Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?
- Thread starter PINKIE
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Calm down.
We've missed your insults and "predictions"
Why dont you stick to facts about whether there's a UK constitution or not?
I'm simply responding to your post that I quoted. He may be an academic but he certainly never sought the advice of academics. And I really don't understand how you can claim he understands people when he completely put off virtually everyone in the teaching profession with his ridiculous approach to education despite having little experience of it other than harping back to his own schooling.
Nevertheless all I can do it speak from experience as this is my field and I see it every day. When he came in, primary education was already in the process of developing a new curriculum where teachers were being trained and developed to provide a more holistic approach to improving progress and attainment, particularly in core subjects such as English and Maths. The education system was growing and it was a natural progression of improvement. A decade earlier the National Curriculum had been introduced and despite teething troubles, the profession was learning how teaching and learning was progressing. There was good consensus on developing literacy and maths and foundation subjects in a holistic way, and some really good work going on in terms of developing reading at an early age such as with the Rose Review and a primary curriculum which was heading in the right direction with the support of the vast majority of the teaching community.
Gove, without any thought scrapped the whole thing, scrapped the National Curriculum overnight and left nothing in its place so teachers basically had no guidance on what to teach. He then informed schools he was removing the long-established method of assessment and grading pupils' attainment and was replacing it with... nothing. He ignored the advice of Headteachers and teachers and others in the education system about the turmoil this was creating, and ploughed on. He then presided over the introduction of tests for children from as early as 5 and 7 years old which in effect forced prescriptive teaching methods which were counter-productive. As a result, children in Early Years are now sitting baseline tests, and Year 1 children are learning to sound out nonsense words!! Then we have children from Year 2 upwards being taught the "mechanics" of English rather than the art and sophisticated style of English as a language. Pupils are being assessed on a tick box system, so a child that can write a bland piece of writing which lacks any depth, but can add specific word types and punctuation like a formula, is being classed as higher attainer than a pupil who can bring together a well crafted sequence of ideas which fires the imagination but might not include enough subjunctive clauses. These are just examples I know of first hand, off the top of my head and I can come up with many more, but those are damaging enough. I see the U-turn that's happened to good teaching and learning over the last 3/4 years as a result of his proposals and it's a massive disappointment. For experienced teachers who really know child development and pedagogy, and who were heading in the right direction, Gove really was a massive backward step.
You can be an excellent mathematician but a **** maths teacher. I can tell you without a shadow of doubt, good pedagogy is entirely different to knowing your subject. Being excellent people isn't enough.
Well I'm happy to bow to your superior knowledge about teaching. Maybe politicians don't make enough effort to discuss their ideas with teachers who do the work day in and day out?
My experience is from the outside. When I was at school I went to a Grammar School which helped children from a working class background to achieve their potential. Maybe secondary modern children were left behind and not able to achieve their potential. I would think they should be taught subjects that would help them in the future. Now a lot of people are going into further education - especially degree level - but they come out lacking the basic skills. This is why so many of them still going into retail or call centres. I was talking to somebody who was doing an accounting course at a local authority. She described what they did and it was an absolute shambles. She said they were asked questions on very small parts of accounting and nothing was brought together so they understood what it was all about. There were multiple choice questions which didn't help anybody to judge what they knew about accounting.
I also think that there should be more flexibility so that if pupils are assessed for a certain stream earlier the people who don't seem to be cut out for that stream could go into classes to help them transfer rather being stuck for the rest of their schooldays.
It's the day to day stuff which has been counter-productive more-so than the media headline stuff against Gove tbf.
I would love more Grammar schools, although having experienced one child successfully gain entry to a grammar school, while the other one "failed" to, that stigma of the 11plus should NEVER have to be experienced by any child at such a young age. But in theory I think Grammar schools are a force for good and there should be more.
The trouble is they are no longer there for the working classes. The demand is high and the places are few. So unlike in our day, the middle-classes and wealthier families have the advantage of getting in. Nowadays, you tutor your child into grammar school. Pay £20 per hour to someone who will teach them grammar school entry exam techniques on english (vocabulary), maths, non-verbal (IQ type) tests. If you have the money would you rather pay £30k a year to send your kid to private school or spend about £2000 a year for a couple of years to get them into Grammar schools and save yourself the later expense? It angers me to be honest. Because you get robotic kids who are taught towards a test and the naturally bright and able learners from under-privileged backgrounds are being missed because they haven't had the tutoring. The real irony is that the grammar schools actually brought many of these tests in to try and find the naturally talented gems, and with time they've made these tests even tougher. But the tougher they make them, the more they alienate those who they were designed for.
I agree about degrees as well. I think at one point you could get a degree in satanic music lol. We need more vocational qualifications, but are enough people going into skilled professions? We seem to be becoming a service industry rather than a skilled one. Your point goes back to your earlier point about bringing in experienced people into teaching. I came into teaching later in life and I believe that some young adults who come in at age 21/22 after getting their degrees lack the life experiences and skills to put it all together in the classroom. Worse still, many never actually understand what I call, the real world. They're cocooned for most of their working life in a school environment and become institutionalised. That in itself is part of the problem with poor teachers who think the world owes them a living and they need to be weeded out. Some of them should try working in private industry and see what life is really like... but that's a whole different topic
We seem to be pretty much agreeing but obviously you have the experience to know what is going on and how to fix it although the testing is a difficult one. There needs to be testing but it shouldn't be the be all and end all of the system.It's the day to day stuff which has been counter-productive more-so than the media headline stuff against Gove tbf.
