Mature Students

My DD returned at age 32 to take her teaching thingimmyjig. She got a grant from guernsey to cover the fees, but no living allowance.
She came and lived with me and I subsidised her.
She got into Bristol. She told them she wanted Bristol partly because her mum was disabled and elderly and needed looking after! Also because it was one of the best.
They did snap her up and she came top of her year.
Meanwhile, elderly decrepit mum is on her own!. And enjoying it!

My DS has returned to college part time in order to get qualifications for what he has at last decided to do. He's in his early 30s with a family. He's working alongside younger people who are just keen to pass the exams whereas he wants to know more about the subject as well. Unfortunately the staff appear to be on the side of those who wish to cram and seem very lackadaisical about the whole course eg don't turn up for tutorials, don't seem sure about the requirements. He's complained but nothing seems to have improved which is a great pity and as a result he's not enjoying the process and just wants to pass the exams and finish the course - so the staff have won in actual fact! This is the second college he's attended - different courses - and staff attitude seems to be the same ie anything for a quiet life. Apparently the staff have asked for the project to be handed in a month early so that they can go on holiday!!!!! This is not what education is all about to my way of thinking whether it be for mature or younger students. Luckily for DS he's done really well so far but it's down to his own perservance; staff support has been severely lacking.

I am sure of my facts, Greatnan, because I was accepted at Teacher Training College in Manchester in 1971. I was 20, and had been working for three years. I had 7 'O' levels. It was a three year course and if completed successfully (you had to take two academic subjects, I presume to 'A' level standard), qualified you to teach primary school children.

I only did two years as circumstances forced me to pull out, so I never did qualify

Anagram - are you sure of your facts? I started a B.Ed in 1967 with just nine 'O' levels but I had to take the Cambridge General Studies 'A' level paper and it was made clear that I was being accepted on the 4-year course only because I was a mature student (I was 27. ) I am pretty sure all the young students taking the 3-year Teaching Certicate had 'A' levels.
I have often thought that nobody should be allowed on certain courses, such as teaching and social work, until they are 25, but it should be much easier for people to return to full time education. The mature students formed 10% if the student body in my year, but we took 50% of the prizes!
Because I was a married woman, I got the minimum grant - about £300 a year, which just covered child care for my two children.

It had been a long time since I'd left full time education, so I took an Access course to help me get back into swing of studying and writing essays etc. Then I went on to get my BA. The fees were introduced in my last year and I'm so glad I didn't wait any longer to take my degree as I wouldn't have been able to afford them. In fact I probably wouldn't have bothered at all, as I was well past 24 when I started the Access course.

On the one hand they talk of 'older people' needing to keep their brain stimulated and in the next breath they withdraw opportunities in which 'older people' can do this. Joined up thinking?????

You didn't need a degree to become nurse either. Look what has happened to nursing since they went down that route!

You didn't need a degree to become a primary school teacher in the late 60s/early 70s either. You just needed 5 good O levels.

The problem now is that you cannot get a decent job without a degree. When I left school in the early 1960s (to go to university) not going to university did not preclude you from making a career in any of the major professions (except medicine). I had two friends who for different reasons had to leave school after O levels. A few years later one decided to become a chartered accountant, the other a solicitor. Within months they were articled clerks (apprentices) in companies in their chosen profession, they studied on the job and five years later both qualified and have had outstanding careers.

Although their salaries were low when they started they were earning all the way through, essential for both of them. Now they would first have to go back to college to get their A levels, then they would have to go to university to get their degrees, to do this they would have to take on a mountain of debt,then they would still need to serve an admittedly shorter apprenticeship before qualifying. With luck they would qualify in their chosen profession 8 years later but hampered by debt.

What we need is more ways of getting into the professions without people having to burden themselves with debt and higher and higher levels of pre-qualifications before they can even begin their professional training

It's disgusting

PS I benefited from our accessible higher education, and got my language degree from Queensland University without paying anything but my books and student union fees.

I'm horrified. But I remember Thatcher saying summat about it being good that highly intelligent people, who cannot afford higher education, have to work in ordinary jobs, as this raises efficiency at the front line of industry.

We still have affordable higher education here in Australia, thank goodness. You don't pay until you earn enough, then you pay higher tax till your hecs (higher education contribution scheme) debt is cleared. If you never earn enough, you never pay, and the debt dies with you.

However, due to highly successful, expensive, Tory propaganda against the carbon tax brought in this week by our Labour Government, we'll probably get the Tories back next year and - well - I dread the effects on everything decent and good for ordinary people, and for the environment. Their leader, Tony Abbott is a religious far right winger. He's a dreadful creature, but the Labour leader, Julia Gillard, is so unpopular he may well get in by default.

Thank goodness my lads already have their degrees and their careers.

I'm all for the opportunities that continuing education can provide for anyone, regardless of income. This is slamming the door of opportunity in the faces of all those who do not earn enough to pay. Although I understand this country is in dire straits, welfare, health and education should be at the top of the list. I too, would rather fund a mature student who will make best use of the course.
It could also lead to loss of employment for FE lecturers.
This is all quite scary but I believe the government is using any excuse to abolish the welfare state. The well being of ordinary people is at stake here!

Bump
because I want as many of you as possible to read this post

I'm an OU graduate too and got my MSc at age fifty on a distance learning course from Manchester via RCN in London which I did have to pay for and work full time. I'm not complaining I had enough salary and a very supportive partnere to do that. People wh havent had opportunties in early life often dont get them later on and I would rather fund a serios committed mature student than yet another 18 year old with mediocre grades on a Media studies course with no hope of work at the end of it.

Will do Annobel. I ignored what was on offer at school - hated it after I left primary school and went my own way as much as possible. It was the OU that I benefited from in my thirties. Equally, I have lots of family members who do OU and college courses - they are from mid twenties to pensionable age. I also have FE tutors in the family who will be mortified to find their jobs could be under threat yet again.