Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

This forum is the place to have more serious discussions about politics and religion, and your opinions thereof. Be courteous!

Moderator: Forum Administrators

Forum rules
When a registered user insults another person (user or not), nation, political group or religious group, s/he will be deprived of her/his permission to post in the forum. That user has the right to re-register one week after s/he has lost the permission. Further violations will result in longer prohibitions.

By default, you are automatically registered to post in this forum. However, users cannot post in the politics forum during the first week after registration. Users can also not make their very first post in the politics forum.
User avatar
Levike
Posts: 6153
Joined: 2013-04-22, 19:26
Real Name: Levi
Gender: male
Location: Budapest
Country: HU Hungary (Magyarország)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby Levike » 2013-08-19, 14:28

For the Gypsies it's harder to integrate even if they want
because almost everyone here thinks of them as criminals or lazy people.
And because of this image sometimes it may seem impossible to get a job.

On the news there was a topic about the Roma getting hired
and when they interviewed some people the majority said that
they would never want a Gypsy as an employee simply because of the ethnicity.

In my town for example almost every waste collector is a Gypsy
because whites will simply not accept this kind of job.

And what Ludwig said about their mentality is somehow true.
One of the biggest problems is that many of them leave school
and sadly the law doesn't do anything about it.
Nem egy nap alatt épült Buda vára.

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby mōdgethanc » 2013-08-19, 19:36

You don't think degrees would have any real difference in usefulness in the job market if only people with above-average intelligence or study skills (or above some other threshold) were admitted to colleges? I don't know about that.
What? Didn't I say that I think they would? If 20% of Americans have a bachelor's degree, and 10% has a graduate degree, it's reasonable to say that even taking into account that unemployment rates vary among majors, people with graduate degrees have an edge over those who don't, because they're rarer and more specialized. Now, that doesn't mean everyone should have a graduate degree, because some people don't need them for their chosen careers and some people don't have the aptitude for graduate-level work. If 40% of Americans had bachelor's degrees and 20% had graduate degrees, it makes sense to say that graduate degrees would be less valuable, and then doctorate holders would take their place. And like I said, it's a vicious circle, because at some point a bachelor's becomes practically mandatory to get a job when at one point only a high school degree was needed for many jobs. When does it stop - when the only people who are competitive in the job market are postdocs?
Levente.Maier wrote:For the Gypsies it's harder to integrate even if they want
because almost everyone here thinks of them as criminals or lazy people.
And because of this image sometimes it may seem impossible to get a job.

On the news there was a topic about the Roma getting hired
and when they interviewed some people the majority said that
they would never want a Gypsy as an employee simply because of the ethnicity.

In my town for example almost every waste collector is a Gypsy
because whites will simply not accept this kind of job.

And what Ludwig said about their mentality is somehow true.
One of the biggest problems is that many of them leave school
and sadly the law doesn't do anything about it.
We even have a name for this phenomenon: Self-fulfilling prophecy.

User avatar
johnklepac
Posts: 2809
Joined: 2012-12-06, 2:18
Real Name: Your Onions
Gender: male
Location: Chicago/Southwest Ohio
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby johnklepac » 2013-08-21, 6:10

mōdgethanc wrote:
You don't think degrees would have any real difference in usefulness in the job market if only people with above-average intelligence or study skills (or above some other threshold) were admitted to colleges? I don't know about that.
What? Didn't I say that I think they would? If 20% of Americans have a bachelor's degree, and 10% has a graduate degree, it's reasonable to say that even taking into account that unemployment rates vary among majors, people with graduate degrees have an edge over those who don't, because they're rarer and more specialized.
I meant a difference between degrees in that situation with one another, not between degrees in that situation with degrees now. You said that the reason why certain degrees are useless is that everyone feels the need to go to college, and the implication I took from that is that degrees would be of roughly equal use if we scaled up the gold-panning in admissions, which I don't think is necessarily the case.

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby mōdgethanc » 2013-08-21, 15:06

johnklepac wrote:I meant a difference between degrees in that situation with one another, not between degrees in that situation with degrees now. You said that the reason why certain degrees are useless is that everyone feels the need to go to college, and the implication I took from that is that degrees would be of roughly equal use if we scaled up the gold-panning in admissions, which I don't think is necessarily the case.
I have no idea what you are talking about, because that's not what I was talking about in my post. I thought you were talking about academic inflation as a whole, not about certain degrees (as in, arts vs. sciences) being more useful than others. I already acknowledged that employment rates vary among majors. But yes, arts degrees would be undoubtedly be more useful if we didn't have four times as many people studying them as sciences.

