Government Funding for Students

djpbarry

bonkey wrote:

There's no better way to weaken yoru argument then to misrepresent your case. Don't bring the Right to an education into things, because it has no applicability here.

I beg to differ. Article 26(1) States the following (emphasis mine):

Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

I thank you.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

I beg to differ. Article 26(1) States the following (emphasis mine):

Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

I thank you.

Accessible does not imply free.

leninbenjamin

in fairness as a student from a middle class background i'd be more than happy to pay fees if i knew it would result in lower student to staff ratio, better facilities and equipment (try using the latest software development tools on PCs around 7 or 8 years old that were substandard to begin with), less incidents of courses being over subscribed and so on... i paid a grand in registration fees this year, so it's still really a case of you get what you pay for.

as mentioned another issue is the grants system. it is pretty damn flawed, but always has been so. like i've heard plenty of stories from my parents generation that are similar to djparry's. an overhaul of this would be far more beneficial from an inequalities point of view than free fee's imo.

i also like that idea from Germany. i'm lucky in that i can mooch from my parents still, but i know a few who've effectively been given the boot for whatever reason and are struggling somewhat.

Mick86

djpbarry wrote:

I think it’s fair to say that most stay in the country (depending on their degree discipline). The majority of those who leave tend to be science and engineering graduates; they have to leave if they want to get a half-decent job (I’m not talking about pay) that’s even remotely related to what they studied.

So Americans and Australians benefit from science and engineering graduates at the expense of the Irish taxpayer.:rolleyes:

djpbarry

themole wrote:

Accessible does not imply free.

Indeed it does not, but fees would unquestionably restrict access.

Mick86 wrote:

So Americans and Australians benefit from science and engineering graduates at the expense of the Irish taxpayer.

Americans maybe, not sure about Australians! But anyway, if you're looking for someone to blame, look no further than the Irish government and the false economy they have built. An interesting statistic from David McWilliams' "Ireland's Generation Game":
In 2006, Irish people spent sixty times more on property than they did on R&D.
If we are to keep science and engineering graduates in this country (and indeed encourage more people to enter these degree programs), the government has to make an effort to drastically increase funding for R&D, and this includes funding for postgraduate research. This will have the knock-on effect of strengthening and diversifying our economy.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

Indeed it does not, but fees would unquestionably restrict access.

And? The section of the declaration quoted does not mention anything about how much help should be provided.

djpbarry wrote:

Americans maybe, not sure about Australians! But anyway, if you're looking for someone to blame, look no further than the Irish government and the false economy they have built. An interesting statistic from David McWilliams' "Ireland's Generation Game":
In 2006, Irish people spent sixty times more on property than they did on R&D.
If we are to keep science and engineering graduates in this country (and indeed encourage more people to enter these degree programs), the government has to make an effort to drastically increase funding for R&D, and this includes funding for postgraduate research. This will have the knock-on effect of strengthening and diversifying our economy.

It is true that more needs to be done to invest in R&D. To me the statisitc given shows more about the attitudes of irish people than the government. We are not used to having money and as a result most people are investing in the wrong things.

People invest in something tangible, like a house, rather than in high tech, or other, compaines which can, and often do, make much more money and are better for the economy as a whole as they bring money into the country rather than moving it between irish people.

leninbenjamin

in fairness i wouldn't read too much into anything David McWilliams says. he's a scaremongerer cashing in on people's fears imo. his examples of how the irish economy will potentially crash are extreme and often not placed in full context i find. the above example is just another case. the govt know only too well that we need to invest in R&D, and through the IDA have been trying to do so for years (the IDA is probably the only efficient state body imo). while there are problems within the lower levels in education in this regard, like themole says i think it's fair to say a huge amount of problems lie in public opinion and such. we're as responsible for buying into the property boom hook line and sinker as much as the govt was.

i don't think that argument has any relevance to the discussion of fees, imo the situation would be the same anyway. i would agree that more funding is needed at post graduate level and beyond, but i dont think you can argue the govt. is entirely culpable for the current state of affairs in this area. there is a lack of public interest really in this kind of area i reckon.

