Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday March 19 2018, @05:46PM   Printer-friendly
from the probably-should-have-researched-this-better dept.

The World Socialist Web Site reports

[...] a former student of Anglia Ruskin University [...] is suing the UK institution for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation.

[...] Graduate Pok Wong is claiming £60,000 compensation--her estimated cost of her university education--on the basis that her degree did not offer the "quality education and prospect of employment after graduation" claimed by the university.

This suit demonstrates the corrosive consequences of students being encouraged to view themselves as consumers entering into contracts with universities for economic advantage. The collective endeavour of learning is replaced by a purely financial and adversarial relationship between two parties, in which each is incentivised to push the other for maximum "cost efficiency".

In comments to the Sunday Telegraph, Wong explained her hopes that the case would "set a precedent so that students can get value for money, and if they don't they get compensated".

Her comments accept the principles of marketised education and attempt to leverage them for individual students' self-interest.

[...] Wong refers in her legal papers to Anglia Ruskin's claim to carry out "world-leading research". In fact, the university is ranked in the 301st-350th bracket for quality of research by Times Higher Education. A number of other institutions have promoted themselves with similar lies or distortions.

Last November, the Advertising Standards Authority watchdog ordered seven universities to change false claims about their status made in advertisements to students. The University of Strathclyde, for example, was told to change its claim, "We're ranked No. 1 in the UK" for physics. Teesside University had to stop calling itself the "Top university in England for long-term graduate prospects".

[...] in 2013, [...] replies to freedom of information requests at 70 universities found that [...] Anglia Ruskin was listed as one of a number of institutions, particularly newer ones, whose spending [on marketing themselves] skyrocketed in these years. It spent £1.76 million in 2012-13, about £1 million more than in 2010-11.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @06:21PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @06:21PM (#655045)

    No, the purpose of a college degree is to show you can think. If you think it is about money, the college failed. So she both should, and should not receive a refund. Yes, she failed to learn to think, but no, it is not necessarily the University's fault. Retro-active recension of degrees (flunking), without refund, is appropriate in a case like this.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @07:20PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @07:20PM (#655072)

    No, the purpose of a college degree is to show you can think

    Really? Two words, "gender studies" and I rest my case.

    • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @07:46PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @07:46PM (#655082)

      If you can't appreciate, or don't want to know about, or don't enjoy the other gender, then you are missing out on some of the sweetest things in life.

    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday March 19 2018, @08:43PM (2 children)

      by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Monday March 19 2018, @08:43PM (#655111) Homepage
      Yes, and the two word response to that is "wrong think". It's still thinking, it's just wrong.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @11:56PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @11:56PM (#655199)

        No, its wong, not wrong. Wong thinking degree equals top job 5 seconds after graduation. Sorry dear millennial asian, several years of hard slog might bring you success, and success is never guaranteed in life.

        • (Score: 2) by archfeld on Tuesday March 20 2018, @02:11PM

          by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Tuesday March 20 2018, @02:11PM (#655380) Journal

          Truer words have not been spoken, at least to this precious snowflake brought up on participation trophies and in an era of no competition allowed. Welcome to the real world 'honey' You can do everything correctly and still lose. Now that isn't to say that for profit education isn't a scam and film studies degrees or women studies degrees would ever get you a job.

          --
          For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
  • (Score: 5, Touché) by arslan on Monday March 19 2018, @11:29PM (1 child)

    by arslan (3462) on Monday March 19 2018, @11:29PM (#655187)

    Not if they didn't advertise as such. I see colleges advertisements all the time saying folks should sign up with them to get the degree that will give them employment opportunities. I say its fair play if they can't deliver on that.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @11:55PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 19 2018, @11:55PM (#655198)

      Yeah. We had a series of stories [soylentnews.org] about places that made bogus claims about job placement for their graduates.

      The Education Department (before DeVos) came down on them like a ton of bricks.

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 20 2018, @12:27AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday March 20 2018, @12:27AM (#655207) Journal

    Retro-active recension of degrees (flunking), without refund, is appropriate in a case like this.

    Sure, the lawsuit is silly. But taking someone's degree away is not something a school should ever do under the circumstances. I think the only situation it should apply is fraud or corruption where it becomes clear that the degree holder didn't acquire their degree in a legal manner. But even that can be gamed by those who are willing to produce fake evidence.