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23268
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby linguoboy » 2013-08-22, 16:06

So what do people think of this idea?

"A draft of the proposal, obtained by The New York Times and likely to cause some consternation among colleges, shows a plan to rate colleges before the 2015 school year based on measures like tuition, graduation rates, debt and earnings of graduates, and the percentage of lower-income students who attend. The ratings would compare colleges against their peer institutions. If the plan can win Congressional approval, the idea is to base federal financial aid to students attending the colleges partly on those rankings.

Mr. Obama hopes that starting in 2018, the ratings would be tied to financial aid, so that students at highly rated colleges might get larger federal grants and more affordable loans." (Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/education/obamas-plan-aims-to-lower-cost-of-college.html)
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
mōdgethanc
Posts: 10658
Joined: 2010-03-20, 5:27
Gender: male
Location: Toronto
Country: CA Canada (Canada)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby mōdgethanc » 2013-08-22, 22:22

I just read today that my university is thinking of a) raising the minimum average needed for admission and b) shifting to a three-semester model with more summer classes. Both are great news, IMO. The two-semester model is silly and outmoded.

User avatar
linguoboy
Posts: 23268
Joined: 2009-08-25, 15:11
Real Name: Da
Location: Chicago
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby linguoboy » 2013-08-23, 1:04

mōdgethanc wrote:I just read today that my university is thinking of a) raising the minimum average needed for admission and b) shifting to a three-semester model with more summer classes. Both are great news, IMO. The two-semester model is silly and outmoded.

Both the university I attended and the one I work at are on the quarter system. The big disadvantage is that classes end late (so you're entering the job market a couple weeks after your peers). The big advantage, to my mind, is that fall quarter finals are over with before the Christmas break.
"Richmond is a real scholar; Owen just learns languages because he can't bear not to know what other people are saying."--Margaret Lattimore on her two sons

User avatar
Yasna
Posts: 2206
Joined: 2011-09-12, 1:17
Gender: male
Location: Boston
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Apartheid & Separation

Postby Yasna » 2013-08-23, 1:53

linguoboy wrote:But you do understand that one of the primary forces....

Great post.
Ein Buch muß die Axt sein für das gefrorene Meer in uns. - Kafka

User avatar
md0
Posts: 7550
Joined: 2010-08-08, 19:56
Country: FI Finland (Suomi)

Re: Money/Education-based Apartheid & Separation

Postby md0 » 2013-10-07, 13:03

I just read a blog post who reminded me of this thread's question.
A month ago some MPs of the ruling party here came out stating their views about public education (and it's what you can expect from conservative neoliberals). But at some point they say "but yeah, I can see us granting free higher education to top students [in highschool]", and this is what the blogger commented, and I thought he was spot on:
We know from statistics (domestic and international), that the top students in high school are those who can afford private schools, or pay for (private) cram schools. The way our highschool works, and especially the final exam that doubles as an university admittance exam (with an element of randomness1). One of my brothers for example is at his final highschool year this year and he can't afford cram school, and he's quite angry about this, because sadly, it's actually necessary.
So what those MPs supported was offer free university to rich kids, and make poor kids pay for the privilege of having the chance the rich kids are given for free.
As every teacher in the country says, first thing we need is an overhaul of the highschool system. Right now is three years of trying to memorise stuff for the final exam, without learning anything. And since it's a single exam, if you fail, you need to wait to take that exam again next year.
For as long as "top student in highschool" matches up perfectly with the "rich enough to go to a cram school for 35 hours each week for 3 years", then you can't say "we will reward top(=rich) students with free university".

1. The way it works, is that the final exam of highschool is also used to judge whether you should go to the first, or second, or third etc choice in your university wishlist.
So if you expect an average of 18/20, and want to go to C.U.T., you'd place it second in your wishlist because that's about the equivalent score (second option = 18/20, first option = 19/20). If you score better than expected, you mind end up in a university you didn't want and there's nothing you can do about it, other than retake the exams next year (or be rich/indebted enough to go abroad).

Now, the exams themselves are basically a contest to see who has the most effective memorisation skills.
"If you like your clause structure, you can keep your clause structure"
Stable: Cypriot Greek (el-cy)Standard Modern Greek (el)English (en) Current: Standard German (de)Elementary Finnish (fi)
For fun: Legacy: France French (fr)Japanese (ja)Standard Turkish (tr)


Return to “Politics and Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest