"Medieval History is Bunk"?

Have members seen the views of Charles Clarke, the current Education
Secretary, on mediaeval history? They are appalling.

Acording to 'The Times' today:

----
SUBJECTS such as medieval history are a waste of time and should not
be funded by the taxpayer, Charles Clarke, the Education Secretary,
has said.

He told a gathering at University College Worcester, a former
polytechnic: "I don't mind there being some medievalists
around for ornamental purposes, but there is no reason for the State
to pay for them." Only subjects that had a "clear
usefulness" should be publicly funded, he added. ......

An Education Department spokesman said: "He is basically saying
that universities exist to enable the British economy and society to
deal with the challenges posed by the increasingly rapid process of
global change."
----

I hope all members will complain to their MPs as well as writing to
the Department of Education and Skills about these narrow views about
the purpose of universities and, indeed, of education.

I agree with you entirely. Quite apart from anything else, the main
purpose of a university education is not simply to pack students'
heads full of 'useful' information, but to train the intellect, and
provided the training is sufficiently rigorous, it only matters to a
limited extent what subject is used for the medium of that training.

What a pity we cannot lash Mr Clarke to a quintain and have a party
of knights use him for jousting practice!

Ann


--- In , "Eric Thompson"
<ej.thompson@b...> wrote:
> Have members seen the views of Charles Clarke, the current
Education
> Secretary, on mediaeval history? They are appalling.
>
> Acording to 'The Times' today:
>
> ----
> SUBJECTS such as medieval history are a waste of time and should
not
> be funded by the taxpayer, Charles Clarke, the Education Secretary,
> has said.
>
> He told a gathering at University College Worcester, a former
> polytechnic: "I don't mind there being some medievalists
> around for ornamental purposes, but there is no reason for the
State
> to pay for them." Only subjects that had a "clear
> usefulness" should be publicly funded, he added. ......
>

> He told a gathering at University College Worcester, a former
> polytechnic: "I don't mind there being some medievalists
> around for ornamental purposes, but there is no reason for the
State
> to pay for them." Only subjects that had a "clear
> usefulness" should be publicly funded, he added.


That is pathetic. He must own stock in high tech firms!

Does anyone know what Charles Clarke's track record is
and where he was 'educated'?

Charles Clarke does his party no good whatsoever by
spouting such pious drivel and if he is a typical
example of Blair's ministers, then the sooner Labour
gets kicked out the better.

As a trade unionist and former Labour Party supporter,
I am disgusted with Charles Clarke, as I appreciate
the value of education and the knowledge of our
nation's heritage.

I saw Professor McKitterick from Cambridge make some
excellent points on today's BBC News and it is clear
that Clarke's 'clap trap' is yet another nail in the
Labour Party's coffin.


I'll be writing to my M.P. and the press.

God preserve us from the likes of Charles Clarke and
his clones.

The late Pol Pot would have been proud of him!

Lomond Handley
lomondhandley@...







__________________________________________________
Yahoo! Plus
For a better Internet experience
http://www.yahoo.co.uk/btoffer

This is really scary. It sounds as though he's suggesting pulling the
rug from under not just student funding but the university staff as
well. I wonder what his own background is. Engineering??
This begins to make sense of the strange history curricula in the
schools these days, which incidentally as inflicted on my two before
Labour got in. Ancient Greece and the Tudors at junior school.
Followed by 'aren't you lucky you aren't a Victorian servant?'. Then
1st year at "big school", canals, stage coaches & railways. And on to
World War I. After which, never look back. The result, I understand,
has been a sharp fall in the numbers of students choosing history for
A level & degrees. I had naively thought the gov. might be worrying
about this, but now I know better.
Clearly the assumption is that we owe something to people who started
modern transport, and(in a jr school way) to Ancient Greece and the
Tudors (for getting us out of the medieval period, I suppose). After
that it's done in a spirit of history is valid merely as background
knowledge for current affairs.
Presumably the Middle Ages was one long dark night of mud huts,
headless monks & gargoyles.
Charles Clarke, a suitable case for re-education?
Can these people be emailed?

Marie



--- In , "Eric Thompson"
<ej.thompson@b...> wrote:
> Have members seen the views of Charles Clarke, the current
Education
> Secretary, on mediaeval history? They are appalling.
>
> Acording to 'The Times' today:
>
> ----
> SUBJECTS such as medieval history are a waste of time and should
not
> be funded by the taxpayer, Charles Clarke, the Education Secretary,
> has said.
>
> He told a gathering at University College Worcester, a former
> polytechnic: "I don't mind there being some medievalists
> around for ornamental purposes, but there is no reason for the
State
> to pay for them." Only subjects that had a "clear
> usefulness" should be publicly funded, he added. ......
>
> An Education Department spokesman said: "He is basically saying
> that universities exist to enable the British economy and society
to
> deal with the challenges posed by the increasingly rapid process of
> global change."
> ----
>
> I hope all members will complain to their MPs as well as writing to
> the Department of Education and Skills about these narrow views
about
> the purpose of universities and, indeed, of education.