37 replies to this topic

[Melchoire]

Shouldn't everyone have the exact same opportunity as everyone else to receive top grade education. Your money shouldn't buy you better education than others. Isn't the whole idea of equality debunked when organizations actually claim some colleges to be better than others?

Discuss the quality of education these days

[Sweeney]

Hello Capitalism.

[Waser Lave]

You can go to Oxford despite being from a low-income background as long as you have the right grades. They even give grants of over £10k on top of the government grants.

Got to love our education system.

Edited by Laser Wave, 18 May 2008 - 03:02 PM.

['B']

Shouldn't everyone have the exact same opportunity as everyone else to receive top grade education.

No. Those who worked hard during their high school career should receive top grade education.

Your money shouldn't buy you better education than others.

There's financial aid, scholarships, loans, etc for the poor. For Ivy League, I believe that if the family income is under 60k then the student will get a full ride.

Isn't the whole idea of equality debunked when organizations actually claim some colleges to be better than others?

Who said colleges had to be equal? Humans are born equal. Then their actions define who they are and what they deserve (such as top-notch education). Organizations claim some colleges to be better than others, because they simply are. You can't compare Harvard to a community college.

[Melchoire]

Lol, I was wondering if oxford was really a good example or not, being British and all. I was gonna put Princeton but I wasn't sure if everyone knew what that place was

[ShadowLink64]

There's financial aid, scholarships, loans, etc for the poor. For Ivy League, I believe that if the family income is under 60k then the student will get a full ride.

Hmm, I've never heard of that before. I had always assumed that you just paid up the ass to go to the Ivy League schools.

[ShadowLink64]

Lol, I was wondering if oxford was really a good example or not, being British and all. I was gonna put Princeton but I wasn't sure if everyone knew what that place was

Who doesn't know what Princeton University is? o__o

[Melchoire]

No. Those who worked hard during their high school career should receive top grade education.

I didn't mean it that way. I meant that if you had really good grades, money shouldn't stand in the way of receiving good education.

Who said colleges had to be equal? Humans are born equal. Then their actions define who they are and what they deserve (such as top-notch education). Organizations claim some colleges to be better than others, because they simply are. You can't compare Harvard to a community college.

It's just a personal idea I have that all colleges and universities should give the same grade of education so no one is less educated than another.

[Alex]

Why would they give the same level of education? Its impossible to have equal faculty.

['B']

Harvard does not give out merit-based scholarships. They only give out scholarships based on financial need (determined by the FAFSA). Under their new financial aid intiative, families with an income of less than $60,000 a year can attend Harvard for free basically. Families with and income of $60,000-$80,000 can go to the school for a greatly reduced tuition rate. I'm not sure if students in these situations are still forced to take out the stafford loan (about $2500), so there may be a minimal price.

So yes, it is possible for someone with a lower income to go to Harvard and not be in debt for years.

http://talk.collegec...2458-post2.html

I didn't mean it that way. I meant that if you had really good grades, money shouldn't stand in the way of receiving good education.

The problem has been alleviated to the sense that it's not really impossible to go to your school of choice as long as you get accepted (at least in the US), and it's getting better.

It's just a personal idea I have that all colleges and universities should give the same grade of education so no one is less educated than another.

Standardized colleges...interesting, but frankly unappealing. If all colleges were equal then there's no middle ground. Each college is as selective as the next, meaning that it's all or nothing. Either you get into a college, or you don't. So the entire concept of "backup colleges" disappears really. Thus really widening the gap between the poor and the rich.

[Waser Lave]

Which is why Britain is quite good, in that it will cost you exactly the same to go to Oxford or Cambridge as it will to go to a much lesser university, all of which is paid by a student loan which you don't pay back until you're earning at least £15000. The whole point was to make all levels of education available to everybody.

God bless Tony Blair.

