Because The United Kingdom?

[Brian Kennedy]

[Panzermann]

Brits envy German universities and scientific institutes?

 

How Germany abolished tuition fees

 

In terms of quality, there are more UK universities at the top end of international league tables. But this is because league tables do not always include research institutes which do not teach or award degrees - and Germany has a muchmore distinct separation between teaching and research universities.

 

Report author Mr Hillman says that if the elite German science institute, the Max Planck Society, were included in global rankings it would overtake both Oxford and Cambridge .

shows once again there are lies, damn lies and benchmarks.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Panzermann

[Ssnake]

The funny thing is, the OECD is harping Germany all the time that "too few" of its citizens follow a university education, completely failing to understand that our non-university education on the job usually produces higher and more useful skills than what the brain mills yield (particularly if it's a degree in arts history, or entirely bogus fields like gender studies, or economics).

[swerve]

Of course one might argue Universities are not there to provide low level training, that their view is to cover a high level of education.

The problem we have now is that a lot of average teenagers who would at one time have got jobs with training schemes which turned them into skilled workers now go to university - & emerge three years later with a theoretical understanding of something, but a distinct lack of practical skills. And to make it worse, they're encouraged to do courses which are perceived to be easy (nothing hard, like maths, nothing with objective measures), rather than technical or scientific subjects, because they're easier & cheaper (hardware, labs etc. cost money, need safety equipment & training, extra staff, & recruiting staff with increasingly rare knowledge & skills) to teach & easier to produce high grades in, which suits universities which want to market themselves & maximise their income.

 

So degrees, like the qualifications obtained at school, are dumbed down. Getting the top grades in A levels used to mean you could pick your university. Nowadays, there are so many top grades that universities have to find other ways to distinguish between applicants, & yet they haven't learned things we used to have to know just to get a pass, let alone a top grade.

 

For example, I've heard of basic calculus being taught in the first year of university degrees, to people with maths 'A' levels (qualification needed for university entrance). When I got my grade 1 (passing grades from 1 to 6, not A to C) 'O' level (exam usually taken aged 16, preceding 'A' levels), calculus was part of the curriculum, & I don't think it was possible to get a decent grade without using it in the exam. And yet the proportions getting high grades have gone up enormously!

[DB]

Differential calculus was part of my O level course, integral calculus was part of the A level course.

 

I did two maths A levels - called "Maths" and "Further Maths" and our teacher indicated that stuff was being pushed out of the normal A-level into the "Further" A level even then. Proof by contradiction was one thing - how you can expect people to do mathematics without understanding proofs is beyond my understanding.

[Panzermann]

The funny thing is, the OECD is harping Germany all the time that "too few" of its citizens follow a university education, completely failing to understand that our non-university education on the job usually produces higher and more useful skills than what the brain mills yield (particularly if it's a degree in arts history, or entirely bogus fields like gender studies, or economics).

Is it really OECD or is it local german media/political spin? The socialdemocrat/green/left dream is more academics, because it makes an instantly better society. And world peace. And Rainbows.

 

AFAIK Meister and Techniker educations are considered equivalent to academic degrees by OECD actually.

[Mikel2]

Decline in British education has been going on decades. When I was school in the 1980s, it was pretty evident that many of us kids knew more about Computers than the adults. And the material we had to work with was apalling, I seem to recall we had geography text books that were so old they showed the British Empire on them.

 

 

While in the Boy Scouts, I once spent a night in an old school that had a map that showed the Austro Hungarian empire and there was a photograph of a very young Franco presiding the classroom...

[MiloMorai]

The first high school (G9) I went to Stuart was built in the early 1920s. The halls were nice and wide as were the stairwells for the 4 stories. Student population was ~1000.

 

 

For G10 went to a new built school, Brookfield, (1961) and the halls were even wider than those at Glebe. Student population ~1000.

 

And, we had to buy are own books.

[Leo Niehorster]

I'm going to have to admit there was a map of the Roman Empire on 117 AD in one of my classrooms.

Well, it was an decent English school, after all.

[Mike Steele]

 

 

Decline in British education has been going on decades. When I was school in the 1980s, it was pretty evident that many of us kids knew more about Computers than the adults. And the material we had to work with was apalling, I seem to recall we had geography text books that were so old they showed the British Empire on them.

 

 

While in the Boy Scouts, I once spent a night in an old school that had a map that showed the Austro Hungarian empire and there was a photograph of a very young Franco presiding the classroom...

 

 

Im fully expecting someone at this point to stand up and say they went to school with a map of English territories in France on the wall.

 

No but we had a map of the thirteen Colonies on the wall, How did that turn out for you?

[Panzermann]

 

 

I'm going to have to admit there was a map of the Roman Empire on 117 AD in one of my classrooms.

Well, it was an decent English school, after all.

Crucifixion for late arrivals was it?

Locking up the gates of Hadrian's Wall.

[Marek Tucan]

So what's the deal with Corbyn? Our media present him as slightly to the Left of Lenin

[urbanoid]

That he will make Labour unelectable, hurray!

Edited September 12, 2015 by urbanoid

[cbo]

That he will make Labour unelectable, hurray!

 

...and if not, turn the UK into the United Socialist Republic of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

[urbanoid]

And they will still have a strategic ally across the pond - the Bolivarian Republic!

[BansheeOne]

Gosh, he was actually elected. Bring the popcorn and warm beer!

[FlyingCanOpener]

So what's the deal with Corbyn? Our media present him as slightly to the Left of Lenin

 

Well, Labour of late has been doing their part to appear as close to the Tories as possible, so I guess Comrade Corbyn will be a return to the mean.

[Panzermann]

 

 

So what's the deal with Corbyn? Our media present him as slightly to the Left of Lenin

Well, Labour of late has been doing their part to appear as close to the Tories as possible, so I guess Comrade Corbyn will be a return to the mean.

A party named "labour" that actually implements big capital politics and kills jobs for workers was not really credible. That is now the back lash by the partybase. How big was the influence of fresh members on the result? There seemed to be an influx of new members recently. Edited September 12, 2015 by Panzermann

[BansheeOne]

Genosse der Bosse.

[Panzermann]

Genosse der Bosse.

Exactly why german SPD is dying slowly. Astonishingly a few months ago I talked with a JuSo, and he had a harsh case of cognitive dissonance pertaining to his party's politics. Fascinating.

 

I guess Labour members have had enough.

[cbo]

 

Lets level up the lunatic side of his ideas. He is against Nato, nuclear weapons and the EU. So in that regard he is something of a complete throwback to the Lunatic left from the 1980s. I personally reject all that, and I think any right minded individual in Britain does too. Indeed if he concentrates on that, I think he might make himself unelectable.OTOH, one can point to the Coalition and the Present Government and say they have done nothing to assist the armed forces or Nato or the EU and so in that regard you might think there isnt much to choose between them.

 

 

Interesting - I probably haven't been listening properly, but I was under the impression that the Conservatives in the UK had become so anti-EU that if Corbyn really wants to beat them on that policy, he would have to invade the Continent - and for that he needs an army

 

Great post, btw.

[sunday]

So, are we getting Gibraltar at last, or not?

[Marek Tucan]

¨Well, support his unilateral disarmament ideas, purchase the nukes off him for "disposal", arm them, hey presto, you have nuclear deterrent, UK doesn't... Gibraltar is yours.

 

Now if he tried to go for the British Socialist Union, will Northern Ireland become Britain's Taiwan?

[cbo]

I tend to think that Europe needs Britain either in or out.

 

Britain being in, having a say, but not contributing to solve European problems is a nuissance. Seems to me that this is were we are currently moving.

 

But I'd much prefer Britain in the EU to keep some of the centralistic tendencies (both in the EU and in some of the EU countries) in order, for economic stability, as a solid democracy etc.

[Ivanhoe]

So, are we getting Gibraltar at last, or not?

 

Optimists believe Russia will get the Rock, pessimists China.