Never said it was them and us
I repeat: I'm quite happy to fund people doing a degree they have a genuine talent for and love of the subject. Such people generally get good results, and benefit from the qualification.
The arts, media subjects etc seem to be seen as easy by some people, who pick a degree to avoid effort. I know an english graduate who can't spell (not dyslexic either). Which is pretty shit for people who want to do art/language/etc because they are blindingly good at it (e.g. mate of mine did archeology and anthropology at Oxford) . I admit that as a hairy arsed engineer I can't see the use of such degrees, but I am willing to believe there is a use-if you are good at it.

I agree in theory that education needs more funding, however that rather misses the whole reason for the cuts. There isn't any money. However, the cuts should be handled better, perhaps by weeding out lower quality degrees and the unis that seem to exist purely to pay senior management handsomely.
( Greenbat, Thu 11 Nov 2010, 23:43, 1 reply)

Yep
I think that's it, really. It comes down to a value judgment on what should be funded and what shouldn't, but I think you and I agree that that isn't clear-cut and isn't necessarily about what you study but about the quality of the course, and your ability to take something from it.

Basically, I'd rather less places for degrees than a system where a dodgy degree is a given if you can afford it, which is where we're heading.
(SnowyTheWereRabbit the Leporid from Hell, Fri 12 Nov 2010, 0:03, closed)