[Melchoire]

Standardized colleges...interesting, but frankly unappealing. If all colleges were equal then there's no middle ground. Each college is as selective as the next, meaning that it's all or nothing. Either you get into a college, or you don't. So the entire concept of "backup colleges" disappears really. Thus really widening the gap between the poor and the rich.

Highschools are standardized(at least they're supposed to be) so why shouldn't colleges be too? I don't understand how my idea would widen the gap between rich and poor, so can you elaborate on that?

[pyke]

I didn't mean it that way. I meant that if you had really good grades, money shouldn't stand in the way of receiving good education.


It's just a personal idea I have that all colleges and universities should give the same grade of education so no one is less educated than another.

But this suggests that all people are academically equal. The more diligent, intelligent people will go to higher caliber schools and receive greater education. Most times, the people that don't get accepted to upper tier schools, wouldn't be able to handle the course loads and thus don't deserve to be labelled as having the same education as someone going to a school with less prestige.

[A Silent Soliloquy]

All ivy-league schools provide need-based grants. If you make under $60 000 (family income) your attendance at Harvard, Princeton, Yale and Cornell is free.

Also Harvard and Oxford are reputable because they can spell pinnacle correctly.

@FlashGM: He means that there is no middle level of higher education such as community or state/public colleges. You're either in or you're not destroying the middle class and thus widening the gap.

Edited by The Golden Cheesepuff, 18 May 2008 - 09:45 PM.

[ShadowLink64]

All ivy-league schools provide need-based grants. If you make under $60 000 (family income) your attendance at Harvard, Princeton, Yale and Cornell is free.

Wow, shit. Do you if that's the case for international students at all? If so, I might consider taking my graduate studies there for Engineering (providing I get through their strenuous admission requirements).

[Melchoire]

You pay more you get nicer campuses, libraries, foods, teachers, lab equipments, theaters, the list goes on. For example I went to Sac State over here and it was pretty pathetic, almost compared to my high school (which is beyond ghetto). They had like 2 libraries, one food court, large classrooms, etc. Then I went to Davis and it was like a complete turn-around. They had a lovely landscape throughout the entire area, 4-5 libraries ranging from 2-5 stories and tons of personalized classrooms, like 5 different food courts, etc. This of course was more expensive to get into than Sac.

Now if I were a professor and I had choice between Sac and Davis which do you think I would choose? Most likely Davis and that's where things get different. Davis gets more professors (usually better qualified as well) whereas Sac is left with the remains.

And don't even think about bringing the state in on this issue. The last thing our state, and country for that matter, cares about is education. It's a sick reality tbh.

I don't think I've said this to you before, but I agree with that =P

All ivy-league schools provide need-based grants. If you make under $60 000 (family income) your attendance at Harvard, Princeton, Yale and Cornell is free.

Also Harvard and Oxford are reputable because they can spell pinnacle correctly.

@FlashGM: He means that there is no middle level of higher education such as community or state/public colleges. You're either in or you're not destroying the middle class and thus widening the gap.

The end result of removing the middle level of education would get rid of the gap because there would be nothing in between the two sides. If Bob and Doug both have the same grades(A's) then both should be able to attend a facility with the same resources, faculty and etc. If both of them attend the same kind of college with the same level of education where does this "gap" come from? Tbh, if I had my own country post-secondary education would be free to anyone who qualifies for it. Money wouldn't stand in the way of anything.

PS: garmticamal coertrncess is only eoncragued not riquered.

PS, PS: I was thinking of the suffix "penn" which applies to the 5 pointed star(venus) which was often regarded as a very powerful symbol back in the days, so I thought that was how you spelled pinnacle.

Wow, shit. Do you if that's the case for international students at all? If so, I might consider taking my graduate studies there for Engineering (providing I get through their strenuous admission requirements).

First check the US' stats for education standards and scores. Canada does way better.

Edited by ShadowLink64, 18 May 2008 - 10:32 PM.

[Amagius]

Highschools are standardized(at least they're supposed to be) so why shouldn't colleges be too? I don't understand how my idea would widen the gap between rich and poor, so can you elaborate on that?

