Paid to Stay at School ....
Discussion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3633227.stm
Young people 'get paid to study'
More than a third of a million 16 year olds are being offered money to stay in education, in an effort to end the high drop-out rate at that age. The Education Maintenance Allowance, worth between £10 and £30 a week, will be available to those from low-income families in England from September.
Students could also receive bonuses of £100 if they remain on the course and make good progress.
However, those who miss lessons will forfeit their right to a grant.
The UK has one of the highest rates for leaving school at 16 in the developed world.
EMAs have been piloted across a third of the country since 1999.
Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies and University of Loughborough found that:
Among the 16 year olds eligible, the staying-on rate increased by 5.9%
For boys, the figure was 6.9%
And, for boys among the lowest socio-economic group, it was 10%
To qualify for EMAs, young people must come from households with incomes of less than £30,000 a year.
The means-tested payments will go into students' bank accounts.
The government expects 350,000 of the 660,000 people who will be aged 16 by September to be eligible. Of these, 70,000 or so are expected to take up the offer.
Changing attitudes
The Education Secretary, Charles Clarke, said: "The UK has one of the highest post 16 drop out rates in the western world and this government is determined to smash school drop out rates at 16 and boost the aspiration and opportunities for those young people who have never viewed staying on at school or college as something for them.
"There is no point having improving GCSE results and higher education participation rising towards 50% if there remains a huge chunk in the middle that continue to drop out and enter into a cycle of continuous low paid work or unemployment."
He added: "EMAs are not money for nothing. You only earn if you learn. The weekly payments depend on the young person being able to demonstrate that they are committed to turning up and working hard. If you stop learning, then you stop earning."
EMAs would, he said, help those who would have "been in dead-end jobs with no training or self development, at best, and unemployed at worst".
However, Phil Willis, Liberal Democrat education spokesman, said: "Under this scheme young people are still better off going into low paid work at £3 per hour than staying in the classroom. Continuing their education simply makes little financial sense.
"Sixteen year olds from poorer backgrounds are still missing out under Labour."
Young people 'get paid to study'
More than a third of a million 16 year olds are being offered money to stay in education, in an effort to end the high drop-out rate at that age. The Education Maintenance Allowance, worth between £10 and £30 a week, will be available to those from low-income families in England from September.
Students could also receive bonuses of £100 if they remain on the course and make good progress.
However, those who miss lessons will forfeit their right to a grant.
The UK has one of the highest rates for leaving school at 16 in the developed world.
EMAs have been piloted across a third of the country since 1999.
Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies and University of Loughborough found that:
Among the 16 year olds eligible, the staying-on rate increased by 5.9%
For boys, the figure was 6.9%
And, for boys among the lowest socio-economic group, it was 10%
To qualify for EMAs, young people must come from households with incomes of less than £30,000 a year.
The means-tested payments will go into students' bank accounts.
The government expects 350,000 of the 660,000 people who will be aged 16 by September to be eligible. Of these, 70,000 or so are expected to take up the offer.
Changing attitudes
The Education Secretary, Charles Clarke, said: "The UK has one of the highest post 16 drop out rates in the western world and this government is determined to smash school drop out rates at 16 and boost the aspiration and opportunities for those young people who have never viewed staying on at school or college as something for them.
"There is no point having improving GCSE results and higher education participation rising towards 50% if there remains a huge chunk in the middle that continue to drop out and enter into a cycle of continuous low paid work or unemployment."
He added: "EMAs are not money for nothing. You only earn if you learn. The weekly payments depend on the young person being able to demonstrate that they are committed to turning up and working hard. If you stop learning, then you stop earning."
EMAs would, he said, help those who would have "been in dead-end jobs with no training or self development, at best, and unemployed at worst".
However, Phil Willis, Liberal Democrat education spokesman, said: "Under this scheme young people are still better off going into low paid work at £3 per hour than staying in the classroom. Continuing their education simply makes little financial sense.
"Sixteen year olds from poorer backgrounds are still missing out under Labour."
RobDickinson said:
'tis only a re-introduction of the grant (Which I recieved) IMO.
Just not all in 1 lump sum so cant be called the same.
Interesting thought. Did we regard student grants as a bribe to stay in education though? We used them to pay for food and lodging, whereas at 16 children live at home.
ing New Labour tossers - I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire. So now we are going to pay 16 year olds to stay on at school whether or not they can really benefit from it and at the same time anyone going to University can expect a life of debt.
Its
class war - no less. I actually think this isn't a bad idea. Its the combination of doing it whilst deliberately rogering middle-class kids up the a**e for thinking of getting an education that really winds me up.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGHHHH!!!
Education is a good thin, and maybe it will reduce the number of chavs on the streets. It all depends on how well the authorities educate. If it is an attempt to reduce unemployment numbers, hen they are happy with them being off the list, if it is an attempt to raise the level of education, and they will make a good attemp at making sure the clowns are refused grants, for not performing, then i think its worth it.
Deester said:
May benefit some less priviliged kids who have no motivation from their families to stay in school.
Yeah but what about the rich kids you don't want to go to school??
I don't think is the correct way to go about things. There is too much onnus on getting a-levels (or whatever they are called now) and then going to uni.
Some people aren't suited to the education system and would benefit from leaving school at 16 and learning a trade.
pmanson said:
May benefit some less priviliged kids who have no motivation from their families to stay in school.
The school I was at, indeed my year was the first to recieve the EMA as a pilot scheme, I think it was a council wide thing as well. Some observations I made :
1) a lot of the less desirable students that the school didn't want in stayed on to get the £30 a week. This, while initially a good thing meant that the people like me who wanted to learn couldn't due to the disruption they caused.
2) the threat of "we'll stop your allowance" was never used AFAIK.
3) A lot of people drank the money they recieved.
4) It was unfairly given, at the time I got around £15 as did another mate, someone else I know got £7 and many didn't get anything. Apparently our parents were meant to top up the monies to £30 each week. At the time my parents gave me pocket-money of £12 a month, I personally didn't see the need to change it...
5) I still had a part-time job.
6) There was no-hassle doing a part-time job, indeed it taught me a lot.
7) It set up a lot of people ready to accept money for very little...
Personally I thought it was a tremendous idea - getting money for free
but now, when I'm at uni I'm not so sure it was. The "less desirables" now sit in bus-stands drinking, as do the others that get the money now-a-days. It doesn't help the people, but does bring them into school. Personally, I don't think the money should be paid to them at all, the money should be spent on making the schools better so that they want to go there.
pmanson said:
May benefit some less priviliged kids who have no motivation from their families to stay in school.
Yeah but what about the rich kids you don't want to go to school??
I don't think is the correct way to go about things. There is too much onnus on getting a-levels (or whatever they are called now) and then going to uni.
Some people aren't suited to the education system and would benefit from leaving school at 16 and learning a trade.
I've been working on the EMA project for a while now.
The EMA program has been trialled for a while as docevi1 has pointed out, however it is now rolling out nationwide.
EMA was developed from an Australian scheme. The Aussie scheme was successful in encouraging kids from lower income families staying in education.
The aim of the UK scheme is the same.
By giving awards of £30, £20 or £10 it is hoped that the incentive will encourage more kids to stay in post GCSE education. As long as it has a certain amount of guided learning and is a recognised institution, students are elegible for an award + bonus depending on household income, attendance and meeting learning goals. One of the big hopes is that it will foster interest in practical courses which could provide a foundation for learning a trade.
Taking in one of docevi1s points, you inevitably will get some people who are dossing in order to get their money, however the new scheme will only pay out if there is 100% attendance on courses. Schools and colleges make the decision to pay or not to pay so if there is an ineffective administration you have the potential for people taking advantage. Even if you do get some scrotes in, £30 a week EMA + a bit of education probably costs the taxpayer less in the long term than dole + housing
Personally I think that the opportunity for education should be reward enough, if you don't get off your arse and go for it then you don't deserve it. Unfortunately until the tax and benefits system reward those who work and provide for those who can't (not won't) then these schemes are the only motivation for people who won't do things for themselves.
In Scotland (well North Ayrshire anyway) there is a Bursary available to all pupils over 16. I had it myself, it is means tested, I recieved £64 PPM. It was superb, it meant that I could stay on at school and not really have to worry about going to work.
I think its a great idea and can't understand why it hasn't been done before.
However, £30 PPW is just too much, its almost Dole money for chissakes.
I think its a great idea and can't understand why it hasn't been done before.
However, £30 PPW is just too much, its almost Dole money for chissakes.
bga said:
Schools and colleges make the decision to pay or not to pay so if there is an ineffective administration you have the potential for people taking advantage.
I don't think that was the problem when we got it, it was more a case of "if we take the money from them, they simply won't turn up at all".
Pretty terrible idea imo (and thats not just because I'm leaving college this year).
