The great Tax credit joke !!

by TRUSSMAN66 Fri 27 Nov 2015, 5:18 pm

First topic message reminder :

Brought in by a Business toadying Blair so that the taxpayers supplement wages so that big business gets away withour paying them a living wage...

Then attempted to be taken away by spoon fed types with no extra cost to big business...

Gotta laugh haven't you..

by **seanmichaels** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:19 pm

Pr4wn wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Try getting into a top University if you're from a state school when you have the same grades as someone who has been privately educated....

Other way round these days....

Lol, behave.

The only quotas employed, or have ever been employed, in Uni's are the top Universities who have to accept a certain percentage of state educated kids. Therefore it is only ever possible for privately educated kids to be disadvantaged. That is fact.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:20 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Everybody judges people........Appearance, the way they speak,where they live and where they go to school...I'm guilty of it.

Try getting into a top University if you're from a state school when you have the same grades as someone who has been privately educated....

They are being judged.....
Sorry. You're talking nonsense and basing opinion on ancient history. What do you mean by "top University"? Even Oxford/Cambridge don't behave the way you're suggesting any more.

Yes I'm sure they don't ..

by Steffan Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:23 pm

Apology accepted on the slight

In regards to the other part...everyday politicians waste tax payers money on expenses, meaningless meetings, second houses and now possibly dropping more bombs on people who have done nothing to us

But if one little student says he might not pay back his fees...

Spoiler:

by Scottrf Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:24 pm

You're still twice as likely to attend Cambridge having been to private school rather than state school.

by Scottrf Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:25 pm

seanmichaels wrote:The only quotas employed, or have ever been employed, in Uni's are the top Universities who have to accept a certain percentage of state educated kids. Therefore it is only ever possible for privately educated kids to be disadvantaged. That is fact.

If the targets are 1. Fair 2. Met.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:25 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
navyblueshorts wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Everybody judges people........Appearance, the way they speak,where they live and where they go to school...I'm guilty of it.

Try getting into a top University if you're from a state school when you have the same grades as someone who has been privately educated....

They are being judged.....
Sorry. You're talking nonsense and basing opinion on ancient history. What do you mean by "top University"? Even Oxford/Cambridge don't behave the way you're suggesting any more.

Yes I'm sure they don't ..

I know they don't.

by **seanmichaels** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:26 pm

Data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency showed that 89.3 per cent of undergraduates admitted in 2012/13 were from the state system.

It was up from 88.9 per cent a year earlier and 85 per cent 15 years ago.

The figures represent the first full year of the new tuition fees regime – when universities in England were able to charge up to £9,000 for a degree.

A new system of targets was also introduced requiring institutions to set “ambitious” benchmarks to ensure student intakes better reflect society.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:27 pm

2014 figures.............

7% of children are privately educated.....

43.2% of students at Oxbridge come from privately educated schools....

2014 figures show the increase in admissions over recent years has gone into reverse...

Anyone who thinks years of prejudice changes overnight is pretty naive..

Plenty of naive types on here..

by **ShahenshahG** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:28 pm

Not really, you say that as if politicians aren't decried for that and you're the only one getting it in the neck. You posted that to get a reaction and you got a reaction that is truth. either you were winding up in which case well done or it's a true intention and you're backing up because people are telling you what a useless twit you are.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:28 pm

Steffan wrote:Apology accepted on the slight

In regards to the other part...everyday politicians waste tax payers money on expenses, meaningless meetings, second houses and now possibly dropping more bombs on people who have done nothing to us

But if one little student says he might not pay back his fees...
Spoiler:

:sigh: So, you think that because something, someone else does isn't fair/decent/moral/legal, that makes it perfectly OK for you to cheat the system? What if everyone took that attitude in all walks of life? It's not a logical or justifiable argument really is it?

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:32 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:2014 figures.............

7% of children are privately educated.....

43.2% of students at Oxbridge come from privately educated schools....

2014 figures show the increase in admissions over recent years has gone into reverse...

Anyone who thinks years of prejudice changes overnight is pretty naive..

