NationStates Jolt Archive

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:

(this comes from a reliable source (a lecturer) as we were given a lecture on the subject at uni).

As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:

As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.
To teach you things you should have learned in high school, but didn't. :(

Option 2, definately. Learn how to learn in secondary school, learn how to think in uni. Makes sense.

Well, the main reason I am currently at Uni is too learn stuff and two further my knowledge in the two subjects I am taking (History and Politics).

Minor reasons would be, too get out of Manchester (don't get me wrong, I love that place, but it is nice to experience a different city) and to get an NUS card and mooch of the state for a couple of years* :D


*Don't take that seriously btw, I don't mooch off anyone.

Option 1 to 4.

3. Kill time waiting for one to grow up

Well, the main reason I am currently at Uni is too learn stuff and two further my knowledge in the two subjects I am taking (History and Politics).

Minor reasons would be, too get out of Manchester (don't get me wrong, I love that place, but it is nice to experience a different city) and to get an NUS card and mooch of the state for a couple of years* :D


*Don't take that seriously btw, I don't mooch off anyone.

Yeah, it rains a bit too much in Manchester

Option 2, definately. Learn how to learn in secondary school, learn how to think in uni. Makes sense.
Good point,.

Yeah, it rains a bit too much in Manchester
Yes well, what Manchester has in rain, Liverpool seems to make up in wind

I'd go for 2. i'm a social anthropology major and i don't really think it'll get me very far in life. and that's why i choose 2. ;)

#2, definitely.

1. To learn the theories behind your career of choice
2. To learn how to deal with other people, espescially those of dissenting beliefs.
3. To make connections and build your resume.
4. Learn about stuff beyond the level of "layman"
5. To learn how to learn.

1. To learn the theories behind your career of choice
2. To learn how to deal with other people, espescially those of dissenting beliefs.
3. To make connections and build your resume.
4. Learn about stuff beyond the level of "layman"
5. To learn how to learn.

Points 2 through to 4 are fine, but re point 1: how do you make your career choice before entering university, if university is required for it. There are obvious exceptions to this problem such as medicine. But how could you know that you wanted to be, for example, an oil prospecting geologist, before entering university to read geology?

I'd go for 2. i'm a social anthropology major and i don't really think it'll get me very far in life. and that's why i choose 2. ;)

It may get you further than you think. I am a philosophy major.

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:



As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.
B. Definately B.

B. Definately B.

you need item 2..

pick 1, 2, 3, or 4

you pick B

you need 2..really

Seems to me that there are two points to going to college. One is that you want ot get a job which requires that you have the piece of paper. The other reason is that there are things that you can't get outside of college. I'm part of the second.

I think that anything beyond these is a waste of money.

Points 2 through to 4 are fine, but re point 1: how do you make your career choice before entering university, if university is required for it. There are obvious exceptions to this problem such as medicine. But how could you know that you wanted to be, for example, an oil prospecting geologist, before entering university to read geology?
I should have been more clear on number one. We all go into the University with a general idea of what we want to do, and expound on that.

It may get you further than you think. I am a philosophy major.
I'm curious. What do philosophy majors do besides teach? Nothing derogatory intended, it's just that I've never considered hiring one.

Oh, and if you don't learn how to think at Georgia Tech, you aren't going to make it out of undergraduate.

In a critical sense it seems to me that university is about learning different ways of analysis. I say this because when I look at all the different variety of jobs people go on to do after their degree (in the UK) it seems that the degree often doesn't correlate to the degree, the only major exception being Vocational (right word?) degrees such as Medicine and Business related degrees.

For me, personally, I'm really not sure. Having been to university and then dropped out after I slowly found out that I wasn't interested in Chemsitry as much as I thought I was. A thorough disapointment if I must say. Thoroughly commercialised.

2. - but then I did two philosohpy degrees, so I would say that.

I have to agree with 2, but I'm gonna go outside the box and say that its also a major step in social development. If anyone can't decide whether to go or not - go. It is the best decision you will ever make. On top of the obvious academic and career advantages, it is great fun, and also teaches you a lot about society. Oh, and drinking.

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:



As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.

As a current Univeristy student, I can certianly say, University is for getting a piece of paper that says you can make stuff up.

University is so you acn get a high paying job one you are finally outta there :D

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:



As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.
all of the above. plus it's fun and i get to dick about all day doing practically SFA until i absolutely need to. love it.

but it's not for learning "micky-mouse" subjects like drama, dance or (even) art. those things need to be taught as they are a part of culture, but not in a place of academic learning and further education, imo.

Although you obviously intended to ask each individual why he or she choose (or not choose) to attend University, I will respond stating why our society values universities. If our society did not value what we gain from post-secondary education (via those who recieve it), businesses would not have such high demand for college-educated employees for management positions and technical positions like mathematicians or physicians; and if businesses did not have such a high demand for college-educated employees, people would satisfy their need for knowledge in ways that do not cost $10,000 per semester. Therefore, the individual values University because businesses value it. One might gain the knowledge of a subject without attending University; but because businesses value college degrees so much, students attend formal post-secondary school to gain these degrees and compete for positions with those businesses.
Society as a whole, through businesses, values college-educated workers because businesses function more efficiently when their technicians are knowledgable in the subjects that most concern the businesses and when their managers are knowledgable in a variety of disciplines, helping them to manage and lead the businesses more effectively. However, because managers must have a comprehensive education that cannot focus on any one subject too much, business managers might be unable to determine which prospective technical workers have the greatest knowledge in the subject in which they specialize. The technicians might surpasses in knowledge the point at which the manager can still understand and compare them. This is the case for almost every technical job. Journalists, computer scientists, nurses, and other technicians have so much knowledge in their subject that they develop "jargon," their own lexicon for speaking about the subject, which "laypersons" do not understand. Because the business manager is likely to be one of theses laypersons he could not expect to choose the most worthy applicant for a technical job if he could only determine their knowledge of the subject via the interview. The resumè would be useful in determining the best applicant except that the manager would eliminate knowledgable but inexperienced applicants judging by the resumè alone. College degrees offer a way for business managers to know which applicants have the most learning in the area in which the business demands technically skilled employees; and when two applicants have the same level degree, the manager can determine which is the better applicant by comparing grade point average and the reputation of the university each attended. Therefore, technical workers attend University to gain a degree to prove that they have knowledge that businesses value.
Potential managers, however, also benefit from having a college degree. Although all managers need a "comprehensive" education that allows them to make judgements given a variety of facts, not every managerial position requires the same type of comprehensive education. In this sense, even positions in management recquire technical knowledge: the human resources director needs a general understanding of psychology, whereas the marketing director needs a general understanding of sociology. Because the human resources director is responsible for hiring the marketing director, he must have a way of determining which applicant is most knowledgable in sociology, economics, and the other areas in which marketers should have knowledge that human resources directors might not have. To make this decision, the human resources director refers to the marketer's education, just like he or she would do for a more technical position. Because human resources jobs require basic knowledge of the subjects that technical workers of the business need to know, so the hirer can make a more informed decision about whom to hire, these jobs also require a college education, which provides this basic knowledge through the same source that provides the more technical knowledge in the same subjects. Thus, businesses demand employees with college degrees because it is a more efficient way for human resources workers to differentiate among employees who have knowledge different from their own, and because human resources workers make better hiring decisions when they also have basic academic experience in the subjects that more technical workers have learned thoroughly.

As a current Univeristy student, I can certianly say, University is for getting a piece of paper that says you can make stuff up.
Know what makes a good thesis? One that your committee will sign!

--this was too hard to read. Learn how to make a paragraph--
Anyhow, after I did read it, it sums up as this. Companies hire college grads over non-grads for one main reason. A college education shows that you can be trained. We like to have grads do things our way, it works and we like it.

The purpose of a University is to corrupt the minds of conservatives and turn them into bleeding heart liberals. :)

Points 2 through to 4 are fine, but re point 1: how do you make your career choice before entering university, if university is required for it. There are obvious exceptions to this problem such as medicine. But how could you know that you wanted to be, for example, an oil prospecting geologist, before entering university to read geology?
I think we may be running into the difference in british and american terminologies here, though I might only think that out of my own ignorance.

In america we have elementry then high school and that's it for required education. If you were a good or decent student you can apply to college, our universities. Striaght from high school to Harvard or Berkeley or State college, all the same (not in esteem, in the degree they offer).

You can enter those institutions 'undeclared' or you can enter knowing what it is you want to do.

We have 'second chance' colleges called community colleges, or 'the thirteenth grade' or UBW (university behind walmart), or any number of other demeaning names...not really the point. These institutions have little or no requirements for entrance and the highest degree they can give out is an associates degree. Most function as quasi-vocational schools, with things like nursing and paramedic training, etc.

You can also do all your lower division work, your general education requirements that all college students have to do to get their degree, here for much cheaper than the tuition at the universities. After that you can transfer to the big universities, ones we distiguish by calling them 4-year colleges (community colleges are 2-year colleges).

As I understand it, and I understand it poorly, college in england is more like community college in it is general advanced education and university or uni is like the 4-year college in that it is instruction in a specific field. But unlike the US, this is a natural two stage process rather than a voluntary or second chance situation.

So here we can enter the university not knowing what we are going to do, and in fact change our mind several times. Long way to go for all of that.

So, some confusion comes from the fact that we americans use the words college and university interchangably. (though the term 'university' does not apply to community colleges except in jest)

So to answer the core question, the basic function is to gain specific job skills in the field you choose to be trained in. It also provides a transition for students to fend for themselves, though this doesn't always work. Nothings perfect.

General education is to give you a base understanding, and eventually to learn how to gather and assess information. This hardly ever works. It's not learning a set number of facts, it's learning how to validate and critically look at information when you get it.

This is one of the failings of a high school oriented towards standard testing. If you teach to the tests, you are not teaching students to process information, you are teaching them how to regurgitate it. This works well if you want a populace to respond to something repeated over and over again without analysing or thinking about what is being said.

Now, who would advocate a system like that, and who deals with public opinion that way? Hmmm.....

University is so you acn get a high paying job one you are finally outta there :D
Because teachers are so well paid ;)

Because teachers are so well paid ;)
:D
Actually, my dad gets a shitload of money for being a 'guest professor' at some medical school.
Turns out he's getting paid more than their regular professor's salaries.

Then again, Daddy-dearest is some kind of OB/GYN specialist who supposedly is very good or something like that. But hell, he's only a guest professor...

:mad:
Stupid society....

The modern, somewhat corrupted, purpose is to produce people who have the apperance of being able to think, but don't. This stems from the root purpose, which is to teach people to think. It has been corrupted by a job market that gives lip service to needing educated thinkers.

I went in undeclared, considered several different majors (forestry, information science, philosophy, and geography), and ended up with PoliSci.



This is an unjustified attack against my writing style.

It was a comment on your lack of indication of where your paragraphs began and ended, which does make it difficult to read.

The purpose of a University is to corrupt the minds of conservatives and turn them into bleeding heart liberals.

Funny thing is it had just the opposite effect on me. I went in a bleeding heart, came out fairly conservative, swinging Libertarian. :D

1-5

5: Get a better higher paying job or so we've been told.

A lot of people seem to be missing the most vital part of university (at least, outside of the US): learning how to drink. Seriously, learning how to drink people under the table at lunch and still have a semi-productive afternoon was the most practical lesson I received from university. It's always a good idea to be able to outdrink your boss.

A lot of people seem to be missing the most vital part of university (at least, outside of the US): learning how to drink. Seriously, learning how to drink people under the table at lunch and still have a semi-productive afternoon was the most practical lesson I received from university. It's always a good idea to be able to outdrink your boss.

So true.

Except for the rare "Brings out expensive bottle of wine" and you shoot it down in a Yam-Seng.

University is so you acn get a high paying job one you are finally outta there :D
You wish. Most of my friends have a degree (master) but quite many of them are unable to find any proper job. I'll get my papers out in few months and the situation doesn't look too promising.

University produces professionals for employees and researchers for themselves.

You should be more careful about avoiding real mistakes in your own writing before you imagine mistakes in mine in order to condemn me for having a style different from your own.
First, you're pretty thin-skinned to consider my comments a personal condemnation. Second, it's hard to read. It just is. Communications is about making people understand, not about creating a pretty form. It's a whole lot easier to read and grasp ideas when they are not buried in thousand word paragraphs. Trust me on this.

