Does anyone know what Justin Paterson is actually saying?

[Neil C]

I was editing before I saw your reply there, I wasn't expressing myself how I wanted.
I now end on the line which tallies with your first point.

[A Non O Miss]

I wasn't expressing myself how I wanted.

Now THAT is something I know all to well...I often do it completely automatically and without any awareness, like I was made to be elusive or something...

[TheReson8or]

Can I counter with the assertion that perhaps we are creating a generation determined to self educate in adulthood? Our "culture" is also a complex thing and decisions that don't make sense now may ultimately lead to a change unforeseen and yet beneficial.....they also could lead to horribleness and an Idiocracy.... but i am a glass half full man!

[Exalted Wombat]

Can I counter with the assertion that perhaps we are creating a generation determined to self educate in adulthood? Our "culture" is also a complex thing and decisions that don't make sense now may ultimately lead to a change unforeseen and yet beneficial.....they also could lead to horribleness and an Idiocracy.... but i am a glass half full man!

You can certainly train yourself in adulthood. I'm not so sure about education. It's easy to learn to do things, but if you don't know those things exist...?

[hollowsun]

Can I counter with the assertion that perhaps we are creating a generation determined to self educate in adulthood? Our "culture" is also a complex thing and decisions that don't make sense now may ultimately lead to a change unforeseen and yet beneficial

I suspect that you're giving far too much credence to 'educationalists' and politicos who have been tinkering with teaching methods for decade from various hopeless reading schemes to propaganda ridden history lessons to 'flexibility' with grammar and spelling (i.e. ignore mistakes) to 'flexibility' with written legibility and coherence of written ideas (i.e. ignore it because they're 'expressing themselves naturally'), etc..

You cannot have an egalitarian education system because different children are, ermmm, different and if educationalists want every child to have an 'equal' education, the inevitable result is to dumb down to the lowest common denominator.

No-one has the balls to say that some kids are thick (and/or don't want to learn) and some are average and some are bright, some precociously so. You simply cannot give them the same education. In the past, this was ok because (as a rough generalisation) kids who weren't, shall we say, destined for the field of Academia got apprenticeships and did valuable work making things. The average kids got the blue collar jobs managing or accounting or organising, whatever ... or became electricians, electronic repairers, etc., (again valuable work) and the really bright kids went on to be the rocket scientists. Unfair? Maybe but when was life ever fair?

Now, however, everybody is entitled to a 'degree'. As a result, little polytechnics that once churned out cracking electricians, chiropodists, dental assistants, whatever, are now 'universities' handing out useless and meaningless (ahem) 'degrees' in Media Studies, Golf Course Management, Aromatherapy, Swiming Pool Technology, etc.. (*) Oh! And Music Technology!

Although introduced by that idiot John Major in the dying throes of his government (probably at the behest of his PR advisors to get some votes), the last governmental incumbents loved this because His Tonyness could boast that we have the best educated young people in the known universe with more kids in Uni and more kids with degrees than ever before under any previous government.

Total bollox!

The kids out there are no better or worse than and no different to previous generations but they have been sorely let down - especially recently - by an (ahem) 'education' system that is not designed to educate but to get box ticked results that made the last government look good to garner popularity and votes.

It is a fact that Lord Digby Jones, the CBI, the head of major retailers such as M&S, etc., have all said that many kids - despite the 'degrees' they have - are almost unemployable. Not because they're thick - far from it - but because they don't possess basic skills in arithmetic, writing, reading, written communication, ability to research and problem solve, lack of initiative, etc.. How can you employ some kid who has to write to your customers when they can't string a sentence together? And I can testify for this. My missus is a maths tutor and she tutors 16 year old kids (all bright and lovely kids) who don't know their tables or how to perform simple sums.

Furthermore, gone are the days of "What is 4,567 divided by 256? Show your working.", the questions are more like "You have to attend a meeting at 9.45am. A train leaves at 7.30am and takes 2 hours to get your destination. Discuss why it would be environmentally unfriendly to go by car. Any answer will do."

OK, I jest on that last one but you get the gist. The answer requires a written explanation and the poor kids can barely string a coherent sentence together... which is why my missus has been employed except that a lot of the time, they need an English tutor as well as a maths tutor (and I invariably get roped in to help them because as well as not knowing basic arithmetic, they often lack skills in basic grammar as well).

