The thing that made me laugh about the "searing" editorial in the Irish Independent is :
"Ireland has stood by the EU and should not be made to pay the price for another member storming out. We saddled our future generations with debt to protect the euro when the dam threatened to burst a decade ago. Small nations within the EU will be watching closely to see how we are treated."
Past behaviour really is a good predictor of future behaviour in the case of the EU.
Bingo! The key point about Ireland and the backstop. Ireland can't afford a hard border, either by conceding on the backstop or because of No Deal. It can't afford the UK diverging from Ireland as that causes the hard border (Northern Ireland can afford it even less but no-one in mainland UK cares about them). If it goes no Deal, Ireland will probably have to partially derogate from the Single Market. For that reason, Ireland, backed by the EU, will absolutely not compromise the backstop.
In the case of no deal the EU, Ireland and the UK will announce they are starting work planning for a technological solution to the border that will take at least 2 years planning work, so nothing changes.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
Dominic Cummings got a first at Oxford. And even Boris got a second. Tristram Hunt got a first at Cambridge. Hardly a suggestion that Oxbridge is a haven of quality.
with a Third in History the late 1940s. Going back further Thirds were awarded to Barbara Castle - PPE - in early 30s , and Alec Douglas-Home - History - in the 1920s. Are today's students so much brighter , or is the explanation again to be found in grade inflation? Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
I think it depends on how you classify the individual who obtained the first. Harold Wilson was described as being very gifted and exceptional where as Cameron may have been very gifted. The distinction is slight but the intellectual difference might be comparing chalk and cheese! Wilson continued a lifelong interest in academia either directly or indirectly whereas Cameron did not seem to fit into that groove. Intelligence does not always partner good judgement!
Jim Hacker Got a Third from the LSE, which he wore with some pride and goaded Sir Humphrey with - any bachelor's degree is pretty straightforward though in reality - why we think a 1st in PPE or pretty much anything else makes anyone intellectually special is ridiculous.
I can confirm that a first in PPE does not make the holder intellectually special. Just read my inane posts on PB for confirmation!
By your day , had 'doing the minimum necessary to ensure a Third' ceased to be an option?
Students don't enrol with the OU just to do the minimum necessary.
A first in PPE at the OU? Now that is a seriously good degree.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
of quality.
Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
I think it depends on how you classify the individual who obtained the first. Harold Wilson was described as being very gifted and exceptional where as Cameron may have been very gifted. The distinction is slight but the intellectual difference might be comparing chalk and cheese! Wilson continued a lifelong interest in academia either directly or indirectly whereas Cameron did not seem to fit into that groove. Intelligence does not always partner good judgement!
I was a 2:1 but slap bang between a 2:1 and a first at 65%.
My strategy was highly numeric: I'd put all my effort into the exams and projects that'd give me the most credits for the least effort, although I wasn't as bad as some who looked to get just 59% and then get upgraded by performing well at the viva.
That sounds like a good approach.
My strategy was just to see it through to the end!
I had a recurring nightmare for about 7 years after I graduated that I failed my degree. I'd be in the exam rooms for my finals and couldn't remember how to answer a single question.
That wasn't fun.
It happened because I only really pulled my socks up in the last 3-4 months in the lead up to my finals in my 3rd and 4th year, promptly forget most of the detail of what I'd learnt (i still understand all the principles about it) and felt guilty about the degree I'd been awarded.
I have exam nightmares as well two decades plus since I finished it!
Nobody cares about the people quoted on the billboards, so I doubt they are effective. Maybe it just reflects that Brexit is all about the blame game now. Nobody much thinks Brexit is going to be stopped or that it's going to do us any good.
They claimed a relative told them they were going on holiday to Turkey in 2014 but from there they “ended up in Syria”. “We don’t know how it happened and since then we have been trying to escape, but it has not been possible,” Ms Aslam said.
I had a recurring nightmare for about 7 years after I graduated that I failed my degree. I'd be in the exam rooms for my finals and couldn't remember how to answer a single question.
That wasn't fun.
It happened because I only really pulled my socks up in the last 3-4 months in the lead up to my finals in my 3rd and 4th year, promptly forget most of the detail of what I'd learnt (i still understand all the principles about it) and felt guilty about the degree I'd been awarded.
