Asia-Pacific

Check out this week's top Asia-Pacific news on the Asia Pacific Headline page.
  

Follow RoF

For all the breaking news, follow RoF on Twitter and Facebook

         
   
  

My Profile

Check all your messages, update your blog, change your account details,  find friends and much more on the My Profile section.
  

Regional Firms

Thinking of moving out of the City? Regional Inside Info gives you the lowdown on firms in Birmingham, Bristol, Manchester and Leeds.
  

Main Discussion

Why have state funded mass education?
Rate it
0
Report as offensive
Elphi
Posted - 17 April 2017 03:43
The historical drivers are no longer appropriate and there is no modern replacement. We have it because we have it

Much of the impetus for universal education came from the emerging Protestant religions. Martin Luther declared that salvation depends on each person's own reading of the Scriptures. A corollary, not lost on Luther, was that each person must learn to read and must also learn that the Scriptures represent absolute truths and that salvation depends on understanding those truths. Luther and other leaders of the Reformation promoted public education as Christian duty, to save souls from eternal damnation. By the end of the 17th century, Germany, which was the leader in the development of schooling, had laws in most of its states requiring that children attend school; but the Lutheran church, not the state, ran the schools [3].

In America, in the mid 17th century, Massachusetts became the first colony to mandate schooling, the clearly stated purpose of which was to turn children into good Puritans. Beginning in 1690, children in Massachusetts and adjacent colonies learned to read from the New England Primer, known colloquially as "The Little Bible of New England" [4]. It included a set of short rhymes to help children learn the alphabet, beginning with, "In Adam's Fall, We sinned all," and ending with, "Zaccheus he, Did climb the tree, His Lord to see." The Primer also included the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the Ten Commandments, and various lessons designed to instill in children a fear of God and a sense of duty to their elders.

Employers in industry saw schooling as a way to create better workers. To them, the most crucial lessons were punctuality, following directions, tolerance for long hours of tedious work, and a minimal ability to read and write. From their point of view (though they may not have put it this way), the duller the subjects taught in schools the better.

As nations gelled and became more centralized, national leaders saw schooling as means of creating good patriots and future soldiers. To them, the crucial lessons were about the glories of the fatherland, the wondrous achievements and moral virtues of the nation's founders and leaders, and the necessity to defend the nation from evil forces elsewhere.[/I]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/200808/brief-history-education
Laz will be Lib Dem leader
Posted - 17 April 2017 04:06
Report as offensive
It's lucky we have free thinking radicals like you around m88, the intellectual freeborn not bound by convention, free to say the unsayable and think the unthinkable
Keef is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 17 April 2017 07:50
Report as offensive
But what about being able to read the dishwasher instructions jj?

You've not thought this one through m-74
Bert Weedon
Posted - 17 April 2017 08:14
Report as offensive
Which is quite a job for them considering how filthy everything is....
Keef is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 17 April 2017 08:20
Report as offensive
I'm not sure that if you started with a completely blank sheet of paper that you'd end up with an education system markedly different from what we have now. It has evolved from historical expediency to something vaguely functional.
Keef is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 17 April 2017 08:56
Report as offensive
You don't want to let engineers near the c-suite. Recipe for disaster. They're there to build and design, not to make executive decisions.
Gannicus
Posted - 17 April 2017 09:07
Report as offensive
Clearly the OPs lack of education hasn't stopped them from from opening on stuff they know fuckall about.
Lydia
Posted - 17 April 2017 09:51
Report as offensive
In the UK there is not a mandated education but there must be some. Home education is lawful (what the Queen had by the way) and that might be by way of just playing in a forest. I don't think they do many checks on what exactly you are teaching.

Schools are as much to give parents a break from childcare and enable them to work as anything else.

We could provide state schools on line which parents or people parents hire then make their children listen and contribue to from the home if they want the children educated. i think there are some US states with no home schooling checks and it is up to you what you do with the children. One of the twins' friends just came to school into the sixth form - before that he was educated at home.

However in our society until robots take over we probably do want people to be able to read and write and know a bit of stuff about some subjects.
🐤🐤🐤 is voting Conservative
Posted - 17 April 2017 09:53
Report as offensive
The obsession with "free" education has resulted in a chaotic university system. Of course everyone needs some sort of elementary education, perhaps to the age of 14 or so, but you've got to draw the line somewhere.
BREXIT!!
Posted - 17 April 2017 10:18
Report as offensive
WHY IS MY HARD-EARNED MONEY BEING USED TO TEACH THE OFFSPRING OF OIKS?!?

AND - IT MUST BE REMEMBERED - TAXES ARE THEFT, BECAUSE THE STATE TAKES THEM FROM US WITH THE IMPLICIT THREAT OF FORCE: THAT MEANS I AM ESSENTIALLY A SLAVE!!!

SO WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THE HORRORS OF SLAVERY IN THE PAST, REMIND THEM OF VERY REAL HORRORS OF SLAVERY IN THE PRESENT WHERE MY TAXES ARE WASTED ON EDUCATING PROLES!!
Excession
Posted - 17 April 2017 11:20
Report as offensive
'The obsession with "free" education has resulted in a chaotic university system'

LOL - or you could take the view that education is a good in itself and the very apex of civilisational achievement.

I haven't noticed Denmark and Finland etc. suffering from terrible chaos because of their free tertiary education.

You can make a case for a lower % of pupils going to university (as was historically the case before's 's push for 50% in the noughties) but surely it's hard to argue that education is generally a very good thing?

If so it's then just a question of how's it's funded - the usual trade off of lower taxes but restricted access/significant debt for poorer people or higher taxes but wider access.

Health service is the same decision.

The Tories are certainly are bolloxing up some aspects of education. The pointless obsession with grammar schools that no-one really wants.

Or even more heh-some, the total boneheaded failure of their 'attempt' to train more desperately-needed nurses.

Which went as follows. "I know, let's abolish nursing bursaries, and make them pay for their degree like everyone else - no need to treat them like doctors and fund their education at all.. that way the uni/ex-Polys can train more of them at no cost to us.Win-win eh, old chap? After all who wouldn't jump at a chance to go £50,000 or so into debt for the glittering prospects and pay of a career in nursing?

Oh wait - a 25% decline in already miserable enrolment numbers. Who would have thought that would happen?"



BREXIT!!
Posted - 17 April 2017 11:44
Report as offensive
"you could take the view that education is a good in itself and the very apex of civilisational achievement"

I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST EDUCATION PER SE BUT IT IS A FINITE RESOURCE AND SHOULD NOT BE WASTED ON THE LOWER ORDERS

AS 3-DUCKS (SOMEONE WHO'S EDUCATION WAS WORTH EVERY PENNY) WISELY POINTS OUT:

"Of course everyone needs some sort of elementary education, perhaps to the age of 14 or so, but you've got to draw the line somewhere."

QUITE RIGHT: YOU'VE GOT TO DRAW THE LINE SOMEWHERE (ALTHOUGH IF ANYTHING I THINK 14 IS OVERLY GENEROUS)!
Scot Chegg
Posted - 17 April 2017 12:22
Report as offensive
AS 3-DUCKS (SOMEONE WHO'S EDUCATION WAS WORTH EVERY PENNY) WISELY POINTS OUT:

Heh!
Hodge
Posted - 17 April 2017 12:22
Report as offensive
The subsidising of fifth and sixth year of Med School and Dental School but not the less well paid clinical professions is one of the most staggeringly blatant pieces of favouring your own kind ever witnessed. And I say that as someone whose other half is a doctor.

"Jeremy mate, we need to find ways to save money. What about getting rid of the uni bursaries for Nursing, Midwifery, Dentistry etc.?"

"Absolutely top idea mate. Just one thing, don't ditch it for the doctors and dentists. I've got some mates who do that and they don't even make a tun. You've got to support people sacrificing so much to help others".

"Fair point Jeremy. What about the midwives and nurses?"

"Stcik with that, Sure they probably just sit around in lectures and drink anyway, plus they're paid a bomb I think."

"Great stuff. That saving should deffo allow us to pay for the 7 day NHS. Do we know what that is yet by the way?".