I truly hope this new lot have the cojones to rip it all apart because our young people (which to bring it vaguely musically on-topic, George Benson and Whitney Houston tell us are 'the future') are being severely let down by 'the system' we have.

(*) These are all accredited 'Mickey Mouse' degree courses now! There are more!

[A Non O Miss]

I think self education is highly overrated...but if that is all one has, then that is what one must run with...

Now, however, everybody is entitled to a 'degree'. As a result, little polytechnics that once churned out cracking electricians, chiropodists, dental assistants, whatever, are now 'universities' handing out useless and meaningless (ahem) 'degrees' in Media Studies, Golf Course Management, Aromatherapy, Swiming Pool Technology, etc.. (*) Oh! And Music Technology!

Well I can speak on the Golf so for a first hand account...Over here it is a required course in order to become certified as a professional and essentially the only way to become employed in that industry.

I took this, shamefully face palming, and in all due respect to the teachers and school,it was a complete joke. Everybody was a great person, I had some great teachers, but the overall structure was flawed. The course was totally mickey mouse, and by third year I barely went because essentially it was as you say, dumbing down to the lowest common denominator and I pretty much was learning nothing. The only learning was from the odd teacher that stepped outside the box, and from being employed in the field, where things actually happen...

I now have a friend going through the same program, different school, and I know that it will do little other then provide him the piece of paper he requires to be employed within that field and receive the certification he needs to be considered a viable professional...wasting 3 good years he could be doing something and advancing...and guess what? The public does nothing but looks to see if someone is certified and thus uses that as justification that they are a worthy instructor or professional

Oh well, thanks to Google I don't need to know anything anymore...

[Neil C]

My missus is a maths tutor and she tutors 16 year old kids (all bright and lovely kids) who don't know their tables or how to perform simple sums.

I have never learned tables although I did kind of try because my friend could do them.
I always multiply breaking down the multiplier and doubling up (doubling any not very huge number I find almost instant) and adding the single amount on for a odd multiplier. That's knowing one universally effective principle rather than having to remember lots of individual answers.
I don't see why it's of any importance to know tables if you can work the answer out very quickly by another method.

[Exalted Wombat]

I have never learned tables although I did kind of try because my friend could do them.
I always multiply by doubling up (doubling any not very huge number I find almost instant) and adding the single amount on for a odd multiplier. That's knowing one universally effective principle rather than having to remember lots of individual answers.
I don't see why it's of any importance to know tables if you can work the answer out very quickly by another method.

That might be considered an excellent example of the difference between education and training

[Neil C]

That might be considered an excellent example of the difference between education and training

It would be, but I was never taught it, I just do it!

[Hugh Robjohns]

I always multiply breaking down the multiplier and doubling up ..... I don't see why it's of any importance to know tables if you can work the answer out very quickly by another method.

But quite clearly you ~do~ know your tables, or at least some of them including the two-times table. How else would you know the answers when 'doubling up'

Hugh

[Exalted Wombat]

That might be considered an excellent example of the difference between education and training

It would be, but I was never taught it, I just do it!

Yup. Self-training taught you that you could get away with knowing only your 2 times table. Education would maybe have revealed wider fields of mathematics where further tools would have been useful. How do you cope with long division for instance?

The trained man says "I never need that, and if I do, I've got a calculator!" and stops. The educated man carries on "because it's there" and maybe, just maybe, discovers great things.

[Mixedup]

We are becoming a country of telephone sanitsers and hairdressers, to quote Douglas Adams, and come the end of the world the UN will be putting most Brits on the B-Ark.

Witty, but unfair: the sanitisers and hairdressers have always been there; it's just that now they get to say they've got a degree. Go to any of the 'old' universities, and quite a few of the newer ones, and you'll still find plenty of courses that do what they're supposed to do, and plenty of intelligent, motivated people. One problem, of course, is that they can no longer afford to continue their education past undergraduate level, without first working for some years to clear the debts they've accumulated in the name of study. And when they've cleared those debts, they realise they can't continue to study, because they have to save £40k to put down as a deposit on a modest house, and have to start putting cash aside for a pension because no employer pays that for you — particularly not if the industry has gone freelance.

As for the accusation of 'Mickey Mouse' subjects, I think that's unfair too. I could see how 'Golf Management' or 'Music Technology' could be a perfectly legitimate subject for deep study and research; my problem is with the way in which it is taught, and the lack of centralised, recognised, enforced and rigorous standards.

I fail to see, for example, why even an arts degree in music technology can fail to deliver basic modules on acoustics, psychoacoutics, transducer design and so on. It's like promising to teach a would-be carpenter how to carpent(!)... but failing to teach them about the tools (s)he needs to do the job because 'it doesn't matter as long as it turns out like you want'. But most of music tech courses do — even when the students are crying out for tuition and guidance in this area; and despite promising accreditation initiatives like JAMES, standards remain voluntary and potentially costly.

[TheReson8or]

Hi Hollowsun, Surely my point is that many kids have also lost faith and are doing many alternative things out there. This isn't an apology for a crap system, just demonstrating that kids will find a way regardless of OUR aspirations for them. If texting was an Olympic sport I know some contenders!! Dave

[Exalted Wombat]

As for the accusation of 'Mickey Mouse' subjects, I think that's unfair too. I could see how 'Golf Management' or 'Music Technology' could be a perfectly legitimate subject for deep study and research; my problem is with the way in which it is taught, and the lack of centralised, recognised, enforced and rigorous standards.

Go on then! Rough out a 3-year course in "Philosophy and practice of golf management" for us! Some subjects just aren't BIG enough to be the core of a degree course. Trades are good. Professions are good. They can overlap. But there IS a difference.

[Mixedup]

As for the accusation of 'Mickey Mouse' subjects, I think that's unfair too. I could see how 'Golf Management' or 'Music Technology' could be a perfectly legitimate subject for deep study and research; my problem is with the way in which it is taught, and the lack of centralised, recognised, enforced and rigorous standards.

Go on then! Rough out a 3-year course in "Philosophy and practice of golf management" for us! Some subjects just aren't BIG enough to be the core of a degree course. Trades are good. Professions are good. They can overlap. But there IS a difference.

FWIW, I've got no axe to grind here: I hate golf with as much passion as some people love it! However, I reckon you're being quite closed-minded. If you're just talking about training someone to run a golf club, then yeah, I'd say you have a point. But if it extended to an understanding of the sport science behind golf, equipment design, ballistics and so on, as well as course design, landscaping, ground maintenance, the commercial aspects of the thing, media management, and so on, then yes, I *do* think you could construct a perfectly viable degree or even post-grad course on it, and I think there'd be plenty of potentially transferable skills and knowledge that would make it a useful qualification — whether people recognised it or not. I know someone who — although hasn't gone to university — has done years of such research into archery, and revolutionised the design of bows, arrows, facilities for sight-marking and so on. And in the process has had to teach himself some very complicated maths (to the extent that he was able to come up with better solutions that his brother, who has a doctorate in Mathematics!). There would certainly be scope for a degree in that.

You don't *need* to do a degree in maths to get good at it. But it helps. And the same to my mind is true for any subject with an elements of science and research. Does that quality of course exist for the subjects you describe as 'Mickey Mouse'? Probably not. But that wasn't my point: they could exist, and if any courses do exist, they should be structured in a way that allows and requires people to gain a proper understanding of the subject, and to conduct original research.

You could call music tech degrees Mickey Mouse. The Tonmeister teaches the same subject, but in a rigorous way. In other words, the courses may be Mickey Mouse, but there's no reason why courses can't deliver the subjects in a better, more appropriate way.

[narcoman]

Tonmeister, LIPA et al are NOT music tech "degrees". There are strong engineering and math components.

[Neil C]

I always multiply breaking down the multiplier and doubling up ..... I don't see why it's of any importance to know tables if you can work the answer out very quickly by another method.

But quite clearly you ~do~ know your tables, or at least some of them including the two-times table. How else would you know the answers when 'doubling up'

Hugh

I suppose I do to some extent, but it's not like a long rote learned list.
Well, two times 27 for instance, I don't know the 27 times table. I suppose I do just know that two 25's are 50 and that's a kind of part of a times table, but that's knowing that with 25's you will always have 0, 25, 50, 75 as the last two digits. Then from 27 - 25 being 2 I have 2 + or x 2 and knowing that is kind of times table I suppose, so I then have 4 to add to the 50.

How do you cope with long division for instance?

I never could do it really.

[hollowsun]

Tonmeister, LIPA et al are NOT music tech "degrees". There are strong engineering and math components.

Plus (for Tonmeister at least) you need Grade 8 performance proficiency on a musical instrument.

[hollowsun]

Witty, but unfair: the sanitisers and hairdressers have always been there; it's just that now they get to say they've got a degree.