Plenty of naive types on here..

Sorry. Got to do better than that. %s are a cheats argument - what are the absolute numbers? I'd be pretty confident that 7% of all secondary school pupils amounts to a shed load more people than 43.2% of the people at Oxbridge.
Oxbridge take what they see re. absolute qualifications. They don't make morality judgements about whether private vs. state education is a fair basis. Exceptions may be sporting excellence but that's hardly a significant number.

by **seanmichaels** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:34 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:2014 figures.............

7% of children are privately educated.....

43.2% of students at Oxbridge come from privately educated schools....

2014 figures show the increase in admissions over recent years has gone into reverse...

Anyone who thinks years of prejudice changes overnight is pretty naive..

Plenty of naive types on here..

That attitude is why we have a dumbing down of society. Privately eduated kids have smaller classes, better facilities and importantly better opportunities should they decide to take them. The proportion of privately educated kids at the top Uni's should therefore be higher.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:34 pm

I've missed the bit where Steffan has broken the law ? ......

Why are these politicians getting re elected that abused the second home mortgage ??..

Guess most people haven't got any morals these days to put them back in.. ..

If I could pay less tax than I'm supposed to I would !!.

If you can beat the system then beat it..

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:37 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I've missed the bit where Steffan has broken the law ? ......

Why are these politicians getting re elected that abused the second home mortgage ??..

Guess most people haven't got any morals these days to put them back in.. ..

If I could pay less tax than I'm supposed to I would !!.

If you can beat the system then beat it..

Now you're changing the topic. I never said he broke the law. I said the attitude was pretty scummy and I stand by that. He's taken a loan and has no intent to repay it at all. It's one thing not to be able to repay; it's another to have no intention to repay.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:39 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I've missed the bit where Steffan has broken the law ? ......

Why are these politicians getting re elected that abused the second home mortgage ??..

Guess most people haven't got any morals these days to put them back in.. ..

If I could pay less tax than I'm supposed to I would !!.

If you can beat the system then beat it..

Sorry Truss, much as I like your posts as a rule, that argument (it's the same as Steffan's) is what a child would put out. "He's being naughty, doing XXXX and getting away with it, therefore I'm going to do XXXX...or YYYY...or ZZZZ". Need a :pout: emoticon...

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:41 pm

I'm not changing the topic......

Morality is subjective......Who are we to say what is moral and what isn't....

Steffan isn't earning enough to pay back the loan and is happy he isn't....

Physician heal thyself..

by TopHat24/7 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:42 pm

Pr4wn wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Try getting into a top University if you're from a state school when you have the same grades as someone who has been privately educated....

Other way round these days....

Lol, behave.

As fallacious as Seans comment is/was, what he was responding too was also a falsehood. Went to a standard (Ofsted: Good) state school and from a sixth form of maybe 100-120 kids, of the ones that decided they did want to go to Uni, several got into Oxbridge or top London and the majority got into Russell Group unis.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:44 pm

navyblueshorts wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I've missed the bit where Steffan has broken the law ? ......

Why are these politicians getting re elected that abused the second home mortgage ??..

Guess most people haven't got any morals these days to put them back in.. ..

If I could pay less tax than I'm supposed to I would !!.

If you can beat the system then beat it..
Sorry Truss, much as I like your posts as a rule, that argument (it's the same as Steffan's) is what a child would put out. "He's being naughty, doing XXXX and getting away with it, therefore I'm going to do XXXX...or YYYY...or ZZZZ". Need a :pout: emoticon...

Too much morality holds you back.....Although I admire people who are 100% honest and live life to the good book.

Never met any yet though... thumbsup

The Guardian did an expose on Oxbridge and it's intake a little while back......Anyone interested and open minded (I'm the eternal optimist) maybe should look it up.

by TopHat24/7 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:45 pm

Scottrf wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:The only quotas employed, or have ever been employed, in Uni's are the top Universities who have to accept a certain percentage of state educated kids. Therefore it is only ever possible for privately educated kids to be disadvantaged. That is fact.
If the targets are 1. Fair 2. Met.

