What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
Huf especially for the show - and why not? This was a kind of free
advertising/promotion that could be worth hundreds of thousands of
euros, and they set out from the very start to make a very good
impression on British viewers, which I'm sure they achieved. I was
surprised when the one German guy said that Huf had already built 20
houses in the UK. Maybe we should invite other builders from other
countries to come here more often, if only to chivvy our domestic
building fraternity into adopting some quality standards like the
Germans obviously have done.

MM

Mike Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

I was impressed too but I guess if you're spending nearly 1/2 a million
pounds on a prefab, it darned well ought to be impressive!

The Huf website seems to be down ( www.huf-haus.de/en/ ) but for anyone who
didn't see it, you can see some Huf houses at
http://www.findaproperty.com/cgi-bin...l?storyid=3482

Tim

--
Remove the obvious to reply by email.
Please support rheumatoid arthritis research!
Visit http://www.justgiving.com/pfp/speyside or
http://www,justgiving.com/speyside if you're a UK tax payer.

In article , Mike
Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

But if the programme had been realistic they would signed the
contract for the new house and then the day before the demolition
crew moved in their existing house would have been listed g.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

Mike Mitchell wrote:

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)

I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
"show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as well.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
Huf especially for the show - and why not?

No they were not. That us how Huf do it.

This was a kind of free
advertising/promotion that could be worth hundreds of thousands of
euros, and they set out from the very start to make a very good
impression on British viewers, which I'm sure they achieved. I was
surprised when the one German guy said that Huf had already built 20
houses in the UK. Maybe we should invite other builders from other
countries to come here more often, if only to chivvy our domestic
building fraternity into adopting some quality standards like the
Germans obviously have done.

John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
similar type of design and efficiency. He will need to use that left hook a
lot to even get the cowboys to look.

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Mike
Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

But if the programme had been realistic they would signed the
contract for the new house and then the day before the demolition
crew moved in their existing house would have been listed g.

The good thing about Huf is that the price is fixed, so you pretty well know
where you stand financially. Huf make house a lot cheaper than £450,000.
You can lay the slab yourself, omit the plumbing and wiring and others bits
and do them yourself saving a ton of money.

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Mike Mitchell wrote:

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)

I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
"show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as well.

That house was predominantly glass at the front. You can have all insulated
boards if you like. You choose. The house come in set patterned squares.
You then design your own house to suit.

They also have timber joists and cement over to reduce sound.

"John Rumm" wrote
| I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
| "show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
| and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as well.

As the chap was an artist he probably feels at home in an art gallery :-) I
thought it looked a lot less clinical than most of this style of
'contemporary' houses.

But weren't those German versions of British 13A sockets (with horizontal
rockers) hideous. And they never put that missing screw back in.

Owain

"IMM" wrote
| "Mike Mitchell" wrote
| But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
| Huf especially for the show - and why not?
| No they were not. That us how Huf do it.

And the builders cleaned them afterwards!!

| John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
| similar type of design and efficiency.

A fitted kitchen in a day (even though it was presumably pre-designed and
pre-fab'd) - British builders couldn't do a fitted kitchen in a day with
Lego bricks. One of the square bricks would fall down the back of the sofa
and they'd have to take three hours off to go to the toyshop for a new one.

| He will need to use that left
| hook a lot to even get the cowboys to look.

He'll probably make it illegal to own a trowel unless you're a member of a
trade association, to which all the big speculative developers and
Moben/Dolphin will belong, and that will immediately raise standards in the
industry.

Owain

Mike Mitchell wrote in message . ..
What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

I loved the house too.

Having struggled to project manage some IT disasters, it was an object
lesson in project management (at least to me !!)

However, her indoors (a better PM than me) pointed out:

The basic construction activities are repeated in each Huff-build -
so the estimates for assembly are based on previous experience. If you
are building something new, go for your best estimates then add your
contingency.

Assembly is far less susceptible to time vagaries than on-site build.

The whole Huff-fabrication and assembly process kept track of people
and things so they could be reliably made available even to a precise
schedule.

The people doing the job knew their job well, worked according to an
existing system and could rely on each other to be ready when needed.

Huff kept as much of the delivery under their control as possible -
right down to supplying their own screws etc. When they did rely on
Von Tommy Atkins to play his part, things did fall apart.

Die Huff-Manner were committed to the task and worked their little
backsides off.