They already send some of the 'less able' to college when 14-16 to do vocational courses, when at our college most just seem to doss around. A friend of mine did this when she was at school and for her it was just another opportunity to go into town and not do any work. (And when challeneged in the corner shop how old she was when buying cigs 'I've just been at college'
)
Yes, it might be less of a financial burden on the taxpayers than them going on the dole, but I'd rather see those not really interested in education at least try and get a job, rather than disrupting those that want to learn and are going to make a go of it
They already send some of the 'less able' to college when 14-16 to do vocational courses, when at our college most just seem to doss around. A friend of mine did this when she was at school and for her it was just another opportunity to go into town and not do any work. (And when challeneged in the corner shop how old she was when buying cigs 'I've just been at college'
) Yes, it might be less of a financial burden on the taxpayers than them going on the dole, but I'd rather see those not really interested in education at least try and get a job, rather than disrupting those that want to learn and are going to make a go of it
swilly said:
Ah this is the death knell of responsibilty and self-determination and the rise of turnip-heads.
Why? Don't the rest of us get paid to encourage us to do things that benefit others?
I don't know about you, but I'm not working in the bank through altruism.
Why is this different? I think it's a good idea.
I was hoping there was going to be a thread on this!
Paid to stay on at school? What utter bunkum.
The education is the reward sonny jim, not some state pocket money thats designed to get the concept of being paid by the state accross (Marxism anyone?)
Sensational arse aside for a moment.
What bothers me about the entire affair is that this move effectively sullies the perfectly good apprentiship trades of mechanics, sparkys, plumbers etc.
Theres absolutely nothing wrong with not being academic but this government seems to think there is. 75% of all students in Uni? What complete twaddle, I would personally rate someone with a trade way over some black polo necked oblong yellow glasses turner bloody prize hopeful.
I weep for the future of this nation on a what seems like daily basis...
Paid to stay on at school? What utter bunkum.
The education is the reward sonny jim, not some state pocket money thats designed to get the concept of being paid by the state accross (Marxism anyone?)
Sensational arse aside for a moment.
What bothers me about the entire affair is that this move effectively sullies the perfectly good apprentiship trades of mechanics, sparkys, plumbers etc.
Theres absolutely nothing wrong with not being academic but this government seems to think there is. 75% of all students in Uni? What complete twaddle, I would personally rate someone with a trade way over some black polo necked oblong yellow glasses turner bloody prize hopeful.
I weep for the future of this nation on a what seems like daily basis...
Plotloss said:
I was hoping there was going to be a thread on this!
Paid to stay on at school? What utter bunkum.
The education is the reward sonny jim, not some state pocket money thats designed to get the concept of being paid by the state accross (Marxism anyone?)
Sensational arse aside for a moment.
What bothers me about the entire affair is that this move effectively sullies the perfectly good apprentiship trades of mechanics, sparkys, plumbers etc.
Theres absolutely nothing wrong with not being academic but this government seems to think there is. 75% of all students in Uni? What complete twaddle, I would personally rate someone with a trade way over some black polo necked oblong yellow glasses turner bloody prize hopeful.
I weep for the future of this nation on a what seems like daily basis...
Well said Plotloss. It is high time we separated academia out and left it in the universities. About 75% of University courses are not academic in so far as they are bullshit based. These courses need to go. We have massive skill shortage especially at technician level. While there has been a revival of the craft apprenticship in the last few years the true technician is a rare beast. Large firms are desperate for these skills and are prepared to train but cannot find the raw materials. Presumably they are all at UNI doing Posh and Becks studies.
The lentilist ambition is to destroy the class system by reducing us all to 5.50 an hour shelf fillers with degrees in tree psychiatry and no future due to the £30k debt from UNI. Any young person should carefully look at university courses and ask pertinant questions like, "what is the drop out rate/ pass rate and what percentage get jobs in that field?" Just this one question alone would close 70% of courses and 99% of media studies courses. The notion of getting a place is something we breed into young people. "If you are good enough you may get an interview." Bollocks, its a course not a job. When I did my last degree I interviewed them, it was my money and I made it very clear I was a customer. University staff do not live in the real world they need re-educating...
Northernboy said:
Ah this is the death knell of responsibilty and self-determination and the rise of turnip-heads.
Why? Don't the rest of us get paid to encourage us to do things that benefit others?
I don't know about you, but I'm not working in the bank through altruism.
Why is this different? I think it's a good idea.
Speak for yourself, but I get paid due to the value I bring to the job through the skills and abilities I possess not to enourage me to do things to benefit others.
In effect I get paid out of the income I generate.
If I cost the company more than I generate I get sacked.
Either education beyond 16 isnt for you in which case you leave and get a job/apprenticeship/vocational study or it is for you and you remain in education upto the point that you can still benefit from it.
Considering University students are being made to pay fee's etc etc because the Gov claim there is not enuogh dosh to fund Universities, it is a load of hypocrisy to then go and bribe/offer easy money to keep those 16 years olds in education that would otherwise leave.
It also raises the question, What 16 year old with half a brain cell would consider leaving edcuation at that age, unless they will be unable to benefit from further education anyway?
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff