In message , at 18:12:24
on Wed, 8 Apr 2015, remarked:
Very few students were registered to vote before the reduction of the voting
age. This was partly because you had to be 21 at the time you qualified to
register to vote (i.e. in October before each May's elections). The voting
age was reduced in 1970 and provision was made to include everyone on the
register from their 18th birthday.

And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr O-level
stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr degree course,
not very many undergrads would have been over-21 anyway.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:00:13 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:12:24
on Wed, 8 Apr 2015, remarked:
Very few students were registered to vote before the reduction of the voting
age. This was partly because you had to be 21 at the time you qualified to
register to vote (i.e. in October before each May's elections). The voting
age was reduced in 1970 and provision was made to include everyone on the
register from their 18th birthday.

And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr O-level
stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr degree course,
not very many undergrads would have been over-21 anyway.

I suspect the majority of students still don't have gap yahs. They tend to
be restricted to those whose parents have deep pockets and can fund them
buggering about in the far east smoking weed for a year.

--
Spud

In message , at 09:36:08 on Thu, 9 Apr
2015, d remarked:
And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr O-level
stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr degree course,
not very many undergrads would have been over-21 anyway.

I suspect the majority of students still don't have gap yahs. They tend to
be restricted to those whose parents have deep pockets and can fund them
buggering about in the far east smoking weed for a year.

The gap years I've heard about aren't leisure. They are a form of
sandwich course - probably no longer available.

Spend a year working for a "sponsor" firm, who then pays you a small
retainer while you do your degree, and then as long as you pass will
give you a further year of "graduate trainee" induction. At the end of
the five years you both decide whether to stay or not.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:36:08 on Thu, 9 Apr
2015, d remarked:
And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr O-level
stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr degree course,
not very many undergrads would have been over-21 anyway.

I suspect the majority of students still don't have gap yahs. They tend to
be restricted to those whose parents have deep pockets and can fund them
buggering about in the far east smoking weed for a year.

The gap years I've heard about aren't leisure. They are a form of sandwich
course - probably no longer available.

Having recently taken an interest in "employing" sandwich students, most
unis [1] now offer them as an optional part of appropriate (usually
engineering) degrees.

If you can find an appropriate placement, you work the third year of your
degree and take your finals in the fourth. If you can't, you just take your
finals in the third year.

tim

[1] that's most of the ones that previously offered them as standard. There
are, of course, many unis that never offered them, and still don't.

In message , at 13:29:40 on Thu, 9 Apr 2015,
tim..... remarked:
The gap years I've heard about aren't leisure. They are a form of
sandwich course - probably no longer available.

Having recently taken an interest in "employing" sandwich students,
most unis [1] now offer them as an optional part of appropriate
(usually engineering) degrees.

If you can find an appropriate placement, you work the third year of
your degree and take your finals in the fourth. If you can't, you just
take your finals in the third year.

I understand about those arrangements, but they are very different to
the ones I was describing.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 11:38:01 +0100
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:36:08 on Thu, 9 Apr
2015, d remarked:
And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr O-level
stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr degree course,
not very many undergrads would have been over-21 anyway.

I suspect the majority of students still don't have gap yahs. They tend to
be restricted to those whose parents have deep pockets and can fund them
buggering about in the far east smoking weed for a year.

The gap years I've heard about aren't leisure. They are a form of
sandwich course - probably no longer available.

Ah ok. Arn't sandwich courses still available? I'd have assumed they were
crucial for some courses such as languages.

Spend a year working for a "sponsor" firm, who then pays you a small
retainer while you do your degree, and then as long as you pass will
give you a further year of "graduate trainee" induction. At the end of
the five years you both decide whether to stay or not.

Probably less common now firms can just do zero hours contracts.

--
Spud

In message , at 13:07:41 on Thu, 9 Apr
2015, d remarked:
The gap years I've heard about aren't leisure. They are a form of
sandwich course - probably no longer available.

Ah ok. Arn't sandwich courses still available? I'd have assumed they were
crucial for some courses such as languages.

Yes, but they aren't described as a "gap year" - which is between
leaving school and going to Uni.

Spend a year working for a "sponsor" firm, who then pays you a small
retainer while you do your degree, and then as long as you pass will
give you a further year of "graduate trainee" induction. At the end of
the five years you both decide whether to stay or not.

Probably less common now firms can just do zero hours contracts.

The sort of firms I had in mind don't do zero-hours contracts.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
18:12:24 on Wed, 8 Apr 2015, remarked:
Very few students were registered to vote before the reduction of the
voting age. This was partly because you had to be 21 at the time you
qualified to register to vote (i.e. in October before each May's
elections). The voting age was reduced in 1970 and provision was made to
include everyone on the register from their 18th birthday.

And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr
O-level stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr
degree course, not very many undergrads would have been over-21
anyway.

Not exactly. All Cambridge students had to do the 7th term entrance exam.
But the real point was that no-one could vote before they were 21 1/2 and
most not until they were nearly 22.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 08:29:35
on Thu, 9 Apr 2015, remarked:

And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr
O-level stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr
degree course, not very many undergrads would have been over-21
anyway.

Not exactly. All Cambridge students

Not all students went to Oxbridge. Difficult to imagine, I know.

had to do the 7th term entrance exam.

As I did, but I'd been accepted already on the basis of my A-level
results, so it was only an examination to see if I could win a
scholarship/exhibition.

I think I'd also studied Latin as a prerequisite for entrance, only to
find that by the time I applied it wasn't necessary any more. Although
in retrospect I found that understanding Latin was very useful in other
ways.

But the real point was that no-one could vote before they were 21 1/2
and most not until they were nearly 22.

And despite experiencing that 2-term "gappy" part-year, after having sat
the exams, I was still not 21yrs old until the very last few weeks of my
final term.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
08:29:35 on Thu, 9 Apr 2015, remarked:

And what with students in those days probably being from a 4yr
O-level stream, not having gap years, and almost always on a 3yr
degree course, not very many undergrads would have been over-21
anyway.

Not exactly. All Cambridge students

Not all students went to Oxbridge. Difficult to imagine, I know.

True but note which newsgroup we are in.

had to do the 7th term entrance exam.

As I did, but I'd been accepted already on the basis of my A-level
results, so it was only an examination to see if I could win a
scholarship/exhibition.

True, but everyone had to take it in my day (before yours).

I think I'd also studied Latin as a prerequisite for entrance, only
to find that by the time I applied it wasn't necessary any more.
Although in retrospect I found that understanding Latin was very
useful in other ways.

Indeed, though it was still needed in my day.

But the real point was that no-one could vote before they were 21 1/2
and most not until they were nearly 22.

And despite experiencing that 2-term "gappy" part-year, after having
sat the exams, I was still not 21yrs old until the very last few
weeks of my final term.

I came of age on 1 January 1970, between 18 and 21. My 21st birthday was at
the start of my third year.

--
Colin Rosenstiel