Hughes Says Unis Should Recruit 90% of Students from State Schools

#1
Universities aiming to charge high fees should recruit more than 90% of their students from state schools, according to a senior member of the Government.

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Simon Hughes is responsible for improving access to education for the less well-off.

He said there needed to be radical changes in the balance of privately and publicly-educated young people doing degrees.

Mr Hughes, who abstained in the key Commons vote allowing institutions to almost treble fees to £9,000, told The Guardian universities had "failed miserably" at reflecting society.

The paper said about 7.2% of young people in England attended private schools, but went on to make up more than a quarter of students at the 25 most selective institutions - 46.6% at Oxford.

"Every university should, wherever their fee level is, but specifically for a fee level above £6,000, recruit on the basis of no more people coming from the private sector than there are in the public as a whole," Mr Hughes said.
Fees: Simon Hughes Says Pricey Universities Should Recruit 90% Of Students From State Schools | Politics | Sky News

This is exactly the sort of idealism over common sense that I hoped would end with the demise of Labour. I'm all for giving everybody a fair chance, and I certainly wasn't sent to a private school, but the idea of penalising students simply because they've received an excellent education is nothing short of insanity.
 
#2
huges is a drunken wombat that said why should top univeristies be the preserve of less than 10% of the population they did'nt get their on merit they just got lucky by an accident of birth.
so you got brilliant exam results well you had a massive set of advantages of cause you did if you got only average results you must be a bit of a thicko really.
 
#3
Fees: Simon Hughes Says Pricey Universities Should Recruit 90% Of Students From State Schools | Politics | Sky News

This is exactly the sort of idealism over common sense that I hoped would end with the demise of Labour. I'm all for giving everybody a fair chance, and I certainly wasn't sent to a private school, but the idea of penalising students simply because they've received an excellent education is nothing short of insanity.
The real problem is that the state schools are a disaster. Get them sorted out and private school children will have no advantage.

Unfortunately, Labour wrecked the state schools and the current government is doing nothing to improve them.
 
#4
The real problem is that the state schools are a disaster. Get them sorted out and private school children will have no advantage.

Unfortunately, Labour wrecked the state schools and the current government is doing nothing to improve them.
Agreed, except state schools have to take on the pupils they're given. Many of those will be destined for careers as factory workers, bin men or builders. Some will be headed into deliberately unemployment or prison. For those reasons, private schools will always have the upper hand.
 
#5
Hughes must be drunk. His Government has just taken away state funding for universities and he now wants to tell them how to do their admissions.

The idiot hasn't realised they are effectively privatised.
 
#6
cambridge has failed in its target to attract 75% state educated pupils and needs to work on achieving that.
I can live with that its unfair to state pupils but I can live with that.
90% plus don't get private education so whining that proles take most of the places tough.
 
#7
Agreed, except state schools have to take on the pupils they're given. Many of those will be destined for careers as factory workers, bin men or builders. Some will be headed into deliberately unemployment or prison. For those reasons, private schools will always have the upper hand.
I don't think that private schools turn down many children. So they should get their share of thickos.

However, parents who send their children to private schools expect them to try and learn. Whereas, many parents with children in state schools are happy to let their children truant or misbehave. That will give the private schools a statistical advantage.

IMHO what matters is that the children who go to state schools and want to learn should be able to.
 
#8
As Brian Cox, professor of particle physics at Manchester University and former keyboard player with D:ream once said: "It's complete bollocks".

What does Hughes propose? 15% of state school leavers are illiterate. Should some of them go on to university? What about disabled kids with IQs under 50? They're part of society so presumably there should be a place for them at university too.

Bollocks like this has already led to the development of a very obvious, American style Ivy League in Britain. Next time you're browsing the job ads, see how many of them require a degree from a "traditional university" or a "Russell Group university" or an "established university". Graduates of the South London University of Media Studies who spent less time in a lecture theatre than they spent in the union bar need not apply.

The next step will be the development of a private university sector. Harvard, MIT, Princeton and Yale are all in the private sector and they can charge what they like. Currently, there is only one private university in Britain. Oxford and Cambridge have been dropping hints about dropping out and charging 30 grand a year like the top American colleges.

Still, why worry. Simon's got his degree from Cambridge and everybody else can go and do media studies at Scumbags College.
 
#9
Perhaps the University's (the top ones) should only be recruiting the top 10% of school leavers. Then we can get rid of all the psudo Uni's. They can go back to being Colleges/Polytechnics.

I seem to remember the Colleges/Polys being full of part time students doing C&G, ONC, and HNC. The companies sending them there had already done the intelligence sift, and sent those with the aptitude to College. They want to train people to their requirements and send some for further education in the broader field. This will repay itself in ideas brought back by the student in their education that will be broader than the industry their company may be working in.

Now companies are faced with dozens of Degree level students, but they have no idea if these people have the capability to work in a real world environment.
 
#10
I don't think that private schools turn down many children. So they should get their share of thickos.
I don't think so. I have relatives who were looking for a private school for their daughter. All of the private schools they tried had an entrance exam. The local state secondary was one of those specialist Academy schools. Specialised in research into stab wounds and drugs. Had a strict policy of no expulsions, even for kids who put classmates in intensive care.

The state system in many places is so awful that private schools can pick and choose their pupils. Only the clever ones will be admitted and most of them will have the ability to go on to university. You could turn Hughes' argument around and ask whether able kids should be denied a place at university because they went to a private school.
 
#11
We know how to teach children in the UK we have some excellant state schools.

what we appear to be unable to do is replicate that model in the not so good schools.
 
#12
Hughes must be drunk. His Government has just taken away state funding for universities and he now wants to tell them how to do their admissions.

