The All New Education Debate

[brasicritique]

You're a fucking idiot, do you know that? You can't even comprehend what I've written, and that chip on your shoulder keeps getting bigger. Maybe you should take some pills and calm down, your spittle is practically visible in your post.

oh look its the old mental health smear which means bluestreak will probably pop up in a mo and accuse me of being a memeber of the bnp

you see to you a lot of the posts on urban are about 'issues' which is where we differ as to me an many other posters these issues are a 'reality' still i am sure if you go thru your copy of the weekends daily mail which you probably have hidden in your gaurdain then it will have an interesting article on how to cope with being a social climber and the merits of flipflopery

 

[brasicritique]

Nice of you two to share your burgeoning love

This is about education. You have a number of issues to choose from. Should single sex schools be illegal? Why are CFE's getting closed down without debate? What are the chances of turning your life around with the current system? How could it be improved? How important is it to get a second chance in life??

I'm sure we all share a common caring attitude for our common man, and wish to work out the best practice for education. ?

ha fucking ha your poll options really prove it to

Otherwise why would you be here on the thread?

Surely you have more in your life than hanging around websites hoping to trip each other up on consistency?

last i looked your not a mod and as bucthersapron has already stated you have not got a shut down all private education option therefore your poll is nothing more than standard newshamebore elitist thinking and yes me and kyser have online handbags true but your thread and ultra lame post is so inane i dont think any is really bothered enough to try to trip you up on consistancy especily when you cannot even put your crap poll thed in the right forum

 

[brasicritique]

you don't half know how to destroy every thread you go on

mores the pity all i do is try to raise different points of view sometimes in context to wider interelated subjects other posters just seem to have very fragile egos who like to flame but cant take a grilling they just have to be right about every thing or even when they agree with what i am arguing for would rather sacrifice there principles to be seen as popular urbanites to keep in with the monothoughtcliq still thanks for the compliment

 

[Gmart]

ha fucking ha your poll options really prove it to




last i looked your not a mod and as bucthersapron has already stated you have not got a shut down all private education option therefore your poll is nothing more than standard newshamebore elitist thinking and yes me and kyser have online handbags true but your thread and ultra lame post is so inane i dont think any is really bothered enough to try to trip you up on consistancy especily when you cannot even put your crap poll thed in the right forum

Just because I didn't do the poll in exactly the way you wanted and you decide not to take part in a constructive debate. Says alot about your priorities.

I couldn't care less about BA's opinion which is why I have him on ignore.

Even if this thread was lame, it is still one up on your contribution which is to whinge about Kyser, while adding nothing to the debate.

Why would we even consider shutting down the private schools anyway? Like all things which are in demand it would just drive them further underground. The rich have every right to use their money however they wish in a free society....

If you (and BA) want to go off and create some authoritarian utopia then feel free - but don't be surprised when no one shares your view or follows you.

 

[brasicritique]

Just because I didn't do the poll in exactly the way you wanted and you decide not to take part in a constructive debate. Says alot about your priorities..

its not about doing the poll in the way i wnat it its about your poll just being in keeping with current othodox and socially elitst education policy

I couldn't care less about BA's opinion which is why I have him on ignore..

on ignore now thats what i call authoritarian ! which is why you are another conservative hypocritical cry baby and highly ignorant

Even if this thread was lame, it is still one up on your contribution which is to whinge about Kyser, while adding nothing to the debate. ..

yah relly becasue of your options there is no debate to be had as has clearly been demonstrated by the lack of take up

Why would we even consider shutting down the private schools anyway? Like all things which are in demand it would just drive them further underground. The rich have every right to use their money however they wish in a free society....
..

oh dear its toryboy anyone who disagree with him is a rabid communist with polpot underpants

what a fuckwit! underground private schools i'm sorry yourve been reading to much harry potter

If you (and BA) want to go off and create some authoritarian utopia then feel free - but don't be surprised when no one shares your view or follows you.

yeh thats really what i have suggested what a fuckwit so if you are in favour of getting rid of public schools thi smakes you authoritarian is canada a authoritain utopia i think even my handbag sparring buddies would admit that i could not care less about who follows me or who shares my views

you are very ignorant and very immature and your thred is in the wrong forum you silly sausage you

 

[Gmart]

Of course there are private schools in Canada.

What you seem so blind to is that people feel that it is their freedom to use their money as they see fit. And this includes paying for private schools if they wish.

You might wish to take this choice away from them but that makes you authoritarian, because you would be imposing your view of the world on others.

The rest of your post is just name calling, prob because you have nothing constructive to add, and can't seem to prevent yourself commenting despite this. Your attempt to describe having someone on ignore as authoritarian shows how divorced from reality your agenda has made you.

 

[butchersapron]

The rich have every right to use their money however they wish in a free society....

There's so many things wrong with just this line alone.

 

[brasicritique]

Of course there are private schools in Canada.

What you seem so blind to is that people feel that it is their freedom to use their money as they see fit. And this includes paying for private schools if they wish.

You might wish to take this choice away from them but that makes you authoritarian, because you would be imposing your view of the world on others..

do your parents know your online and cut and pasting from wikipedia

The rest of your post is just name calling, prob because you have nothing constructive to add, and can't seem to prevent yourself commenting despite this. Your attempt to describe having someone on ignore as authoritarian shows how divorced from reality your agenda has made you.

no actually it exposes your ingnorance and hypocrasy - if your that secure as both a person and poster and more importantly in your arguements then why use ignore? YOUR use of ignore is inherently autrhoritain as it reveals that you cannot take critism nor have room for different ideaological perspectives you really should move on from fullypumpeds breast milk

 

[Gmart]

Nope, tho ten out of ten for sticking with your agenda against evidence

I use the ignore function only as a last resort for people who have continually and over a long period of time shown themselves to be unreasonable, illogical and/or derailing in their discussions, after many chances have been given to be reasonable. There are many who I might disagree with vastly but who are worth reading because they at least stick to discussing the subject (such as Rachamin for example). However the people who are not interested in debate and who end up name-calling because they cannot follow logic or think of anything else to say (but are unable not to comment) are obviously not worth it. It is not a constructive use of my time to read their posts. If they say anything important, then others will quote them (this rarely happens).

For example, on this debate you are making no attempt to discuss the subject at hand - you are trying to discuss a different subject but you seem unable (or unwilling) to start a thread of your own and so you try and derail this one.

Your comments have no sense anyway, as I have not copied from Wikipedia and you have not shown me any evidence of hypocrisy on my behalf; though I am indeed ignoring these people so I am happy with the term 'ignorant'.

I am waiting to see if you have a brain yet, and if you actually have anything interesting to say. The evidence shows so far that you do not. All you have done so far is whinge. I will wait for a reasonable length of time of course as I share your concern for the need to listen to criticism - but if you just continue with your infantile whingeing and baseless name-calling for too long then it would be a waste of my time to read your posts.

 

[brasicritique]

Nope, tho ten out of ten for sticking with your agenda against evidence

I use the ignore function only as a last resort for people who have continually and over a long period of time shown themselves to be unreasonable, illogical and/or derailing in their discussions, after many chances have been given to be reasonable. There are many who I might disagree with vastly but who are worth reading because they at least stick to discussing the subject (such as Rachamin for example). However the people who are not interested in debate and who end up name-calling because they cannot follow logic or think of anything else to say (but are unable not to comment) are obviously not worth it. It is not a constructive use of my time to read their posts. If they say anything important, then others will quote them (this rarely happens).

For example, on this debate you are making no attempt to discuss the subject at hand - you are trying to discuss a different subject but you seem unable (or unwilling) to start a thread of your own and so you try and derail this one.

Your comments have no sense anyway, as I have not copied from Wikipedia and you have not shown me any evidence of hypocrisy on my behalf; though I am indeed ignoring these people so I am happy with the term 'ignorant'.

I am waiting to see if you have a brain yet, and if you actually have anything interesting to say. The evidence shows so far that you do not. All you have done so far is whinge. I will wait for a reasonable length of time of course as I share your concern for the need to listen to criticism - but if you just continue with your infantile whingeing and baseless name-calling for too long then it would be a waste of my time to read your posts.

aww bless the joys of virginity well all those many many posters who have bothered to post a reply on your really brilliant OP clealry differ heres only one whinger on this thread and we all know who that is

 

[kyser_soze]

To be honest tho GM, saying that private schools shouldn't be done away with or taxed as ordinary businesses is a bit shit - they're the basis for social exclusion and the class system, and anyone who can't see that is a fool.

Fine if the rich want to send their kids to a boarding school - but somewhere like Switzerland, not here. Remove the option in the UK at the very least.

 

[Gmart]

So you want to abolish private schools. I don't blame you, it is irritating having this entire section of the education system which is not constrained by the curriculum and the control of the government. Slowly providing the Tory party with yet another crop of well-educated people ready to take up the reins of power when the population finally gets bored of the Labour party.

I used to feel that abolishing them would be a good idea but then I realised that there was precisely no chance of ever getting that through without a total totalitarian dictatorship. Labour tried it as a policy in the early 80's, and lost the next election by far.

So I tried to work out a way that would abolish the difference between the private and the public - thus abolishing them through homogeneity. The voucher system would accelerate this process.

There is no doubt that the private schools are good schools and we could learn a great deal from them. At the moment all the best teachers go into them because they have the most independence and the most money to pay decent wages. If we want to keep these teachers then we need to give them independence, not maintain the status quo with pie in the sky revolutions which will never happen while such a thing as a rich person has children.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

The main reason that private schools get better results for both able and less able pupils is smaller class sizes. The pupils get double the individual attention than those in state schools. As for the teachers, I wonder if some of the private school teachers could even survive in a state school with its larger classes.

 

[butchersapron]

Gmarthews - Labour did not propose any such thing so a) you're factually wrong and b) your claim that they lost the 83 election as a result of public disgust at such a move falls and with it c) the related inference that there's no support for such a initiative today thereby making it impossible.

 

[catinthehat]

Finland puts plenty of money in at the pre and primary level and deal with what gets termed compensatory education (ie ensure the kids get breakfast etc) to mitagate where there are chaotic families. Putting cash in at the start will take about 14 years to show results and here we have had a succsession of governments who want quick fixes.

Prof Ball at the Institute of Education has written a lot about the marketisation of education - a policy of introducing the private market bit by bit - agency teachers, academies, discrediting of state schools which leads to the m/c taking their kids out and into the private sector. This has had a negative inpact on the state sector.

We are often told we have a meritocratic system but we do not - we have a class based system where those who have socio economic disadvantage start the education race at the back with their legs tied together and those who have privilege get a ten yard start. Of course there are those who manage to get a good education despite a range of problems but they are the exception not the rule.

Someone said why is this thread not prompting more debate - I can almost be certain if it was a teacher slagging thread it would get more attention. What do we educate for ? Self actualisation or just the cash nexus - pursuit of credentials that can be turned into cash. Gramsci is one of the best I think for ideas about a radical change in the system. But you cant put a Marxist plaster on a capitalist wound.

Children and families being able to opt out seems like a short sighted idea to me - making a big assumption that all parents engage in a dialouge with their children - there will be a few who encourage their children to opt out or fail to discuss the ramifications of doing so - and there will be those who dont want their kids to go to school for very, very dubious reasons (a lot of child abuse is picked up in school). For some kids school is a lifeline and teachers are the only people who take an interest in them.

A lot of the state system is being held together by the free labour of teachers - contracts stating 37 hours but work 50 minimum. There appears to have been an ongoing general criticism of the state sector and those who work in it - some might say this is designed to discredit it so that its easy to dismantle it.

You cant fix the education system without fixing the context within which it exists. And education is not just the province of schools, colleges and universities but a whole range of institutions and individuals.

 

[Gmart]

I wonder if some of the private school teachers could even survive in a state school with its larger classes.

That's pure speculation, the fact remains that most teachers would prefer to be in the private sector and would jump ship given half a chance.

This brain drain from the state sector is not going to help. We need to level the playing field.

The government seems to wish for a school sector which is vastly better than it is, but seems reluctant to take the difficult decisions needed to change.

As mentioned Teachers work vast numbers of hours and are forced (in the state sector) to fill in huge amounts of red tape to check that they are doing their job properly. Imagine the imaginative lessons which might be found if they were just allowed to get on and teach - inventing decent lessons which challenge the children.

Yet teachers are not trusted to do so.

Independence would get rid of the large amount of red tape and enable the teachers to teach. If the parents/governors think that this is NOT happening then they would be able to get rid.

 

[treefrog]

The reason I haven't replied so far is that the OP is not about The All New Education Debate, it's about ten different debates.

 

[butchersapron]

That's pure speculation, the fact remains that most teachers would prefer to be in the private sector and would jump ship given half a chance.

Is this a fact? Is this not speculation?

As is this nonsense from you earlier:

At the moment all the best teachers go into them

.

 

[_angel_]

Is this a fact? Is this not speculation?

As is this nonsense from you earlier:

.

It's total speculation.. I've not met a teacher who's said they've preferred the private sector.

My Dad taught mainly state schools and just one religious private school part time (cos it's near to him). He's been pretty scathing about the staff and the (education level) of the kids there, actually.

 

[Gmart]

It's total speculation.. I've not met a teacher who's said they've preferred the private sector.

My Dad taught mainly state schools and just one religious private school part time (cos it's near to him). He's been pretty scathing about the staff and the (education level) of the kids there, actually.

So you think that the opportunity of more money, less centralised control, better behaved kids and lower class sizes is not going to attract the best teachers.

Fair enough - you're entitled to your beliefs.

I accept that there will be some who just love the state system with all these disadvantages, and maybe they feel that they are helping the poor and unfortunate, and that this makes up for everything. I would suggest though that an offer from a private school conveniently located would be hard to turn down - and if you are a successful teacher with good results, these offers will come in.

 

[scifisam]

So you think that the opportunity of more money, less centralised control, better behaved kids and lower class sizes is not going to attract the best teachers.

Fair enough - you're entitled to your beliefs.

I accept that there will be some who just love the state system with all these disadvantages, and maybe they feel that they are helping the poor and unfortunate, and that this makes up for everything. I would suggest though that an offer from a private school conveniently located would be hard to turn down - and if you are a successful teacher with good results, these offers will come in.

Private schools have their disadvantages for teachers, too.

Nobody goes into teaching for the huge amounts of money and easy life, so teachers aren't necessarily champing at the bit for those things.

Those teachers who do prioritise lots of money and an easier life are probably not really the 'best' teachers.

 

[Gmart]

Private schools have their disadvantages for teachers, too.

Nobody goes into teaching for the huge amounts of money and easy life, so teachers aren't necessarily champing at the bit for those things.

Those teachers who do prioritise lots of money and an easier life are probably not really the 'best' teachers.

Nobody eh?

For once I feel I should use the - because your comments truly deserve it.

To decide that a teacher is bad if they want the best job they can get - maybe to spend more time with their family (among many other obvious reasons).

Unrealistic. Hopeful - but ultimately rubbish. There are a few teachers who will work in the state sector happily sure but the vast majority of teachers I have actually talked to, would jump ship given half a chance - and to dismiss this fact without apparent thought or logical discourse is just facile.

And your claim that

Private schools have their disadvantages for teachers, too.

Er... example?

 

[scifisam]

Nobody eh?

Yes, nobody. If you want huge amounts of money and an easy life, you won't choose teaching. You choose it for decent money and security, as well as the more highminded stuff like helping kids.

To decide that a teacher is bad if they want the best job they can get - maybe to spend more time with their family (among many other obvious reasons).

I don't think private school teachers necessarily get to spend more time with their family - the demands in terms of afterschool classes are higher, although the paperwork is less. That's one of the disdvantages I was talking about. Less job security is also a big disadvantage. Dealing with pushy parents is another. The pay isn't necessarily better, either.

Unrealistic. Hopeful - but ultimately rubbish. There are a few teachers who will work in the state sector happily sure but the vast majority of teachers I have actually talked to, would jump ship given half a chance - and to dismiss this fact without apparent thought or logical discourse is just facile.

Nah - not when they ctually think about it properly rather than mouthing off in the pub.

 

[treefrog]

Nobody eh?

For once I feel I should use the - because your comments truly deserve it.

To decide that a teacher is bad if they want the best job they can get - maybe to spend more time with their family (among many other obvious reasons).

Unrealistic. Hopeful - but ultimately rubbish. There are a few teachers who will work in the state sector happily sure but the vast majority of teachers I have actually talked to, would jump ship given half a chance - and to dismiss this fact without apparent thought or logical discourse is just facile.

And your claim that


Er... example?

Not a teacher then I take it! I know a few teachers in the private sector, who complain of the following:

* no money spent on resources, as a profit is trying to be made/salaries paid for
* lots of unpaid overtime doing paperwork, additional reporting on students etc.
* greater expectations that you'll do extra work/extra-curricular classes etc.
* pushy parents who see you as their employee, rather than educating their child

I teach in the public sector, always have done. I love it. The budget for stuff isn't great, but we manage. the camaraderie among staff is great, the kids are switched-on and keen, and I think most teachers who have mastered the dark art of time management don't need to do excessive amounts after school or at home.

however, I doubt my first-hand experience of the situation matches your argument, especially as scifisam also works in education AFAIK and you're arguing with her making almost identical points.

Still, best not let the real world interfere with your soapbox, eh?

 

[_angel_]

So you think that the opportunity of more money, less centralised control, better behaved kids and lower class sizes is not going to attract the best teachers.

Fair enough - you're entitled to your beliefs.

I accept that there will be some who just love the state system with all these disadvantages, and maybe they feel that they are helping the poor and unfortunate, and that this makes up for everything. I would suggest though that an offer from a private school conveniently located would be hard to turn down - and if you are a successful teacher with good results, these offers will come in.

Whoever said that private schools paid more. I think my Dad preferred not to teach spoilt private school brats, basically.

 

[butchersapron]

Unrealistic. Hopeful - but ultimately rubbish. There are a few teachers who will work in the state sector happily sure but the vast majority of teachers I have actually talked to, would jump ship given half a chance - and to dismiss this fact without apparent thought or logical discourse is just facile.

What 'fact'?

You really are the worst debater on here.

 

[Gmart]

Not a teacher then I take it! I know a few teachers in the private sector, who complain of the following:

* no money spent on resources, as a profit is trying to be made/salaries paid for
* lots of unpaid overtime doing paperwork, additional reporting on students etc.
* greater expectations that you'll do extra work/extra-curricular classes etc.
* pushy parents who see you as their employee, rather than educating their child

Sounds like the state sector.

however, I doubt my first-hand experience of the situation matches your argument, especially as scifisam also works in education AFAIK and you're arguing with her making almost identical points.

Still, best not let the real world interfere with your soapbox, eh?

Am working in the state sector now, and am surrounded by teachers at their wits end working against a system which has piled on the workload with no recompense - so snide comments aside, I would suggest that both situations happen depending on the institution.

 

[catinthehat]

Having had an email today from a teacher in the private sector asking me if I can help them as they have just realised they are teaching from a specification that was replaced two years ago I would have to say the private sector does not attract the best. In fact what the private sector does attract is people that were educated in the private sector. I often do in service stuff for an exam board and frequently come across 'old boys' who teach in the PS. Teaching qualification optional.

Most people I know would not teach in the PS because they belive in the SS, were educated in the SS and were trained via public expense in part and thats why they dont want to be in the PS.

 

[Gmart]

Am working in the state sector now, and am surrounded by teachers at their wits end working against a system which has piled on the workload with no recompense - so snide comments aside, I would suggest that both situations happen depending on the institution.

And again

I note that the class divide is coming thru here. The SS are dissing the work in the PS (Teaching qualification optional apparently though I find that hard to believe) and I have no doubt that the PS are just as scathing.

Certainly the PS has greater freedom and thus has the option to use outdated syllabuses. Only half independent schools get inspected by OFSTED and of course they are not constrained by the National Curriculum. This should be changed.

However there is no need to become as snobby as they are about what they do. 2400 independent schools must have great differences ranging from the good to bad.

My institution is a CFE (College of Further Education), and they are very unhappy with the vast amount of work and as I say they all seem to want to leave. They are also expected to accept everyone who wants to be on a course and yet are told that if they don't achieve 75% pass mark the course and funding will be cut.

In the long term is seems that more than ever if a child messes around at school they will not be given a second chance...

Do those here feel that the degree of independence they have to choose what to teach is desirable? From what you are saying it seems that you are very happy to have the central control we have now??

 

[DownwardDog]

Fine if the rich want to send their kids to a boarding school - but somewhere like Switzerland, not here. Remove the option in the UK at the very least.

If public schools weren't an option wouldn't the rich just send their kids to after school cram sessions like the juku in Japan? Or would these be illegal too and you're going to have the police raid institutions to make sure kids aren't learning anything?