You wish. Most of my friends have a degree (master) but quite many of them are unable to find any proper job. I'll get my papers out in few months and the situation doesn't look too promising.
That's surprising. There's another guy/gal/neutral on here from Finland that makes it sound like a workers paradise. EreSomething_Forest. Are you saying that unemployment is a big problem in Finland? What sort of degrees do you and your friends hold?

Minor reasons would be, too get out of Manchester (don't get me wrong, I love that place, but it is nice to experience a different city) and to get an NUS card and mooch of the state for a couple of years* :D


*Don't take that seriously btw, I don't mooch off anyone.

Sounds about right, although I'm from Essex, and it's not a nice place.

Personally, I'm at uni because I didn't have a clue what I wanted to do with my life, and university seemed a good way to spend 3 years thinking about it. Now I have thought of something I want to do, a History degree is beginning to look a little pointless. Meh.

I'm curious. What do philosophy majors do besides teach? Nothing derogatory intended, it's just that I've never considered hiring one.

Oh, and if you don't learn how to think at Georgia Tech, you aren't going to make it out of undergraduate.

Generally beg, whinge and complain that the world just aint fair.

More seriously, philosophy teaches critical thinking skills if mothing else. so philosophy graduates actually tend to make very competent managers. (If you exclude those who simply go crazy.)

I think we may be running into the difference in british and american terminologies here, though I might only think that out of my own ignorance.

In america we have elementry then high school and that's it for required education. If you were a good or decent student you can apply to college, our universities. Striaght from high school to Harvard or Berkeley or State college, all the same (not in esteem, in the degree they offer).

You can enter those institutions 'undeclared' or you can enter knowing what it is you want to do.

We have 'second chance' colleges called community colleges, or 'the thirteenth grade' or UBW (university behind walmart), or any number of other demeaning names...not really the point. These institutions have little or no requirements for entrance and the highest degree they can give out is an associates degree. Most function as quasi-vocational schools, with things like nursing and paramedic training, etc.

You can also do all your lower division work, your general education requirements that all college students have to do to get their degree, here for much cheaper than the tuition at the universities. After that you can transfer to the big universities, ones we distiguish by calling them 4-year colleges (community colleges are 2-year colleges).

As I understand it, and I understand it poorly, college in england is more like community college in it is general advanced education and university or uni is like the 4-year college in that it is instruction in a specific field. But unlike the US, this is a natural two stage process rather than a voluntary or second chance situation.

So here we can enter the university not knowing what we are going to do, and in fact change our mind several times. Long way to go for all of that.

That's interesting cos i've been wondering about how the american system works for ages.
i really like the idea of being able to go to college/uni (whatever) not knowing what you want to do - it would have saved me wasting a year on Economics.


And just to clarify, the UK system:

Compulsory education: Primary and Secondary School; years 1-6 and 6-11 (or 1 to 5 again if you have an older school like mine) respectively. You can leave aged 16 with GCSE's (General Certificate of Secondary Education) or GNVQs (General National Vocational Qualification i think - they are a bit of a joke, and i'm not sure if they are actually at this level).

Further education: College, aged 17 to 18, two year courses to attain (usually) three A-Levels (Advanced), and now two additional AS-levels (Advanced Subsidiary) which only take one year each. This is either done in a 'sixth form college' specialising in teaching a-levels only, or just an additional two years (sixth-form) at your secondary school (as it was for me, though this is becoming less common)

Then University, which (generally) only accept people with A-levels. sometimes we take a 'GAP' year (year out) between sixth-form and uni - im not sure if this is common practice in the US. Uni is still the highest level of academic achievement in the UK, although the government want upwards of 40% of the population to attend (another debate as to if this is wize is needed). Our courses, almost as a rule, are 3 years long, at the end of which you get either a 1st, upper 2nd, lower 2nd or 3rd class degree (again not sure if its the same system in the states - perhaps someone could enlighten me?). This is added to our CV (Curriculum Vitae = resume) and we go on to do masters then doctorate but very few can. Interestingly, almost 50% (if i remember the figure correctly) of people studying at uni in the UK take English or Philosophy. I think psycology is similarly ridiculously and disproportionally high with around 20%.

that's our system in a nutshell. hope that was interesting for somebody cos i just wasted 5 minutes of my life typing it.... and i want them back.

oh and what's the deal with SAT's? (in the US. apparently we have them in the uk as well but i never had to take them...)

:D
Actually, my dad gets a shitload of money for being a 'guest professor' at some medical school.
Turns out he's getting paid more than their regular professor's salaries.

Then again, Daddy-dearest is some kind of OB/GYN specialist who supposedly is very good or something like that. But hell, he's only a guest professor...

:mad:
Stupid society....

Not so stupid. The majority of lecturers know absolutely nothing about the practice of what they teach. What they have done in their lives is study: school, college, uni, post grad; and then gone stgraight into teaching. For a loty of subjects this is fine, but for medicine, engineering, management etc. it is good for the university if they can get a real professional to come and teach. However doctors, engineers and managers tend to earn more than lecturers do, so to get these experienced professionals to help the university has to pay them more than the "normal" lecturers. The counter argument is based on these professionals not having teaching skills, but IMHO this matters little as the students, by the time they encounter these professionals, should have acquired compensatory learning skills.

I think we may be running into the difference in british and american terminologies here, though I might only think that out of my own ignorance.


So, some confusion comes from the fact that we americans use the words college and university interchangably. (though the term 'university' does not apply to community colleges except in jest)


The difference is not just between the USA and the UK. Here in Brazil, one also has to choose what you want to do before applying for a university place.

The words university and college have become so intertwinned in the English language that I would not care to try and diferentiate between them any more. Twenty years ago there was a clear dividing line, technical vs. academic, but with the "attract more students or perish" policies for higher education funding this difference has vanished.

I'm curious. What do philosophy majors do besides teach? Nothing derogatory intended, it's just that I've never considered hiring one.


Well can one ever really "do" anything? To make such an assertion would assume some kind of definitive external universe that could be changed in decisive ways. This, of course, would presume....

*Ahem*. Sorry. In my case bugger off to China for a couple of years while trying to decide what masters degree to take up. Simple fact is that nowadays to get a truly decent job you need a specialised master's degree; bachelor's degrees are worth increasingly little, regardless of subject (with a few exceptions). Basically a philosophy graduate has pretty much most of the same options as any other graduate, here in the UK at least, since most graduate positions just require any kind of degree.

The purpose of a university education is to end up with a piece of paper which entitles you to sell your soul to someone richer than you for a higher price than you would receive if you hadn't gone to university.

The purpose of a university education is to end up with a piece of paper which entitles you to sell your soul to someone richer than you for a higher price than you would receive if you hadn't gone to university.

Ah, thats where I went wrong. I just sold my time, not my soul.

That's surprising. There's another guy/gal/neutral on here from Finland that makes it sound like a workers paradise. EreSomething_Forest. Are you saying that unemployment is a big problem in Finland? What sort of degrees do you and your friends hold?Where, exactly, have I said Finland is a workers' paradise? Most of my posts about Finland have dealt with the issue of social democracy and how a social democratic government can run a well-functioning society.

Unemployment is certainly a problem in Finland, at least in a historical and regional perspective. Our unemployment ratings is now rather stable at the Euro-area average, but earlier, from early to late 90s, unemployment was really bad. We were hit by a bad depression in the late 1980s, which caused the unemployment rate to rise as high as 17% around 92-93, since when it has steadily dropped and is now around 9%. Before the depression, since WW2, our unemployment rates were very low indeed -- but then we had staggering inflation, thanks to some really poor financial and monetary policies. As of 15.11.2004, unemployment was in fact 0.2% below the Euro-area average, at 8.7%. A decent graph from 1999 to the present can be found here (http://www.bof.fi/eng/5_tilastot/5.1_Tilastografiikkaa/inetkaavio.asp?kuvaid=824&kieli=ev&topicid=5.1.8_reaalitalous).

One thing to consider is that unemployment varies heavily by region. In the area around the capital unemployment is around 5%, while in some places in Northern and North-Eastern Finland it can be up to 20%. In the more urbanized areas, especially in South, West and Central Finland, it's generally below the national average (6-8%), while further North and East, in the countryside, it's 10% and up.

I think it may be the case that there's relatively more people with master's or higher degrees in Finland than in, say, the US. Not sure about that one, though. There were 16,557 new university degrees given in 1998, and that figure has been steadily rising (with the population being 5,214,512). What Helioterra and her friends have their degrees in is also pretty central to this issue. For example, from what I can gather, you're pretty much guaranteed a decent job if you get a master's in chemistry in the next couple of years, either in the private sector or as a teacher. On the other hand, majoring in philosphy with a minor in folkloristics isn't very conducive to getting a good job right out of the university.

Ah, thats where I went wrong. I just sold my time, not my soul.

Oh, believe me, you did. The thing is, employers give it back when they don't need it anymore ;)

Oh, believe me, you did. The thing is, employers give it back when they don't need it anymore ;)

Believe me I didn't. Which may be why I was fired.

Believe me I didn't. Which may be why I was fired.

*Ponders*

Well, you're the philosophy graduate so i'm not going to argue :p

That's interesting cos i've been wondering about how the american system works for ages.
i really like the idea of being able to go to college/uni (whatever) not knowing what you want to do - it would have saved me wasting a year on Economics.


And just to clarify, the UK system:

Compulsory education: Primary and Secondary School; years 1-6 and 6-11 (or 1 to 5 again if you have an older school like mine) respectively. You can leave aged 16 with GCSE's (General Certificate of Secondary Education) or GNVQs (General National Vocational Qualification i think - they are a bit of a joke, and i'm not sure if they are actually at this level).

Further education: College, aged 17 to 18, two year courses to attain (usually) three A-Levels (Advanced), and now two additional AS-levels (Advanced Subsidiary) which only take one year each. This is either done in a 'sixth form college' specialising in teaching a-levels only, or just an additional two years (sixth-form) at your secondary school (as it was for me, though this is becoming less common)

Then University, which (generally) only accept people with A-levels. sometimes we take a 'GAP' year (year out) between sixth-form and uni - im not sure if this is common practice in the US. Uni is still the highest level of academic achievement in the UK, although the government want upwards of 40% of the population to attend (another debate as to if this is wize is needed). Our courses, almost as a rule, are 3 years long, at the end of which you get either a 1st, upper 2nd, lower 2nd or 3rd class degree (again not sure if its the same system in the states - perhaps someone could enlighten me?). This is added to our CV (Curriculum Vitae = resume) and we go on to do masters then doctorate but very few can. Interestingly, almost 50% (if i remember the figure correctly) of people studying at uni in the UK take English or Philosophy. I think psycology is similarly ridiculously and disproportionally high with around 20%.

that's our system in a nutshell. hope that was interesting for somebody cos i just wasted 5 minutes of my life typing it.... and i want them back.

oh and what's the deal with SAT's? (in the US. apparently we have them in the uk as well but i never had to take them...)

Time to add yet another system: the belgian system.

elementary: years 1 to 6. All together

secondary: years 1 to 6. You can leave at 18. the secondary education is split up in:
-KSO: art school.
-BSO: a technical course preparing you for a technical job.
-TSO: a technical course preparing you for a more advanced technical job or administrative job.
-ASO: a theoretical course preparing people for higher education.
-BuSO: a school for those with a mental handicap. They learn how to take care of themselves and a job they can handle.

Higher education: Split up in high school and university
-High school: A 3 or more year course resulting in a 'bachelor' (Bologna:( ) or a master (when it's more than 3 years). You can become a teacher, manager, industrial engineer, translator, ... here. Anyone with a degree of secondary education can enter.
-University: At least 4 years resulting in a 'master'. Most courses take 4 years, but some are longer: psychology, civil engineering, law takes 5 years; medicine takes 7 years + 2 or more years (depends on what kind of doctor you want to be). Anyone with a degree of secondary education can enter except for medicine. They have to takes some tests (I had to do some tests too for civil engineering, but they are abolished now).

Time to add yet another system: the belgian system.

elementary: years 1 to 6. All together

secondary: years 1 to 6. You can leave at 18. the secondary education is split up in:
-KSO: art school.
-BSO: a technical course preparing you for a technical job.
-TSO: a technical course preparing you for a more advanced technical job or administrative job.
-ASO: a theoretical course preparing people for higher education.

