Schoolteachers

[LeazesMag 0]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20100309/tuk-pa...to-45dbed5.html

[Meenzer 15871]

Quite right too. Anything else would be weak-willed, lily-livered do-gooding.

[Guest alex]

If you aren't doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.

[ewerk 31596]

And I would've gotten away with it if it weren't for those pesky, hand-wringing, left-wing loony school kids.

[NJS 4446]

Just going by the name and the fact its an academy, it completely serves them rght for sending their kids there.

[Guest alex]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

[NJS 4446]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

 

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

[Guest alex]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

 

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

State schools though? One of these public finance inititative things?

[NJS 4446]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

 

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

State schools though? One of these public finance inititative things?

 

Yes.

 

My anti-religion stance aside, I don't think its particularly right that a group of parents whose kids might attend the school for 7 years should get have so much power in deciding its ethos or selection policy etc when the school may exist for decades. I think its taken choice too far - nowt wrong with parents taking an interest and getting involved but I think actually forming schools to their requirements is wrong.

[Guest alex]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

 

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

State schools though? One of these public finance inititative things?

 

Yes.

 

My anti-religion stance aside, I don't think its particularly right that a group of parents whose kids might attend the school for 7 years should get have so much power in deciding its ethos or selection policy etc when the school may exist for decades. I think its taken choice too far - nowt wrong with parents taking an interest and getting involved but I think actually forming schools to their requirements is wrong.

Personally, following on from that, I'd ban any religious schools but short of that I'd remove any public funding. Can't see it going down well in Northern Ireland mind.

[NJS 4446]

Personally, following on from that, I'd ban any religious schools but short of that I'd remove any public funding. Can't see it going down well in Northern Ireland mind.

 

Defintely - though I think there'd be outrage in England (and Scotland) as well.

 

I know historically the education system in the UK has a lot to be grateful to the churches for but we should have moved on by now. The sad thing for me is that I thought that as a pupil at a Catholic school in the 70s, I could see a decrease in the religious influence even in the 7 years I was there and presumed it would continue. Unfotunately using it as a fiddle to re-introduce selection has meant its influence has returned.

 

The people who suddenly "find God" when it comes to the application period should be shot.

[ewerk 31596]

Are 'academies' etc. just the name being given to comprehensives these days?

 

No its where groups of nutjobs or businesses put up a few quid and get the rest of us to pay the rest for the brainwashing of theirs and other peoples kids who are daft enough to send them there.

State schools though? One of these public finance inititative things?

 

Yes.

 

My anti-religion stance aside, I don't think its particularly right that a group of parents whose kids might attend the school for 7 years should get have so much power in deciding its ethos or selection policy etc when the school may exist for decades. I think its taken choice too far - nowt wrong with parents taking an interest and getting involved but I think actually forming schools to their requirements is wrong.

Personally, following on from that, I'd ban any religious schools but short of that I'd remove any public funding. Can't see it going down well in Northern Ireland mind.

 

It would be a good idea though, especially given the ridiculous stance of Catholic schools on entrance exams.

[Renton 22437]

The people who suddenly "find God" when it comes to the application period should be shot.

 

Hardly fair like. You should blame the ridiculous selection procedures which in my mind border on 'racist'. But if you had a kid and the only good school around was a catholic one you might be tempted to feign a bit of piety.

[NJS 4446]

The people who suddenly "find God" when it comes to the application period should be shot.

 

Hardly fair like. You should blame the ridiculous selection procedures which in my mind border on 'racist'. But if you had a kid and the only good school around was a catholic one you might be tempted to feign a bit of piety.

 

It's a dilemma and I wouldn't knock parents doing their best but I'd always be uneasy with the dishonesty and especially in explaining that dishonesty to the kids. If both sides can shrug their shoulders and say the end justifys the means then fair enough but it's a bit too cynical for me.

 

It's not just catholics of course - I used to work with a lass who did it for a CofE school and even worse did the "piety" test while her and her husband had separated and were awaiting divorce.

[NJS 4446]

I would add that the school governors/priests who know that parents are doing it and welcome them anyway are complete twats.

[Andrew 4969]

The people who suddenly "find God" when it comes to the application period should be shot.

 

Hardly fair like. You should blame the ridiculous selection procedures which in my mind border on 'racist'. But if you had a kid and the only good school around was a catholic one you might be tempted to feign a bit of piety.

 

It's a dilemma and I wouldn't knock parents doing their best but I'd always be uneasy with the dishonesty and especially in explaining that dishonesty to the kids. If both sides can shrug their shoulders and say the end justifys the means then fair enough but it's a bit too cynical for me.

 

It's not just catholics of course - I used to work with a lass who did it for a CofE school and even worse did the "piety" test while her and her husband had separated and were awaiting divorce.

 

I thought the CoE was all about divorce? might be why she passed

[NJS 4446]

I thought the CoE was all about divorce? might be why she passed

 

It was more about the fact that they went to church together (their only "date" of the week) and pretended to be a happy family that was wrong imo.