If you got a decent degree after "pulling up your socks" you still earnt it. If the sylabus had been important to your following work or postgraduate studies, you would have remebered what you needed. But I can understand the anxiety dreams, I hope they are now ancient history.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
Dominic Cummings got a first at Oxford. And even Boris got a second. Tristram Hunt got a first at Cambridge. Hardly a suggestion that Oxbridge is a haven of quality.
Are firsts at Oxford and Cambridge quite what they used to be? I have my doubts. How comparable is David Cameron's first in PPE in the late 1980s to that obtained by Harold Wilson fifty years earlier? I am struck by how few appear to end up with Thirds there nowadays - yet not so long ago it seemed pretty common. David Dimbleby got a Third in PPE in late 1950s - Jeremy Thorpe in Jurisprudence earlier in same decade. Edward Boyle emerged with a Third in History the late 1940s. Going back further Thirds were awarded to Barbara Castle - PPE - in early 30s , and Alec Douglas-Home - History - in the 1920s. Are today's students so much brighter , or is the explanation again to be found in grade inflation? Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
If intellegence was all, Enoch Powell would have been a brilliant prime minister. A double starred first, followed by becoming (at 25) the youngest full professor in the Empire & Commonwealth. Fat lot of good it did him.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
Dominic Cummings got a first at Oxford. And even Boris got a second. Tristram Hunt got a first at Cambridge. Hardly a suggestion that Oxbridge is a haven of quality.
Are firsts at Oxford and Cambridge quite what they used to be? I have my doubts. How comparable is David Cameron's first in PPE in the late 1980s to that obtained by Harold Wilson fifty years earlier? I am struck by how few appear to end up with Thirds there nowadays - yet not so long ago it seemed pretty common. David Dimbleby got a Third in PPE in late 1950s - Jeremy Thorpe in Jurisprudence earlier in same decade. Edward Boyle emerged with a Third in History the late 1940s. Going back further Thirds were awarded to Barbara Castle - PPE - in early 30s , and Alec Douglas-Home - History - in the 1920s. Are today's students so much brighter , or is the explanation again to be found in grade inflation? Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
If intellegence was all, Enoch Powell would have been a brilliant prime minister. A double starred first, followed by becoming (at 25) the youngest full professor in the Empire & Commonwealth. Fat lot of good it did him.
Oxford used to award fourth class degrees (apparently as prized as firsts) until the late 1960s or early 70s. Frank Bough was one such recipient.
We were always secretly hoping someone got a 2:2 or a third class degree at Bristol, just so we could mock them by saying they got a "Desmond" or a "Douglas".
Yet until the mid to late 1980s a 2:2 was the 'normal' degree. People were pleased to end up with a 2:1 - yet now feel they have wasted their time if awarded anything less! Grade inflation pretty clearly.
Two of my close friends got 2:2s and now have good careers but they really struggled upon graduating and had to do it the hard way. They didn't qualify for all the usual schemes.
No two ways about it, at university they were lazy. It isn't hard to get a 2:1 if you're intelligent and put some basic effort in, but they don't come automatically.
It was pretty difficult to get a 2:1 back in the 60s and 70s - and Firsts were seen as being almost impossible. I recall the shock in 1975 when a guy did manage a First in History - it had not happened in the preceding ten years!
My feeling (backed up by many colleagues in higher education) is that students now put in a lot more hours work than back in the 60s/70s. But the modern bachelors degree is mostly learning the syllabus and very little reasoning. If learning is what society wants to reward, then the honours grade inflation is justified, if we want to reward flexibility, logical reasoning and basic research methods, then the grade inflation is unfair.
Oxford used to award fourth class degrees (apparently as prized as firsts) until the late 1960s or early 70s. Frank Bough was one such recipient.
We were always secretly hoping someone got a 2:2 or a third class degree at Bristol, just so we could mock them by saying they got a "Desmond" or a "Douglas".
Yet until the mid to late 1980s a 2:2 was the 'normal' degree. People were pleased to end up with a 2:1 - yet now feel they have wasted their time if awarded anything less! Grade inflation pretty clearly.
