Education superclass?

[Amber2]

blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100245274/it-is-much-worse-than-sir-john-major-says-a-new-superclass-is-being-created-in-london/

This is interesting coming from John Major ...sounds like more lobbying along the lines of the Sutton Trust but do people really think it's much worse than it ever has been..? and this is do with with the inexorable rise of London...and the global money flowing in there...and so to creating an elite superclass of private schools also ...not just any old private school but a small handful of elite ones, applications to which have reached record numbers, presumably more and more from London and from overseas with over inflation rises in fees pricing out the traditional middle classes that used to be able to afford these schools.

I would hate someone to opt for being an MP because it pays better than being a dentist.

rabbitstew - we put cleverness on a pedestal because it is believed, rightly or wrongly, that the creation of value through innovation, entrepreneurship and management is most likely to occur when very clever people have very many skills. And value creation is what makes humans richer and more comfortable (on average) than anything else.

The creation of value is not achieved without the work of a great many. If the intellectual elite want their big projects to get off the ground, they need to understand and sympathise with those doing the grunt work.

Actually I am not concerned with nurturing an elite. But since any material security I or my children have has to be earned by my dh (or me) as we do not have have families who will be able to,leave us money, I am concerned that we have security. I would also like my children to have the option to do that if they want and have tried to ensure they have the cultural capital to give them that option. But I also have a plan b for them and us if their preference is for a simpler, less acquisitive life.

Rabbit, a strong desire to serve is ideal and wonderful but in practice, food needs to be put on the table first. If MPs are to come from all backgrounds they need to be paid properly and I feel this very strongly.

You are comparing MPs only to people who earn more than them

No. I was comparing them to others who "work to improve society". No one seems to mind GPs and dentists earning shed-loads of taxpayers' money. Why do they resent politicians earning similar amounts?

....anyway, several posts have intimated that the real power lies not with politicians but with global business leaders and observation has shown me some truth in that.

The idea that Oxbridge is losing out on clever students comes from a section of the media which is losing its traditional hold on places there and also no,longer commanding salaries which so easily can buy the 'toolkit' referred to. It seems to me they are being alarmist. As has been pointed out, cross fertilization is good.

I don't think you can describe rejecting students who then go elsewhere as 'losing out' on them. Of course the proof will be in the eating. If Cambridge ceases to be the best university in the world then we will see that in fact it was losing out when students who didn't get in or didn't dare to try went to the US instead. But I doubt this will happen.

Every year there are students with offers from Oxbridge who reject them in favour of offers from other institutions, be they from Harvard, MIT or Imperial.

Indians...it's not always a question of "didn't get in or didn't dare to try" ....actually I think some students at some select private schools (those who can afford it or those who come from an international background anyway) and also very bright state school students are actually looking at Ivy League as first choice above Oxbridge, especially if they qualify for fee bursaries. I think on world rankings MIT beats Cambridge. Of course, going to Ivy League is lot more expensive if you don't qualify for financial help, but if Oxbridge fees go up, this may equalize the equation. To be honest - if my son is interested at the time, we would apply to both UK and US universities...if it were down to me, Stanford, while not Ivy League as such, would be my first choice (I don't know about him!) but it acceptance rate at 7% is even lower than Oxbridge I think.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/10295999/Top-100-world-universities-201314-QS-rankings.html

Since there is no limit to the number of universities a candidate can apply for in the US, acceptance rates are not comparable between the US and the UK, where candidates are restricted to 5 choices.

ok, but you can also argue that since the population of the US is comparatively much bigger than the acceptance figures are low (not even taking into account the hordes of international students who also apply)!

You are restricted to 5 choices in the UK, but I imagine those who want to apply to Cambridge in practice have to put it first in any case.

There is no order of choices any more Indy - no university is aware of others in your list.

Applying to the US is a fine idea but I'm not always sure that pepper who blithely state that is where their children will look are aware that there is some work to put in : early applications; - separate applications to each instutution; essays to write rather than ine ps as each US university has slightly different requirements; the SAT exam which needs some prep, all at a time when students are getting to grips with lower sixth work. Then the student has to be ready to go to a new country, which is a challenge in itself.

Good luck to those who try.

I would also put some of the better non-Ivy league US unis above some of the RG ones over here..

I have experience of a good but non ivy us university. It was impressive.

Even Oxbridge is warning of a brain drain to the US if education funding isn't improved:

www.theguardian.com/education/2011/oct/04/university-cuts-brain-drain-oxford-head

purits - I think you are wrong that nobody seems to mind that doctors and dentists earn a lot of money and also earn a lot more than MPs. That said, I think most people have more contact with GPs and dentists than MPs and feel that their lives on the whole are far more positively affected by doctors and dentists than MPs, so that, on the whole, the money they earn is felt by the public to be more deserved. Politics, unfortunately, is not guaranteed to serve a particular individual's interests (particularly if they don't run a global corporation) so obviously the politician's value will be considered lower by members of the public, particularly since in the past, politicians were not just politicians but were expected to have day jobs...

As for all the stuff about students preferring Ivy League universities and hundreds of UK nationals pouring off in that direction... that just sounds exactly like the bankers who all declare their intention to leave the country if it doesn't do what they want to ensure they retain their power. Lots of nastiness and very little interest in being constructive.

Apologies if this has all been covered on here. But surely, the main point or advantage of elitism is the networking that goes on?
So your child can come and wrok for my top accountancy firm, and can mine come round to your newspaper please?

Yes, the numbers that actually go to the US are fairly small at the moment. I haven't opened your link Indy, but I think it's just a plea for extra funding with warning if what might happen if UK universities continue to be underfunded, which isn't the same really.

Now seen that breatheslowly may have mentioned it.

Why is it nastiness ...and what on earth does it have to do with bankers ... the Sutton Trust promote programmes for state school students to apply to Ivy League (and get full scholarships) even sending the brightest to the US to attend application workshops/summer programmes at Ivy League unis ...the article in the Guardian is from an Oxbridge head who is pointing out that more should be done on funding of students and research here to stop UK students going abroad esp. at post - grad level. You seem to be particularly blinkered on the issue if you keep bringing up bankers and think that is being constructive.

I do not think it is in any way constructive to claim, untruthfully, that public schools are now being discriminated against in Oxbridge and RG university applications and that, as a result, there is a flood of applications for UK students to go to the US.

I also think that £65,000 a year is more than enough to put food on the table.

Rabbit As for all the stuff about students preferring Ivy League universities and hundreds of UK nationals pouring off in that direction... that just sounds exactly like the bankers who all declare their intention to leave the country if it doesn't do what they want to ensure they retain their power. Lots of nastiness and very little interest in being constructive.

That is my view too. But maybe we are wrong. :) None of my DCs are going to go the Oxbridge route anyway so it's essentially irrelevant to me except as a matter of interest.

On the dentists V MPs debate - having had a very complex abscess situation and serious maxilofacial surgery to sort out my jaw, while I view all dentists with a visceral sense of fear (jaw twanging as I type this) I do believe they are somewhat more useful in extremis than most MPs.