|‘Gorblimey, social mobility and no mistake!’|
LSE ‘saves the children of the future from the poorhouse.’
Homeless orphans in London’s East End were today said to be Mexican-waving in joy at the news that the LSE, one of Britain’s top tertiary educational institutions, had foregone the maximum fees of £9000 for students per annum, and had instead opted for a much lower £8,500 instead.
‘I just can’t believe it,’ said 16 year old Darren Baker, from his cardboard box under London Bridge that he shares with his family of twelve brothers and sisters. ‘This is like all my Christmases have come at once. Previously I had thought that Russell Group institutions would be cruelly priced out of my reach. But now, but now,’ he said, struggling with tears, ‘I know that it’ll be £500 quid less for the LSE. They don’t know how much this means to me. Really, they don’t.’
A spokesman form the University said, ‘This sends out a clear message that the LSE welcomes students from all backgrounds.’ Then he added, ‘Quite wealthy ones, for example. And others who are a tiny bit less wealthy- about £500 a year less so, to be exact. See? It’s not f*cking rocket science is it?’ he said, lighting his Havana with a rolled up hundred pound note. ‘See that?’ he said. ‘That’s a hundred. You have to ask for them at the bank. Five of them.’
Earlier this month, the LSE Academic Board narrowly voted in favour for a charge of £8000 per annum; but the new limit was set after tense nights of brinkmanship, horse-trading and, apparently, taking acid.
‘You see,’ said a board member, ‘How clever we’ve been? It isn’t nine grand. It’s eight and a half. You see what we did there? I hope the poor people are grateful. They bloody better be. Five hundred quid buys a very agreeable Château d’Yquem at Rules, you know. Have you tried the fillet of red deer? You must.’
LSE director Professor Judith Rees said, “We are determined to preserve academic standards and ensure that all students with the ability to benefit are not deterred from applying to LSE.’
Last night, a grateful crowd of weeping paupers and beggars had gathered for a candle-lit vigil outside the gates of the LSE, some of them emptying their pockets of coppers into a collection tin. ‘It’s for the LSE,’ said one half-blind urchin, resembling a character from a period drama. ‘They need it more than us. Now I can stop dreaming, and get on to that three year Masters in Russian Literature.’
Oxford and Cambridge University were unavailable for comment, but there were rumours that they would knock one pound twenty five from their fees.
‘Is that enough?’ one frightened don was heard to say. ‘Is it too much? I don’t know.’
‘What is money?’ he said.
|‘Not safe,’ says Durham study.|
Telling kids how to do better ‘helps them do better’ claims shock survey
A new report from Durham University had the educational establishment flat on its back as it made the previously unheard of claim that teachers who told their students what they were doing wrong, and how to improve, ended up with classes that understood how to ‘do things better.’
‘This is fantastic news,’ said Richard Gravy, a history teacher from Birmingham. ‘Previously we’ve all been doing it the way we thought worked best: the student handed in a piece of work; we looked at it in absolute silence, and returned it to them without saying anything or writing in their books. Turns out we were wrong all along. Who knew? When I trained to teach were told that children would just learn by a magical process, and that any attempt to guide their education would lead to their brains melting, like the Nazis at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Now they’re saying that we have to give them comments and stuff. Quite frankly, I’m shaking.’
Other game-changing conclusions from the report, sponsored by the Sutton Trust included:
- One-to-one tuition is ‘expensive’
- Children learn best ‘when alive.’
- Some children ‘don’t like maths.’
- Putting a jacket on in Winter is an effective way of maintaining a pleasant skin temperature.
- Some men are bachelors.
‘Actually, we’re not totally sure about that last one, said the lead writer of the paper. ‘I think we need some more money to really nail it to the floor.Ooh, that would be lovely.’
Faced with accusations that they were engaged in research that many teachers would regard as ‘completely f*cking obvious’, the research team were defiant. ‘We’re social scientists. That’s what we do.’
|‘Hold on to your dreams!’|
Martin Luther King, Gandhi, pay tribute to Michelle Obama.
The first lady, Michelle Obama was given standing ovations throughout the kingdom of Londonland today after she gave a series of speeches that Elizabeth the first, speaking through a medium, described as ‘transformational, inspirational.’
‘It was amazing,’ said Trisha, a sixth form student attending the speech at Christ Church College, Oxford, a University renowned the world over as appealing to the impoverished outliers of society, the oppressed and the humble. ‘She said, right, that it didn’t matter where you came from. It mattered where you were going. And that you should never stop reaching for your dreams because the stars are forever. It was awesome. I’d never heard words like that before. It was as if a veil had been pulled from my eyes, and now I could see for the first time. I thought that if, like me, you were a member of the affluent middle class then it meant that you would never be a member of the wealthy super-elite. But that’s not true at all.’
‘Then she said something about holding out for a hero, and respecting yourself, but I couldn’t hear because I was so moved. I think the people who say that she should have tried saying that at an inner city East End failing comprehensive have missed the point. They just wouldn’t have understood. But I know what being a little bit wealthy is like, so I can understand being really, really successful.’
‘Excuse me, but I have to go believe in myself.’