From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"EMA can be seen as a bribe to stay on, and the money given out is supposed to be spent on essential school items. However, the money gets fed straight to the students' bank accounts, which they can spend on whatever they like."

It's not actually supposed to be spent on any specific thing, the government does stress that EMA can be spent on anything the student wishes.

Contents 1 Explain something 2 Article needs cleanup 3 Minor changes 4 Article Bias

[edit] Explain something

Am I right in thinking if you miss one lesson in the course of a week, for anything other than extrenuating circumstances, you lose your pay?. I can't any discussion of this in the article. Thanks Danny 11:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I think so. Skinnyweed 21:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

That's true. And it really does have to be something absolutely random too; doctors appointments and funerals don't count as ligitiment excuses. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shamesspwns (talk • contribs) 20:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Article needs cleanup

The article seems to be a list of general grievances with UK student funding rather than specifically on the EMA. Possibly needs cleanup and removal of bias?

Yes, unless something is sourced, it can be removed. Skinnyweed 19:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I am going to update this section and remove the criticism that it 'discriminates against the Nuclear family' - this is the case for every cash benefit / benefit in kind that is dependent on benefit unit income. Its difficult to overcome.

[edit] Minor changes

I noticed a couple of things that needed changing:

• The top income amount was slightly wrong.
• Bonuses aren't necessarily awarded for academic progress, it's entirely at the discretion of the learning provider.
• EMA isn't for students studying "after GCSEs in England or Standard Grades in Scotland", this gives the impression these qualifications are necessary to receive it when they are not.
• From this year onwards, EMA is also available for those undertaking unpaid work-based learning.

--JordR 22:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article Bias

This article seems to be quite biased against ema, and doesnt speak to much of the benefits of the ema system. I recieve ema at the moment and believe it is a very good system and has encouraged me to aim for 100% attendance rather than missing days off college for no reason.

I have removed the one highlighted POV statement, will have a look for more now SGGH 12:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)