The idiot hasn't realised they are effectively privatised.
Universities have always been privatised. They're not part of the state education system, the state just pays a particular sum per head to universities to educate the quota decided on by government.

As A_M says, many of the best universities are considering option out of accepting state quotas entirely. If Hughes tries to insist on them filling 90% of their places with students bringing in a government-capped fee, then he'll either have to ensure that they can recruit them in sufficient numbers to make the overall fee income workable or face them leaving the state system entirely.

Of course, being in government he could try to make things financially too difficult for them to leave by hampering their international recruitment efforts via the Tier 4 visa regulations - but then again it's hard to think how they could be made much more of an expensive fuckabout for universities than they already are.
 
#14
Carrots, I was merely making the point that before the tuition fees fiasco govt could threaten to withhold subsidies if universities failed to comply with the latest social engineering crap. Hughes no longer has a stick and universities aremore concerned about maintaining their international reputations-the good ones at least.
 
#15
Graduates of the South London University of Media Studies who spent less time in a lecture theatre than they spent in the union bar need not apply.
I went to a very good University and spent far more time in the bar than in lectures because we had very few lectures/seminars. We were not taught our degrees but expected to do our own independent study with the guidance of the academic staff.

The state system in many places is so awful that private schools can pick and choose their pupils.
Private schools always pick & choose their own pupils. It's rather the point.

Only the clever ones will be admitted and most of them will have the ability to go on to university. You could turn Hughes' argument around and ask whether able kids should be denied a place at university because they went to a private school.
Hughes' argument is that people of middling talent at independent schools get University places because they are recipients of additional assistance not available to those similar in the State sector which is unfair. Personally I'd like to see all State schools as good as the Independent ones but lack of money & intransigence amongst educationalists means that won't happen.
 
#16
Agreed, except state schools have to take on the pupils they're given. Many of those will be destined for careers as factory workers, bin men or builders. Some will be headed into deliberately unemployment or prison. For those reasons, private schools will always have the upper hand.
Well thats all the Polish kids sorted, but what about the English ones?
 
#17
Hughes is a public school educated knob! My public school as it happens, so no arguments on that fact please.

Imposing stupid rules on universities will only further dilute our educational achievement levels further. Poor children, not up to the required standard, will merely lower standards all round - a Stalinist Utopian goal (I can see the repellent Balls licking his public school and Oxford educated chops as I type).

What is required is the immediate DISBANDMENT of most of the so-called universities, and their reverting to being useful TECHNICAL COLLEGES

Blair was, is, a cvnt, and his 'university for all' was a stupid, ill thought out, back of a fag-packet, vote winning, unachievable, unsynchronised uttering from his copious 'gob'. The twerp Blair, and his excremental successor, have all but brought this nation to its knees. Irrelevant so called 'universities' and their fatuous 'degree courses' have no place in the recovery of the country.
 
#18
Universities returning to polys and technical colleges would be a good thing. Also I'd like to see the end of all this 'you must go to Uni', or 'Uni is a life experience' tosh that gets bandied about.

If we want to 'open' education to all I would suggest the following. Stream the schools. We need schools that cater for the morons who will on get to sign on, schools to cater for those that will do something useful with their lives and schools that will cater for the geeks.

Once we have those streams we can look at ensuring that there is easy swapping between them, up or down, should a student be a late bloomer. A student surely doesn't have to stick to the rigid time table of ages versus forms that are laid down. A year either way shouldn't be a problem.

Exams should ensure the vast majority of students hit the middle area grades. A whole year of students getting A***** is just a fcuking insult. The majority should be hitting around C surely?

Finally further ed. Introduce a nice scheme to really help those who are gifted but poor. If bursaries and scholarships can't help, why not award government aid based on the students (family) means and their grades.

ie a poor kid with a fist full of As and A*s gets the full ride, where as a rich kit that is thicker than a whale omlette gets no assistance financially.

Likewise, if Unis will be looking at how the kid has developed and worked over the years, then the state schools have to provide adequate access to schemes such as DoE, community work etc. Maybe even CCF style detachments of ACF, ATC and Navy Cadets.
 
#19
I just love the logic of people like Hughes.

"Oh no! Our state education system is underfunded and as a result, consistently fails to prepare their students for further academic study, when competing with private schools. What should we do?"

A - Increase funding, number of teachers etc. to bring our state schools up to a higher standard, so that talented pupils who can't afford an expensive private education can still have the same opportunities
B - Fuck our unis around with quotas to create the illusion that we're accomplishing A, without actually having to invest any of the extra money required.

"Er... B? B sounds easier. Let's do B."

It's so transparent that it sickens me, but it happens anyway.
 
#20
I just love the logic of people like Hughes.

"Oh no! Our state education system is underfunded and as a result, consistently fails to prepare their students for further academic study, when competing with private schools. What should we do?"

A - Increase funding, number of teachers etc. to bring our state schools up to a higher standard, so that talented pupils who can't afford an expensive private education can still have the same opportunities
B - Fuck our unis around with quotas to create the illusion that we're accomplishing A, without actually having to invest any of the extra money required.

"Er... B? B sounds easier. Let's do B."

It's so transparent that it sickens me, but it happens anyway.


Errrrr...well, having had a good hard dig around google it appears that the amount of cash per pupil in State or Private education is pretty close to the same figure. About £9,000 per term per pupil......ish. The difference is that State schools have a percentage hived off by LEA's to pay for their crap and another percentage is hived off to pay for all the crap Central Government pours down like turds in a crapper.... Private schools pretty much manage to avoid the LEA crap and swerve the bulk of Central Government crap. Which means that a Private pupil gets £9,000 spent on them, whilst the State Pupil may only see £4,500 spent on them.

(Very rough figures and liable to change)
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top