Hotblack Desiato

djpbarry wrote:

Ok, seeing as I'm (apparently) talking nonsense, in your opinion, how do we determine who should be entitled to free fees / grants and who should not?

How do you think? Seriously. :rolleyes:

What should the criteria be?

Distributing the available resources to those who most need them, rather than spending them trying to win middle-class votes.

djpbarry

themole wrote:

And? The section of the declaration quoted does not mention anything about how much help should be provided

No, but it states that higher education should be available to all on the basis of merit. In other words, your personal background should not be a factor.

themole wrote:

To me the statisitc given shows more about the attitudes of irish people than the government. We are not used to having money and as a result most people are investing in the wrong things.

Yes, absolutely, I totally agree.

leninbenjamin wrote:

in fairness i wouldn't read too much into anything David McWilliams says. he's a scaremongerer cashing in on people's fears imo. his examples of how the irish economy will potentially crash are extreme and often not placed in full context i find.

Don’t get me wrong, I am by no means a fan of Ginger McWilliams, but I would say there is a fair degree of truth in that particular statistic.

leninbenjamin wrote:

i think it's fair to say a huge amount of problems lie in public opinion and such. we're as responsible for buying into the property boom hook line and sinker as much as the govt was.

Yes, absolutely, I’m not going to dispute that. You can’t force people to be entrepreneurs.

leninbenjamin wrote:

i would agree that more funding is needed at post graduate level and beyond, but i dont think you can argue the govt. is entirely culpable for the current state of affairs in this area. there is a lack of public interest really in this kind of area i reckon.

I’m not sure about that. First of all, unless you are a very highly respected researcher, it is very difficult to secure funding for research in this country. Secondly, even if you do secure funding, from a state-funded body such as IRCSET, it is not likely to be very much. There are a number of postgraduate research positions around the country (in Dublin in particular) at the moment that cannot be filled because people simply cannot afford to live on €10 – 12k per annum for 3 or 4 years. An extract from a typical grant proposal is shown here:

djpbarry

ninja900 wrote:

How do you think? Seriously.

I thought it was a perfectly reasonable question!

ninja900 wrote:

Distributing the available resources to those who most need them, rather than spending them trying to win middle-class votes.

It would seem to me you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

leninbenjamin

djpbarry wrote:

I’m not sure about that. First of all, unless you are a very highly respected researcher, it is very difficult to secure funding for research in this country. Secondly, even if you do secure funding, from a state-funded body such as IRCSET, it is not likely to be very much. There are a number of postgraduate research positions around the country (in Dublin in particular) at the moment that cannot be filled because people simply cannot afford to live on €10 – 12k per annum for 3 or 4 years. An extract from a typical grant proposal is shown here:

yike's, i knew this was an area the goverment needs to improve funding for, but i'd never really seen the figures before. you're right, it's in urgent need of attention.

but still, i still don't think it's entirely the governments fault, the general's public attitude really comes into this. if the government were to announce tomorrow that they were going to significantly increase funding you'd have people up in arms around the country giving out about the state of their hospitals/roads/schools. an area like this is very much overlooked by general public opinion, it's mainly from boards and hearsay like this that i hear about the problem, than say mainstream media... public opinion is just too short-termist on issues like these imo. and governments will almost always choose the soft option to placate the masses at the cost of long term investment really (or perhaps that should read Fianna Fáil led governments...). that's why we had the mess of the 80s really.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

No, but it states that higher education should be available to all on the basis of merit. In other words, your personal background should not be a factor.

My interpretation is that access to higher level should not be based on background, ie race, where you live etc. This has nothing to do with whether or not you can afford to go.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

Secondly, even if you do secure funding, from a state-funded body such as IRCSET, it is not likely to be very much. There are a number of postgraduate research positions around the country (in [/FONT][/COLOR]Dublin in particular) at the moment that cannot be filled because people simply cannot afford to live on €10 – 12k per annum for 3 or 4 years. An extract from a typical grant proposal is shown here:

Where are these unfilled positions?

I am myself doing a PhD in Computer science in UCD and there a lots of people on the low money you describe. Also while this money may seem low, it is still much more than you will get for instance in france.

djpbarry

themole wrote:

Where are these unfilled positions?

There's quite a few in DIT.

themole wrote:

Also while this money may seem low, it is still much more than you will get for instance in france.

In fairness, the level of R&D funding in this country is laughable compared to France. If you complete a PhD in Ireland, realistically, you have to go abroad if you want to pursue a career in research.

Mick86

djpbarry wrote:

....the government has to make an effort to drastically increase funding for R&D, and this includes funding for postgraduate research. ...

Sounds like throwing good money after bad to me.

Time Magazine

We shouldn't be wasting our money on R&D. It's not cost effective and we're particularly bad at it.

As a nation, we are far better at implementing R&D than creating it.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

In fairness, the level of R&D funding in this country is laughable compared to France. If you complete a PhD in Ireland, realistically, you have to go abroad if you want to pursue a career in research.

?????

There are lots of french phd students in my research group and my supervisor is french. Most of them have told me there was no possibility to get the amount of money they get here in france. The wages for research in france are terrible.

What are your sources?

themole

Here is an example or a postdoc position in inria, one of the best research institutes in france and

The salary is 2,320€ gross per month.

Hardly a lot for someone with a phd.

Here is an msc position availabel in ucd computer science for 16,002 euro per annum.

oscarBravo

djpbarry wrote:

It would seem to me you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

No more getting personal, thanks.

djpbarry

Mick86 wrote:

Sounds like throwing good money after bad to me.

Not sure what you’re getting at here.

Ibid wrote:

We shouldn't be wasting our money on R&D. It's not cost effective and we're particularly bad at it.
As a nation, we are far better at implementing R&D than creating it.

I suppose you have experience working in the area? How do we progress as a nation without innovation?

themole wrote:

There are lots of french phd students in my research group and my supervisor is french. Most of them have told me there was no possibility to get the amount of money they get here in france. The wages for research in france are terrible.

Sorry, I think you misunderstood. I meant overall funding (maybe spending would be a better word?). I would have thought there would be far more spent on R&D in France than in Ireland, particularly in the private sector? Apologies, I should have made that clearer.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

I would have thought there would be far more spent on R&D in France than in Ireland, particularly in the private sector?

Well, according to one of the french lads that used to be in our research group, no.

leninbenjamin

Ibid wrote:

We shouldn't be wasting our money on R&D. It's not cost effective and we're particularly bad at it.

As a nation, we are far better at implementing R&D than creating it.

but that's exactly the problem with the Irish economy today isn't it? We HAVE to develop the R&D aspect because we are pricing ourselves out of the other activities. if we want to avoid another prolonged period of stagnation in the future at the rate things are going we need to stimulate a much great culture of innovation in this country surely.

Time Magazine

djpbarry wrote:

I suppose you have experience working in the area?

No, I don't.

How do we progress as a nation without innovation?

We can innovate without creating the R&D. We implement others' R&D. Compared to other nations, we're crap at R&D. Really, really crap. And the return on investment on R&D is crap in the first place.

It's a bubble.

themole

Ibid wrote:

We can innovate without creating the R&D. We implement others' R&D. Compared to other nations, we're crap at R&D. Really, really crap. And the return on investment on R&D is crap in the first place.

It's a bubble.

I don't follow your logic. The people who reap the rewards of innovation are mostly the early adopters who own the tech. That is those who do the R&D.

Time Magazine

What rewards? That's the scatter plot for the largest 1000 R&D spenders in the world. They'd be better off hiring a few marketing students. And Ireland is at the low-end of that pile.

Also, public funding for R&D squeezes out private funding for R&D, which is more effective.

And finally, all, please note there is a distinction between fourth level education and R&D. There are certainly cross-overs, but they're not the same.

djpbarry

themole wrote:

Well, according to one of the french lads that used to be in our research group, no.

I'll have to take your word for it - maybe France was a bad example .

Let me ask you this - what is your opinion of the current state of private sector research in Ireland?

