Breaking news: the poor are thick

gurdas said:
What percentage of London banking interns last year do you think came from Newcastle? It's an example of how industry can look down upon people. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that, it's simply an example where it does happen.
Click to expand...

I'd say your statement is flawed. It's much easier to get an IB job if you know people in the companies than it being based on your university. Obviously they will be minimum standards but I'm sure there are students from top 25 unis in investment banking if u looked.

E.g. I went through the whole application process to get an internship with a Big four and managed to get the job. A girl on my course spoke to the head of the department and didn't even need to finish the application form, never mind do the assessment centre and all that stuff. She was fast tracked and given an interview straight away.

Fair? Probably not, but that's life.
 
As long as this is considered a generallisation im fine with it...

If people start trying to say ALL poor people are dumb, then it raises issues.
 
Regardless of the specifics of IQ, class and intelligence in general, I think the guy does have a point.

Forcing good Universities to admit less able students is tackling the problem at the wrong end. The fact is that by the time they are 18 it is likely that these kids will be too far behind, and more able poeple shouldn't be excluded just because they went to a private school in order to fill quotas.

You need to look at why kids from lower income backgrounds are doing worse academically from a young age, and tackle the problem here.

Saying that, opportunities are there - I come from a single parent low income family, and got a degree from a top 5 University.
 
Kemik said:
I'd say your statement is flawed. It's much easier to get an IB job if you know people in the companies than it being based on your university. Obviously they will be minimum standards but I'm sure there are students from top 25 unis in investment banking if u looked.

E.g. I went through the whole application process to get an internship with a Big four and managed to get the job. A girl on my course spoke to the head of the department and didn't even need to finish the application form, never mind do the assessment centre and all that stuff. She was fast tracked and given an interview straight away.

Fair? Probably not, but that's life.
Click to expand...

It's not flawed, it's statistically true. Yes if you know the right people you can get pretty much anywhere, however applications filtering are heavily weighted towards the top 10 unis.
 
gurdas said:
Newcastle Uni lol, hardly a fine establishment:p
Click to expand...

It's actually one of the top universities. I had to get AAB at A level to read economics. Hardly the sort of requirements for a poor or non-academic institution.

Universities should be encouraged to take people from worse off backgrounds, but ONLY if they actually have the academic ability. They should not turn down someone with 60% for someone with only 40% because the latter person came from a state school.
 
Last edited:
Working class people have lower IQs than those from wealthy backgrounds and should not expect to win places at top universities, an academic has claimed.
Click to expand...
I don't even understand why this article was printed, it does not point out how he came to this conclusion or what data it was based on.

It does not qualify the term 'Working Class' or what constitutes a 'Wealthy Background'.

Nor does it qualify what a 'significant' difference is between IQ's.
Let alone the fact that IQ's have no bearing on the current education system.
 
I don't understand why wealth is even an issue here, to get into universities you give them your GCSE/A-level grades, a personal statement and possibly an interview. None of these are dependent on wealth.

Now if Cambridge etc are actively favouring candidates for coming from a private school or having rich parents then that is clearly not on.

But simply having a well-off student intake because they *happen* to have better grades and write better statements is just the way it is, no problem there.

Personally I went to a top-3 private school, but didn't get into a great uni because I did **** all work and got mediocre A-level grades. A friend of mine went to a bog-standard school and 6th form, got 4 A's including Further Maths, and then went to Cambridge to do Maths. You get out what you put in, and all that...
 
Last edited:
Paracelsus said:
I don't understand why wealth is even an issue here, to get into universities you give them your GCSE/A-level grades, a personal statement and possibly an interview. None of these are dependent on wealth.

Now if Cambridge etc are actively favouring candidates for coming from a private school or having rich parents then that is clearly not on.
Click to expand...
That's another flaw with the article, it does not even give any indication of what data they come to the conclusion that less 'working class' students get into these 'elite' universities and again it mainly refers to these 'elite' universities.

Does anyone have a link to maybe a more precise article?
 
Kemik said:
E.g. I went through the whole application process to get an internship with a Big four and managed to get the job. A girl on my course spoke to the head of the department and didn't even need to finish the application form, never mind do the assessment centre and all that stuff. She was fast tracked and given an interview straight away.

Fair? Probably not, but that's life.
Click to expand...

Spoke? More like got on her knees
 
malc30 said:
@paradox
The simple answer is Yes of course it is True but then the Rich have developed a system where by there off spring do much better within our currrent economical structure.
This does Not make them more intelligent though !!!
Click to expand...

Agreed.:)
 
I go to a grammar school and I would think only a very small minority come from council estates etc.

It's fairly obvious that people who aren't working class care for their children more, in MOST cases.
 
Drizmod said:
Spoke? More like got on her knees
Click to expand...

Haha. Slightly off topic but she backed that up the other day by picking up her phone in the library and rang him to ask for help with a question!

My mates said the exact same thing as you when I told them. I understand having his office number but she must have his mobile caus he wasn't in his office :p
 
inferno said:
I go to a grammar school and I would think only a very small minority come from council estates etc.

It's fairly obvious that people who aren't working class care for their children more, in MOST cases.
Click to expand...

It's fairly obvious that people who aren't working class have the money to send their children to private schools, in MOST cases.

* fixed
 
Tommy B said:
Top 25, and in general tables are absolute rubbish. Universities should be picked regarding SUBJECT.

What's ironic given the article this thread scrutinizes is that Newcastle has one of the highest public school intakes of any university in the country!
Click to expand...

That and to an extent the enjoyment factor (of the course). Several of the 6 universities I put down and got conditional offers for are quite high on that list, but the university I decided to go to isn't. But it is still accredited and I can live with the fact the course is far more intersting..

You're simply describing two bad doctors in a case which isn't one or the other. You can have a doctor who got 100% on his exams and he's got fantastic bedside manner, that would be a good doctor. Well infact he wouldn't. Exams are easier than they used to be, yes, even for medicine at uni, seeing as my family work with hundreds of people in the NHS and my dad is personal friends with several of the people who run most of the schools of medicine in London and thats their opinion, not mine. Doctors don't have to take hundreds of courses and refresher info if they don't want to. Neither do they have to specialise in the hardest subjects or learn an entire books information to pass an exam on the book. THe best doctors are those who read all the going information because they want to be great doctors, and not those that read who want to do great on the exam.

Give two people a text book, lets say a huge 1000 page small print a4 sized thing with shedloads of info. one person could get 50% on an exam set to test on that book, while the other guy can get 100%, that in no way means the guy who got 100% knows more info, he simply knew the right info from the book. These days thats all exam taking is, extremely narrow focus learning, learning only whats required on the exam, nothing more. Those that learn more, because they want to will always have a better knowledge frankly.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't know how medical students are examined. The have to take 2 exams throughout the year where every year (from first to 5th) takes the same exam and the exam can consist of ANYTHING (especially stuff they haven't learned), the people who are in the lowest 5 or so% are chopped. It means they have to know as much as possible, not just a narrow field, or they will fail because their peers will do better than them.. I don't agree entirely with it, for one it creates ultracompetativity(?) between all the medics, and that isn't necessarily a good thing for people who are supposed to be helping people.
 
Kemik said:
Haha. Slightly off topic but she backed that up the other day by picking up her phone in the library and rang him to ask for help with a question!

My mates said the exact same thing as you when I told them. I understand having his office number but she must have his mobile caus he wasn't in his office :p
Click to expand...

I know a girl like that, and she DEFINATELY slept with him...:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom