By: John Green
- 23rd October 2017 at 14:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This subject will always offer counter argument by opinion. The fact that someone, perhaps a former poly graduate, disgruntled by the absence of value of an award of a soft degree, chooses to publish their disagreement in the Guardian rather than a quality journal such as the Telegraph, screams volumes !
You make a pointless point about Adonis 'taking the whip'. If he does, he is a politician of that hue. Simple and true.
My endlessly reiterated point about polys masquerading is well supported by Adonis' statement. Polys at one time served a very useful purpose. Some would comment that they were more useful in the service of the country than universities, in that you learnt a useful vocation which would then provide a living, rather than just learning to think, a useful exercise in itself but, wasted on many.
"news a little late" ? I prefer to lull you into a sense of security that, ultimately proves to be without foundation !
By: Beermat
- 24th October 2017 at 08:56Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The 'volumes' that this 'screams" amount to the likelihood of the increasingly incoherent Telegraph (matching your own trajectory) publishing the letter being slim.
A long time ago there was an argument, which as a recent graduate of a 'proper' university I supported, that 'University' was the wrong name for Polytechnics. A lot of time has passed, and many former polies now have an academic ethos and a thriving research culture that is the envy of many "older' institutions.
By: trekbuster
- 24th October 2017 at 14:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The difference is that those who write to the Guardian on education matters are usually well educated and show symptoms of actually relying on their own recent experiences rather that Torygraph correpondents who ( if JG is a typical example) tend to lack academic rigour, wouldn't accept alternative perspectives even in the face of overwhelming supporting evidence and rely on experiences way back in the past
By: John Green
- 24th October 2017 at 14:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The point that most would make is that the Guardian is so rabidly left wing - even if judged only by the content of its advertising - that as a neutral or unbiased commentator, few take it seriously.
The Telegraph doesn't always commit itself. Its capacity to 'sit on Bruce's fence' can be alarming, leading one to query the possibility of an upheaval in the proper order of things !
'recent experience' is not as valuable as experience in depth - you should know that.
By: Beermat
- 26th October 2017 at 10:45Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It'll have to wait until Saturday. I don't read the print version of the Guardian except at weekends, when I buy it for the (doubtless Marxist) TV guide.
The online version is trying to sell me a Smartphone - is that left-wing? You tell me, you seem to know about these things.
By: John Green
- 26th October 2017 at 10:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Let me send you the Daily Mail TV guide. It is excellent. Regrettably, Littlejohn doesn't contribute in the Saturday edition - a significant omission compensated only by his presence mid week.
By: trekbuster
- 26th October 2017 at 13:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think that to support your theory regarding left wing adverts you need to provide a clear example for us to consider. Without that it is very difficult to be sure about what you would define as a left wing advert, perhaps because it is that you are confused about political definitions. So please John, can you provide a link, or failing that a scanned image of one of the adverts to which you are referring
By: John Green
- 26th October 2017 at 14:17Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't 'need' to do anything ! The clues are in the wording. Look for anything that smacks of a non job. Look for anything that mentions 'outreach worker'. Look for anything that mentions 'inclusivity,' 'diversity', or the famous one; 'multicultural'. Especially look at jobs advertised in the public sector, that's practically all of them; most of them with generous salary packages.
There you are Trekie. Plenty to chew on. I'll wait for incoming flak.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 23rd October 2017 at 14:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This subject will always offer counter argument by opinion. The fact that someone, perhaps a former poly graduate, disgruntled by the absence of value of an award of a soft degree, chooses to publish their disagreement in the Guardian rather than a quality journal such as the Telegraph, screams volumes !
You make a pointless point about Adonis 'taking the whip'. If he does, he is a politician of that hue. Simple and true.
My endlessly reiterated point about polys masquerading is well supported by Adonis' statement. Polys at one time served a very useful purpose. Some would comment that they were more useful in the service of the country than universities, in that you learnt a useful vocation which would then provide a living, rather than just learning to think, a useful exercise in itself but, wasted on many.
"news a little late" ? I prefer to lull you into a sense of security that, ultimately proves to be without foundation !
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 24th October 2017 at 08:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The 'volumes' that this 'screams" amount to the likelihood of the increasingly incoherent Telegraph (matching your own trajectory) publishing the letter being slim.
A long time ago there was an argument, which as a recent graduate of a 'proper' university I supported, that 'University' was the wrong name for Polytechnics. A lot of time has passed, and many former polies now have an academic ethos and a thriving research culture that is the envy of many "older' institutions.
Once again you are late.
Posts: 963
By: Agent K - 24th October 2017 at 09:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Usually by about 44 years all evidence would suggest Beermat..........
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 24th October 2017 at 11:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"wasted on many...." Umm !
Posts: 851
By: trekbuster - 24th October 2017 at 14:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The difference is that those who write to the Guardian on education matters are usually well educated and show symptoms of actually relying on their own recent experiences rather that Torygraph correpondents who ( if JG is a typical example) tend to lack academic rigour, wouldn't accept alternative perspectives even in the face of overwhelming supporting evidence and rely on experiences way back in the past
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 24th October 2017 at 14:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The point that most would make is that the Guardian is so rabidly left wing - even if judged only by the content of its advertising - that as a neutral or unbiased commentator, few take it seriously.
The Telegraph doesn't always commit itself. Its capacity to 'sit on Bruce's fence' can be alarming, leading one to query the possibility of an upheaval in the proper order of things !
'recent experience' is not as valuable as experience in depth - you should know that.
Posts: 851
By: trekbuster - 24th October 2017 at 15:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you honestly believe that the Telegraph sits on the fence on any political matter then there is no hope for you John.
Posts: 686
By: silver fox - 24th October 2017 at 22:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
John
What is "the proper order of things" sounds more like an utterance from Queen Victoria than anything else.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 25th October 2017 at 11:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We are not amused.
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 25th October 2017 at 13:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What on earth is 'left wing' advertising? Free means-of-production with every purchase?
I sense you are railing against something, but you don't really know what it is.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 25th October 2017 at 19:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I though that it was known as the Guardian - to give it a polite description.
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 25th October 2017 at 21:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
So. You are angry that a newspaper gives voice to those with points of view contrary to your own?
So it's not the political opinion, it's that people are free to express it that gets John's goat?
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 26th October 2017 at 10:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"left wing advertising?"
BM read the ads, then you'll get the flavour.
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 26th October 2017 at 10:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It'll have to wait until Saturday. I don't read the print version of the Guardian except at weekends, when I buy it for the (doubtless Marxist) TV guide.
The online version is trying to sell me a Smartphone - is that left-wing? You tell me, you seem to know about these things.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 26th October 2017 at 10:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Let me send you the Daily Mail TV guide. It is excellent. Regrettably, Littlejohn doesn't contribute in the Saturday edition - a significant omission compensated only by his presence mid week.
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 26th October 2017 at 11:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I was joking - but the DM really does have a political TV guide? John - how on earth can you accuse the Left of trying to indoctrinate?
Posts: 851
By: trekbuster - 26th October 2017 at 13:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I think that to support your theory regarding left wing adverts you need to provide a clear example for us to consider. Without that it is very difficult to be sure about what you would define as a left wing advert, perhaps because it is that you are confused about political definitions. So please John, can you provide a link, or failing that a scanned image of one of the adverts to which you are referring
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 26th October 2017 at 14:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't 'need' to do anything ! The clues are in the wording. Look for anything that smacks of a non job. Look for anything that mentions 'outreach worker'. Look for anything that mentions 'inclusivity,' 'diversity', or the famous one; 'multicultural'. Especially look at jobs advertised in the public sector, that's practically all of them; most of them with generous salary packages.
There you are Trekie. Plenty to chew on. I'll wait for incoming flak.
Posts: 851
By: trekbuster - 26th October 2017 at 17:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Thought so. Not anything specific, just meaningless waffle. Sorry doesn't cut it John
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 26th October 2017 at 19:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Explains it perfectly. Those ads do not appear in the D. Tel.