Does that analysis include a control for educational attainment?

by Scottrf Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:47 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:The only quotas employed, or have ever been employed, in Uni's are the top Universities who have to accept a certain percentage of state educated kids. Therefore it is only ever possible for privately educated kids to be disadvantaged. That is fact.
If the targets are 1. Fair 2. Met.

Does that analysis include a control for educational attainment?

No, the bias or lack of is going to be hard to prove with header level detail but clearly for the universities to set targets they must see that there's some sort of a problem.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 01 Dec 2015, 3:48 pm

Quota systems were brought in because they've always been fair.... Cool

You can get around quota systems though...

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:31 pm

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Too much morality holds you back.....Although I admire people who are 100% honest and live life to the good book.

Never met any yet though...

The Guardian did an expose on Oxbridge and it's intake a little while back......Anyone interested and open minded (I'm the eternal optimist) maybe should look it up.

Possibly true re. too much morality. I'd challenge the "good book" relevance but let's not open that one up again...!

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:33 pm

Scottrf wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:The only quotas employed, or have ever been employed, in Uni's are the top Universities who have to accept a certain percentage of state educated kids. Therefore it is only ever possible for privately educated kids to be disadvantaged. That is fact.
If the targets are 1. Fair 2. Met.

Does that analysis include a control for educational attainment?
No, the bias or lack of is going to be hard to prove with header level detail but clearly for the universities to set targets they must see that there's some sort of a problem.

Not necessarily. There are penalties for not having some sort of 'widening participation' elements to admissions. If an institution is going to be penalised, in any way, for not "doing their bit", they'll do it - doesn't mean they buy into the concept though.

by Scottrf Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:39 pm

They were involved in the set up of that though...

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:40 pm

Maybe. Not sure it means they accept the premise though, although I'm sure a lot accept that not all applicants are equal in terms of their opportunities while going through school. Just Government doing some sh!tty engineering again.

by Scottrf Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:42 pm

OK! All is perfect with the world and everybody is equal!

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 01 Dec 2015, 4:51 pm

Scottrf wrote:OK! All is perfect with the world and everybody is equal!

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 8:40 am

You've met me Truss i'm 100 percent moral Wink

On the subject though, the problem with Uni's etc at the moment is that standards have been lowered and they are being told to accept just about anyone. Degrees seem to have become like confetti and handed out willy nilly meaning there';s an overabundance in the job market making some of them next to meaningless.

Quota's and such pee me off, if my kids decided to something useful in Uni (they won't be doing a degree in Buffy/Glee/Singing and Dancing) I want them to get in based on their marks not because the government says x amount of kids from crappy areas get to go in

by **seanmichaels** Wed 02 Dec 2015, 9:00 am

I finished A-Levels at the time where changes were happening. My exams were 95% exam based and in core subjects. When I got to Uni I was surprised that a lot of people I met had done 100% coursework A-Levels in things like 'general studies'. Non vocational subjects introduced in the state system. The 2 types of education are totally different in my opinion and the better Uni's probably look at that.

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 9:31 am

Flippin eck, again did a big reply and this stupid system logged me out (my system not the website)

@Truss - With regards to someone doing better than you but not having to study as long, that's just life. To get further on in my job I had to work a lot harder than others and spent a lot of time reading up on the bits I didn't quite understand that others got naturally. Does that mean they shouldn't have been promoted quicker than me??? (I say no, that's how the world works)

Personally think that the clamour for degrees has made them a lot less worthy than they used to be, the fact that there's been a lot of hoohaa over coursework doesn't help matters either as lets be honest you can get a lot of it direct from the net without doing any actual study yourself. Whilst I absolutely detest exams (I'm more practical minded I guess) it has to be the best way to go for Uni's and if you can't cope with them then take an NVQ or find a different way to gain that further education (or do what I did and start at the bottom of your chosen your profession (although i've had enough of it now and am currently studying like hell to pass a Cisco exam (I know people that look at it once and get it - gits Smile

)

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 9:56 am

Derbymanc wrote:You've met me Truss i'm 100 percent moral

On the subject though, the problem with Uni's etc at the moment is that standards have been lowered and they are being told to accept just about anyone. Degrees seem to have become like confetti and handed out willy nilly meaning there';s an overabundance in the job market making some of them next to meaningless.