Two of my close friends got 2:2s and now have good careers but they really struggled upon graduating and had to do it the hard way. They didn't qualify for all the usual schemes.
No two ways about it, at university they were lazy. It isn't hard to get a 2:1 if you're intelligent and put some basic effort in, but they don't come automatically.
It was pretty difficult to get a 2:1 back in the 60s and 70s - and Firsts were seen as being almost impossible. I recall the shock in 1975 when a guy did manage a First in History - it had not happened in the preceding ten years!
The modern bachelors degree is mostly learning the syllabus and very little reasoning. If learning is what society wants to reward, then the honours grade inflation is justified, if we want to reward flexibility, logical reasoning and basic research methods, then the grade inflation is unfair.
That certainly wasn't my experience. Admittedly my experience was 15 years ago, or seven if we include my last post as a lecturer, but I'd be very surprised if it has changed as radically as you indicate in that time.
Oxford used to award fourth class degrees (apparently as prized as firsts) until the late 1960s or early 70s. Frank Bough was one such recipient.
We were always secretly hoping someone got a 2:2 or a third class degree at Bristol, just so we could mock them by saying they got a "Desmond" or a "Douglas".
Yet until the mid to late 1980s a 2:2 was the 'normal' degree. People were pleased to end up with a 2:1 - yet now feel they have wasted their time if awarded anything less! Grade inflation pretty clearly.
Two of my close friends got 2:2s and now have good careers but they really struggled upon graduating and had to do it the hard way. They didn't qualify for all the usual schemes.
No two ways about it, at university they were lazy. It isn't hard to get a 2:1 if you're intelligent and put some basic effort in, but they don't come automatically.
It was pretty difficult to get a 2:1 back in the 60s and 70s - and Firsts were seen as being almost impossible. I recall the shock in 1975 when a guy did manage a First in History - it had not happened in the preceding ten years!
The modern bachelors degree is mostly learning the syllabus and very little reasoning. If learning is what society wants to reward, then the honours grade inflation is justified, if we want to reward flexibility, logical reasoning and basic research methods, then the grade inflation is unfair.
That certainly wasn't my experience. Admittedly my experience was 15 years ago, or seven if we include my last post as a lecturer, but I'd be very surprised if it has changed as radically as you indicate in that time.
You weren't around to see how much the students slacked off in the seventies. As long as tou turned up to the exams and wrote something you would get a degree. These days if you do not at least hand in course work and pass each year then you won't progress to the next year.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
of quality.
Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
I think it depends on how you classify the individual who obtained the first. Harold Wilson was described as being very gifted and exceptional where as Cameron may have been very gifted. The distinction is slight but the intellectual difference might be comparing chalk and cheese! Wilson continued a lifelong interest in academia either directly or indirectly whereas Cameron did not seem to fit into that groove. Intelligence does not always partner good judgement!
I was a 2:1 but slap bang between a 2:1 and a first at 65%.
My strategy was highly numeric: I'd put all my effort into the exams and projects that'd give me the most credits for the least effort, although I wasn't as bad as some who looked to get just 59% and then get upgraded by performing well at the viva.
That sounds like a good approach.
My strategy was just to see it through to the end!
I had a recurring nightmare for about 7 years after I graduated that I failed my degree. I'd be in the exam rooms for my finals and couldn't remember how to answer a single question.
That wasn't fun.
It happened because I only really pulled my socks up in the last 3-4 months in the lead up to my finals in my 3rd and 4th year, promptly forget most of the detail of what I'd learnt (i still understand all the principles about it) and felt guilty about the degree I'd been awarded.
I get exam dreams every month or so. About as often as I dream of the fall off Constantinople.
They claimed a relative told them they were going on holiday to Turkey in 2014 but from there they “ended up in Syria”. “We don’t know how it happened and since then we have been trying to escape, but it has not been possible,” Ms Aslam said.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
Dominic Cummings got a first at Oxford. And even Boris got a second. Tristram Hunt got a first at Cambridge. Hardly a suggestion that Oxbridge is a haven of quality.