Overall, I want a Huff House for Christmas please

CRL

"Tim Downie" wrote in message ...
Mike Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

I was impressed too but I guess if you're spending nearly 1/2 a million
pounds on a prefab, it darned well ought to be impressive!

500 grand for a greenhouse? Not for me thanks...!
David

"Lobster" wrote in message
om...
"Tim Downie" wrote in message
...
Mike Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

I was impressed too but I guess if you're spending nearly 1/2 a million
pounds on a prefab, it darned well ought to be impressive!

500 grand for a greenhouse? Not for me thanks...!

You don't have to have all the glass. Insulated wall panels can be fitted.

"Owain" wrote in message
...
"IMM" wrote
| "Mike Mitchell" wrote
| But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
| Huf especially for the show - and why not?
| No they were not. That us how Huf do it.

And the builders cleaned them afterwards!!

| John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
| similar type of design and efficiency.

A fitted kitchen in a day (even though it was presumably pre-designed and
pre-fab'd) - British builders couldn't do a fitted kitchen in a day with
Lego bricks. One of the square bricks would fall down the back of the sofa
and they'd have to take three hours off to go to the toyshop for a new
one.

| He will need to use that left
| hook a lot to even get the cowboys to look.

He'll probably make it illegal to own a trowel unless you're a member of a
trade association, to which all the big speculative developers and
Moben/Dolphin will belong, and that will immediately raise standards in
the
industry.

In Germany they do not BCOs. The builder is educated and qualified and
registered and he passes the house. Self certification.

Mike Mitchell wrote:

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
Huf especially for the show - and why not? This was a kind of free
advertising/promotion that could be worth hundreds of thousands of
euros, and they set out from the very start to make a very good
impression on British viewers, which I'm sure they achieved. I was
surprised when the one German guy said that Huf had already built 20
houses in the UK. Maybe we should invite other builders from other
countries to come here more often, if only to chivvy our domestic
building fraternity into adopting some quality standards like the
Germans obviously have done.



I have to say outright that the house, tho fantastic, was not to my taste.

There is definitely a place for 'flat pack' houses. Or even trailer
parks - why don't we have more of those? Ideal first time buyer places
for young people wanting to leave home.

Gernmany does have a very good building apperntie an traning scheme.
Instead of going to un snotty unis and getting degres, they get proper
and detailed practical instruction on 'ze right way to build ze houses'
and they do. And as professional people they take pride in the quality
of what they do.

In France or germany, to be an 'engineer' is something to be proud of,
atracting top peole to good salaries. In this countyry it means 'car
mechanic' and that is about how one is regarded.

Its probably teh same for builders. Over here building trades are the
last resort of cowboys, crims and scoundresl ,who are too lazy or
shiftless to do anything else.









MM

IMM wrote:

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
Huf especially for the show - and why not?


No they were not. That us how Huf do it.


This was a kind of free
advertising/promotion that could be worth hundreds of thousands of
euros, and they set out from the very start to make a very good
impression on British viewers, which I'm sure they achieved. I was
surprised when the one German guy said that Huf had already built 20
houses in the UK. Maybe we should invite other builders from other
countries to come here more often, if only to chivvy our domestic
building fraternity into adopting some quality standards like the
Germans obviously have done.


John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
similar type of design and efficiency. He will need to use that left hook a
lot to even get the cowboys to look.




He won't succeed until the education system scraps 90% of the so called
'unis' and starts reintroducing technical and vocational colleges that
teach something of some use, and make the actual qualification reflect
some real acquisition of skill and experience and even knowledge and
understanding, rather than a certificate of having wasted public money
for three years...

IMM wrote:

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

Mike Mitchell wrote:


What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)

I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
"show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as well.


That house was predominantly glass at the front. You can have all insulated
boards if you like. You choose. The house come in set patterned squares.
You then design your own house to suit.


Hugely energy inefficient, all that glass tho.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Hugely energy inefficient, all that glass tho.


I was wondering about that. In passing, Kevin mentioned that the house
was "super insulated" or something like that - but there didn't seem
much scope for that in their design.

Neil

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:36:09 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Mike
Mitchell wrote:
What an amazing house!

But if the programme had been realistic they would signed the
contract for the new house and then the day before the demolition
crew moved in their existing house would have been listed g.

The good thing about Huf is that the price is fixed, so you pretty well know
where you stand financially. Huf make house a lot cheaper than £450,000.
You can lay the slab yourself, omit the plumbing and wiring and others bits
and do them yourself saving a ton of money.