"Haven't a fvcking clue. We absolutely have to deliver on it though. It's a manifesto promise and that is unshakeable".
Scot Chegg
Posted - 17 April 2017 12:59
Report as offensive
There is no way you know ten girls tarquin, so I'm calling bullsh1t on that entire anecdote.
Massive fuckwit
Posted - 17 April 2017 13:05
Report as offensive
Doctors are highly skilled but an expensive drain on NHS resources. It makes sense to encourage more people to enter that profession in the short term through subsidies so that the resulting increase in supply keeps future wage bills down. The way the current crop bleed the system dry with their egregious locum and overtime pay is already bad enough.

The NHS was built on nursing provided by people who left school at 14 and learned their trade on the job. The current generation feel this is below them and have aspirations to equal the doctors even though the majority clearly do not have the intellectual capacity.

We don't need expensive nurses we need cheaper doctors.
Hodge
Posted - 17 April 2017 13:17
Report as offensive
Ah of course, I forgot that years of NHS bursaries have left us with such a healthy supply of doctors. It's particularly important to maintain it given Med Schools are absolutely begging for applicants.

Also, heh at any lawyer calling doctors locum pay egregious. I'm sure if lawyers were in the same situation we'd be willing to work out of sheer love for the job. It takes all the effort I can muster just to persuade partners to get bills out at the end of the month, so desperate are they to provide their services to those who need them.
Excession
Posted - 17 April 2017 13:58
Report as offensive
'The current generation feel this is below them and have aspirations to equal the doctors even though the majority clearly do not have the intellectual capacity.'

You are joking right?
Nurses have been forced into having degrees to have any sort of career progression - the degree is in the main full of pointless socio-logical reflective/experiental learning bollox and a huge pain in the arse esepcially to a nurse who is already qualified - but it's not 'nurses getting above themselves' - it's the Govt. and NHS bureaucrats saying they can't do anything except get paid kittens for wiping arses unless they jump on the bandwagon.

And the roles that used to be done by student nurses as they learned on the job have now been taken by care assistants, who aren't as trained, motivated or as bright as most nurses.

To take on a role as as a prescribing nurse in a GP's practice nurses have to get an MSc by the way. That is the only way they 'replace' or 'equal' doctors and even then in a very limited way (usually for chronic illnesses).

And previously, because general nursing and prescribing nursing roles are desperately needed in the UK the Govt. funded these programs. Now they have basically just pulled all the funding in the ridiculous expectation that nurses will self-fund it. It's just about possible for the prescribing nurse MSc.(although apparently numbers doing this have dropped off a cliff since last year) but for basic nursing there is simply no chance. They've seen a 25% drop in already disastrous numbers with every expectation numbers will continue to plunge later this year.

Hunt has suggested going back to a 5 year apprenticeship - purely 'on the job' training but (a) it's being rolled out to a few hundred at best (b) it just creates perceived '2nd class' nurses who will likely be stuck on the lower career ladder rungs as opposed to those who have degrees and (c) it will take 5 years to have any impact.

I get the feeling the Tory view is that it's just cheaper to import more and more foreign nurses rather than train our own so fk em....

Laz will be Lib Dem leader
Posted - 17 April 2017 14:09
Report as offensive
OH MY GOD JUST STOP TALKING COMPLETE SHYTE YOU TOXIC CABAL OF IDIITS
Osama
Posted - 17 April 2017 14:19
Report as offensive
Laz!
Massive fuckwit
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:15
Report as offensive
"Also, heh at any lawyer calling doctors locum pay egregious."

The oversupply of law graduates to the legal market has seen wages collapse in real terms for most over the last couple of decades. This is not the case for medical professionals. I am a very familiar with a large number of doctors, dentists and nurses who in some cases had experience going back to the early 20th century. Even the regular salary levels they currently enjoy far outstrip the average lawyer. Don't expect me to have any sympathy with them. The aren't saints. They don't do it for their love of humanity they do it for the massive pay. They make a living gouging the public purse by exploiting the job security afforded by the NHS, restricted supply to the market, constant supply of and desperation of ill people and the fact that NHS puts all governments over a barrel. Anything that serves to break their parasitic stranglehold so that the public get a fair deal should be welcomed.
Massive fuckwit
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:26
Report as offensive
^ A feature of the NHS that infamous Tory Nye Bevan observed when he said that to get the medical profession to agree to the NHS he had to stuff their mouths with gold.
BREXIT!!
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:37
Report as offensive
NURSES AND DOCTORS MAKE ME SICK

GREEDY GOOD FOR NOTHINGS!

PARASITES!!

I HATE THEM! I HATE THEM SO MUCH! I HATE THEM!!!
hoolie is voting lib dem
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:43
Report as offensive
Massive fuckwit presumably meant some clever irony by his posting name but, it's just true isn't it?
SumoKing
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:49
Report as offensive
pops in to see what is happening on RoF.....


ah, as you were then people being epically trolled by Elphi
Hodge
Posted - 17 April 2017 16:53
Report as offensive
I seem to earn a similar amount to Mrs Hodge when she isn't locumming, but that's just based on the amounts going into our account each month, she may well be be diverting funds elsewhere in order so she can make a break for it when the opportunity arises.

I think generally it's possible to be a below average doctor earning 80-90k a year in the regions. Lawyers can't do that. But being a good lawyer, or at least a partner/GC, usually means more dollar than a doctor of equivalent success.
Excession
Posted - 17 April 2017 19:10
Report as offensive
'Even the regular salary levels they currently enjoy far outstrip the average lawyer.'


For nurses? Are you mad? Unless you are counting parablozzas as 'average lawyers' do they bollox.

A registered nurse with 20 years' experience has an average salary of 30k (or what a small provincial firm will pay an NQ). In London that goes up by about 15%.

The most a nurse can make without switching fully to management is around £40k (maybe £50k in London) and that will require post-gradaute study (MA or MSc)





Twinkle twinkle little wang
Posted - 17 April 2017 19:36
Report as offensive
The best thing about state education is that 3dix pays for my nippers to have milk. There is nothing not to like about that result.
BREXIT!!
Posted - 17 April 2017 20:52
Report as offensive
"A registered nurse with 20 years' experience has an average salary of 30k (or what a small provincial firm will pay an NQ). In London that goes up by about 15%."

WELL WELL WELL, ITS EXACTLY AS MASSIVE [SWEAR]WIT SAYS: THESE NURSES ARE NOT SAINTS, DO NOT DO WHAT THEY DO OUT OF LOVE OF HUMANITY AND ARE JUST IN IT FOR THE MASSIVE PAY!

MAKING THEIR LIVING GOUGING THE PUBLIC PURSE BY EXPLOITING THE JOB SECURITY AFFORDED BY THE NHS, RESTRICTING SUPPLY TO THE MARKET, A CONSTANCE SUPPLY OF AND DESPERATION OF ILL PEOPLE AND THE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT THE NHS PUTS ALL GOVERNMENTS OVER A BARREL!!

WE MUST BREAK THESE NURSES' PARASITIC STRANGLEHOLD SO THAT THE PUBLIC GETS A FAIR DEAL!

I HAVE NO SYMPATHY FOR THEM!!
Used Psychology
Posted - 17 April 2017 21:11
Report as offensive
I somehow doubt that they don;t do it for love of humanity, but there are infinitely easier and less arduous ways (and probably less filled with disgusting moments) to make the sums medics earn.

The government actually controls the system pretty much completely - it controls how many are trained, licensed and how much they get paid.

The fact they can't control it well is more a triumph of the free market than it is of medics raking in super profits.
BREXIT!!
Posted - 17 April 2017 21:17
Report as offensive
"I somehow doubt that they don;t do it for love of humanity"

LIKE MASSIVE [SWEAR]WIT SAYS ABOVE: THEY AREN'T SAINTS

THEY ARE DRIVEN BY NOTHING BUT GREED

GREED!!

