidate will be able to complete their degrees.

The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families

2012-04-04 16:12:08

#150

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6689

It's kinda like saying you should give all tenants the opportunity of living in their own place without any guarantee in place that they can pay 12 months' rent.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

Topic closed

Pages: 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 18

Index »
Community »
Debate and Serious Talk »
Design a new college system

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Design a new college system

Dilbert_X wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Pochsy wrote:

Uzique wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Pochsy wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Board footer