UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated ***
Will wrote: "My view is that standards are still very high. I saw the A level questions for my daughter's exams, and frankly I would not have liked to do that paper !The issue I see is in fact too much regula..."
Whilst I thoroughly agree with the regulatory framework that is vastly overblown, the race to pass grades and testing is the reason why you can't pass your daughter's paper. After 12 months intense coaching you'd probably do it.
A class of children were "taken back in time" to the 1950's schooling procedures and were sat down and given a test. These were A Star GCSE pupils, selected for their expected grades. Out of the 30 in the class, only one scored over 40%.
It was then revealed that they had just taken an 11 plus exam from the era. These pupils were 15-16 year olds.
Will wrote: "Streaming within a single school allows slow starters to achieve more potential though than selection at age 11. They can catch up and get better grades, better sets - which a different school stop..."In Barrow we actually introduced the education act properly with a tech as well as a Grammar School and Secondary Modern.
AND we had transfer exam for 14 year old (from memory) which pupils at the Grammar school sat (Including me) and pupils at the other schools sat, and this led to pupils who were late developers being moved up
The big problem with the old system was so many local authorities didn't actually bring it in properly, no Tech, and no transfer exam
Will wrote: "My view is that standards are still very high. I saw the A level questions for my daughter's exams, and frankly I would not have liked to do that paper !The issue I see is in fact too much regulation of the teachers, stupid curriculae and focus on grades and testing to the exclusion of actual teaching, and that's something both parties have been guilty of. ..."
I'm not sure about A level, but from looking at the stuff daughters got lower down in the school some subjects were badly taught.
Youngest daughter taught herself History from the horrible history books and talking to her Dad (which breed healthy skepticism if nothing else)
My mother was a teacher who retired some time before 1990 and the problem there was a lot of the nonsense coming through was from the teaching unions and educationalists. Those who'd been in the profession could ignore it, but there were a lot of teachers coming out of college who'd been badly trained and couldn't cope.
The problem from the point of view of government was that the only way they could correct this was heavy handedly from above, which causes as many problems (but different ones)
Certainly the idea that you can only teach small classes would have made my mother laugh, who habitually had classes of 50 working class kids, and who taught them all to read with the assistance of an infant help shared with another teacher.
She preferred small classes, but she preferred not to have to deal with educationalists
Nottingham had the full range of schools, my sister went to the textile school, normal core lessons but textiles, colour chemistry and design were also taught.
Has the UK ran out of money? In between taking our tongue out of China's arse, there was a lot of talk about low public spending and the need for Chinese investment. So China is going to help us build a nuclear power station, and here's me wondering if anybody at Westminster has ever heard of the Trojan Horse...
R.M.F wrote: "Has the UK ran out of money? In between taking our tongue out of China's arse, there was a lot of talk about low public spending and the need for Chinese investment. So China is going to help us ..."
Yes we've run out of money. About 35 years ago when the riches built up by creaming off from the old Empire finally ran out
Marc wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Has the UK ran out of money? In between taking our tongue out of China's arse, there was a lot of talk about low public spending and the need for Chinese investment. So China is goi..."
But we've got money for trident and bank bailouts...
The one thing I agree with Corbyn about is that we need to withdraw from our international-military role which is complete posturing and based on ever-diminishing historical influence as our actions alienate countries who used to hold us in high esteem. No nuclear deterrent, no bombing raids or troops on the ground . We can remain part of the laughable EU foreign and security initiatives, but a) they can never agree on any united action and b) we might vote to come out of the EU anyway.If we have any diplomatic credibility left, we can aspire to how the Norwegians use theirs and work quietly and unseen in the background.
One problem we will have is unilaterally untangling bilateral treaty commitments if we go down that road. It's not just the Falklands we've promised to support, we've got deals with most of the Commonwealth as well
Like reneging on agreements has ever caused our Foreign Office one sleepless night, ever, Jim...Why do you think we've been known as 'Perfidious Albion' across the continent for centuries?
When did any nation ever put the interests of another ahead of its own?
I see our glorious Home secretary hsas been on the gin again. She claims that there are four constabularies that have no ethnic representation. One of them is our force.There is a reason for the lack of representation, that is because there is no ethnic minority to represent! I think we'll have to drive down to Birmingham, kidnap a black police officer and force him to live in Cheshire, then promote him to Chief Constable.
Will wrote: "Like reneging on agreements has ever caused our Foreign Office one sleepless night, ever, Jim...Why do you think we've been known as 'Perfidious Albion' across the continent for centuries?"
Absolutely. The problem is just who you renege on and why.
For example, supporting the Falklands could be seriously important for our oil industry, a small investment now and it pays back well over the next century or two.
Same with India. Yes we could cut their aid but they might stop buying arms of us and even turn to other suppliers for other stuff.
Actually its a complicated thing to untangle. Let's look at steel. One problem with steel is thanks to the policy Ed Miliband put in place (and agreed by all political parties so it's not a pop at him) our energy is expensive. Yes our wages are expensive as well, but we could probably cope with that, but we cannot produce steel with expensive wages AND expensive energy. So the money that could have ensured that we had a steel industry is paying householders with solar panels.
