Education and stuff

Former Member

I know the Sun is often cause for complaint round here, but today's Littlejohn column is spot on:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2002540501,00.html

Social workers don't create wealth, welders and plumbers do so I think any idea to get teenagers to learn a trade is a good one.

Former Member

Ive heard this idea before, I think its a brilliant idea, there are so many kids who just arent cut out for the way the education system works and just dont want to be there, but then you see them a few years later and theyve got a job and theyre doign alright for themselves, whats the point in wasting time, most people like that dont get many GCSEs anyway and if they needed them at a later date then they could go back and get them.

Former Member

Giving people the oppourtunity to learn a trade is one thing, but sending 14yr olds out into the work place???
Why would a 'non-achiever' be any more likely to take up a trade and stick with it at 14 rather than 15 or 16?
Sounds to me like 'lets cast out the non achievers and thosenot wealthy enough for further education into the workplace so the elite get a better education' 'the no hopers can then keep the economy alive whilst we all get our degrees and go on to non productive jobs'
The education system is failing 'non achievers' you arent born stupid! Perhaps a better education system would benefit them, and encouraging skilled trade as a serious option rather than making it out to be an inferior career.

Former Member

Originally posted by cheekychick
Giving people the oppourtunity to learn a trade is one thing, but sending 14yr olds out into the work place???
Why would a 'non-achiever' be any more likely to take up a trade and stick with it at 14 rather than 15 or 16?
Sounds to me like 'lets cast out the non achievers and thosenot wealthy enough for further education into the workplace so the elite get a better education' 'the no hopers can then keep the economy alive whilst we all get our degrees and go on to non productive jobs'
The education system is failing 'non achievers' you arent born stupid! Perhaps a better education system would benefit them, and encouraging skilled trade as a serious option rather than making it out to be an inferior career.

*heart felt applause*
While i agree that the world needs its tradespeople as much as its pencil pushers, I'd like to here some stats first on how many companies are willing to recruit 14 year-olds lacking in a rounded education for an apprenticeship. i have a few friends in the trades whose education in that field was just as strenuous, if not more so, than an average university degree. i imagine they'd be insulted by the idea that an "underachiever" could just pick up blow torch and go at it just as well as they do. :chin:

Former Member

Who would get to decide who is a non-achiever? The school? Some people are very immature at 13/ 14 but go on to do ok-ish at GCSE's and brilliantly at A-Level. Not that I'm describing myself, just some people I went to school with who's academic potential took a while to shine through. And at 14 behaviour problems can be a cause of "non-achieving"... but no employer would want to take on someone who's still a moody kid who can't behave. The same person could continue at school and then finish at 16 and get employed when they are more mature. School years offer more than academic stuff anyway, they're meant to set you up for life.

Former Member

Lets just face facts, no columnist out of the sun has or ever will say anything intelligent..............

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
Lets just face facts, no columnist out of the sun has or ever will say anything intelligent..............

Not that you'd be biased of anything...

and I don't think that you are being totally fair here either. WHat Richard Littlejohn started with is a good premise. Unfortunately he's aimed it at "underachievers" and that is wrong. This isn't a target issue.

Not so long ago we had a lot of plumbers, sparks and chippies but less and less are now coming out of schooling and going into these trades. As he says, the Govt is pre-occupied with getting our children into further education and university - at the same time they are looking at introducing fees.

I can't argue with either of these areas (actually I can, but I'm not going to here) but it doesn't address the fundamental issue that many of our skilled tradesmen are over 45, and will be retiring in the next 20 years. Unfortunately there aren't so many trainees to replace them.

It may be that one solution is a return to the "apprentice" set up, where the employers pays for further education, relevant to their trade, and you work 2 days per week. Naturally I would expect to have a fixed term contract for a period to repay the employer for their investment.

Another is similar to what Richard Littlejohn is suggesting. There are children at school whose career path is not matched by the school lessons. Yet they are forced to remain there. What is wrong with an employer taking them on for 2 days per week to teach them a trade which will be more relevant to them when they leave school? The remaining three days could be spent at school on relvant life topics, such as basic literacy and maths (how many of us use algebra?) as well as some life skills.

Just a thought. Certainly there are many people who feel that school doesn't offer them anything anymore and it would be better to give them something more relevant whilst preventing them from disruption those who do want to learn...

Former Member

Why am I biased against the sun?

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
Why am I biased against the sun?

You bastard! I wrote all that and all you comment on is the opening line :mad:



Well you comment gives away your bias. As does your previous comments about the paper in other discussion. I don't comdemn you for it, I just think that it makes your comment unfair because you make a judgement based on the paper, and not the article.

Still, its no different to my views of the Socialist Worker, or Guardian, I suppose...

Former Member

I can't recall saying anything anti-sunnish, Al, Pru and DJP have I think but not me, unless I have forgot...........

I think the problem witht the schemes you suggest id the limiting of options. At what age do you decide that this child recieves a different education to another thus limiting their life options?

Not many trades use algebra granted but if you don't teach it to some children properly then they are unlikely to ever get or even apply for a job where it is needed, is that fair?

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
I think the problem witht the schemes you suggest id the limiting of options. At what age do you decide that this child recieves a different education to another thus limiting their life options?

I think we need to take into consideration the wishes of the individual, for a start, but by the time someone is in the last two years of their schooling you can be pretty sure which way they are going...

Not many trades use algebra granted but if you don't teach it to some children properly then they are unlikely to ever get or even apply for a job where it is needed, is that fair?

I didn't learn Russian as school either, so I can;t apply for job where that is a requirement can I?

That argument is pretty mute, there are many skills I have learned as a result of being in work which I would never have got from school. What the point in question shows is that we spoend an inordinate amount of time teaching something which has little real value. Why teach algebra is few trades use it?

Former Member

I was born and raised in Spain so I have no knowledge of the British educational system. But I would have thought that there were technical and craftsman schools to provide just what Littlemoron was saying?

They have changed it now, but when I was a kid you would do 8 years of primary school, until the age of 14. Then you had two options to choose from: go to secondary school in preparation for university or go to what was called 'professional and technical skills formation' school. To go for the latter you didn't need to have passed your primary school final exams- which meant no kid would be excluded. You would just have to choose what is it you would like to learn: electricity, plumbing, building, metal work, wood work... and do at least two years of basic formation. You could then at 16 leave school and look for a job, or study further and obtain a technical 'degree' in the craftsmanship you had studied.

It worked pretty well and many kids who did not do well at school were at least kept in education until 16, and in many cases left with a learned skill and went on to find a job in the trade.

Former Member

But exactly as you say Mok, why not teach them algebra when they are unlikely to use the other skills they will learn. Apart from the basics most skills are fairly specialised........

I didn't start studying economics until I was 16 and now I'm doing a degree in it and will probably move into a career involving it when I graduate.....

If someone had asked me when I was 14 whether I wanted to Algebra anymore I would have siad no but now it is one of the most important skills I need..............

Former Member

Originally posted by Toadborg
Lets just face facts, no columnist out of the sun has or ever will say anything intelligent..............

I cannot agree more with Toadborg - I'm "The Times" & "Daily Telegraph" person, much more interesting read - Apart from Page3!