Higher education: Split up in high school and university
-High school: A 3 or more year course resulting in a 'bachelor' (Bologna:( ) or a master (when it's more than 3 years). You can become a teacher, manager, industrial engineer, translator, ... here. Anyone with a degree of secondary education can enter.
-University: At least 4 years resulting in a 'master'. Most courses take 4 years, but some are longer: psychology, civil engineering, law takes 5 years; medicine takes 7 years + 2 or more years (depends on what kind of doctor you want to be). Anyone with a degree of secondary education can enter except for medicine. They have to takes some tests (I had to do some tests too for civil engineering, but they are abolished now).
smart system. i assume that people can only enter the next stage with sufficient grades, or is it truly that 'anyone (with any degree) can enter'?

In another thread the following coment was included in a post:



As I have been a lecturer in a University, but no longer am, I am curious as to what you lot think the purpose of a university education is.

The basic options are (IMHO)
1: To know stuff;
2: To learn how to think;
3: To kill time while waiting for . . . ;
4: Its better than going to work;
5: Other.

6: Sex
7: Beer
8: A sense of independance while at the same time still hitting up mom 'n dad to cover all your expenses.

smart system. i assume that people can only enter the next stage with sufficient grades, or is it truly that 'anyone (with any degree) can enter'?

To enter secondary education, you need a degree of elementary education of course.
To enter higher education, you need a degree of secondary education. Any degree will do, but the first year of higher education will be more than enough to filter out those that simply do not have the capacity required.

6: Sex
7: Beer
8: A sense of independance while at the same time still hitting up mom 'n dad to cover all your expenses.
What about us that got sex before collage?

And who hate beer (not alcohol but I don’t like beer … give me mixed drinks any day)

Oh yeah also paying my own way (without loans I may add …) in fact just picked up a full time network admin job this semester … which means they will cover class costs for me

(along with 50 k a year)

But before this boon I had 4 years of working 70 hrs a week ;)

6: Sex
7: Beer
8: A sense of independance while at the same time still hitting up mom 'n dad to cover all your expenses.

Yeah, that too. :D

It's a very expensive way to get Internet access, so you can spend all your time on some stupid Internet forum instead of studying or going to class.

To enter secondary education, you need a degree of elementary education of course.
To enter higher education, you need a degree of secondary education. Any degree will do, but the first year of higher education will be more than enough to filter out those that simply do not have the capacity required.
nice. here A-levels are graded (with much controversy of late) and your 'UCAS' points totalled. The best you can get (without doing more than 3 subjects) is 360 points. Universities accept people only according to their grades or points (they are interchangable) which change per degree you apply for, and between unis too. For example to get into Cardiff to study Economics last year I needed 300 points (which i did not get unfortunatley, but came top of my year and with recommendations from my economics teachers so i got in anyway with 280 points :) ) Similarly for me to get into the London School of Economics, to do the same degree, i would have needed 320 points and specifically a maths A-level.
on balace i think i prefer your system (if i understand it right) - it lets people make their own choices and doesn't give the uni's too much control. and its not overly-complicated either

It's a very expensive way to get Internet access, so you can spend all your time on some stupid Internet forum instead of studying or going to class.
Our university the internet is free ... but the housing costs ;)

Our university the internet is free ... but the housing costs ;)

Well, if you add up the tuition and the housing and the other fees, and then figure that a lot of the people on this forum are on all day when they should be in class, that's probably 10,000 pounds for two semesters of Internet access.

Well, if you add up the tuition and the housing and the other fees, and then figure that a lot of the people on this forum are on all day when they should be in class, that's probably 10,000 pounds for two semesters of Internet access.
What about people like me who dont study?

What about people like me who dont study?

Then you're obviously wasting your time in school. Really, there should be a way to test out of a university degree.

Here in the US, it's possible to sit for the bar exam (lawyer) without ever going to law school. If you're smart enough, you can walk in, take the test, and walk out a lawyer.

Then you're obviously wasting your time in school. Really, there should be a way to test out of a university degree.

Here in the US, it's possible to sit for the bar exam (lawyer) without ever going to law school. If you're smart enough, you can walk in, take the test, and walk out a lawyer.

Yeah ... THOUGH I have LEARNED immensely in collage I just have a tendency to pick up classes (especially computer courses) without side study… stay awake and pay attention during lecture does wonders for me

Ehh its kind of weird but that is always what I have done … and still managing to hold onto a 3.97 (4 years in collage… graduating end of spring)

What about us that got sex before collage?


This still generally represents a higher education in that field...

And who hate beer (not alcohol but I don’t like beer … give me mixed drinks any day)


Fair enough. I should have edited that to: Alcohol

Oh yeah also paying my own way (without loans I may add …) in fact just picked up a full time network admin job this semester … which means they will cover class costs for me
(along with 50 k a year)

But before this boon I had 4 years of working 70 hrs a week ;)

Which puts you in the minority of students. Congrats though, few people do manage to escape higher education debt free. I went through a co-op program to help in that regard, but still wound up about 20G in the hole by the time I graduated. It was worth it though....

nice. here A-levels are graded (with much controversy of late) and your 'UCAS' points totalled. The best you can get (without doing more than 3 subjects) is 360 points. Universities accept people only according to their grades or points (they are interchangable) which change per degree you apply for, and between unis too. For example to get into Cardiff to study Economics last year I needed 300 points (which i did not get unfortunatley, but came top of my year and with recommendations from my economics teachers so i got in anyway with 280 points :) ) Similarly for me to get into the London School of Economics, to do the same degree, i would have needed 320 points and specifically a maths A-level.
on balace i think i prefer your system (if i understand it right) - it lets people make their own choices and doesn't give the uni's too much control. and its not overly-complicated either

I think i also prefer the belgian system if you want higher education. There are some flaws tho in the secondary education. You have to make a pretty big decision when you are 11-ish. On top of this, most people see BSO lower than TSO and TSO lower than ASO. A lot of parents will simply put their children in ASO untill their results get too bad and they lose a year, they then try TSO, ... you get the picture. The system would work tho if people just realised that the sooner their child is preparing for the right job, the better end result (the better he/she will be at the job) they will get.

Generally beg, whinge and complain that the world just aint fair.