If we then step back from our 'international military role' then the first thing that happens is that we lose our arms industry. We don't have a big enough military to support one and it's the international backscratching that brings in sales. Effectively part of the advantage of buying our kit is firstly we've field tested it in combat and secondly we'll turn up and help if things get serious because we're tied into various long term arrangements.
If we lose our military shipbuilding, then we've lost shipbuilding in this country because military is about what's left.
If we stop building military aircraft, we'll probably lose our national aircraft industry such as it is. Not overnight but in the next ten years.
This knocks on to things like steel and a lot of top of the range engineering.
One reason we strut and fret our hour upon the stage is that we need it. Every year we sacrifice a few decent young men because it helps keep many thousands of others in jobs.
BJ is right. The British electorate don't vote in a government to have it be nice to Johnny Foreigner at their expense.
Don't agree with you on Steel, Jim. The reason we are losing our steel industry is that China has spent years buying scrap steel from all over Europe (last year there were 4 container ships A DAY from Newport docks alone heading to China with scrap...Now they are dumping it at a fraction of new cost to close down competitor plants before hiking the price back up...
Whilst idiot Osborne signs Trade Deals with them
China has been studying the capitalist West for years and has learned how to beat us at our own game. The weakness of letting 'the market' decide which of our industries go to the wall is that there will always be someone better able to exploit a situation. We should have supported our steel industry over the years and used that scrap ourselves.
With steel I was just following up on a discussion on Radio 4 on Tuesday at some point (I spent too long in the car) The Chinese in their boom were buying everything in the commodities line. Even things like Milk Powder. So their slowdown has hit a lot of industries.
But the problem is that if you don't sign a trade deal, you're still no better off. There is so much CHinese (and other steel) sloshing about the world market that our industry is screwed anyway.
The problem we have in the UK is our 'business model'
Our labour, energy and other costs are too expensive to compete on basic products.
As a general rule our population is not well enough educated to go for the top of the range manufactured stuff on the sort of scale we need to support a population.
Manufacturing has been a low margin activity, the returns on the investment were too low to tempt new money into it.
We're trapped in military production because it's an area where you can rig the market without too much worry about it being regarded as state aids.
Any new model would have to start with decent technical and similar education and that's going to take us a couple of decades to get right and a couple more decades to make a real difference.
One thing that struck me with education.My late mother did teach at a few other schools locally including a 'special' school, but most of her career, from the age of 19 to 60 she taught at one school, returning there repeatedly from maternity and supply work.
I did rather wonder how her experience would contrast with that of Patti who is teaching all over the world
Not quite the 'exact opposite' and not meaning it's better or worse, but interested in the difference
Cardiff wire and steel used to buy in most of that scrap for making reinforcing rods. The landlords sold their site for luxury housing so they had to close. I used to export a lot of it to Europe. Who owned the land? Guess - another reason to despise the meddling Welsh politicians.
So, to sum up: We've sold out to the Chinese, our industries have gone down the pan, we have no money, we're pulling out of Europe, and the Tories are wrecking the UK (as usual) whilst enriching themselves and their cronies....but everything is fine? :)
Yes the Arabs and Russians are cherry picking. What more do you want :o)
R.M.F wrote: "So, to sum up: We've sold out to the Chinese, our industries have gone down the pan, we have no money, we're pulling out of Europe, and the Tories are wrecking the UK (as usual) whilst enriching th..."Back To The Future & the Thatcherite 80s. Apart from the Chinese that is, back then I think it was the Japanese buying up swathes of the UK.
Marc wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "So, to sum up: We've sold out to the Chinese, our industries have gone down the pan, we have no money, we're pulling out of Europe, and the Tories are wrecking the UK (as usual) whils..."Has their ever been a time the UK wasn't in crisis?
yes when it colonised half the globe & ripped off its colonies
Marc wrote: "yes when it colonised half the globe & ripped off its colonies"But there was always the crisis of how much it was going to cost to police those colonies ;)
we sent lotsd of Scots to do the job cos they were cheap :-)
Will wrote: "And better at it..."'Good infantry when led by white officers' was the sort of thinking prevalent at the time
EVEL passed in the commons yesterday, and the end of the UK just got a little bit closer. I'm not complaining, on the contrary, I'm overjoyed, but I do feel sorry for those who wanted an English parliament or a federal solution. Still, it's just like Westminster to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory...
An English Parliament almost certainly would end the Union. It would have to be convinced to pay over money to the other administrations
Jim wrote: "An English Parliament almost certainly would end the Union. It would have to be convinced to pay over money to the other administrations"Can it be any worse than the half-way house situation we have know?
For fiscal purposes, we are a unitary state, for law, health and education, we're a federal state, and for human rights, we're going to be a divided state!
What a shambles.
Well actually for Law we've been a federal state since the act of union and that has had a knock on effect in other fields.With human rights, who knows what's happening, I've caught the edge of this 'named person' scheme that seems to have upset a wide variety of people
For as long as England have 85% of the population (and that's not England's fault) this running sore will keep going. Westminster had one chance to save the Union last year, but for whatever reason, they blew it.
I'm not complaining, but I always thought the UK would end with a bang, and not a whimper.
EVEL also makes it highly unlikely that somebody from Wales, NI, or Scotland can ever be Prime Minister...and here's me thinking the Tories were serious about preserving the union.
And if a future Labour government can't command a majority in England and needs Welsh and Scottish seats...well, I do love a good constitutional crisis. I can't believe the Tories would sacrifice the union for short-term gain.
R.M.F wrote: "And if a future Labour government can't command a majority in England and needs Welsh and Scottish seats...well, I do love a good constitutional crisis. I can't believe the Tories would sacrifice..."
all that has happened is that England has been put on a similar footing to Scotland.
English MPs cannot vote on matters that are devolved to Scotland.
Scots MPs cannot vote on matters the Speaker (who might be of any party) decides are devolved to England
Obviously England hasn't got the treaty safeguards Scotland has
R.M.F wrote: "For as long as England have 85% of the population (and that's not England's fault) this running sore will keep going. ..."
you're the ones who voted to stay, we were never asked
However, if you had asked...
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "And if a future Labour government can't command a majority in England and needs Welsh and Scottish seats...well, I do love a good constitutional crisis. I can't believe the Tories w..."
It effectively makes it impossible for a non-English MP to become PM, and if the Labour party commands a majority with MPs from Wales and Scotland, but the Tories have a majority in England, then we have grid-lock...
Hey, I'm not complaining - I'm over the moon. I cannot believe the Tories would be so stupid as to push this through. It only the cause of Scottish independence.
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "For as long as England have 85% of the population (and that's not England's fault) this running sore will keep going. ..."
you're the ones who voted to stay, we were never asked"
Well, we stayed, and as you're 85% of the UK you have the majority, so you can fix this constitutional mess :)
R.M.F wrote: "Well, we stayed, and as you're 85% of the UK you have the majority, so you can fix this constitutional mess :) ..."I suspect that the most popular solution with the English would have been an English parliament with full powers over the taxation of England. Then the English could decide how they spent their money.
But nobody asked us
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Well, we stayed, and as you're 85% of the UK you have the majority, so you can fix this constitutional mess :) ..."I suspect that the most popular solution with the English would ha..."
Nothing stopping England from getting off its backside and fixing this!
As I've said many a time, England has had 40 years to fix this.
Well it isn't as if it's that important. There's a million more Moslems in the UK than there are Scots who voted for Independence. Which is the most important group for the government to get on side?
Jim wrote: "Well it isn't as if it's that important. There's a million more Moslems in the UK than there are Scots who voted for Independence. Which is the most important group for the government to get on side?"Maybe the group that has been in Union with England for 308 years, and fought and died in many wars involving this island nation? :)
Well if length of service and numbers of dead give priority, that puts the Welsh as more important
The Welsh!!! Bloody hell! :)I nearly fell out of my chair!
They were dying for us in France, killing Scots :-)
presumably we were killing Welsh Patagonians in Las Malvinas?
Marc wrote: "presumably we were killing Welsh Patagonians in Las Malvinas?"It's entirely possible but apparently the number of Argentinean of English or Scots descent both outnumber those of Welsh descent by at least two to one. We probably killed more 'English Buenos Aireans' than we did Welsh Patagonians
Anyone else annoyed by the Conservtive party's attitude to the Lords over the Tax Credits thing?Every moaning minnie going is complaining about the Lords, suggesting that the are going to break the salisbury Convention - when they aren't because osborne chose to use the wrong method * of changing the rules.
They are going to provoke another crisis out of sheer arrogance.
(*Choosing to use a Statutory Instrument rather than an Act of Parliament )
UK Amazon Kindle Forum
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beiderbecke Affair (other topics)The Grain Market in the Roman Empire: A Social, Political and Economic Study (other topics)
The Peasants Are Revolting (other topics)
How to Lie with Statistics (other topics)
That Old Ace in the Hole (other topics)
More...
I went to a grammar school (it wasn't a private school - although there were a very small number there who passed an entrance exam if they hadn't passed the 11+ - some of them may have paid fees I'm not sure about that)
My sister was in the first year that there was no eleven plus, and my parents had no choice over the school that she could attend. However this school wasn't ready - it was an existing secondary modern that had to practically double the intake for the year, and the new classrooms and other facilities weren't there. My parents argued that they should be given some degree of choice. In the end they sent her to the same school that I went to - but paid fees for her.
Five years later my brother went to the comprehensive - which was at that time the best school in the area. The pupils went into streams based on their junior school results, and were divided into sets later.
I spent a few months teaching at another nearby comprehensive - and it was this experience that made me decide that teaching was not for me. They did not believe in streaming, and sets were used to make smaller classes for certain subjects - it was all mixed ability. In one class there were pupils who raced through the work and needed more to keep them occupied and one girl who shouldn't have been in the school at all IMO - or at the least should have had a special assistant with her as she used to spend the whole lesson trying to write her own name at the top of the page.