Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Education / Michael Gove


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#41 hindle xiii

hindle xiii
  • Coach
  • 21,168 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 09:18 AM

So what you're saying is: people are people?

 

I find this hard to believe.

Ee tha knows lad it wern't like tha in mah day, if it weren't for t'Latin I'da not passed t'pit ponies darn t'ginnel, I'da just stood behind gerrin covad in 'oss muck.


If you use "should of", "would of" or "could of", you are a moron.

On Odsal Top baht 'at.

 


#42 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,741 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 02:54 PM

Surely you mean: Ee tha sciat puer eam wern't similis tha Mah in diem si non esset t'Latin I'da non transivit t'pit mannis SUMMUS t'ginnel, I'da iustus stetit post gerrin in covad 'oss illuvie. :jester:



#43 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 10:07 AM

Ahem Grammar school.

 

But unfortunately the Tories do not support Grammar schools.



#44 GeordieSaint

GeordieSaint
  • Coach
  • 5,050 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 10:29 AM

SPOT ON Gove IMHO is doing a brilliant job that will sadly be all reversed if that champagne socialist Miliband wins the next election.

We need also to bring back grammer schools ASAP which means the likes of myself can save thousands of pounds in school fees for which my wife and i have no choice but to pay to ring fence our children from attending a state school in London (To get your kids into a decent one like Latymer in West London your name has to be Tony Blair:(((

CM

 

The removal of the grammar schools was an awful decision, which has drastically reduced social mobility in this country.

 

Ahem Grammar school.

 

But unfortunately the Tories do not support Grammar schools.

 

Beat me to it! :tongue:

 

I spotted this on the BBC website this morning. No offence to the teachers on this forum but I think she is way off the mark when she talks about English schools being the envy across the world.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...cation-22558756


Kings Lynn Black Knights Rugby League Club - http://www.pitchero....nnblackknights/


#45 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,403 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 10:56 AM

The removal of the grammar schools was an awful decision, which has drastically reduced social mobility in this country.

 

I didn't go to a grammar school. I'm from a working class background. I sat the eleven plus in 1958.  Most of those in my class at primary school who passed were from better off families than mine.  Most of those who didn't were from similar backgrounds to me.  It's a fallacy to say that the old grammar schools encouraged social mobility, all they did was make a superior education available free to those in the past (before the Butler education act) would have had to pay fees.  The exam at eleven, before the Butler act was called "the scholarship" and those who passed could go to the grammar school, provided their parents were able to afford a contribution to their education. All the grammar schools did was perpetuate the class system.  Both of my children went to comprehensive school.  Both of them went to university, they can speak, and write good english and they are numerate.

The downside of the grammar school system was the Secondary Modern. I went to one of these shools.  In the top stream it was basically a pale imitation of a grammar school education. Except of course we learned from textbooks that were getting on for forty years old. In classrooms that were falling down and in some cases wooden huts.  No money was spent on our school premises - the bulk of  the education money locally was spent on the grammar school - presumably  because those on the education committee's kids were at the the grammar school.  I'm afraid I have something of a chip on my shoulder about grammar schools.  But then given my experience that's hardly surprising.


"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#46 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 5,057 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 02:58 PM

I didn't go to a grammar school. I'm from a working class background. I sat the eleven plus in 1958.  Most of those in my class at primary school who passed were from better off families than mine.  Most of those who didn't were from similar backgrounds to me.  It's a fallacy to say that the old grammar schools encouraged social mobility, all they did was make a superior education available free to those in the past (before the Butler education act) would have had to pay fees.  The exam at eleven, before the Butler act was called "the scholarship" and those who passed could go to the grammar school, provided their parents were able to afford a contribution to their education. All the grammar schools did was perpetuate the class system.  Both of my children went to comprehensive school.  Both of them went to university, they can speak, and write good english and they are numerate.

The downside of the grammar school system was the Secondary Modern. I went to one of these shools.  In the top stream it was basically a pale imitation of a grammar school education. Except of course we learned from textbooks that were getting on for forty years old. In classrooms that were falling down and in some cases wooden huts.  No money was spent on our school premises - the bulk of  the education money locally was spent on the grammar school - presumably  because those on the education committee's kids were at the the grammar school.  I'm afraid I have something of a chip on my shoulder about grammar schools.  But then given my experience that's hardly surprising.