In relation to the link you posted for the Msc; admittedly, that is very good pay for postgrad study, but the money available as maintenance will depend on the other costs associated with the project. If little is to be spent on materials/consumables, then this will leave more for the student and vice-versa.

themole

Ibid wrote:

What rewards? That's the scatter plot for the largest 1000 R&D spenders in the world. They'd be better off hiring a few marketing students. And Ireland is at the low-end of that pile.

Also, public funding for R&D squeezes out private funding for R&D, which is more effective.

And finally, all, please note there is a distinction between fourth level education and R&D. There are certainly cross-overs, but they're not the same.

What you are saying, i gather, is that the amount of money spent in r&d does not equate to increase in sales?

That misses the point. If you don't create a new product you have no sales and get left behind by your competitors. If you only look at the money spent it will always seem like an expense rather than a factor which enables you to do business in the first place. So, even if the r&d spend did not increase sales it was probably responsible for keeping existing customers.

What would be a more interesting and relevant figure to find would be how many companies spent no money on r&d, (and also didn't buy another company with the tech as this equates to spending money on r&d) and now dominate their market.

You have to come up with a product in the first place. Just trying to copy your competitors will not get you very far, if you can even do it considering patents etc.

themole

djpbarry wrote:

Let me ask you this - what is your opinion of the current state of private sector research in Ireland?

Could be a lot better :rolleyes:

djpbarry wrote:

In relation to the link you posted for the Msc; admittedly, that is very good pay for postgrad study, but the money available as maintenance will depend on the other costs associated with the project. If little is to be spent on materials/consumables, then this will leave more for the student and vice-versa.

The situation with the it sector is that very little or mostly no money is needed for consumables, so i is a different situation that most other fields. But the it sector is also a huge part of the economy here.

Time Magazine

themole wrote:

What you are saying, i gather, is that the amount of money spent in r&d does not equate to increase in sales?

It does, but it's not the economic miracle people think it is. It's a lot like investing in more labour or capital in terms of return.

That misses the point.

No, it doesn't.

What would be a more interesting and relevant figure to find would be how many companies spent no money on r&d, (and also didn't buy another company with the tech as this equates to spending money on r&d) and now dominate their market.

If you're talking about competition rather than aggregate wealth, that's a particularly easy one. Think of how many companies dominate primarily because of marketing. Nike hasn't improved the shoe all that much in the last while yet it dominates. Coke and Pepsi haven't changed much lately and still dominate. Microsoft spend billions on R&D that would be far better spent, in competitive terms, improving their public image.

You have to come up with a product in the first place. Just trying to copy your competitors will not get you very far, if you can even do it considering patents etc.

You're still living in the secondary sector which is becoming increasingly irrelevant. Tertiary/services are the big players now. What "product" do financial services offer? Mind power, essentially. Training is great for that and some research is needed. But R&D is not as amazing as people say it.

I'm not arsed at the moment sourcing the OECD report that says Ireland is crap at R&D and we should focus instead on implementing others' technology. I'm sure some of you can find it though. Dr. Constantine Gurdgiev argued about it in Business and Finance a couple of years ago.

djpbarry

Ibid wrote:

Compared to other nations, we're crap at R&D. Really, really crap.

What exactly are you basing that on if you have no experience of working in research?

Ibid wrote:

What rewards? That's the scatter plot for the largest 1000 R&D spenders in the world.

I’m sorry, but that’s just daft. When you undertake a research project, you are entering the unknown to a certain degree – otherwise it wouldn’t be worth doing. You cannot possibly project the potential monetary gain the research will provide, as this would depend on a whole range of factors.

Ibid wrote:

Also, public funding for R&D squeezes out private funding for R&D, which is more effective.

That is highly debateable.

themole wrote:

Could be a lot better

Indeed it could, because it's virtually non-existent!

themole wrote:

The situation with the it sector is that very little or mostly no money is needed for consumables, so i is a different situation that most other fields.

I suspected as much but thought I should clarify.

themole wrote:

But the it sector is also a huge part of the economy here.

Absolutely, I'm not going to argue with that !