More seriously, philosophy teaches critical thinking skills if mothing else. so philosophy graduates actually tend to make very competent managers. (If you exclude those who simply go crazy.)
Those are just the qualities I expect to see in a manager! :)

It may be intended by #2 but I would say the primary function is to learn how to learn and to get enough theoretical background to learn anything one needs to or is interested in throughout life. University programs that simply provide job skills are really doing a massive disservice to their students. Everything changes and a large percentage of folks end up doing things very different from what they thought they would do in school. We need to constantly re-educate ourselves in our own chosen area and we need to be able to sort out the BS from the substance in every one elses area.

This still generally represents a higher education in that field...



Fair enough. I should have edited that to: Alcohol



Which puts you in the minority of students. Congrats though, few people do manage to escape higher education debt free. I went through a co-op program to help in that regard, but still wound up about 20G in the hole by the time I graduated. It was worth it though....
Yup ... it was lots of work but it is kind of cool being able to say that I did it myself … along with making me work harder for it.


And I get pissed at the “daddy bought me collage” types myself, I used to work (actually it is within the department I now manage) doing network card installations (along with viral removal, os repair, spyware …. So on so forth

But when we went on installs for network card which back in the day cost 45$ for the card … there were two options to pay. Check … or bill to student account (which shows up with tuition)

About 60% of the people out there go “oh tuition … just put it on there, rents pay for it”

GAWD that used to piss me off … adding 40 bucks without even bothering to give them a call, really considerate for their parents situation)

Yeah ... THOUGH I have LEARNED immensely in collage I just have a tendency to pick up classes (especially computer courses) without side study… stay awake and pay attention during lecture does wonders for me

Ehh its kind of weird but that is always what I have done … and still managing to hold onto a 3.97 (4 years in collage… graduating end of spring)

I have a tendency not to go to classes which don't help me study the subject. If i go to class i will pay attention and learn a lot, but since almost all classes this semester were basicly a lecture from our books or they simply solved some problems on the board, I went to few classes. I study a bit at home, but not a lot and i just study like everyone else during the exams.

I do understand about the computer courses. Last year I had a programming course and i went to the majority of the classes. In the end all i ever did at home was programming the 2 days before my exam. I had 93.5% on the exam.

I have a tendency not to go to classes which don't help me study the subject. If i go to class i will pay attention and learn a lot, but since almost all classes this semester were basicly a lecture from our books or they simply solved some problems on the board, I went to few classes. I study a bit at home, but not a lot and i just study like everyone else during the exams.

I do understand about the computer courses. Last year I had a programming course and i went to the majority of the classes. In the end all i ever did at home was programming the 2 days before my exam. I had 93.5% on the exam.
That’s cool … I am opposite … the two ways I learn

1) lecture … listening and DOING specially if it was covered in lecture
2) Specific problem solving … I look up the info and figure out how to do it by myself

Strait up book learning I have issues with … I mean referring to a book to solve a problem … that’s cool I learn a lot … but strait reading through a chapter and then taking a test on it.

I am an audio/doing learner that does fine with reference materials for specific problems

(don’t get me wrong I LOVE reading fiction … but non-fiction kills me)
(btw what language? I do C++ C java jsp asp php pearl shellScripting and Some basic in there ... though not a programmer by nature (networking geek))

That’s cool … I am opposite … the two ways I learn

1) lecture … listening and DOING specially if it was covered in lecture
2) Specific problem solving … I look up the info and figure out how to do it by myself

Strait up book learning I have issues with … I mean referring to a book to solve a problem … that’s cool I learn a lot … but strait reading through a chapter and then taking a test on it.

I am an audio/doing learner that does fine with reference materials for specific problems

(don’t get me wrong I LOVE reading fiction … but non-fiction kills me)
(btw what language? I do C++ C java jsp asp php pearl shellScripting and Some basic in there ... though not a programmer by nature (networking geek))

I'm studying engineering, so 'studying from my books' means 'see that you understand everything in the book and start solving the problems'.
The language was java, but i have chosen the path of physics now so i don't have any programming courses now (allthough i plan on buying the books and doing them during the summer).

I'm studying engineering, so 'studying from my books' means 'see that you understand everything in the book and start solving the problems'.
The language was java, but i have chosen the path of physics now so i don't have any programming courses now (allthough i plan on buying the books and doing them during the summer).
Fun times ... I was thinking about Engeneering but I like to do higher level stuff then that personaly ... but to each their own

That's interesting cos i've been wondering about how the american system works for ages.
i really like the idea of being able to go to college/uni (whatever) not knowing what you want to do - it would have saved me wasting a year on Economics.


And just to clarify, the UK system:

Compulsory education: Primary and Secondary School; years 1-6 and 6-11 (or 1 to 5 again if you have an older school like mine) respectively. You can leave aged 16 with GCSE's (General Certificate of Secondary Education) or GNVQs (General National Vocational Qualification i think - they are a bit of a joke, and i'm not sure if they are actually at this level).

Further education: College, aged 17 to 18, two year courses to attain (usually) three A-Levels (Advanced), and now two additional AS-levels (Advanced Subsidiary) which only take one year each. This is either done in a 'sixth form college' specialising in teaching a-levels only, or just an additional two years (sixth-form) at your secondary school (as it was for me, though this is becoming less common)

Then University, which (generally) only accept people with A-levels. sometimes we take a 'GAP' year (year out) between sixth-form and uni - im not sure if this is common practice in the US. Uni is still the highest level of academic achievement in the UK, although the government want upwards of 40% of the population to attend (another debate as to if this is wize is needed). Our courses, almost as a rule, are 3 years long, at the end of which you get either a 1st, upper 2nd, lower 2nd or 3rd class degree (again not sure if its the same system in the states - perhaps someone could enlighten me?). This is added to our CV (Curriculum Vitae = resume) and we go on to do masters then doctorate but very few can. Interestingly, almost 50% (if i remember the figure correctly) of people studying at uni in the UK take English or Philosophy. I think psycology is similarly ridiculously and disproportionally high with around 20%.

that's our system in a nutshell. hope that was interesting for somebody cos i just wasted 5 minutes of my life typing it.... and i want them back.

oh and what's the deal with SAT's? (in the US. apparently we have them in the uk as well but i never had to take them...)


There's no gap year in the states, but sometimes there's a junior (3rd) year abroad for tertiary students (uni).

No 1st, 2nd, or 3rd class degrees, but usually colleges and universities offer honors, cun laude, magna cum laude, and summa cum laude degrees that indicate special programs and ranking within one's class.

The SAT (aka college board's) and ACT are college tests. The US education system's not as centralized, so schools need a neutral test to compare students. Lots more here:

http://www.collegeboard.com/splash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACT_%28examination%29



On to Japanese education:
(Note: I'm not Japanese, but I've lived here 13+ years.)

Kindergarten: not compulsory, 2-3 years
Elementary: compulsory, 6 years,

Junior High: compulsory, 3 years, usually supplimented by "cram school"

High School: not compulsory but high rates of attendance, 3 years, entrance exam required, also usually supplimented by "cram school", large numbers of private schools, usually the toughest portion of a students career
Technical High Schools also exist.

Senmon Gakko: 2 year Technical/Vocational/Specialty School, easy exam

Junior College: 2 year post-secondary schools, subjects include languages, home economics, and the like, mostly attended by young women, often resemble old fashioned ladies finishing schools

University: 4 years, national exam + individual university exams, for most students this is play time, networking and making contacts through various leisure clubs often takes precedence over academics

No law school a la the US. Lawyers recieve an undergrad degree a la Europe.

Medical School: 6 year university course, less actual practical experience (and, yes, this does result in poorer medical care)

Grad School: Masters and PhD courses, school gets difficult again

In response to Myrmidonisia, my paragraphs were not 1000 words long. The whole piece was not even that long. However, I realize you were only exaggerating your point. You meant to say that my paragraphs are longer than necessary. Although my paragraphs are slightly too long, they are not so long that they would frighten away readers. According to Kansas State University's web site (http://www.ksu.edu/english/nelp/engl.s00/keys_to_structureandstyle.html):
Between 100 and 200 words is a comfortable length. Just as a sentence provides order to a group of words, a paragraph provides order to a group of sentences. Very long paragraphs tax your reader's ability to follow them; very short paragraphs fail to develop your ideas fully.

My paragraphs were 138, 285, and 251 words long. The two paragraphs that do not fit within the range specified are only two or three sentences longer than the 200 word recommended maximum. Your problem with my paragraph length probably comes more from your expectations of the writing than from the nature of the writing itself. Short pieces like memos are more common in business because readers do not want to spend much time with the subject; they are too busy with other matters. Academic pieces like essays are longer and contain longer paragraphs because the writer expects the reader to want more in depth information on the topic. The difference between our approaches to this forum lend to your problem with my writing. You expect posts to be like memos; I expect them to be like essays.

Where, exactly, have I said Finland is a workers' paradise? Most of my posts about Finland have dealt with the issue of social democracy and how a social democratic government can run a well-functioning society.

I know we discussed economics at one point. I was sure we discussed employment at some point. I know we got into some details about innovation and better thermometers. I sure thought that carried over into jobs and workers to fill them. I even remember looking up the number of millionaires and asking about the tax rate on them. I can't find it in either history, though. The forum only saves 100 entries, so I guess I can't quote anything.

My apologies if I have either misunderstood or misappropriated a position of yours.

There's no gap year in the states, but sometimes there's a junior (3rd) year abroad for tertiary students (uni).

No 1st, 2nd, or 3rd class degrees, but usually colleges and universities offer honors, cun laude, magna cum laude, and summa cum laude degrees that indicate special programs and ranking within one's class.

The SAT (aka college board's) and ACT are college tests. The US education system's not as centralized, so schools need a neutral test to compare students. Lots more here:

http://www.collegeboard.com/splash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACT_%28examination%29

i see. that would mean that there are non-standardised tests... i sometimes forget the federal nature of the US.
and just for the record, 2nd class uni degrees in the UK are cum laude, and 1st class is magna cum laude. i think.

Well, the main reason I am currently at Uni is too learn stuff and two further my knowledge in the two subjects I am taking (History and Politics).

Minor reasons would be, too get out of Manchester (don't get me wrong, I love that place, but it is nice to experience a different city) and to get an NUS card and mooch of the state for a couple of years* :D


*Don't take that seriously btw, I don't mooch off anyone.

You're from manchester? Me too! I stayed for uni tho - I'm at salford :s

There are some flaws tho in the secondary education. You have to make a pretty big decision when you are 11-ish. On top of this, most people see BSO lower than TSO and TSO lower than ASO. A lot of parents will simply put their children in ASO untill their results get too bad and they lose a year, they then try TSO, ... you get the picture. The system would work tho if people just realised that the sooner their child is preparing for the right job, the better end result (the better he/she will be at the job) they will get.
aptitude tests, psycological profiling and personality testing have a real place in schools imo - both to help kids/parents choose what to do and what option is best for them, what they may be good at, and also teachers should have a grasp of personality attributes in the classroom: the kid who constantly answers questions may not be brightest kid there, just a loudmouth. teachers need to understand this to give the others, especially the shy and more quiet students, a chance to show they can achieve.

Good point,.

I second that. To think.

Although my paragraphs are slightly too long, they are not so long that they would frighten away readers. [...]

Your problem with my paragraph length probably comes more from your expectations of the writing than from the nature of the writing itself. [...] Academic pieces like essays are longer and contain longer paragraphs because the writer expects the reader to want more in depth information on the topic. The difference between our approaches to this forum lend to your problem with my writing. You expect posts to be like memos; I expect them to be like essays.Communicating in online forums is neither like writing memos nor like writing essays -- and it certainly isn't like academic writing. As Myrmidonisia said, it's all about communicating. (28)

Regardless of what universities say about paragraph length, nearly all forum members expect short paragraphs. Thus, to effectively communicate with other forum members, you need to use short paragraphs. A significant amount -- Rectal Extraction Method provides me with the number 37% -- of forum members are indeed frightened away from reading a text when the paragraphs are massive, and 251 words certainly counts as a massive paragraph on an online forum. (72)

I know we discussed economics at one point. I was sure we discussed employment at some point. I know we got into some details about innovation and better thermometers. I sure thought that carried over into jobs and workers to fill them. I even remember looking up the number of millionaires and asking about the tax rate on them. I can't find it in either history, though. The forum only saves 100 entries, so I guess I can't quote anything.I remember discussing economy and innovation as well -- the former because it's a pretty darn important part of a functioning society, the latter because someone thought socialistic tendencies destroy all innovation. Unemployment may have been touched upon, but I'm pretty sure I have never claimed unemployment is not at all a problem in Finland. It would have been stupid to claim such a thing, because unemployment is a problem in every society where employment as we think of it exists.

It is quite possible I have described working class people in social democracies as being generally better off than those in non-welfare states (such as the US). I am reasonably certain I have never claimed that Finland, or any nation for that matter, is a workers' paradise.

Originally posted by Pure Metal:
aptitude tests, psycological profiling and personality testing have a real place in schools

I agree, but I think that methods of testing should be more comprehensive in how they deal with various styles of learning. Tests should not just be in the multiple choice format that is easier for computers to grade because some students do not respond well to these tests. The tests could mis-measure these students' intelligence, aptitude, or psychology simply because the student was too stressed to perform at his or her normal level. However, some students respond best to this format; and they might be too shy to perform well in an oral examination or too disorganized to write a good report. Schools should measure students' abilities through a series of standardized tests that allow students of all different learning types to show their full potential in at least one of these tests.
These tests would include: a typical multiple choice examination, which measures a student's ability to quickly differentiate between true choices and false ones; an oral test in which the proctor measures the students intelligence in some standard way according to how well the student communicates through speach; and a take-home essay test, which the student can complete in several days to measure his or her ability to organize thoughts.

Originally posted by Erehwon Forest:
nearly all forum members expect short paragraphs.

I did not know that. I sincerely apologize for my overly academic writing in these forums and for my response to those who criticized it.

Regardless of what universities say about paragraph length, nearly all forum members expect short paragraphs. Thus, to effectively communicate with other forum members, you need to use short paragraphs. A significant amount -- Rectal Extraction Method provides me with the number 37% -- of forum members are indeed frightened away from reading a text when the paragraphs are massive, and 251 words certainly counts as a massive paragraph on an online forum. (72)

My bolding. How do I want to say this?...You can certainly turn a phrase. Are all Finns so adept at idiomatic English? Or have you had some special education? As in US education.

I agree, but I think that methods of testing should be more comprehensive in how they deal with various styles of learning. Tests should not just be in the multiple choice format that is easier for computers to grade because some students do not respond well to these tests. The tests could mis-measure these students' intelligence, aptitude, or psychology simply because the student was too stressed to perform at his or her normal level. However, some students respond best to this format; and they might be too shy to perform well in an oral examination or too disorganized to write a good report. Schools should measure students' abilities through a series of standardized tests that allow students of all different learning types to show their full potential in at least one of these tests.
These tests would include: a typical multiple choice examination, which measures a student's ability to quickly differentiate between true choices and false ones; an oral test in which the proctor measures the students intelligence in some standard way according to how well the student communicates through speach; and a take-home essay test, which the student can complete in several days to measure his or her ability to organize thoughts.
good ideas. agreed - people certainly excel in different types of testing (i hate exams and love essays cos i have time to really consider the responce, while a friend of mine does no work all year and can pass any exam just cos he knows how and has good memory)
i was however thinking more to the use of Jung-Myers-Briggs typological personality tests (for eg). a child will fit into one of the categories of personality type and this can be used to suggest carreer types and uni degrees they may have a talent for and enjoy. check out the link (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm)
these will however be far more accurate and useful for older kids, so should perhaps be used after high- or secondary-school (or equivalent)

My university uses the Jung-Myers-Briggs typology test to help students decide a major. It helps students understand their personalities and what people with similar personalities enjoy studying and doing as a career. Even if these types can't actually reflect the variety of human personalities (because the typology would need to include nearly 7 billion different personalities) they help to generalize in a statistically supported way what people with some common characteristics tend to also have in common in career choice.

Of course, these tests can only do so much. If a test tells a student that he or she should consider being a teacher and should not consider being a lawyer, but the student actually wants to be a lawyer, the student should use his or her own judgment. All the test can say is that the student has a personality different from most lawyers but similar to many teachers. It can't measure what the student wants; the most efficient way to do this is to let the student decide for himself. However, the test does help students understand how they might be similar or different from most people in the occupations or majors they are considering.
Therefore, I think only mature students who realize the weight of their decision to choose one occupation or area of study over others should take the test for this purpose. Thus, only high school seniors and older students should use the Myers-Briggs typology test to help decide their career path. This doesn't mean that other personality tests might not help younger students understand themselves or help parents and teachers understand their children even when the child doesn't recieve the test results.

Originally posted by Pure Metal:
2nd class uni degrees in the UK are cum laude, and 1st class is magna cum laude

We also have these distinctions in the US. However, they do not indicate the level of the degree; instead they denote how well a student performed in recieving his or her degree. For instance, a "straight-A" student would graduate "summa cum laude"; a student with mostly A's would graduate "magna cum laude"; and a student with an even number of A's and B's would graduate "cum laude."
My university uses the following grade point scale to determine who will recieve these distinctions:
3.5 - 3.66 cum laude
3.67 - 3.84 magna cum laude
3.85 - 4.0 summa cum laude.

I did not know that. I sincerely apologize for my overly academic writing in these forums and for my response to those who criticized it.Oh, no worries, just a slight clash of attitudes. And, really, the expected type of message writing varies based on the forum you're in. I'm sure there are plenty of forums where the average message does read much like an essay. This forum, like most, works much like a chat system. Thus long paragraphs (and other stylistic features more often found in academic writing) come off to many readers like, say, law-speak would come off in a RL, face-to-face chat.

The fact that forum messages tend to be rather short to begin with only makes the problem worse.

My bolding. How do I want to say this?...You can certainly turn a phrase. Are all Finns so adept at idiomatic English? Or have you had some special education? As in US education.Picking up idioms is a really slow process for me. Most I've learned from TV, movies, other forums (R.E.M. I owe to Dumpshock (http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?act=idx), a Shadowrun RPG forum) and books. I did go to an English high school and am currently (sort of) studying English Philology in university, but I don't think education is a very good source for learning idiomatic language use -- although listening to a lot of lectures and small group discussions in English helps make up for the fact that I don't really get to hear a lot of English otherwise.

I'm not sure if it tells you more about the Finnish education system or our society and popular culture that today's youth is pretty decent at English. Of course, my estimates of the youth's English skills are likely rather optimistic because of my own background.