Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by meridian, Jan 20, 2009.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
You know the drill
Scrap the need to stay in education till 18 (back to 16)
Make PE compulsory at lesat 2 hrs a week
Give more power to teachers and reduce the amount of testing
(then brainwash brainwash brainwash )
If I ran education. I would scrap the national curriculum, keep testing to ensure that a reasonable amount of education takes place. knowing that certain subjects will be tested. However the curriuclum has become bastardised beyond its intended purpose and is infact aiding to regress education to a pre 1988 state. I would get rid of work related education, there is time for that after 16; make sure they can read and write before taking apart a motorbike. I would then reopen the technical colleges and give them the power to deliver work related qualifications such as the building diploma taught in schools. At the same time I would give the headteachers more autonomy from the lea and governers allowing then to expel teachers knowing they wont get back in on appeal, also creating a system similar to borstol to act as a deterent, to stop kids from misbehaving. I have more but i will rant for hours.
Pre-school: Four to five year-olds. Any four hour period between 0830 and 1730. Primarily concentrating on developing the basics of social skills.
Nursery: Five to six year-olds. Any six hour period between 0830 and 1730. Teaching more advanced social skills and the basics of literacy and numeracy. At least 30 minutes of P.E. per day from specialist P.E. teachers (not an overweight middle-aged woman that thinks pretending to be a tree is P.E.). A suitable, healthy meal is provided daily.
Lower Primary: Six to nine year-olds: Any eight-hour period between 0830 and 1730. Concentrating on literacy, English and numeracy, with introductions to geography, sciences, languages, history, arts, etc. At least one hour of P.E. per day; including one session of swimming, one of individual sport and one of team sport, per week. One light snack and one healthy meal is provided daily.
Upper Primary: Nine to Eleven year-olds. A continuation of Lower Primary but includes regular field trips to major local industries, emergency services (including coastguard and mountain rescue), local places of interest, etc. Prepare their own meals, learning about nutrition and food sourcing in the process. Must be involved in at least one school team (sport, chess, whatever) with regular inter-school/inter-county competitions. Must have two hours of community based activity per week. P.E. to include cycling proficiency training and testing.
Secondary: Eleven plus. 0900 to 1800. Includes the P.E standards from Upper Primary and the two hours of community activity. Education is more tailored, being ability, not age based: when a pupil shows enough ability in a subject, they move on; if they don't, they stay were they are; any serious deficiencies are tackled with remedial lessons, with priority given to core subjects.
No more studying toward single-subject, GCSE/O-Level style exams. Secondary education culminates in a broader Diploma taken in various tests over, perhaps, a week. Diploma incorporates all subjects, English competence is derived from written and oral components. If a student passes, they can leave school at sixteen, if not, they will continue with quarterly tests until they're eighteen - after which they will either leave compulsory education or will be able to study for their Diploma at adult education centres.
College: A-levels are open to all those with high enough Diploma scores. Vocational training is also available, with minimum Diploma scores where necessary.
University: Open free of charge to the top 10% of A-Level students with a sliding scale of funding for those below. Will cease being a lifestyle choice or being presented to students as the only choice.
Reinstate the Imperfect Subjunctive. If I WERE in charge...
Go to the top of the class, I have been waiting for someone to pick that up
apologies, nothing clever about being a smart arrse, but someone had to do it.
Scrap all the key stage tests and rely on the two benchmarks of GCSE/O-Level and A levels. Make them a true and subjective test of the pupils' ability by removing most of course-work, which we all know gets done by parents or teachers with the will to do it.
Scrap the need to stay in school until any age. Have a basic level of key skills which pupils must achieve before electing to leave full time education - callit a school leaving certificate if you like. This should include reading, writing, basic numeracy and basic science. In addition they should be educated in useful trade skills such as woodwork, metalwork, IT or the like as well as some life/social skills - cookery, nutrition, social skills, personal welfare. If they can reach this standard by 14 or so and want to leave and start a career then let them go. If they can't reach the standard - they stay at school until they do. Whichever way they go - no entitlement to benefits at all until they hit 18 years of age and have reached standard. Simple motivation - this is your school leaving certificate, you get sod all from the state until you pass it.
Replace some Head teachers with professional managers - teachers will of course be able to compete for posts if they have the skills.
ottar,your plan is sound.Do you think,for one moment,that the people educated in such a fashion would ever vote for the cnuts who run the country right now?Of course not!That is why it will never happen.
Do away with this PC nonsense of not being able to tell students they have "failed" something. I have spent my life in meetings listening to academics coming up with new ways to put a positive spin on lack of achievement. My own opinion is that you are setting people up for a major shock in the real world and removing any motivation to get on.
One of my teachers (back in the days when life was in black and white) took great pleasure in telling me, in front of my class, that I had failed maths. FAILED!, not achieved a "satisfactory outcome" or "graded in the 3rd percentile" but failed!!
I met him years later, he was an old man and I was in charge of running 22 (yes 22) Masters of Science courses. I actually thanked him for giving me the motivation to succeed.
I believe that our friend Meridian proposed a quite correct statement.
There is a subtle difference between two constructions
If I was...
If I were...
Let's look at it more closely.
If I was fast in the race, it's because I had competition to push me. (I may have been fast; I may not have. The condition is unclear)
If I was rude, I apologize. (I may have been rude. It depends on a person's point-of-view. The condition is unclear)
If I were your teacher, I'd flunk you. (It is clear from the context that I am not your teacher)
If I were going to Antarctica, I'd go with my best friend. (Apparently I am not going to Antarctica)
Our friend Meridian proposed to continue the sentence. It is possible that at least one of the ARRSErs indeed has a connection to the governmental structures, to the decision making process in education. In other words the condition is unclear.
However, I would like to incourage the ARRSErs to use the constuction 'If I were...' wider. English is a fine language and must not be simplified or vulgarised.
Reeding righting and rifmetic.
Bin all testing except GCSEs then A levels, let teachers actually teach and not meet testing criteria. Return the powers of discipline to schools, misbehave then you get the boot and hand the problem back to the parents.
One of my lads left the mob a few years back and went into teaching (he has a degree in the history of fine Spanish art of all things). He was looking forward to his new life until the local teaching authority he was employed by sent him to teach (kids 10-15 yrs old) with "learning difficulties", basically deprived knife wielding, fire starting, housebreaking, old lady mugging (get the picture) chavistic Fcuktards of the highest order. 9 months into the job, due to constant abuse, verbal and physical from both the kids and parents, he decided to shit-can it and seek alternative employment stating that it was not worth the hassle trying to make a difference. He was quite shocked by his experience. This man has done Sierra Leone, Balkans etc, so he is not easily upset. He told me that this is quite a regular occurrence and that the numbers of teachers deciding to look at alternative careers is shocking. They donât receive enough support from their employers as the authorities have an aversion to bad publicity and they have strict targets to achieve. If they donât get the support they deserve, why even think of a carreer in education.!
Not picking a fight but don't teachers apply for posts in your area? They do in mine. Also, couldn't your son apply for another post rather than get out of teaching, he should easily get a position in a 'better' school.
Separate names with a comma.