'Terroring' - my heart goes out to teachers

[jbob]

I didn't say that people had an equal choice. I said that they had a choice.

Personally I would be in favour of a voucher system whereby each parent could choose to spend their voucher at whichever school they liked.

Then all schools would be "independent" but education would still be taxpayer-funded up to a standard level. That way there would no longer be this artificial split between "state" and "private".

Giles..

Most people in society don't have a choice. Even in this ludicrous system where parents can move their kids away from their nearest school, it is still unequal and can be based on simple things like the parent's ability to present themselves and construct a case. Some people will not be as good as this as others, even though their child might be academically bright. The parents who are good at presenting themselves will gain preference - speaking the same langauge as the panel before them, so to speak.

Again, you contradict yourself. With the system you suggest you wouldn't be able to enforce this dictum: Money gives you the power to avoid the yob element. Good.

The terrible yobs would all have vouchers and could demand to go to Eton.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Why is it unacceptable to want to work though? and why should children who want to work have their education affected by mob rule and the domination of the loudest/most unruly?Just because they exist in society.. .
I managed to go to a comprehensive which didnt have too many problems with really bad behaviour fortunately but if you did disrupt the class you were made to leave and work where you couldnt cause problems.

Fortunately being on your own didnt appeal too much to troublemakers so there was a line and generally most people didnt cross it too often. I know thats used in schools here quite often.

 

[Giles]

Most people in society don't have a choice. Even in this ludicrous system where parents can move their kids away from their nearest school, it is still unequal and can be based on simple things like the parent's ability to present themselves and construct a case. Some people will not be as good as this as others, even though their child might be academically bright. The parents who are good at presenting themselves will gain preference - speaking the same langauge as the panel before them, so to speak.

Again, you contradict yourself. With the system you suggest you wouldn't be able to enforce this dictum: Money gives you the power to avoid the yob element. Good.

The terrible yobs would all have vouchers and could demand to go to Eton.

Doubtful that Eton would take them. And one would assume that Eton would charge more than the standard voucher, wouldn't you?

Giles..

 

[jbob]

Gawd, you really make no sense at all.

I was commenting on your proposed 'voucher system', that gave everyone equal choice and relating it back to how pleased with yourself you were that rich people could afford to buy their way out of equality. Under your system, surely Eton wouldn't have a choice if people could afford the extra? Again, I'm not using your measure that poor = yob.

And are there no 'yobs' in public schools? I've seen a number of the rugby shirted twats in Clapham of an evening.

 

[cyberfairy]

And are there no 'yobs' in public schools? I've seen a number of the rugby shirted twats in Clapham of an evening.

I was about to post that-there are really nasty bullies in public school but as well as being bullies, they are arrogant snobs as well-often harder to expel them as well due to the amount of money being paid by their families and their families possible 'generosity' to the school

 

[Belushi]

I was about to post that-there are really nasty bullies in public school but as well as being bullies, they are arrogant snobs as well-often harder to expel them as well due to the amount of money being paid by their families and their families possible 'generosity' to the school

I think your confusing 'Youthful High Jinks' (posh kids) and 'Anti-Social Behaviour' (Estate Kids)....

 

[untethered]

Because disruptive yobs exist, and part of education is learning about them. Just look at PK.

Congratulations. That's the worst excuse for failing to enforce discipline in schools that I've ever heard.

 

[cyberfairy]

I think your confusing 'Youthful High Jinks' (posh kids) and 'Abti-Social Behaviour' (Estate Kids)....

I was fine being beaten up by someone in Pringle but oh god, don't get nylon against my skin!

 

[phildwyer]

Congratulations. That's the worst excuse for failing to enforce discipline in schools that I've ever heard.

Well I suppose you're right. But all I know is PK wouldn't have lasted five minutes at my school. So the world would have been spared a great burden.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

I was about to post that-there are really nasty bullies in public school but as well as being bullies, they are arrogant snobs as well-often harder to expel them as well due to the amount of money being paid by their families and their families possible 'generosity' to the school

Oh I dont know so much. I know the benchmark for bad behaviour in public schools which will lead to explulsion is MUCH lower than in state schools.
Public schools can also pick and choose who they take and who they get shot of and are unlikely to face being forced to take a child theyve previously had to exclude/expell

 

[Giles]

Gawd, you really make no sense at all.

I was commenting on your proposed 'voucher system', that gave everyone equal choice and relating it back to how pleased with yourself you were that rich people could afford to buy their way out of equality. Under your system, surely Eton wouldn't have a choice if people could afford the extra? Again, I'm not using your measure that poor = yob.

And are there no 'yobs' in public schools? I've seen a number of the rugby shirted twats in Clapham of an evening.

Under my system, all schools could choose who they wanted.

So if you brought your kid up to be little c**t, he may well find that no-one wants him.

Giles..

 

[jbob]

Under my system, all schools could choose who they wanted.

So if you brought your kid up to be little c**t, he may well find that no-one wants him.

Giles..

Choosing presumably by a pure objective vision, freed from prejudice and unfettered by social stigma? Or do you mean by meritocratic judgement? If the latter, that was the aim of the tripartite system.

And what happens if the child changes/develops? For example, their parents divorce, they feel emotionally unstable for a period. Is s/he cast out into the wilderness to join all the other 'little c**ts?'

A glorious Dickensian nightmare awaits...

 

[pk]

Because disruptive yobs exist, and part of education is learning about them. Just look at PK.

Yes. You're probably right.

I'll wait until you're unbanned until I comment further.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You can stop fucking stirring or you'll be back later than he will.

 

[pk]

You can wind your neck in until you know what's actually going on.



If you haven't figured out his modus operandi by now have a word with the editor...