Based on the efficiency of the modern standardized high school (spec. United States, but Britain possibly), I don't think that shifting our colleges toward that style would be beneficial. Not that I don't agree with you on the equality of man, but we're the worker bees of capitalism; the quality of those colleges are dictated by its potential for profit.

[Melchoire]

Based on the efficiency of the modern standardized high school (spec. United States, but Britain possibly), I don't think that shifting our colleges toward that style would be beneficial. Not that I don't agree with you on the equality of man, but we're the worker bees of capitalism; the quality of those colleges are dictated by its potential for profit.

It can't be any worse than what's implemented now. These low state test scores come from somewhere don't they? What if every college had the same standards as Harvard?

[Christopher Robin]

Because they teach their students how to spell "pinnacle".

Edited by Christopher Robin, 19 May 2008 - 07:04 AM.

['B']

If Bob and Doug both have the same grades(A's) then both should be able to attend a facility with the same resources, faculty and etc. If both of them attend the same kind of college with the same level of education where does this "gap" come from?

It comes from the fact that merit or education is the 5th top determinant of wealth. The top 2 determinants are inherited wealth and luck.

So to create this "economic equality", you'd need to set up a communist nation, which are great in concept but simply cannot compete against capitalism. Thus you'd need to somehow convince the entire world to adopt communism.


Let's pretend that the top determinant of wealth is the education you received:
Currently:

Different colors represent different levels of college education received. In this scenario you have a gradually increasing salary as student merit goes up.

Now let's say colleges standardized their selectivity to the middle.
Standardized:

Black represents no college education. White represents college education.
Furthermore the top 10% of students receive the same as the rest of the top 50% of students. How's that for equality? In this scenario you have low salaries for the bottom 50% of students. For the top 50% of students you have high salaries.


Edit: Err now that I look at the black & white graph, it seems a bit racist. It's not meant to be :x

Edited by bahblah, 19 May 2008 - 09:07 AM.

[Melchoire]

It comes from the fact that merit or education is the 5th top determinant of wealth. The top 2 determinants are inherited wealth and luck.

So to create this "economic equality", you'd need to set up a communist nation, which are great in concept but simply cannot compete against capitalism. Thus you'd need to somehow convince the entire world to adopt communism.


Let's pretend that the top determinant of wealth is the education you received:
Currently:

Different colors represent different levels of college education received. In this scenario you have a gradually increasing salary as student merit goes up.

Now let's say colleges standardized their selectivity to the middle.
Standardized:

Black represents no college education. White represents college education.
Furthermore the top 10% of students receive the same as the rest of the top 50% of students. How's that for equality? In this scenario you have low salaries for the bottom 50% of students. For the top 50% of students you have high salaries.


Edit: Err now that I look at the black & white graph, it seems a bit racist. It's not meant to be :x

I guess that is what I had in mind: a communistic scenario. And keep in mind even if you don't go to college that doesn't mean you'll be making very little money. Also where did you come up with a 50/50 split between people who go to college and those who don't?

[A Silent Soliloquy]

I don't think I've said this to you before, but I agree with that =P


The end result of removing the middle level of education would get rid of the gap because there would be nothing in between the two sides. If Bob and Doug both have the same grades(A's) then both should be able to attend a facility with the same resources, faculty and etc. If both of them attend the same kind of college with the same level of education where does this "gap" come from? Tbh, if I had my own country post-secondary education would be free to anyone who qualifies for it. Money wouldn't stand in the way of anything.

PS: garmticamal coertrncess is only eoncragued not riquered.

PS, PS: I was thinking of the suffix "penn" which applies to the 5 pointed star(venus) which was often regarded as a very powerful symbol back in the days, so I thought that was how you spelled pinnacle.


First check the US' stats for education standards and scores. Canada does way better.

What if someone gets a C. He normally would be able to attend a community college but now he can't because only A's are admitted. This widening the gap. A middle is required to close the gap.