New teachers strike wtf
Discussion
wolves_wanderer said:
Mr Snap said:
wolves_wanderer said:
A kid from Stabsville Comp who gets similar results to one from a fee-paying private school probably has quite a bit more about him.
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population? Essentially the process of admission to further education should be on merit as judged from a number of standpoints and not because of the need to tick a quota box!
wolves_wanderer said:
Mr Snap said:
wolves_wanderer said:
A kid from Stabsville Comp who gets similar results to one from a fee-paying private school probably has quite a bit more about him.
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population? Rovinghawk said:
nadger said:
But it is performance related pay!
How unfair!nadger said:
You have to attain certain targets (or show beyond reasonable doubt that you have done everything physically possible to try to ensure achieve the targets) in order to attain a wage increase.
Having to earn a pay rise? Disgraceful. a carpenter would ditch a poor bit of wood, a plumber would bin a poor joint, banks don't just take in the 1st 30 people that walk past the door to run a business unit.
teachers don't get to pick and choose, they get given the kids and given the results they need to get to. not all the kids will get there as they develop at wildly different rates especially through primary school. you can have year 4's who are total PITA yet come back in september as year 5's as good rounded kids, others won't get it till they nearly leave secondary school.
my youngest brother wasn't a nasty kid but left school with just a handful of gcse's, he ended up in a dead end job and the light dawned. 10 years later he has put himself through all sorts of courses, has stupidly high qualifications in chemistry, has worked as a hazardous materials specialist and been published in new scientist. his work now is in orbit.
blaming teachers for a kids parents lack of skills is not very fair either, where were their parents, they should have brought them up.
private schools also can often offer far better facilities as they have the money and don't have the LA selling off their land to developers. Private schools can also pick and choose who they take on, state schools don't have that luxury. incidentally you don't have to be a qualified teacher to teach at private school.
i know of one school that know they will be in special measures next time ofsted come in as their data etc is not up to standard, problem for them is their are a standard primary, but take on the kids that other primaries in the borough can't deal with. they head and her team are fully committed to get every kid they have to a normal secondary, and i'm not talking all behaviour issues, physical and mentally disability is also dealt with by a calm and caring staff, but they will be a square peg hammered into a round hole by ofsted / dfe.
i had a conversation once with someone who moaned that his kids school did this and that and there had been big problems with kids fighting. his view was he had 40 staff under him who just worked, i pointed out his kid was 8 and did he have 30 members of staff asking him constantly, how do i do this, can i get a drink, can i go to the loo, he was mean to me, he punched me, was he just given 40 random people and told to get them working to a certain level etc etc etc. he had to concede that it wasn't quite as black and white as he thought.
yes i am biased my wife is a deputy head, but i'm not biased just because she is my wife, i'm biased because in the years i have known her she has been marked as an outstanding teacher 4 times by ofsted, works at least 10-11 hours a day (12 plus sometimes but the site manager kicks them out), plus normally time at the weekends and the majority of the holidays. she sometimes cry's at home because of stuff going on with the kids at school, but can't tell me so has to bottle it up. there are at least 3 kids she wants to bring home with her as she has one more than one occasion raised the issue of care with social services who do nothing. she cares and so do the rest of the staff at her school, they are in today as normal and she will be back in tomorrow at 7:30.
teachers don't just strike for the fun of it, well at least not the ones I know, they only take that step when they feel that yet again they are being dumped on from a great height by media (and therefore public) and the gubbermint.
my wife chose to be a teacher, she didn't chose to be verbally and physically assaulted by parents and kids, be a surrogate parent, social worker, diplomat, peace keeper etc.
my parents taught me to read and write, teachers opened the door for me to a world of science, technology, art, music sport etc.
oh and if your money stays the same for a few years but inflation rocks along at 2% then in real terms it is a paycut.
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.However what utterly baffles me is that what people who think like that (if indeed Mr Snap does - if not then this is not aimed at him rather those that do) actually think their attitude is going to change? Also the fact that they simply do not grasp that in doing what they are doing and supporting this kind of action then they are perpetuating something that is ultimately harmful and detrimental to those they profess to be trying to support - the children in the system.
Could that be because really when it boils down to it the actual and rather less palatable truth is that those supporting this kind of action and behaviour are doing so out of a more social and political agenda of "wanting more" for themselves and not wanting to see those that do better do so because they have more resources with which to achieve it. Dressing up that age old agenda in a "think of the children" kind of argument though tends to make opposing it make those that oppose it look like heartless barstewards!
heppers75 said:
Dressing up that age old agenda in a "think of the children" kind of argument though tends to make opposing it make those that oppose it look like heartless barstewards!
funnily enough a mate who was moaning that his kids school was closed used exactly that statement to condemn the teachers for being on strike.by the way some schools will have had to close because if a portion of their staff are not available for what ever reason, the pupil to staff level drops below a certain level and so they are not allowed to have the kids in, a major reason why schools close in bad weather if the staff can't get in.
jesta1865 said:
heppers75 said:
Dressing up that age old agenda in a "think of the children" kind of argument though tends to make opposing it make those that oppose it look like heartless barstewards!
funnily enough a mate who was moaning that his kids school was closed used exactly that statement to condemn the teachers for being on strike.by the way some schools will have had to close because if a portion of their staff are not available for what ever reason, the pupil to staff level drops below a certain level and so they are not allowed to have the kids in, a major reason why schools close in bad weather if the staff can't get in.
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
Mr Snap said:
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
ETA - What is your rationale for it being "unfair"?
Edited by heppers75 on Wednesday 26th March 17:46
Mr Snap said:
I have a problem with well off parents who attempt to procure an unfair and unwarranted advantage for their averagely intelligent children.
They shouldn't try to do the best for their kids?Mr Snap said:
scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
I believe they should have the same opportunity. If they don't try to grasp it then tough.Mr Snap said:
I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
The places go to those who best pass the test. If private education ultimately wins then why scrap it?It sounds like jealousy to me.
Rovinghawk said:
Mr Snap said:
I have a problem with well off parents who attempt to procure an unfair and unwarranted advantage for their averagely intelligent children.
They shouldn't try to do the best for their kids?Mr Snap said:
scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
I believe they should have the same opportunity. If they don't try to grasp it then tough.Mr Snap said:
I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
The places go to those who best pass the test. If private education ultimately wins then why scrap it?It sounds like jealousy to me.
Why should the children in areas with low standards simply suffer their fate... if their parents have the affrontery (!) and the means to spend even more money on rectifying the failures of the state system, then that's actually an unfairness working against them. Poorer families in other places wouldn't have to spend more, the fact that they cannot is neither here nor there. The question then is, why should the children in areas with poor state education miss out on university places.
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
Mr Snap said:
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
I do not deny it is supportive of what you say, I am saying it is hardly able to represented as a universal fact when it is based on low single digit percentage of the total.
Edited by heppers75 on Wednesday 26th March 18:01
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
I do not deny it is supportive of what you say, I am saying it is hardly able to represented as a universal fact when it is based on low single digit percentage of the total.
You have to wonder what a study of degrees obtained by state educated pupils with the same A-levels from Nottingham or Grimsby compared to students with the same grades from state schools located in Bournemouth or Gloucester.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/school...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/schools/873597...
Part of the reason we have to wonder what the study would say is that there almost certainly isn't such a study to consult.
Having quotas based on the perspective of one social group is ridiculous, particularly when the social group concerned is politically polarised with a sizeable chip on its collective shoulders. Variable geographical quotas seem daft, state-independent quotas seem less so only due to incessant propaganda which abuses the concept of fairness for political ends.
Randy Winkman said:
Isn't the point that some people think inequality of outcome simply reflects inequality of opportunity?
In some cases yes, it looks that way. However it isn't so.
Randy Winkman said:
I'm not sure there are very many people at all who think inequality of outcome is bad and should be stopped.
Egalitarian delusion is more widespread than that view suggests. Some reading for those interested (pdf):
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/533/1/equality_of_outcome...
turbobloke said:
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
heppers75 said:
Mr Snap said:
fblm said:
Mr Snap said:
...many parents who opt for private education drop out. Often when their "brilliant" offspring turn out to be not quite so brilliant and they can't achieve the grades required for the next stage.
Mr Snap said:
You weren't aware of the fact that public school alumni are measurably more intelligent than the rest of the population?
You clearly find it impossible to hide your sneering contempt for 'posh' kids but the fact that most public schools have entry exams, scholarships for the brightest poor kids and kick failing kids out means that you are probably right. Doh.As I've explained before, my partner is the head of a private school. To be broad brush regarding class, scholarships tend to go to, stretched, middle income people with a middle class background; i.e. people who know how to play the system. Poor working class parents, with highly intelligent children, don't apply.
Considering that it's the future of the country we're talking about, doesn't it make more sense to give the best - state funded - places in universities to the most intelligent students, rather than to those with the most expensive education? It's common knowledge that ex state school students tend to get better degrees at Oxbridge - that points towards a lot of your 'posh' kids being bed blockers. I don't mind about people paying for private education, what I object to is their using it to gain an unfair advantage in getting a, state funded, university place.
I do not deny it is supportive of what you say, I am saying it is hardly able to represented as a universal fact when it is based on low single digit percentage of the total.
You have to wonder what a study of degrees obtained by state educated pupils with the same A-levels from Nottingham or Grimsby compared to students with the same grades from state schools located in Bournemouth or Gloucester.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/school...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/schools/873597...
Part of the reason we have to wonder what the study would say is that there almost certainly isn't such a study to consult.
Having quotas based on the perspective of one social group is ridiculous, particularly when the social group concerned is politically polarised with a sizeable chip on its collective shoulders. Variable geographical quotas seem daft, state-independent quotas seem less so only due to incessant propaganda which abuses the concept of fairness for political ends.
Also as I said earlier in the thread that actually I would expect if you have two persons who got the same results on a standardised test and one managed to do so in a more disadvantaged environment then you would tend to lean at one level towards the one that did so in the harsher environment.
The study also raises the very valid point and seems to support that what should be used to allocate places is contextual information and not just results, or state vs private. Contextual analysis is rather common sense and is exactly what should be used.
It is in fact rather telling that aspect of the study was ignored by you Mr Snap and you simply focused on the more social and political standpoint to support one argument.
heppers75 said:
You may have perhaps hit on something there!
However what utterly baffles me is that what people who think like that (if indeed Mr Snap does - if not then this is not aimed at him rather those that do) actually think their attitude is going to change? Also the fact that they simply do not grasp that in doing what they are doing and supporting this kind of action then they are perpetuating something that is ultimately harmful and detrimental to those they profess to be trying to support - the children in the system.
Could that be because really when it boils down to it the actual and rather less palatable truth is that those supporting this kind of action and behaviour are doing so out of a more social and political agenda of "wanting more" for themselves and not wanting to see those that do better do so because they have more resources with which to achieve it. Dressing up that age old agenda in a "think of the children" kind of argument though tends to make opposing it make those that oppose it look like heartless barstewards!
As a teacher, I never went on strike because, during the ten years I was in the NUT, one was never called for my school (I bet lots of PH'ers won't believe this, but it's true, teachers don't actually strike that often). I personally would have felt uneasy doing so - agreeing with you that it's probably counterproductive. But it would also depend on the cause, I've been on strike in other situations. However what utterly baffles me is that what people who think like that (if indeed Mr Snap does - if not then this is not aimed at him rather those that do) actually think their attitude is going to change? Also the fact that they simply do not grasp that in doing what they are doing and supporting this kind of action then they are perpetuating something that is ultimately harmful and detrimental to those they profess to be trying to support - the children in the system.
Could that be because really when it boils down to it the actual and rather less palatable truth is that those supporting this kind of action and behaviour are doing so out of a more social and political agenda of "wanting more" for themselves and not wanting to see those that do better do so because they have more resources with which to achieve it. Dressing up that age old agenda in a "think of the children" kind of argument though tends to make opposing it make those that oppose it look like heartless barstewards!
However, it's more complex than this. No teacher in their right mind is going to go against their union because of the legal protection they also provide - no small thing when a disgruntled child or parent can utterly ruin your life with an accusation (which I've seen happen twice to people who weren't guilty but had their lives destroyed none the less). Damned if you do and damned if you don't, basically.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff