It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Odium
Logic evades you I see.
If you bothered to read the lists, you'd notice they differ which means they can't decide on who is best. If they can't do that what does it suggest? Furthermore, Cambridge students on average when I was at Uni had lower grades than where I went.
Originally posted by Odium
I skipped through parts of it, the arguement that he suggests doesn't work.
Originally posted by Odium
How would your education system (the one they suggest) ensure equal opportunities for all? How would it improve social mobility? I can't see the answers on the video.
Originally posted by Odium
Furthermore, does the U.S.A. education system (especaillly Uni's) not just favour the rich? Take Harvard for example, what are the vast majority of peoples economic and social backgrounds at the Uni?
Originally posted by Odium
Furthermore, both lists do not link or explain their methodolgy.
Ummm... I found the Methodology on both sites I linked.
You sure you watched the video?
Originally posted by Odium
Show us then please.
Originally posted by Odium
However, you've still yet to explain how it'd be different. So what if they compete? Are you claiming that there are not bad Uni's in the U.S.A?
Originally posted by Odium
You can make them compete, so what? IT will not change how things work, the better teachers will always work in schools that can pay them more. The schools that can pay more are private schools and paid/owned by the rich.
Originally posted by Odium
Methodology is flawed.
Originally posted by Odium
Furthermore, your video does not provide evidence to back up the claims that it'd work.
Originally posted by Odium
Then who teaches? Who decides what should be taught if the Government doesn't?
Originally posted by Odium
Do we go back to what we used to have, where Rich people would own the Schools and would teach what they wanted instead?
Originally posted by Odium
Fact is, you remove Government from the education system the poor will still suffer.
Originally posted by Odium
Their is nothing on that video that speaks of how to improve social mobility and reduce ascribed status eventually replacing it with achieved status. Which is the purpose of education on one level.
Originally posted by Odium
Watched it.
How would your education system (the one they suggest) ensure equal opportunities for all? How would it improve social mobility? I can't see the answers on the video.
Furthermore, does the U.S.A. education system (especaillly Uni's) not just favour the rich? Take Harvard for example, what are the vast majority of peoples economic and social backgrounds at the Uni?
Furthermore, both lists do not link or explain their methodology. If a 14-16 year old submitted something like that (or even sourced in) and it didn't give their methodology or explain any of it they'd fail. This source isn't credible, just because a University has it linked. If someone published a piece of work "claiming something" but they did not explain how they reached this conclusion you'd not accept it.
In fact, that's exactly what happens all over this website.