 

You are right about the disparity of funding between the Grammar Schools and the Secondary Moderns. In principle, there is nothing particularly wrong with providing a child with the education to which he/she is best suited, but both types of school need proper funding. The Secondary Moderns didn't get it.

 

Not everyone is suited to a Grammar School education, just as not everyone is suited to a degree-level education, but everyone should have an education that is best-suited to their abilities and aspirations. I wish I could wave a wand and make that happen.


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#47 Bostik Bailey

Bostik Bailey
  • Coach
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 03:38 PM

They actually do appreciate it. I'm not an ogre and berating people is not my default position; I only resort to it in exasperation when advising has no effect. I've never had anyone walk out (though there have been tears) and I've only ever sacked one ... for continually not turning up. The rest have carried on until they went to college or got a job, and quite often they then ask if a friend can take their place.
Even now, they ring me up and ask if they can give my name as a reference.

I'm not pretending that my attitude would have been any different from theirs if I'd had the same education as them, but I didn't. We were imbued with a sense of discipline and plain speaking was the norm.


So you are of the opinion that public humiliation is a progressive managment style. I suppose you think that this is way to get the best out of your staff.

#48 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,836 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 05:03 PM

So you are of the opinion that public humiliation is a progressive managment style. I suppose you think that this is way to get the best out of your staff.

 

 

How is it public, when only the two of us are present?

 

The people who work for me are part-timers; I would hope that, if they were actually "staff" they might  actually take an interest in the work.

 

I speak having endured a frustrating morning where the girl who works for me has listened to half of what I asked her do, instead of all of it. I asked her to cut some documents from one file, and  collate them to form another.  Then to add certain identified photographs from another file to the new file and then print them all off.

 

Before she started, I asked her if she knew what she was doing. 'Oh yes' was the answer ... then of course she cocked it up; none of the three files had the correct stuff in it. It took me half an hour to sort out a job that I could have done myself in ten minutes. While I did this, it was an ideal opportunity for her to do some texting on her phone.


Edited by Wolford6, 18 May 2013 - 06:10 PM.

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#49 WearyRhino

WearyRhino
  • Coach
  • 3,422 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:26 PM

How is it public, when only the two of us are present?

The people who work for me are part-timers; I would hope that, if they were actually "staff" they might actually take an interest in the work.

I speak having endured a frustrating morning where the girl who works for me has listened to half of what I asked her do, instead of all of it. I asked her to cut some documents from one file, and collate them to form another. Then to add certain identified photographs from another file to the new file and then print them all off.

Before she started, I asked her if she knew what she was doing. 'Oh yes' was the answer ... then of course she cocked it up; none of the three files had the correct stuff in it. It took me half an hour to sort out a job that I could have done myself in ten minutes. While I did this, it was an ideal opportunity for her to do some texting on her phone.


I'd be interested to know just how old this "girl" is?

LUNEW.jpg


#50 giwildgo

giwildgo
  • Coach
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:31 PM

Can I just say, as someone who is a handful of years into their working life, that it doesn't matter how old you are, I've worked with plenty of thick people who are twice my age and plenty of people who are a similar age to myself and clever.

Completely agree - some of the most stupid and inept people I have encountered are from the same generation and education system as those most critical of the current system. There is a tendency for nostalgia about education, however I can confidently state that my numeracy, spelling, grammar, creative thinking and communication skills far exceed those of my parents.

Posted Image


oderint dum metuant


#51 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:33 PM

I agree with everything you have said in this post and the previous one. However, here for me lies the crux of the problem. The kids priorities are different nowadays but the reality of adult life hasn't changed. In order to get a good job and be successful within that career, you still need good literacy and numeracy skills and a broad education base. In order for the country to be economically competitive, we still need a well educated population with literacy and numeracy skills at the core. We are falling so far behind other nations in regards to education standards, it has a negative effect on this country attracting investment and forcing business to look elsewhere. I think Gove is correct in attempting to solve this issue.

There are a couple of problems with this. First of all, Gove has set himself us as the sole champion of standards, implying that they are currently lax. This is not the case at all. The reasons I pointed out the difference in children nowadays was to give an alternate reason for (apparent) lower standards of basic literacy and numeracy than a change in teaching methods. Like I said, Northern Ireland has a much more traditional education system without noticeably better results, often worse.

The second problem is the idea that a return to essentially a 1950's style curriculum will solve these problems in the 2010's. The media and Gove often like to mention the now discredited polls suggesting that masses of children do not know who Winston Churchill was. However, even if it were true, are we really suggesting that a lot of children get through education without being taught about Winston Churchill at some point? This is again nonsense but for some reason children don't remember it; I would suggest it is because they aren't interested in it and see no relevance in knowing that information. Look at what our society so often sets up as role model: sportsmen, filmstars and celebrities. If this is what they aspire to be then historical knowledge doesn't really fit in. Only a fool would suggest that it was because of superior history teaching back in the day.

Gove was always up against it, being a Tory education minister but there is something so ideological about his plans for education. It also flies in the face of most educational research. For instance, a couple of years ago I completed a masters assignment on what a Primary history curriculum should look like. This was before a new curriculum was being discussed and there were of course a variety of different opinions but none of them fit with Gove's. There is something arrogant to think you can supercede what the experts say because you think people should know x, y and z.

#52 Maximus Decimus

Maximus Decimus
  • Coach
  • 7,712 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:35 PM

How is it public, when only the two of us are present?
 
The people who work for me are part-timers; I would hope that, if they were actually "staff" they might  actually take an interest in the work.
 
I speak having endured a frustrating morning where the girl who works for me has listened to half of what I asked her do, instead of all of it. I asked her to cut some documents from one file, and  collate them to form another.  Then to add certain identified photographs from another file to the new file and then print them all off.
 
Before she started, I asked her if she knew what she was doing. 'Oh yes' was the answer ... then of course she cocked it up; none of the three files had the correct stuff in it. It took me half an hour to sort out a job that I could have done myself in ten minutes. While I did this, it was an ideal opportunity for her to do some texting on her phone.

Is it the education system that taught her how to text on her phone?

There are far wider societal issues with the problems that you are talking about than just the education system.

#53 WearyRhino

WearyRhino
  • Coach
  • 3,422 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:35 PM

You are right about the disparity of funding between the Grammar Schools and the Secondary Moderns. In principle, there is nothing particularly wrong with providing a child with the education to which he/she is best suited, but both types of school need proper funding. The Secondary Moderns didn't get it.

Not everyone is suited to a Grammar School education, just as not everyone is suited to a degree-level education, but everyone should have an education that is best-suited to their abilities and aspirations. I wish I could wave a wand and make that happen.


The key point for me has always been that 11 is not a good time to decide someone's entire future. Comprehensive Schools allow late 'academic' developers the opportunity to go on to HE when Tech would have been their best option previously. It allowed everyone to have life appropriate education.

Sadly, I don't think the disparate and fragmented trajectory of the current education system will serve anyone well.

LUNEW.jpg


#54 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,836 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:17 PM

I'd be interested to know just how old this "girl" is?

 

 

17


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#55 Trojan

Trojan
  • Coach
  • 15,403 posts

Posted 18 May 2013 - 09:06 PM

The key point for me has always been that 11 is not a good time to decide someone's entire future. Comprehensive Schools allow late 'academic' developers the opportunity to go on to HE when Tech would have been their best option previously. It allowed everyone to have life appropriate education.

Sadly, I don't think the disparate and fragmented trajectory of the current education system will serve anyone well.

 

 

That is the point. Many of the Secondary Modern Schools in the area I live in opted to take 'O'Levels, although sadly not mine.  One even went on to have  a sixth form.  They got some good results too. Any education I got was thanks to five years at evening classes after I left school, in later years Radio 4, and a couple of OU courses. But the point I was trying to make was that grammar schools were not a vehicle for social mobility Those in favour of their restitiution (usually Tories) like to pretend they were, but they weren't.  If  a prime example is required Magaret Thatcher, a grocer's daughter, typical of the type of pupil who went to a grammar school. Hardly a working class hero(ine)


"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014


#56 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 5,057 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 09:27 AM

The key point for me has always been that 11 is not a good time to decide someone's entire future. Comprehensive Schools allow late 'academic' developers the opportunity to go on to HE when Tech would have been their best option previously. It allowed everyone to have life appropriate education.

Sadly, I don't think the disparate and fragmented trajectory of the current education system will serve anyone well.

 

Many people are either unaware of, or choose to ignore, the fact that it was possible for a child who had failed his/her 11-plus to transfer to a Grammar School at 14. It was a very difficult thing to do, but the pathway was there. One of my fellow students at York Uni had taken this route, attending Normanton Grammar before going on to study Chemistry/Education at York. He was from Altofts and followed Wakefield Trinity, so we often shared our passion for TGG, as well as swapping tales of school. I got the impression that he was happier at the Secondary Modern than he was at the Grammar School, but realised he needed to follow that route to get to Uni.

 

You make a very good point about flexibility within a Comprehensive environment, though. It should be a lot easier than the transfer at 14 route, but I suspect it often isn't for a variety of reasons.

 

(see my next post)


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#57 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 5,057 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 09:39 AM

That is the point. Many of the Secondary Modern Schools in the area I live in opted to take 'O'Levels, although sadly not mine.  One even went on to have  a sixth form.  They got some good results too. Any education I got was thanks to five years at evening classes after I left school, in later years Radio 4, and a couple of OU courses. But the point I was trying to make was that grammar schools were not a vehicle for social mobility Those in favour of their restitiution (usually Tories) like to pretend they were, but they weren't.  If  a prime example is required Magaret Thatcher, a grocer's daughter, typical of the type of pupil who went to a grammar school. Hardly a working class hero(ine)

 

You make a good point, too.

 

Your educational achievements are praiseworthy and illustrate one thing which is alluded to, but not always overtly stated, that is "motivation". Schools can do a lot to help children fulfill their potential, but they cannot force unwilling students to study. There has to be a degree of motivation on the part of the student. Not everyone can ignore their school work to concentrate on football and end up like David Beckham, for example. This is the part where parents, teachers and society as a whole have a role to play. I remember, back in the day, despairing when I heard pop stars saying things like "School did nuffin for me, I used to nick off and hang around wiv me mates. Now look at me! Didn't do me no harm*."

 

This is definitely one area where we can all help to improve standards.

 

* Admittedly, I don't hear this very often these days.


Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#58 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,741 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 10:19 AM

I see some "Head Teachers" are setting a good example to their pupils by heckling Gove. 

 

Motivation: indeed.  I knew two secondary modern pupils, personal friends at the time,  from the late 1950s/early 1960s: one, now deceased,  became MP for Gravesend and the other is Professor of the History of Astronomy at Oxford University.  They were motivated  and they rejected  the anti-education sentiment that prevailed (and may still does) in certain sections of society.  In this I really do blame some parents.



#59 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 10:34 AM

That is the point. Many of the Secondary Modern Schools in the area I live in opted to take 'O'Levels, although sadly not mine.  One even went on to have  a sixth form.  They got some good results too. Any education I got was thanks to five years at evening classes after I left school, in later years Radio 4, and a couple of OU courses. But the point I was trying to make was that grammar schools were not a vehicle for social mobility Those in favour of their restitiution (usually Tories) like to pretend they were, but they weren't.  If  a prime example is required Magaret Thatcher, a grocer's daughter, typical of the type of pupil who went to a grammar school. Hardly a working class hero(ine)

They were for some. My mother went to a Grammar school, her family were very working class. These days someone in an equivalent situation would have no choice but to attend the local comprehensive.



#60 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 10:39 AM

The key point for me has always been that 11 is not a good time to decide someone's entire future. Comprehensive Schools allow late 'academic' developers the opportunity to go on to HE when Tech would have been their best option previously. It allowed everyone to have life appropriate education.

Sadly, I don't think the disparate and fragmented trajectory of the current education system will serve anyone well.

The fallacy about the 11 plus has already been tackled but I don't see why a return to Grammar schools necessarily relegates existing Comprehensives to the role of Secondary Moderns. The society for which the Secondary Moderns were created has disappeared. We live in an era where lots of people (probably too many) go to university; very many of these people would not have passed an 11 plus (or equivalent).

 

Some parts of the country e.g. Devon still do have a small number of Grammar schools. My eldest son is currently prepping for the 11 plus. Devon has yet to become an area where 80% of children are fobbed off with a "technical education" preparing them for jobs that no longer exist.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users