[alexgmcm]

Indeed - look at the case in Law where in the UK at least the pupillage requirement (essentially an internship/apprenticeship post university IIRC) ensures it remains the preserve of the privileged - especially the upper echelons of the field such as barristers and judges.

We see the same with the iron grip that the medical council has on the number of medicine students (imagine if we fixed the numbers of software engineering students and made it difficult to register foreign qualifications).

I agree that educational standards are important - but if that isn't coupled with improving access to higher education (including post-graduate education) then it's basically just saying only the rich should be allowed in.

[pragmacoders]

I definitely agree that higher education should be accessible to everyone and for free.

I feel like the conversation should be

- "We need ethical and professional standards because our current way of doing things isn't working out too well!"

- "But that will exclude people who don't have access to education!"

- "Then we should give everyone a means to get the education. Because it is an unlimited resource that can be freely given without being taken from someone else and enriches all of humanity!"

- "Yeah! Let's do both those things!"

At least that's how I had hoped the conversation would lead.

But we can't throw our hands in the air and say "Accessible education is impossible and so we can never have standards of ethics or quality". That is definitely a dead end for society.

Anywho - I absolutely agree!