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Oh aye? Three day ban as you're clearly up for a ruck yet again.

edit: moved to 24h to be fair, for some reason dwyer came up as having been banned for three days (?)

 

[Yossarian]

A 1-day ban for the wind-up and 3 days for the response?

 

[Giles]

I suppose what bothers me is the obvious, although rarely explicitly mentioned fact that inevitably if you have a class of nice kids who have been brought up with some manners, all of them will generally do better than in a class mixed in with more disruptive elements.

Some people seem to think that it is somehow fair and reasonable to say to parents "you have got to send your nice kids to such-and-such a school to mix with these nasty kids, because if you don't, your kids will do really well and the class of nasty kids will do really badly, and that's NOT FAIR."

I don't think that this is right. Why should those who have brought up their kids well have to compromise at all with their children's future in order to cover over the failings of others? I suppose the answer is "social cohesion" or something. Bollocks.

Giles..

 

[Jonti]

A 1-day ban for the wind-up and 3 days for the response?

Fridgemagnet has long had a reputation as Dwyer's minder.

 

[Gavin Bl]

Fridgemagnet has long had a reputation as Dwyer's minder.

do you love Dwyer, sir? Do you sir? Have you got a girlfriend sir?



sorry, it was just sitting there, begging me to say it.

 

[catinthehat]

The tripartite system was not in the least fair - maybe in intent but not in execution. The technical schools and secondary schools did not receive as much funding as the grammar schools. Distribution of grammar school places was uneven - in some areas there were no grammar schools and those that passed the 11plus were offered places at private schools (which stipulated mandatory uniform and equipment lists designed to rule out many recipients of places).

The 11 plus was flawed (the architect Cyril Burt was outed as having faked his research by Leo ? Kamin) with both cultural and class bias in it. When they ran the original tests for it they found that girls got higher marks than boys and so adjusted the marks for gender. On the whole middle class kids went to grammar schools and working class kids to Secondary moderns.

The voucher system proposed - but thankfully never rolled out - by the Tories was about giving a voucher for basic education with any extras to be paid for by parents. Extras could include subjects deemed non vital. O the joy of the Tories deciding what was a non vital subject.

There is overwhelming evidence that if you put the cash in, where the pupils are (not on marketing, consultants, quick fixes, short term schemes, headline grabbing initiatives) at the start of their education - nursery and primary - many of the problems that crop up in secondary will be reduced.

Most of the acting out "yobs" are frightened, angry bundles of low self esteem hiding it through bullying and aggression. Families are responsible in part for a lot of this but intervention in families is difficult, whereas you can and should make sure that primaries and nurseries are well staffed with well qualified staff who have time to talk to and form relationships with children, spot problems and get quick referrals to experts. They should have consistency in who teaches them and not get tested and made to feel wanting if they dont hit the line of average or above. They should provide children with proper decent food, medical checks and so on. Its all very well saying parents should do this, but if they dont someone has to.

........rant over.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Most of the acting out "yobs" are frightened, angry bundles of low self esteem hiding it through bullying and aggression. Families are responsible in part for a lot of this but intervention in families is difficult, whereas you can and should make sure that primaries and nurseries are well staffed with well qualified staff who have time to talk to and form relationships with children, spot problems and get quick referrals to experts. They should have consistency in who teaches them and not get tested and made to feel wanting if they dont hit the line of average or above. They should provide children with proper decent food, medical checks and so on. Its all very well saying parents should do this, but if they dont someone has to.

........rant over.

Rant away, IMO thats one of the most accurate, reasoned and valid 'rants' Ive ever seen on these boards
If only it actually happened in every school ( although I dont doubt it happens in some schools/LEA's)

 

[ViolentPanda]

Fridgemagnet has long had a reputation as Dwyer's minder.

Sorry mate, I'm no fan of dwyer's (I think he's an arrogant braying gimp), and there's no way on earth I'd ever claim that Fridgemagnet "minds" dwyer.

Perhaps there's a perception that the mods don't come down on dwyer as hard as they could, but that's probably actually due to many of those who dwyer tries to bully or abuse not reporting him because they feel sorry for the loser.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Rant away, IMO thats one of the most accurate, reasoned and valid 'rants' Ive ever seen on these boards
If only it actually happened in every school ( although I dont doubt it happens in some schools/LEA's)

When it comes down to it, it'd probably save the LEAs money as well, but unfortunately they never tend to look beyond short-term savings and short-term policy, do they?

 

[mikeinworthing]

Good rant catinthehat!

Most of the acting out "yobs" are frightened, angry bundles of low self esteem hiding it through bullying and aggression.

Much the same as those that bully on the Internet.

Perhaps there's a perception that the mods don't come down on dwyer as hard as they could, but that's probably actually due to many of those who dwyer tries to bully or abuse not reporting him because they feel sorry for the loser.

Nail on head!

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

When it comes down to it, it'd probably save the LEAs money as well, but unfortunately they never tend to look beyond short-term savings and short-term policy, do they?

Nope and its the kids who suffer because every last thing is about being seen to be doing something with minimum cost, not whether what they are doing is relevant and effective and if that costs money, no problem in the longer term.

It costs an awful lot more to imprison someone who has been failed by the education system than it does to educate them properly

 

[ViolentPanda]

Nope and its the kids who suffer because every last thing is about being seen to be doing something with minimum cost, not whether what they are doing is relevant and effective and if that costs money, no problem in the longer term.

It costs an awful lot more to imprison someone who has been failed by the education system than it does to educate them properly

£25,000-30,000pa in a cat b or c nick as against a max of about twice the current spend pa (which is about £5-6,000 AFAIK) for good schooling.

Big difference, especially as criminality due to poor education is the most likely kind to become habitual.