AND NOT THE GOOD TYPE OF GREED THAT HAS MARKED THE UPWARD SURGE OF MANKIND: THE BAD KIND!
Ukiyo-e
Posted - 17 April 2017 23:51
Report as offensive
Education is the way to freedom. The way to freedom is an iterative process.
zazzi
Posted - 18 April 2017 08:34
Report as offensive
HIGHEST taxes and poorest public services - dumbest children - UK
Hank is voting LibDem
Posted - 18 April 2017 09:03
Report as offensive
Doctors have traditionally been overpaid in the UK (by the standards of public servants, not by the standards of the City obviously) because in setting up the NHS their mouths were "stuffed with gold". While salaries are generous the real achievement of the medical profession is to keep the number of medical school places extremely limited so there is always a shortage of doctors. In particular, medical school places have not been allowed to expand to take into account the huge increase in women in the profession who take more time out, work part time more and leave the profession earlier. I have no problem with women doctors but if they are going to outnumber men you need to train an awful lot more of them.
🐤🐤🐤 is voting Conservative
Posted - 18 April 2017 09:47
Report as offensive
That said, if the lumpen proletariat had been entirely uneducated, they'd have slavishly followed their social betters by voting Remain. So I suppose there's an upside.
pancake humper
Posted - 18 April 2017 10:08
Report as offensive
The idea that single provider state healthcare provision keeps doctors salaries too high is so mental.

A 30 year-old hospital doctor in the US can easily be on $250-$300k a year.

Doctors in the UK are egregiously underpaid compared to their actual value in a free market.
Massive fuckwit
Posted - 18 April 2017 10:55
Report as offensive
Hark the cluck of the battery hens & the gobbling of Christmas turkeys.

Medics are only held in high esteem because of their warm and fluffy association in people's minds with the NHS. It is in fact only the NHS that has value whereas suppliers to that service including employees milk it on a daily basis. I doubt many defenders of the medical profession in this thread would feel the same if they lived in the 1920s and 30's when doctors charged for their services and would refuse aid to those who couldn't pay. The profession's mentality is the same now but we pay them via the state.

Bashar al-assad trained as a doctor. Then we have Dr Joseph Mengele and Dr Harold Shipman each the tip of the iceberg as far a attitudes to patients are concerned. No more needs be said on their nature.
Elphi
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:21
Report as offensive
Any review of an organisation has to start with a purpose, which is:
- Clear
- Agreed, and
- Communicated.

With such a purpose, one has a basis for sensibly reviewing:
- How well has the organisation performed in the past in terms of the impact of its existence on the interests of its stakeholders?
- What are the current opportunities for improvement?
- Given the past performance and opportunites for improvement what resource allocations are justified in future?

Without such a purpose, it is almost certain that:
- Leaders will drive the organisation principally for their own personal benefit
- Changes, if any, will be focussed on cementing the power of the current management
- Resource allocation will be wrong. There will either be far too much resource, or too little. And resources will be misallocated

Turning to education, this thread has posters (Well informed? And intelligent?) who have experienced the UK mass education system, and/or know many people who have, and/or are subjecting their own children to it. So you would think that there would be agreement on the purpose. But no!

No-one has commented on the drivers mentioned in the OP. The best we have for purpose is:
- Excession’s fine claim. Which isn’t quite tautologous, but isn’t very helpful
- Ability to read dishwasher instructions
- Getting ducks to pay for free school milk

Without an agreed purpose, it is not surprising that:
- The educational complex is controlled by unelected school administrators in local authorities and unelected tenured faculty in universities
- Changes are driven by teaching unions and testing/accreditation authorities to increase their own power over the complex
- Resources are wildly misallocated. ‘Everyone’ agrees that resources should be shifted from tertiary education to primary and kindergarten care, and resources should be shifted from academic to techincal training, but nothing happens

So come on. Try again. Why have state funded mass education?
ReggiePerrin is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:24
Report as offensive
Dr Shipman was actually a very good doctor and well loved by most of his patients, other than the ones that he killed.
ReggiePerrin is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:27
Report as offensive
In answer to the question in the OP, because education is an inherent good in itself (this is a value judgement which is literally irrefutable) and there is no current viable model for delivering mass education which doesn't involve a large element of state funding.
Clergs is voting lib dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:33
Report as offensive
reg - apaz shippers was a well known weirdo even at uni!
ReggiePerrin is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:36
Report as offensive
Dunno about uni, but I know someone who had him as a family doctor and apparently he was very highly thought of before the murder stuff came out.
Clergs is voting lib dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:49
Report as offensive
Not by other doctors, I heard. GP was probably the perfect specialism for him, though.
ReggiePerrin is voting Lib Dem
Posted - 20 April 2017 13:54
Report as offensive
They were just jealous and didn't understand his methods.