27 replies to this topic

[Golan]

Chyros, on 15 Mar 2010, 18:03, said:

Golan, on 15 Mar 2010, 17:15, said:

Chyros, on 15 Mar 2010, 12:47, said:

Golan, on 15 Mar 2010, 12:45, said:

Every course seems to have its own "other courses that are inferior to us" list and tell you what, I'm quite sure that just as well every course actually is on one of these too.

You'll agree though that as courses go more to exact sciences, they are on fewer lists. I doubt anyone would consider theoretical phyiscs inferior, actually.

Mathematicians. At least those two that were in my Quantum mechanics II course.

Umm, quantum mechanics IS theoretical physics, isn't it?

Yes it is, we have to take non-subject-specific minor field of studies here. The two usually felt a bit underchallenged, seeing that the math used in QM is sort of the standard for them while it is the peak for us.

[deltaepsilon]

Dauth, on 14 Mar 2010, 9:48, said:

deltaepsilon, on 14 Mar 2010, 2:54, said:

Wizard, on 14 Mar 2010, 1:40, said:

This is a political problem caused by a left wing government, desperate to get anyone into university and pretend that it isn't an elitist opportunity. So, yes, they have systematically devalued both the A(S) Level and the degree in the same way. I agree with absolutely everything that you said above, however my answer to the problem is simple. Entry tests. Make them soo hard that if someone wants to go to university they will work for them. Then, make the whole experience free. Ergo, if you're smart enough you can earn one off of your own intelligence and dedication. If you're smart you'll work to get there. If you're lazy or a dumbass, then your presence, which in the last ten years has totally undercut the system of higher education, will not be an issue. It seems that today, if you want to go to uni, you'll need a Masters minimum to have the same standard or kudos as I did when I left.

I genuinely could not care about those that argue, "what about the poor or disadvantaged?", life isn't fair, deal with it. Intelligent people deserve to benefit from HIGHER education. I doubt that people are learning much at uni these days that I didn't learn at A level.

So assuming they implement this entry test you speak of, you wouldn't want the poor and disadvantaged to get in regardless of their academic capabilities?

Now you're being well frankly a moron and reading without thinking.

If you are academically bright then regardless of the financial background you will be able to pass the exams and get into a university.

Well I couldn't quite grasp what he was saying, because I thought his point about the poor and disadvantaged didn't line up with what he was saying earlier. Oh well, you need to have a healthy level of elitism to survive in these threads.

[Wizard]

deltaepsilon, on 17 Mar 2010, 7:15, said:

Well I couldn't quite grasp what he was saying, because I thought his point about the poor and disadvantaged didn't line up with what he was saying earlier. Oh well, you need to have a healthy level of elitism to survive in these threads.

I meant that, currently, in this country, if you aren't intelligent enough or on the poor side of life, the government feel it is their obligation to lower academic standards so that you don't feel marginalised for having parents without a good paying job, or basically being a thick lazy bastard. If you have the ability then I most certainly think that you deserve to be at uni, especially over those who can afford to pay for it but can't stop dribbling on their Gucci's, ie. the rich lazy bastards.

Edited by Wizard, 17 March 2010 - 10:46.