Are firsts at Oxford and Cambridge quite what they used to be? I have my doubts. How comparable is David Cameron's first in PPE in the late 1980s to that obtained by Harold Wilson fifty years earlier? I am struck by how few appear to end up with Thirds there nowadays - yet not so long ago it seemed pretty common. David Dimbleby got a Third in PPE in late 1950s - Jeremy Thorpe in Jurisprudence earlier in same decade. Edward Boyle emerged with a Third in History the late 1940s. Going back further Thirds were awarded to Barbara Castle - PPE - in early 30s , and Alec Douglas-Home - History - in the 1920s. Are today's students so much brighter , or is the explanation again to be found in grade inflation? Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
If intellegence was all, Enoch Powell would have been a brilliant prime minister. A double starred first, followed by becoming (at 25) the youngest full professor in the Empire & Commonwealth. Fat lot of good it did him.
I don't disagree at all. The change in degree results over time.as measured by statistics does interest me.Why were there so many Oxbridge Thirds until a few decades ago? It puzzles me that the students concerned were ever admitted in the first place! There surely were stronger applicants available for those courses. It rather confirms the picture painted by some that until the 1960s Oxbridge was to a large extent a finishing school for public schoolboys - Scholars and Exhibitioners excepted.
Oxford used to award fourth class degrees (apparently as prized as firsts) until the late 1960s or early 70s. Frank Bough was one such recipient.
We were always secretly hoping someone got a 2:2 or a third class degree at Bristol, just so we could mock them by saying they got a "Desmond" or a "Douglas".
Yet until the mid to late 1980s a 2:2 was the 'normal' degree. People were pleased to end up with a 2:1 - yet now feel they have wasted their time if awarded anything less! Grade inflation pretty clearly.
Two of my close friends got 2:2s and now have good careers but they really struggled upon graduating and had to do it the hard way. They didn't qualify for all the usual schemes.
No two ways about it, at university they were lazy. It isn't hard to get a 2:1 if you're intelligent and put some basic effort in, but they don't come automatically.
It was pretty difficult to get a 2:1 back in the 60s and 70s - and Firsts were seen as being almost impossible. I recall the shock in 1975 when a guy did manage a First in History - it had not happened in the preceding ten years!
The modern bachelors degree is mostly learning the syllabus and very little reasoning. If learning is what society wants to reward, then the honours grade inflation is justified, if we want to reward flexibility, logical reasoning and basic research methods, then the grade inflation is unfair.
That certainly wasn't my experience. Admittedly my experience was 15 years ago, or seven if we include my last post as a lecturer, but I'd be very surprised if it has changed as radically as you indicate in that time.
You weren't around to see how much the students slacked off in the seventies. As long as tou turned up to the exams and wrote something you would get a degree. These days if you do not at least hand in course work and pass each year then you won't progress to the next year.
I wasn't disputing that, or how hard most students work. I was saying that logical reasoning and basic research methods remain prized, in my experience, particularly for the top grades.
They claimed a relative told them they were going on holiday to Turkey in 2014 but from there they “ended up in Syria”. “We don’t know how it happened and since then we have been trying to escape, but it has not been possible,” Ms Aslam said.
Oxford used to award fourth class degrees (apparently as prized as firsts) until the late 1960s or early 70s. Frank Bough was one such recipient.
We were always secretly hoping someone got a 2:2 or a third class degree at Bristol, just so we could mock them by saying they got a "Desmond" or a "Douglas".
Yet until the mid to late 1980s a 2:2 was the 'normal' degree. People were pleased to end up with a 2:1 - yet now feel they have wasted their time if awarded anything less! Grade inflation pretty clearly.
Two of my close friends got 2:2s and now have good careers but they really struggled upon graduating and had to do it the hard way. They didn't qualify for all the usual schemes.
No two ways about it, at university they were lazy. It isn't hard to get a 2:1 if you're intelligent and put some basic effort in, but they don't come automatically.
It was pretty difficult to get a 2:1 back in the 60s and 70s - and Firsts were seen as being almost impossible. I recall the shock in 1975 when a guy did manage a First in History - it had not happened in the preceding ten years!
The modern bachelors degree is mostly learning the syllabus and very little reasoning. If learning is what society wants to reward, then the honours grade inflation is justified, if we want to reward flexibility, logical reasoning and basic research methods, then the grade inflation is unfair.