Hey, that IS interesting! I wonder how cheaply a Huf Haus could be
built for. I was not particularly enamoured with the overall 'look' of
the house, but more with the utmost attention to detail and quality. I
would be satisfied if a number of British builders had been watching
and would come away from the programme with a burning urge to do
better with their own products. I believe we tolerate far too much
skimping and cheap and tatty workmanship than is either fair to us or
good for posterity and the repuation of the country.

MM

On 29 Jan 2004 14:16:37 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

John Rumm writes:
Mike Mitchell wrote:

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)

I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
"show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as well.

The nice plot of land made all the difference. You wouldn't want to live in a
house like that where passersby could look in.

Why on earth not?!!!! Look around and see how many houses have no net
curtains! I do not, for one. Go to Holland, where they simply don't
care who looks in while they are sitting around having their tea. And
because anyone can stare, everyone loses interest after the first few
minutes. Net curtains = tiny minds!

MM

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:48:31 -0000, "Owain"
wrote:

But weren't those German versions of British 13A sockets (with horizontal
rockers) hideous. And they never put that missing screw back in.

The missing screw was not missing. There was a metal plate behind,
which precluded having a screw at that point. I also note your mention
of the word "German" in your criticism of the sockets. Do you *know*
they were German? Or merely installed by Germans, perhaps?

MM

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 13:32:49 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
.. .
What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

But those brand new Huf vans! I'm pretty sure they were purchased by
Huf especially for the show - and why not?

No they were not. That us how Huf do it.

Also does not surprise me one bit. In Hamburg, at least, everything
looks expensive, new, clean, and cared for. That's the German way.


This was a kind of free
advertising/promotion that could be worth hundreds of thousands of
euros, and they set out from the very start to make a very good
impression on British viewers, which I'm sure they achieved. I was
surprised when the one German guy said that Huf had already built 20
houses in the UK. Maybe we should invite other builders from other
countries to come here more often, if only to chivvy our domestic
building fraternity into adopting some quality standards like the
Germans obviously have done.

John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
similar type of design and efficiency. He will need to use that left hook a
lot to even get the cowboys to look.

If that is true, I salute Prescott for trying. But the cowboys could
be restrained very easily and quickly if only their clients would
withhold their money and not buy the cowboys' shoddy products. When a
few companies go out of business for lack of customers, others will
start to take note.

MM

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 15:55:05 -0000, "Owain"
wrote:

He'll probably make it illegal to own a trowel unless you're a member of a
trade association, to which all the big speculative developers and
Moben/Dolphin will belong, and that will immediately raise standards in the
industry.

I don't see anything wrong in insisting that tradesmen, craftsmen are
recognised as having undergone training to a certain degree of
proficiency. The Trading Standards people recently discovered the huge
anmount of scams being perpetrated on the British public by a very
large number of cowboys. If it so easy in Britain to pass oneself off
as a so-called professional, then obviously there will be those who
see a quick way of making a few quid. The whole industry does need to
be regulated far more than it is - or do we simply allow the cowboys
to get away with it ad nauseaum? I would say that the chances in the
Greater London area of finding an honest workman is practically nil. I
would also say that the further away from London one lives, the higher
the level of personal trust one could place in most local craftsmen.

MM

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:28:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

IMM wrote:

snip/

John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into a
similar type of design and efficiency. He will need to use that left hook a
lot to even get the cowboys to look.


He won't succeed until the education system scraps 90% of the so called
'unis' and starts reintroducing technical and vocational colleges that
teach something of some use, and make the actual qualification reflect
some real acquisition of skill and experience and even knowledge and
understanding, rather than a certificate of having wasted public money
for three years...

Well said that man ... its not even necessary to scrap the
institutions (although many of their staff would have to go). The
resulting qualification can be called a "degree" if that satisfies the
need of the PTB to have meaningless statistics about the number of
graduates in the working population.

However, it should be evident to all but the most dogmatic of
politcally motivated social-engineers that it would be of immense
benefit to all (students, tax payers, consumers, ...) to restore the
distinction between tertiary *education* (academic, oriented towards
research, maximizing the potential of intellectual capability, etc.)
and tertiary *training* (vocational, job- and skills-oriented).

Of course, *accessiblity* would have to be universal -- children from
low income families should be able to benefit from academic education
if they have the ability to do so, just as those from higher income
families, without the ability to benefit from academia, should be
routed towards vocational training and prevented from taking academic
university places from those more deserving of them.

Julian

--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk

On 29 Jan 2004 08:33:59 -0800, (Clive Long,UK)
wrote:

Mike Mitchell wrote in message . ..
What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)
and am always ready to support the Germans against a lot of the
criticism from British xenophobia, how good it was to see a crack team
of ordinary German workers demonstrate how super-efficient they are.
As the client said, we should feel ashamed that both the cement lorry
and the crane were incredibly late, typical of our often slapdash
approach to commercial enterprises.

I loved the house too.

Having struggled to project manage some IT disasters, it was an object
lesson in project management (at least to me !!)

However, her indoors (a better PM than me) pointed out:

The basic construction activities are repeated in each Huff-build -
so the estimates for assembly are based on previous experience. If you
are building something new, go for your best estimates then add your
contingency.

Assembly is far less susceptible to time vagaries than on-site build.

The whole Huff-fabrication and assembly process kept track of people
and things so they could be reliably made available even to a precise
schedule.

The people doing the job knew their job well, worked according to an
existing system and could rely on each other to be ready when needed.

Huff kept as much of the delivery under their control as possible -
right down to supplying their own screws etc. When they did rely on
Von Tommy Atkins to play his part, things did fall apart.

Die Huff-Manner were committed to the task and worked their little
backsides off.

Overall, I want a Huff House for Christmas please

What never ceases to amaze me is the attitude of the British to cases
like this, where the onlookers (the clients on site and we the
viewers) gasp in amazement at the sheer professionalism of the whole
exercise, as if to equate it with some kind of magic. During the
programme the presenter was often doing a double take, as if he could
hardly believe his eyes that it was happening so quickly.

But it IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE! This attitude to planning and working is
absolutely standard in Germany! This kind of work is the norm
EVERYwhere! What is so amazing is that we find it amazing! We cannot
seem to get our heads around the fact that we could do EXACTLY the
same as the Germans! We could be JUST as efficient. They do not
possess two brains, additional arms, or X-ray vision. We and the
Germans are cousins. We Brits could show the world just what we can
achieve if we only set our minds to it. I'm thinking here of the
change-over in a single weekend of the GWR track from broad gauge to
standard gauge. One weekend, 4,000 men! In 1892! We can organise
things when we want to. I repeat, we CAN and SHOULD strive far more
than we do, not just stand back in amazement. How good it would be for
our national pride and the economy for Germans to be watching a
programme on German TV showing a group of British builders
constructing a British house somewhere in Germany! And I don't mean a
Wimpey or a Barratt.

MM

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
How good it would be for
our national pride and the economy for Germans to be watching a
programme on German TV showing a group of British builders
constructing a British house somewhere in Germany! And I don't mean a
Wimpey or a Barratt.

MM

Did the show the first series of "Auf Wiedersehen, Pet" in Germany?

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:57:36 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:


Well said that man ... its not even necessary to scrap the
institutions (although many of their staff would have to go). The
resulting qualification can be called a "degree" if that satisfies the
need of the PTB to have meaningless statistics about the number of
graduates in the working population.

However, it should be evident to all but the most dogmatic of
politcally motivated social-engineers that it would be of immense
benefit to all (students, tax payers, consumers, ...) to restore the
distinction between tertiary *education* (academic, oriented towards
research, maximizing the potential of intellectual capability, etc.)
and tertiary *training* (vocational, job- and skills-oriented).

Of course, *accessiblity* would have to be universal -- children from
low income families should be able to benefit from academic education
if they have the ability to do so, just as those from higher income
families, without the ability to benefit from academia, should be
routed towards vocational training and prevented from taking academic
university places from those more deserving of them.

Julian

Quite. IIRC, the means tested grant arrangement worked quite well
for dealing with the access issue..



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

In article , Mike
Mitchell wrote:
If that is true, I salute Prescott for trying. But the cowboys
could be restrained very easily and quickly if only their
clients would withhold their money and not buy the cowboys'
shoddy products. When a few companies go out of business for
lack of customers, others will start to take note.

That requires (a) a freeing up of the planning system - greater
supply = greater choice; and (b) more discerning customers. It
seems to be generally accepted that houses sell on the
appearance of the kitchen and bathroom: almost no one cares
about issues of real quality.

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser
http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| "Owain" wrote:
| But weren't those German versions of British 13A sockets (with horizontal
| rockers) hideous. And they never put that missing screw back in.
| The missing screw was not missing. There was a metal plate behind,
| which precluded having a screw at that point.

Then they used an incorrect bracket with an excess hole. Or they could have
used a dummy screwhead to retain the regular pattern of screwheads.

| I also note your mention of the word "German" in your criticism of
| the sockets. Do you *know* they were German? Or merely installed
| by Germans, perhaps?

I don't care if they were German or Belgian or French ... they were clearly
not BS square faceplate style and they were clearly hideous.

I wonder if they were wired in brown/blue cable ...?

Owain

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| How good it would be for our national pride and the economy
| for Germans to be watching a programme on German TV showing
| a group of British builders constructing a British house
| somewhere in Germany! And I don't mean a Wimpey or a Barratt.

I think they did get The Builders episode of Fawlty Towers in Germany.

Owain

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:40:31 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:57:36 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:


Well said that man ... its not even necessary to scrap the
institutions (although many of their staff would have to go). The
resulting qualification can be called a "degree" if that satisfies the
need of the PTB to have meaningless statistics about the number of
graduates in the working population.

However, it should be evident to all but the most dogmatic of
politcally motivated social-engineers that it would be of immense
benefit to all (students, tax payers, consumers, ...) to restore the
distinction between tertiary *education* (academic, oriented towards
research, maximizing the potential of intellectual capability, etc.)
and tertiary *training* (vocational, job- and skills-oriented).

Of course, *accessiblity* would have to be universal -- children from
low income families should be able to benefit from academic education
if they have the ability to do so, just as those from higher income
families, without the ability to benefit from academia, should be
routed towards vocational training and prevented from taking academic
university places from those more deserving of them.

Julian

Quite. IIRC, the means tested grant arrangement worked quite well
for dealing with the access issue..

It is a little more involved than that, I think. At some point we, as
a society, need to come to grips with prejudices that affect the
accessibility issue - for example, the attriude of some lower-income
parents that tertiary information isn't "for their sort of people",
schools and teachers that discourage pupils from applying to certain
universities for reasons of reverse snobbery, etc. In addition,
something would need to be done to avoid the trap in which students
from low income families are fully funded from taxation, students from
high income families are funded with little real impact on parents'
disposible income, leaving those in the middle to dig really deep into
their pockets ...

I suspect also a significant dent in the need for taxpayer-funded
tertiary education could be made by bringing back / re-emphasizing the
sorts of courses that are undertaken part time alongside paid
employment - again, names are unimportant - call them
"apprenticeships", "sandwich courses", etc. Again, a cultural
attitude shift is needed such that these are recognized as of equal
value to "academic" university courses whilst being substantially
different in their content and intent.

Julian

--
Julian Fowler
julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:58:13 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 11:40:31 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:57:36 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:


Well said that man ... its not even necessary to scrap the
institutions (although many of their staff would have to go). The
resulting qualification can be called a "degree" if that satisfies the
need of the PTB to have meaningless statistics about the number of
graduates in the working population.

However, it should be evident to all but the most dogmatic of
politcally motivated social-engineers that it would be of immense
benefit to all (students, tax payers, consumers, ...) to restore the
distinction between tertiary *education* (academic, oriented towards
research, maximizing the potential of intellectual capability, etc.)
and tertiary *training* (vocational, job- and skills-oriented).

Of course, *accessiblity* would have to be universal -- children from
low income families should be able to benefit from academic education
if they have the ability to do so, just as those from higher income
families, without the ability to benefit from academia, should be
routed towards vocational training and prevented from taking academic
university places from those more deserving of them.

Julian

Quite. IIRC, the means tested grant arrangement worked quite well
for dealing with the access issue..

It is a little more involved than that, I think.

Of course.

At some point we, as
a society, need to come to grips with prejudices that affect the
accessibility issue - for example, the attriude of some lower-income
parents that tertiary information isn't "for their sort of people",
schools and teachers that discourage pupils from applying to certain
universities for reasons of reverse snobbery, etc.

Also the political correctness of having a target of 50% of the
population "going to a university".


In addition,
something would need to be done to avoid the trap in which students
from low income families are fully funded from taxation, students from
high income families are funded with little real impact on parents'
disposible income, leaving those in the middle to dig really deep into
their pockets ...

That's a matter of choosing the means criteria correctly.


I suspect also a significant dent in the need for taxpayer-funded
tertiary education could be made by bringing back / re-emphasizing the
sorts of courses that are undertaken part time alongside paid
employment - again, names are unimportant - call them
"apprenticeships", "sandwich courses", etc. Again, a cultural
attitude shift is needed such that these are recognized as of equal
value to "academic" university courses whilst being substantially
different in their content and intent.

I think that that is the essence.



Julian

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:58:13 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:

At some point we, as
a society, need to come to grips with prejudices that affect the
accessibility issue - for example, the attriude of some lower-income
parents that tertiary information isn't "for their sort of people",
schools and teachers that discourage pupils from applying to certain
universities for reasons of reverse snobbery, etc.

Also the political correctness of having a target of 50% of the
population "going to a university".

If I remember correctly, something like 40% of 16-year olds get less
than 5 GCSE A-C grades. The 50% target is ludicrous.

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 13:14:39 -0000, "Neil Jones"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:58:13 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote:

At some point we, as
a society, need to come to grips with prejudices that affect the
accessibility issue - for example, the attriude of some lower-income
parents that tertiary information isn't "for their sort of people",
schools and teachers that discourage pupils from applying to certain
universities for reasons of reverse snobbery, etc.

Also the political correctness of having a target of 50% of the
population "going to a university".

If I remember correctly, something like 40% of 16-year olds get less
than 5 GCSE A-C grades. The 50% target is ludicrous.

True, but all you have to do is keep dropping the standards and
encouraging people to borrow money to pay for access and you can
achieve them.

The question is whether that happens before people realise that it is
all a rather cruel con.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

snip stuff about further education

This mut be a wind up or a first- a thread on uk.d-i-y where everyone is
agreeing AND talking sense !


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

Hugely energy inefficient, all that glass tho.


I was wondering about that. In passing, Kevin mentioned that the house
was "super insulated" or something like that - but there didn't seem
much scope for that in their design.

The customer chose large glass areas. You can have the bare minimum of
window area if you want making a Huf highly energy efficient. The design is
on, I think, 1.2 metres grids. So you can have a large variation in that in
design.

"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On 29 Jan 2004 14:16:37 GMT, (Huge) wrote:

John Rumm writes:
Mike Mitchell wrote:

What an amazing house! Since I once lived in Germany (for many years)

I kind of felt it would be a bit like living in a museam - lots of
"show" but not quite "home". Still they looked prety pleased with it -
and the nice plot of land they had made all the difference to it as
well.

The nice plot of land made all the difference. You wouldn't want to live
in a
house like that where passersby could look in.

Why on earth not?!!!! Look around and see how many houses have no net
curtains! I do not, for one. Go to Holland, where they simply don't
care who looks in while they are sitting around having their tea. And
because anyone can stare, everyone loses interest after the first few
minutes. Net curtains = tiny minds!

Venetian blinds solve a lot.

"Julian Fowler" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 10:28:41 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

IMM wrote:

snip/

John Prescott is attempting to force the UK construction industry into
a
similar type of design and efficiency. He will need to use that left
hook a
lot to even get the cowboys to look.


He won't succeed until the education system scraps 90% of the so called
'unis'

Starting with the two snotty ones.

snip drivel

Well said that man ...

Oh another one!

In Germany they do not have BCOs, the builder is educated and qualified and
certified. he self certifies the build. It works. In this country, we
have an attitude that all workers are cowboys and have a layer to check
their work.

It like the idea of CORGI in principle, but not the way it is run. Any
inexperienced man can easily get a CORGI ticket. It needs to be tightened
up.

Each trade should have a similar system, where education and experience
matter. Then we will stop the shoddiness of the average British worker.

This has nothing to do with universities, of which only about 10% of the
people in this country have a degree. The countries that shine have a high
level of higher education, and lots of it. The UK suffers in ignoring the
so called lower skills. This has to be addressed.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...

Also the political correctness of having a target of 50% of the
population "going to a university".

Political correctness has nothing to do with it. The country is turning to
a high tech economy. The government has to prepare for this. So the other
50%, if it ever gets that high, who do not go to higher education shall be
involved in the basic skills we all know and need. That 50% is a lot of
people.

"Bob Mannix" wrote in message
...
snip stuff about further education

This mut be a wind up or a first- a thread on uk.d-i-y where everyone is
agreeing AND talking sense !

All I have read is bolocks.

In Germany they do not have BCOs, the builder is educated and qualified
and
certified. he self certifies the build. It works. In this country, we
have an attitude that all workers are cowboys and have a layer to check
their work.

How does that work with DIY projects? Do the Germans have to get a qualified
builder in to certify the work?

Colin