• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Sort Out The Government's Failings"

Collapse

  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by Rantor
    I had two, very bright, graduates working for me a few years ago and the could not write a grammatical sentence as they came from that generation who simply didn't get taught any grammar.
    This, and the lack of basic mathematical ability, is what universities now complain about with each year's new intakes.

    I guess that 30 years ago you simply wouldn't be offered a university place unless you were reasonably competent, although I can't remember because in those days we all took that fact for granted.

    Unless you did sociology of course - which was the equivalent of media studies or sports management in the seventies.

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by Euro-commuter
    The difference in attainment is explained by the much lower pupil/teacher ration in private schools: this is normally the major thing that you buy when you send chilren to a private school. The farce is the idea that you could then make things "fairer'" by taking some of that excess teacher time and giving it to state schools.
    I think I was trying to say that a fancy teaching qualification is about as useful as one in basket weaving when it comes to teaching, and possibly counterproductive. What is most important is that the teacher actually know and have a love of the subject they are teaching. Lower pupil/teacher ratio is a bit of a myth. The ratio of adults to children in a classroom in the state schools is higher. There just appears a better ratio for private because a boarding school has teachers on site 24/7. Ahh, such fun to be had when you peel off the layers of the New Lie government statistics.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rantor
    replied
    Originally posted by Bagpuss
    I like to think not
    I've always been sceptical at the onward n' upward results but is there any evidence that kids leaving school are fiker than wot we was?

    I had a look at the OECD stuff and it doesn't really give a clear idea one way or the other.

    Anecdotally, some of them can appear as thick as mince due to how they were taught. I had two, very bright, graduates working for me a few years ago and the could not write a grammatical sentence as they came from that generation who simply didn't get taught any grammar. It was especially amusing to the many dutch/scandinavians on that project who could write grammatical english.

    Leave a comment:


  • Euro-commuter
    replied
    Originally posted by threaded
    Funnily enough many teachers at private schools would not be allowed to teach in state schools as they do not have the relevant qualifications, and vica versa. For example: many private school teachers do not have a teaching qualification, and many state school teachers are not qualified in the subjects they teach. Which basically explains the vast difference in educational attainment of two sets of students.
    The difference in attainment is explained by the much lower pupil/teacher ration in private schools: this is normally the major thing that you buy when you send chilren to a private school. The farce is the idea that you could then make things "fairer'" by taking some of that excess teacher time and giving it to state schools.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bagpuss
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    Were the kids we turned out of schools 20 years ago as bad as they are today?
    I like to think not

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by Euro-commuter
    To be fair, the government has wider plans than that: for example to have private schools lend equipment and teachers to the state schools.
    good idea all those private schools with teachers sitting around doing nothing all day. govts will then be free to sell more playing fields to get more money to spend on keeping more people dependent on the state

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by lilelvis2000
    Don't know what a grammar school is, but do schools not have streams for the bright and not so bright?
    In counties where grammars are still allowed, they scoop off the top 25% or so of those who take the 11-plus test, which is similar to an IQ test. So generally they get the brightest kids. Secondary schools take the rest.

    In counties where they have abolished grammars, all schools are comprehensives.

    Comprehensives and secondaries both have streaming.

    Overall results in grammar/secondary areas are better than in comprehensive areas, which suggests that zeity is correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • threaded
    replied
    Originally posted by Euro-commuter
    To be fair, the government has wider plans than that: for example to have private schools lend equipment and teachers to the state schools.
    Funnily enough many teachers at private schools would not be allowed to teach in state schools as they do not have the relevant qualifications, and vica versa. For example: many private school teachers do not have a teaching qualification, and many state school teachers are not qualified in the subjects they teach. Which basically explains the vast difference in educational attainment of two sets of students.

    Leave a comment:


  • BA to the Stars
    replied
    And we are kept being told that results are constantly improving and exams are not easier to pass hmmmm

    Leave a comment:


  • lilelvis2000
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    That's what I thought. So WTF has gone wrong since?
    Schools now concentrate on enabling students to pass the multiple choice exams rather than relying on teachers to evaluate students abilities themselves. The state wants robots not individuals in my opinion. Girls seem to be be under extreme pressure these days. I wonder what the future generation will be like...

    Don't know what a grammar school is, but do schools not have streams for the bright and not so bright?

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by zeitghost
    About 40 odd years of increasingly demented educational policy, culminating in "Grammars Schools are bad" from that Tory dickhead who went to a public school, so knows all about it.
    Oh, him. Yes, the Northern Irish have nailed that one well and truly. The Irish tell thick English jokes now.

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Originally posted by Kyajae
    I'd say not. We had the benefit of tried and tested teaching methods that have produced highly capable people down the years.
    That's what I thought. So WTF has gone wrong since?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kyajae
    replied
    Originally posted by wendigo100
    Were the kids we turned out of schools 20 years ago as bad as they are today?
    I'd say not. We had the benefit of tried and tested teaching methods that have produced highly capable people down the years.

    Leave a comment:


  • wendigo100
    replied
    Were the kids we turned out of schools 20 years ago as bad as they are today?

    Leave a comment:


  • Euro-commuter
    replied
    Originally posted by Kyajae
    Skills 'pledge' gauntlet to firms

    The government is challenging employers to sign a pledge to improve the basic skills of their workforces.

    So let me get this straight. Public sector education, with all it's targets and trendy educational theories, fail the kids and so it's up to employers to fill in the gaps.
    To be fair, the government has wider plans than that: for example to have private schools lend equipment and teachers to the state schools.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X