[ewerk 31596]

NJS, I assume you're against academic selection?

[NJS 4446]

NJS, I assume you're against academic selection?

 

In terms of schools yes - I think streaming within a school is fine as it allows for pupils to move up and down as they develop and also mix streams if they are better at a couple of subjects.

 

I was at the back end of the 11 plus system (first time around) and though I passed I always thought it was wrong that kids who failed were "written off" at 11 and expected to at best get "junior" academic jobs but were mainly meant for manual labour.

 

I think within a comprehensive system/school it allows kids who are "average" to still have a good chance. I also think bright kids aren't held back that much by "thickos" - the school I went to had just changed from grammar to comprehensive and I never felt restricted.

[ChezGiven 0]

Dont the Vardys of mackem fame finance an academy? Pure religious nutjob place too.

[NJS 4446]

Dont the Vardys of mackem fame finance an academy? Pure religious nutjob place too.

Emmanuel college - not sure if its still going but it made the headlines a few years ago for having creationist science on the agenda (which was backed by fuckwit Blair).

[ewerk 31596]

NJS, I assume you're against academic selection?

 

In terms of schools yes - I think streaming within a school is fine as it allows for pupils to move up and down as they develop and also mix streams if they are better at a couple of subjects.

 

I was at the back end of the 11 plus system (first time around) and though I passed I always thought it was wrong that kids who failed were "written off" at 11 and expected to at best get "junior" academic jobs but were mainly meant for manual labour.

 

I think within a comprehensive system/school it allows kids who are "average" to still have a good chance. I also think bright kids aren't held back that much by "thickos" - the school I went to had just changed from grammar to comprehensive and I never felt restricted.

 

Fair enough, principles are one thing but what about the fact that selection improves overall performance? Plus there are often opportunities to move to grammar schools after the 3rd and 5th year of post-primary education.

[NJS 4446]

NJS, I assume you're against academic selection?

 

In terms of schools yes - I think streaming within a school is fine as it allows for pupils to move up and down as they develop and also mix streams if they are better at a couple of subjects.

 

I was at the back end of the 11 plus system (first time around) and though I passed I always thought it was wrong that kids who failed were "written off" at 11 and expected to at best get "junior" academic jobs but were mainly meant for manual labour.

 

I think within a comprehensive system/school it allows kids who are "average" to still have a good chance. I also think bright kids aren't held back that much by "thickos" - the school I went to had just changed from grammar to comprehensive and I never felt restricted.

 

Fair enough, principles are one thing but what about the fact that selection improves overall performance? Plus there are often opportunities to move to grammar schools after the 3rd and 5th year of post-primary education.

 

 

A big factor in selection improving performance is that it also give schools a chance to reject any disruptive kids. That's fair enough but I think the kids should be dealt with properly (I don't knnow how) rather than just having a policy of sending them to a lesser school.

 

As I said its the unselected ones I feel sorry for - I think that's why parents (especially middle class ones) are so desparate to get into what they think are better schools as they think missing out ends the kids chances. I think putting more effort into helping the average kids is better than just concentrating on the bright who as I said will tend to look after themselves.

 

If things have changed and movement is possible then that's fine and a good improvement.

 

 

Of course my ideal plan would be to abolish private education - if the rich and powerful had to use state education it would blossom within a couple of years.

[Renton 22437]

NJS, I assume you're against academic selection?

 

In terms of schools yes - I think streaming within a school is fine as it allows for pupils to move up and down as they develop and also mix streams if they are better at a couple of subjects.

 

I was at the back end of the 11 plus system (first time around) and though I passed I always thought it was wrong that kids who failed were "written off" at 11 and expected to at best get "junior" academic jobs but were mainly meant for manual labour.

 

I think within a comprehensive system/school it allows kids who are "average" to still have a good chance. I also think bright kids aren't held back that much by "thickos" - the school I went to had just changed from grammar to comprehensive and I never felt restricted.

 

Fair enough, principles are one thing but what about the fact that selection improves overall performance? Plus there are often opportunities to move to grammar schools after the 3rd and 5th year of post-primary education.

 

I've always had a problem with selection at 11 years old (seems to young) but ultimately surely all education is meritocratic. I'd think arbritrarily it is reasonable to stream at 13 years - which effectively happens in comprehensives anyway.

 

And I'd like private education to be abolished along with 'Academies' which are socially devisive imo (as well as being moronic).

[ewerk 31596]

I've always had a problem with selection at 11 years old (seems to young) but ultimately surely all education is meritocratic. I'd think arbritrarily it is reasonable to stream at 13 years - which effectively happens in comprehensives anyway.

 

I agree that 13 seems a more reasonable age but if we're talking about academic selection then it has to be done before entering secondary education.

 

I'm just thinking about the N. Irish education system and why they're consistently outperforming other areas of the UK in exam results.