That certainly wasn't my experience. Admittedly my experience was 15 years ago, or seven if we include my last post as a lecturer, but I'd be very surprised if it has changed as radically as you indicate in that time.
You weren't around to see how much the students slacked off in the seventies. As long as tou turned up to the exams and wrote something you would get a degree. These days if you do not at least hand in course work and pass each year then you won't progress to the next year.
I wasn't disputing that, or how hard most students work. I was saying that logical reasoning and basic research methods remain prized, in my experience, particularly for the top grades.
OK fair point. The best students today are comparabe to the best students 40 or 100 years ago, regardless of what grade they actually get.
The thing that made me laugh about the "searing" editorial in the Irish Independent is :
"Ireland has stood by the EU and should not be made to pay the price for another member storming out. We saddled our future generations with debt to protect the euro when the dam threatened to burst a decade ago. Small nations within the EU will be watching closely to see how we are treated."
Past behaviour really is a good predictor of future behaviour in the case of the EU.
The EU has stood by Ireland in their demands for a backstop.
But you could equally turn it around, and say that by insisting on the backstop, the EU has abrogated its responsibilities to Spain and Portugal.
Guess what, the real world is complex, and the EU has to juggle the demands and desires of countries with different wants and needs.
Yes - and it throws small countries under the bus when it suits.
The power of a union is in solidarity, making it possible for small states to stand up against larger hegemonic neighbours. One can argue with Irelands stance, but you cannot fault the EU for sticking by the decisions of the sovereign government of Ireland.
Are you saying the EU has never thrown any country under the bus, none at all?
No, I don't think it has, but it cannot save sovereign nations from making stupid decisions.
I suspect that you mean Greece, but the EU and Euro are more popular than Greek politicians there. The Greek bailouts reauired a certain amount of tough love, but the EU stood by Greece.
Diane Abbott's tweet is very badly worded and should lose the first sentence which makes it look like Abbott is the one who lied.
Hard to believe she had an oxbridge education.
George W. Bush went to both Yale and Harvard.
Well we all know they are second rate institutions ;-)
Dominic Cummings got a first at Oxford. And even Boris got a second. Tristram Hunt got a first at Cambridge. Hardly a suggestion that Oxbridge is a haven of quality.
Are firsts at Oxford and Cambridge quite what they used to be? I have my doubts. How comparable is David Cameron's first in PPE in the late 1980s to that obtained by Harold Wilson fifty years earlier? I am struck by how few appear to end up with Thirds there nowadays - yet not so long ago it seemed pretty common. David Dimbleby got a Third in PPE in late 1950s - Jeremy Thorpe in Jurisprudence earlier in same decade. Edward Boyle emerged with a Third in History the late 1940s. Going back further Thirds were awarded to Barbara Castle - PPE - in early 30s , and Alec Douglas-Home - History - in the 1920s. Are today's students so much brighter , or is the explanation again to be found in grade inflation? Edit - Just remebered that Stanley Baldwin also ended up with a Third at Cambridge in late 19th century.
Perhaps more that, starting around 1980, they started strongly to discourage the practice of the gentleman’s third....
So it no longer became acceptable to simply swan around and have a good time - and be content with a Third?
I can personally vouch for the early 80s being something of a watershed in the respect. But that’s a story for another time.
On degree results I still have the agenda for my graduation at Manchester in 1965. The BA in Economic and Social Studies produced 7 Firsts, 32 Upper Seconds, 67 Lower Seconds, 16 Thirds, and 36 Ordinary degrees ( without Honours).
Comments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/15/family-manchester-detained-syria-links-isil-say-miss-freedom/
Maureen, I am sure we should have turned left at that last junction.....
"Well, perhaps we are a *little* bit lost."
"Teddy! I've forgotten Teddy!"
"Naughty Peppa! Now Daddy Pig will have to drive back to Raqqa".
Goodnight.
I suspect that you mean Greece, but the EU and Euro are more popular than Greek politicians there. The Greek bailouts reauired a certain amount of tough love, but the EU stood by Greece.
Orange? Pink? Yellow polka dot?
Place your bets.