I would love more Grammar schools, although having experienced one child successfully gain entry to a grammar school, while the other one "failed" to, that stigma of the 11plus should NEVER have to be experienced by any child at such a young age. But in theory I think Grammar schools are a force for good and there should be more.
The trouble is they are no longer there for the working classes. The demand is high and the places are few. So unlike in our day, the middle-classes and wealthier families have the advantage of getting in. Nowadays, you tutor your child into grammar school. Pay £20 per hour to someone who will teach them grammar school entry exam techniques on english (vocabulary), maths, non-verbal (IQ type) tests. If you have the money would you rather pay £30k a year to send your kid to private school or spend about £2000 a year for a couple of years to get them into Grammar schools and save yourself the later expense? It angers me to be honest. Because you get robotic kids who are taught towards a test and the naturally bright and able learners from under-privileged backgrounds are being missed because they haven't had the tutoring. The real irony is that the grammar schools actually brought many of these tests in to try and find the naturally talented gems, and with time they've made these tests even tougher. But the tougher they make them, the more they alienate those who they were designed for.
I agree about degrees as well. I think at one point you could get a degree in satanic music lol. We need more vocational qualifications, but are enough people going into skilled professions? We seem to be becoming a service industry rather than a skilled one. Your point goes back to your earlier point about bringing in experienced people into teaching. I came into teaching later in life and I believe that some young adults who come in at age 21/22 after getting their degrees lack the life experiences and skills to put it all together in the classroom. Worse still, many never actually understand what I call, the real world. They're cocooned for most of their working life in a school environment and become institutionalised. That in itself is part of the problem with poor teachers who think the world owes them a living and they need to be weeded out. Some of them should try working in private industry and see what life is really like... but that's a whole different topic
Why don't you stick to the mathematical realities? It should be your forte old bean
You're fat and ugly and your Polish wife knows it
Maybe that's why you have 2 kitchens so she doesn't have to look at your grid while she's cooking
You can carry on with your childish insults. It is obvious you don't have anything substantial or useful to say.You're fat and ugly and your Polish wife knows it
Maybe that's why you have 2 kitchens so she doesn't have to look at your grid while she's cooking
Wibble
You haven't posted anything remotely sensible in the entire thread Pete.
Looking forward to seeing my pool btw?
Labour have been a mess since the unions voted Miliband Minor in. I've never voted for them and I doubt I could even if Gove became leader of the Tories (not that I'd vote for him either as I'm not a fascist, more centre right).
That's a very good description of how you interact on here.
In the cold light of day you should have a look back about your hysterical rants about losers, winners, sensible people, idiots, asking people to post bank statements to prove their wealth whilst boasting about some slum HMO in the ****test part of SW19.
Given how public you've made all your personal details, this is clearly how you are happy to be perceived by the general public.
I think the problem is that we can't agree on where we are
I totally get what you are saying, as I have three big kids and they have little kids. The difference is that I have been constant (different from know-it-all) in saying that voted change must now be allowed to be planned, negotiated and fulfilled; I have also said it must be as fast as practicable, but controlled and reliable.
We will all feel some pain, as I see getting rid of the EU dogma akin to having a Wisdom tooth removed, but I honestly believe we will be better off for it, eventually.
I have never said my opinion is better than anyone else's, but I will always challenge blatant nonsense that is used only to cloud an important, fairly voted referendum result (pretty much what is happening to Corbyn's elected status as well).
In these uncertain times you are right to have concerns, we all are, but thinking back just two weeks, I was just as concerned, perhaps more so, about the parlous nature of the EU and our support of it.
The initial shock waves have passed, calming influences have spoken and reassured to a point, big business has spoken positively about the future, some will have to adapt, but they understand that change is constant.
It is the fact that change is constant that moves us through periods of calm and then uncertain nervousness; it is that cycle that allows the financial vultures to pick the bones of many a sick or hindered business.
They take their gains from the system and move on, predicting more doom and gloom that only serves to offer them more opportunity to gamble with others futures. It is a **** process, but it is the one we have, at the moment.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Playing-Po...=1467438950&sr=1-10&keywords=playing+politics
I think I bought this book a long time ago. I might even still have it in storage now.
I remember one of the games was very simple but very accurate. The parties were lined up and the parties on the outside knew they could count on the voters outside where they stood and the object was to align your party so you would get more votes and squeeze the more centre parties. The risk was that one of the centre parties would jump over you and mop up all the voters to the outside.
An example of the game in real life was shown after the last election when Labour self destructed and moved to the left. The Conservative Party brought in a budget which moved them closer to the Labour Party knowing that they wouldn't challenge them but move even further to the left.
I think I bought this book a long time ago. I might even still have it in storage now.
I remember one of the games was very simple but very accurate. The parties were lined up and the parties on the outside knew they could count on the voters outside where they stood and the object was to align your party so you would get more votes and squeeze the more centre parties. The risk was that one of the centre parties would jump over you and mop up all the voters to the outside.
An example of the game in real life was shown after the last election when Labour self destructed and moved to the left. The Conservative Party brought in a budget which moved them closer to the Labour Party knowing that they wouldn't challenge them but move even further to the left.
- Status