10-06-2016, 10:47 PM
if they are coming into the course with that understanding, i dont see the problem. the problem that i see is people going into courses with the expectation of becoming professionals at something, and then not getting that realized because it's impossible.
many people start out as something and move on to something else - how many doctors turned writers, politicians, businessmen or moved to a different field entirely? how many people start out the course only to find that it isn't for them, and end up dropping out? how many people simply fail? the problem with your argument isn't the fact that people would do that - I happen to believe that very few people would go through a highly demanding 6 years course to just drop it at the end, it doesn't make much sense - but that currently, the people who Can do that are the people with the financial and social conditions to do so. it doesnt sound fair to me that only the rich get to do that, why should the poor take the burden of waste management while the rich just do what they want? and for no better reason than cutting out other people from the course who weren't quite as high up in the ladder as everyone else was, but they may be twice as enthusiastic. who knows?
as for resource management, it can happen, one thing does not exclude the other. like i said, minimum requirements must be met (for example, in medicine, you shouldnt come in without solid knowledge in biology etc). and courses have stages, right? first year is theory stuff. you dont really waste resources other than a seat and textbooks. is it the teaching? again, being demanding allows you to weed out the lazy and/or incapable. you could end up with one or two students who are just there for no reason, but really, how long would they hold out? and at that point, wdoes it really impact that much?
i dont think it would. i think the stratification in access does nothing but create pointless elitism.
many people start out as something and move on to something else - how many doctors turned writers, politicians, businessmen or moved to a different field entirely? how many people start out the course only to find that it isn't for them, and end up dropping out? how many people simply fail? the problem with your argument isn't the fact that people would do that - I happen to believe that very few people would go through a highly demanding 6 years course to just drop it at the end, it doesn't make much sense - but that currently, the people who Can do that are the people with the financial and social conditions to do so. it doesnt sound fair to me that only the rich get to do that, why should the poor take the burden of waste management while the rich just do what they want? and for no better reason than cutting out other people from the course who weren't quite as high up in the ladder as everyone else was, but they may be twice as enthusiastic. who knows?
as for resource management, it can happen, one thing does not exclude the other. like i said, minimum requirements must be met (for example, in medicine, you shouldnt come in without solid knowledge in biology etc). and courses have stages, right? first year is theory stuff. you dont really waste resources other than a seat and textbooks. is it the teaching? again, being demanding allows you to weed out the lazy and/or incapable. you could end up with one or two students who are just there for no reason, but really, how long would they hold out? and at that point, wdoes it really impact that much?
i dont think it would. i think the stratification in access does nothing but create pointless elitism.

