She is an A grade bucket mouth and nutter BUT does this idea of hers hold merit
Is it a good idea or not
Me i like the idea
Lots of benefits would come from it and it would help a lot of unemployed youth get some experience, some training and even some pride in themselves
@*lady*godiva* wrote:ok, semantics - they pay for it though with the expectation/requirement that they will then serve for an equal period
I think your empirical evidence is outdated.
Of course they used to be from a privileged background - because only the privileged could afford an education in the old days. Many, many people who were otherwise capable of studying to become a doctor, simply couldn't afford the education required to either finish their schooling (might have had to leave school to work in family business for example) or afford the degree itself
Whitlam, whilst ultimately misguided, did try to address this issue with the introduction of free university, but it made very little difference. All this policy did was provide free education to those who could afford to pay and would have gone anyway, the numbers of those excluded due to financial reasons did not increase by any significant amount. That's because the issue was that kids weren't finishing school with the required education to even apply to uni - and it was more likely that those from lower socioeconomic environments were those not finishing school/leaving early.
As soon as the requirement to become a doctor was removed from an apprenticeship and handed to the universities, the social classes of those entering medicine changed. For a long time, those of insufficient financial means were excluded from the profession regardless of their academic ability.
pfft - a 24 year old is still a kid - they know nuthin! They think they do, but they are barely out of nappies!
and no it is not the criteria for acceptance to medicne which has changed the type of student, it is the accessibility of that level of education. Now social and political attitudes have changed - it is now much more common for a kid to complete grade 12 (and thus be eligible for university application), regardless of their class, even if they do end up in a trade or non tertiary employment.
Back in the dark ages, the poor couldn't afford education, even if they were capable. Now, they can. It is also social attitude and expectation - it is now pretty much expected that you won't leave school in grades 5 (my father), 8(my mother), 10 (that used to be the goalpost) the goalpost then changed to grade 12, and it is now moving towards a university education is considered to be the minimum education that future generations will require, even if they plan a trade or non tertiary career.
1995 was not "in the old days", or "in the dark ages". That's when I last had contact with hundreds of medical students, and had done so for the 17 years before that. What has Whitlam to do with things?
The criteria changed in the late 1990s, and students were expected to do a year or two of other degrees or other education before they began their medicine. I do not know how it is now. I doubt that that progressive change would have been reversed.
These 24 year olds had gone straight from private schools into medicine, and had not experienced the facts of life that other students had. A high OP score only does not make a good doctor, other abilities and traits are needed, that is why those huge changes were made.