That's the point! It makes 'degrees' kind of meaningless when everyone has one and artificially elevates subjects and polytechnics with minimal entry requirements which previously would have issued HNCs and HNDs (all perfectly valid for the professions intended) and devalues those subjects and universities with demanding entry requirements which traditionally issued degrees...

Much like it's kind of meaningless when every child leaves school with A-star GSCEs.

[Mixedup]

Tonmeister, LIPA et al are NOT music tech "degrees". There are strong engineering and math components.

I disagree. That's *exactly* what they are. It's just that those examples do justice to the subject, whereas many courses that claim to be music tech degrees do not.

The point you make is no different from saying a history degree has strong politics, economics or sociology components. That does not make it an economics degree.

[Mixedup]

Witty, but unfair: the sanitisers and hairdressers have always been there; it's just that now they get to say they've got a degree.

That's the point! It makes 'degrees' kind of meaningless when everyone has one and artificially elevates subjects and polytechnics with minimal entry requirements which previously would have issued HNCs and HNDs (all perfectly valid for the professions intended) and devalues those subjects and universities with demanding entry requirements which traditionally issued degrees...

Much like it's kind of meaningless when every child leaves school with A-star GSCEs.

Not really. It just makes some degrees more valuable in given situations than others. There are plenty of worthwhile qualifications around. There are no more sanitizers out there than there were before. It's just easier to spot them.

I suppose some of the older universities could take the Oxford approach and start granting honorary Masters degrees to people a given number of years after they complete their batchelors degree...

My point being, who cares what a qualification is called, as long as the courses deliver the education and training that they ought? In other words, why not turn these Mickey Mouse courses into courses that actually deliver, weed the entrant applications, and enforce more rigorous standards, than moaning about the fact that courses in those subjects exist at all?

[narcoman]

Tonmeister, LIPA et al are NOT music tech "degrees". There are strong engineering and math components.

I disagree. That's *exactly* what they are. It's just that those examples do justice to the subject, whereas many courses that claim to be music tech degrees do not.

The point you make is no different from saying a history degree has strong politics, economics or sociology components. That does not make it an economics degree.

The focus of those courses is not the use of technology. A great deal is acoustics and electrical engineering. It's not "this is how you do a loop in Logic".....

Have a look at them - there is a strong focus on learning the mathematics behind sound - fourier transforms and all that loveliness. They are entirely distinct, not only in level, but what they teach. The courses I am against are ALL of the "we'll teach you pro-tools and the routing in a desk and call it a degree"...... All of them. If they don't contain degree level maths or electronics - then they are not a sound engineering degree.

[. . . Delete This User . . .]

not so sure i'd hold LIPA in quite the same class as Tonmeister Narco.... not in the rigour and depth of background technical theory and practical application of it.

LIPA is still a shed load better than most....

i WOULD call tonmeister a PROPER Music tech degree.

and EVERYTHING else, a pale , inferior imitation.
some paler and less use than others.

[Hugh Robjohns]

There are no more sanitizers out there than there were before. It's just easier to spot them.

I disagree. The evidence and the complaints from industry suggests that there are significantly fewer UK people now studying for either traditional and versatile technical degrees or vocational engineering and construction skills.

Instead, there is a far higher proportion studying soft and superficially attractive but useless subjects instead -- like golf course management and music tech.

The result is that most people seem now to be employed in service industries rather than manufacturing industries and I don't think that's a good thing.

Which lead to which might be one of those chicken and egg things. Did manufacturing industries reduce forcing colleges to produce service people, or did the lack of manufacturing-capable people lead to manufacturers going offshore? Discuss...

My point being, who cares what a qualification is called, as long as the courses deliver the education and training that they ought?

But that's the whole point. There are different levels and types of education and they need to recognised with different kinds of qualification. Giving everyone who completes a few years of academic or vocational study something called a 'degree' doesn't help employers trying to differentiate between applicants and find someone with the skills and competencies they require.

hugh

[Mowens800]

Instead, there is a far higher proportion studying soft and superficially attractive but useless subjects instead -- like golf course management and music tech.

hugh

I don't think it is the degree so much that matters. I did a music tech degree, it led to something, that led to something else. I now have a career doing something I enjoy, related (but not directly) to my degree. So I wouldn't call it useless. It depends on the person, how they apply themselves. A piece of paper doesn't usually equal a job in any subject. Sure, some see it as a soft option but...

I don't think it is fair to blanket all music technology degree's/students the way this thread has.