Quota's and such pee me off, if my kids decided to something useful in Uni (they won't be doing a degree in Buffy/Glee/Singing and Dancing) I want them to get in based on their marks not because the government says x amount of kids from crappy areas get to go in

I'm not disagreeing with you over the fact many degrees are stupid and worthless.......

My problem is we have late bloomers in life and educational prowess doesn't equal "intelligence"...It just means you're good at remembering s**t...

In my 20 year career I've come across plenty of people less qualified than others who are much better at their jobs.....Most jobs you're given plenty of training anyway... I was...The sad thing is I needed a degree to be trained when a monkey could probably learn it over time !!

If someone is struggling to gain a degree but is trying hard to do something with his life then I'm happy to be patient rather than confine him to an unhappy life in some factory because he hasn't been given a proper chance..

Like I said a 2:2 might be an overachievement for some and a 2:1 might be an underachievement for others...

One size doesn't fit all...I want to see every kid reach his/her potential......Not just written off..

You sound like Toppy more and more on this thread...and it isn't a good thing.

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 02 Dec 2015, 10:21 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm not disagreeing with you over the fact many degrees are stupid and worthless.......

My problem is we have late bloomers in life and educational prowess doesn't equal "intelligence"...It just means you're good at remembering s**t...

In my 20 year career I've come across plenty of people less qualified than others who are much better at their jobs.....Most jobs you're given plenty of training anyway... I was...The sad thing is I needed a degree to be trained when a monkey could probably learn it over time !!

If someone is struggling to gain a degree but is trying hard to do something with his life then I'm happy to be patient rather than confine him to an unhappy life in some factory because he hasn't been given a proper chance..

Like I said a 2:2 might be an overachievement for some and a 2:1 might be an underachievement for others...

One size doesn't fit all...I want to see every kid reach his/her potential......Not just written off..

You sound like Toppy more and more on this thread...and it isn't a good thing.

Good points there Truss. Although "remembering s**t" is important at University, at the "good" ones, it won't get you the top marks by any means. The idea is that students think for themselves by the time they're in their final year. That said, increasingly it's dumbed down as Government have diddled with the financing and Universities have to maintain their numbers of bums on seats.

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 02 Dec 2015, 10:24 am

seanmichaels wrote:I finished A-Levels at the time where changes were happening. My exams were 95% exam based and in core subjects. When I got to Uni I was surprised that a lot of people I met had done 100% coursework A-Levels in things like 'general studies'. Non vocational subjects introduced in the state system. The 2 types of education are totally different in my opinion and the better Uni's probably look at that.

The better Unis don't accept A-levels such as 'General Studies' etc as a rule. Coursework is an issue at A-level and at Unis themselves - it's a cheats charter, even though there are plagiarism software tools out there, which scan huge data sets, to weed some of this out. Summative coursework should be minimal (IMO) with most of it being for formative learning/feedback etc only.

by TopHat24/7 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 10:51 am

navyblueshorts wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm not disagreeing with you over the fact many degrees are stupid and worthless.......

My problem is we have late bloomers in life and educational prowess doesn't equal "intelligence"...It just means you're good at remembering s**t...

In my 20 year career I've come across plenty of people less qualified than others who are much better at their jobs.....Most jobs you're given plenty of training anyway... I was...The sad thing is I needed a degree to be trained when a monkey could probably learn it over time !!

If someone is struggling to gain a degree but is trying hard to do something with his life then I'm happy to be patient rather than confine him to an unhappy life in some factory because he hasn't been given a proper chance..

Like I said a 2:2 might be an overachievement for some and a 2:1 might be an underachievement for others...

One size doesn't fit all...I want to see every kid reach his/her potential......Not just written off..

You sound like Toppy more and more on this thread...and it isn't a good thing.
Good points there Truss. Although "remembering s**t" is important at University, at the "good" ones, it won't get you the top marks by any means. The idea is that students think for themselves by the time they're in their final year. That said, increasingly it's dumbed down as Government have diddled with the financing and Universities have to maintain their numbers of bums on seats.

Typical comment that would come from an educational unerachiever. Some people aren't as clever as others, fact of life. Same way some people aren't as fast at running or aren't as strong or aren't as tall.

Degrees and job qualifications shouldn't be dumbed down to level the playing field for those that can't cut it and don't want to find their right path, in the same way you wouldn't make better sportsmen compete handicapped to help out the weaker/less gifted sportsmen.

by TopHat24/7 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 10:53 am

navyblueshorts wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:I finished A-Levels at the time where changes were happening. My exams were 95% exam based and in core subjects. When I got to Uni I was surprised that a lot of people I met had done 100% coursework A-Levels in things like 'general studies'. Non vocational subjects introduced in the state system. The 2 types of education are totally different in my opinion and the better Uni's probably look at that.
The better Unis don't accept A-levels such as 'General Studies' etc as a rule. Coursework is an issue at A-level and at Unis themselves - it's a cheats charter, even though there are plagiarism software tools out there, which scan huge data sets, to weed some of this out. Summative coursework should be minimal (IMO) with most of it being for formative learning/feedback etc only.

I got my a-level grades and started Uni in 2002 - no decent Uni was accepting 'general studies', only the rubbish ones, and I can't remember any 100% coursework subjects or Unis accepting any of them either.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 11:01 am

Success is measured in different ways......

Some of us are underachievers at Uni but lucky enough to have decent jobs and even luckier to have a nice Wife and two kids....

Others are bitter, arrogant types who are incredibly talented and yet single in their 30s and always moaning about those apparently less fortunate.......

Some of us are glad we are losers..

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 11:47 am

I agree with Toppy on this one Truss thats why Smile

I do 100 percent agree that people excel at different things in different ways. I'm no good at 'schoolwork' so chose a more practical route as I knew Uni wouldn't have been for me. That's what other people need to figure out.

I wouldn't class any of us as losers that are currently discussing this, in fact i'm loathe to class anyone as losers (bar benefit CHEATS) as there are different situations for each person.

Just think degrees have become too easy and need toughening up again. also think we're getting to used to molly coddling people instead of actually preparing them for the working world.
(Seriously, i've had trainees complain they have to clean for gawds sake)

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 12:29 pm

Yes but people bloom late or are willing to struggle against the odds to do something they want to do and why shouldn't they....

Who am I to tell someone what they should do at 16/18....Ruin their dreams just because they haven't gone to the right school and had the right teachers !!..People develop at differeent times !!...Perhaps they were born in August and are 11 months behind on development than other kids..who knows !!

Some people don't know what they want to do at 18.....

I got help............Other people should too....

Not for people like you and me making life choices for other people Derby......We are not qualified enough !!

I'm not for kicking away the ladder..

I got a second.......When i look at the state of some of the first class muppets we've had....

Education doesn't equal intelligence...

You say it's tough !!...I say you're to harsh and it's not like you... thumbsup

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 02 Dec 2015, 12:30 pm

Derbymanc wrote:...Just think degrees ~~have become~~ are in danger of becoming too easy and need toughening up again. also think we're getting to used to molly coddling people instead of actually preparing them for the working world.
(Seriously, i've had trainees complain they have to clean for gawds sake)

...and you're spot on with the molly coddling.

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 1:49 pm

There's no reason you can't apply for grants later on in life Truss, I just think that if we're going to hand money out (especially in these time of austerity) then it should go to those that work the hardest and those that have the brightest future in their chosen profession. If you can't get the marks then you need to focus on something different or find a different way to enter that career.

To be totally honest though my major issue is how it seems to be a lot easier to gain access to Uni's now than in the past (when I was at school it was seen as a major achievment, now it seems to be what everyone does.)

Definitely agree with education doesn't = intelligence statement too. Personally i'd like to see a lot more advice given in schools and have a form of programme where they can look at where your strengths lie (be it in the practical or learning side of things.) We need to be honest to those that won't be good enough for Uni (and I would have been one of them) and find a different path and more importantly we need to stop focusing on it all as a class issue and making quota's.

(Can I just make the point here as well that there is a strong possibility that when my 2 are old enough for Uni, I more than likely won't be able to afford it) I'd hope that the help is there but they'll only be getting it if they've done their best and it looks like the right choice.

I am pretty harsh on this Truss but it's not to put people down so to speak, I just think we should be finding other ways. (I'm still annoyed to this day that I was pushed down an education route instead of an apprenticeship route, hence why I took a year off before going for that crappy NVQ)

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 2:03 pm

That first paragraph sound terrible and really elitist which is not what I was trying to say at all.

It's very very tough to find out who's going to really try and who's not. It doesn't mean we should just give help to all though. In a perfect world it would be on a case by case basis, unfortunately we don't have the time and money for that so it has to be by exam marks (not coursework though.) Although if a teacher thinks they have a gem then they should also be able to put a case forward for the persons inclusion on a course and maybe why they didn't do as well as they should.

by TopHat24/7 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 2:21 pm

Derbymanc wrote:That first paragraph sound terrible and really elitist which is not what I was trying to say at all.

It sounds like absolutely neither.

Not matter how hard I try I'm never going to get my 10k time down to 30 mins a la Mo Farah. So what? Should I be able to enter races where everyone else has to slow down so I'm more competive?? That's horrendous BS.

Sometimes, no matter how hard someone might try, they may simply just never be good enough. If some kid works their butt off but can only get a dougie or desmond, why should everyone else be dumbed down so their grades are elevated to help them get a job that chances are they also won't succeed at.

Totally agree with your point about better careers and education advice in school - money should be spent on this not ensuring that any old muppet can get a worthless piece of paper.

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 3:38 pm

Derbymanc wrote:There's no reason you can't apply for grants later on in life Truss, I just think that if we're going to hand money out (especially in these time of austerity) then it should go to those that work the hardest and those that have the brightest future in their chosen profession. If you can't get the marks then you need to focus on something different or find a different way to enter that career.)

You're doing it again.....

A guy can work twice as hard for a third class degree than someone who breezes through with a second....

As for the brightest future in their so called profession...That's just conjecture.....

I'll say it again we've had people more qualified than others who have been useless....

The tortoise can beat the hare in the end......Some students are worth persevering with before they are labelledand discarded..

by Derbymanc Wed 02 Dec 2015, 3:59 pm

I'm completely lost at what your getting at now Truss, I haven't said we should throw anyone away, i've said we should be more careful when handing out money and there should be more advice in school.

You'll often find that those that struggle with the schoolwork aspect (exams etc) can excel in a more practical environment and should therefore be pushed to aim for their strenghths.

There is nothing wrong with telling some people that a certain path is not right for them and in my opinion we should be doing more of that.

(As another example, one of the lads I joined up with struggled like hell, he was hand lead through the exams whilst struggling most night with lots of revision etc. 2 years later with him struggling at work he was encouraged to change to a different branch and suddenly excelled. He ended up as one of the youngest managers going and has recently just been promoted again. - He's higher than me and good on him, if he wouldn't have been told he wasn't good enough he'd never have tried and would still be stuck at the bottom of the ladder)

by TRUSSMAN66 Wed 02 Dec 2015, 4:01 pm

Derbymanc wrote:I'm completely lost at what your getting at now Truss, I haven't said we should throw anyone away, i've said we should be more careful when handing out money and there should be more advice in school.

You're handing out money under the pretence of it going to the hardest working......Not taking into account some find it easier than others and some kids develop later than others...

I don't want to have to give up on someone who has it but perhaps needs a little longer to find it..

by Sponsored content