Poor UK education standards

What is a school prefect?
A good prefect should also be mature, empathetic and patient. .
It appears my school may have missed the memo, as each of the prefects were stupid, awful bastards who only cared about the fact they got a gucci robe to wear in assembly and could trip on the limited power given.

I've still got the badge somewhere, I'm sure.
 
What is a school prefect?
Apparently a good school prefect possesses sound morals, good interpersonal skills and organizational skills. A good prefect should also be mature, empathetic and patient. School prefects are required to supervise students, promote a healthy work ethic, and fulfil any other duty delegated by the school's headmaster.
Could you stop failing the Turing test for a minute and explain yourself?
 
Head boys and girls plus prefects are nothing new. We had them at my school. Although there was never a list displayed on any wall. Do they still have fagging at any of your old schools?
We never had head boys or girls. We did have prefects - I was one. I was Computer Room prefect which meant I got to unlock the computer room so other kids could use it during lunchtimes. I shared the role with someone else and were totally bored.

I held another position as a prefect too, but I cannot recall what it was. It was pretty pointless to be honest.
 
One of the worst problems with modern UK education is OFSTED.

The whole shower is a bunch of incompetent box-tickers. They are dedicated to an Politically Correct LGBTWTF agenda set by a bunch of people who think that failure deserves to be rewarded.

Example, friend's wife works in a crap inner city school in Manchester. She gets a bad OFSTED report because of the number of kids who are illiterate and can barely count to 10 aged 6. What OFSTED doesn't take account of is that about 50% of the kids are from one parent families or else extremely dysfunctional families.

One particular instance is that she has had a number of children who have not been properly toilet trained, not to mention the others who can't actually use a knife or fork at the table.

A bigh achievement is actually getting these kids to recognise the alphabet and be able to count to 100 and do basic addition / subtraction.

But OFSTED have TARGETS and TARGETS MUST BE MET
 
We never had head boys or girls. We did have prefects - I was one. I was Computer Room prefect which meant I got to unlock the computer room so other kids could use it during lunchtimes. I shared the role with someone else and were totally bored.

I held another position as a prefect too, but I cannot recall what it was. It was pretty pointless to be honest.
At middle school we had prefects. Can’t remember if we had head boy/girl.
I was made a prefect and had the ‘privilege’ taken off me. We had a system of merits and demerits and if you got a demerit you were binned. Offices of state removed and everything.
I got two demerits from some teacher. We took a dislike to each other, and a battle of wills ensued. I lost.
 
We never had head boys or girls. We did have prefects - I was one. I was Computer Room prefect which meant I got to unlock the computer room so other kids could use it during lunchtimes. I shared the role with someone else and were totally bored.

I held another position as a prefect too, but I cannot recall what it was. It was pretty pointless to be honest.
Me and my mate Kevin reached the heady heights of Milk Monitor. We had to collect the classes allocation of half pint milk bottles and straws from 'cook' and hand it out. I can neither confirm nor deny that the foil top of a bottle was carefully removed, the cream bit drunk, and topped up with pee before the bottle was given to the class bully. It worked, it was our secret, until Kevin told a friend and we were soon after busted, caned, and reduced to the ranks.

Life lesson: Two kids can only share a secret if Kevin is dead
 
I'm currently back in hospital for observation and am working on the second rewrite of a paper on exploitation of Nazi technologies. One of the nurses wondered what I was doing - surrounded by loads of articles and other papers (benefit of a private room!). I explained how I was writing about Britain's chronic inability to exploit Nazi technology after the war. She seemed a bit hazy (or it might have been boredom) until I called up maps of both flying bomb and V-2 attacks on London. We looked out the window on to a line of terraced houses opposite and I pointed out the 1970s section in the middle and linked it back to a V-1 strike on the laptop map. And a number of deaths.

In spite of the War being near omnipresent in British culture and taught at schools (especially the Home Front), it seemed a complete revelation to her. She only had a hazy idea about when the war (WW2) was and conflated it with WW1. And the nurse, probably about 25, is a graduate...
The difficulty with teaching history is that just when you thought you’d covered it, more happens...
Or it gets rewritten...
 
One of the worst problems with modern UK education is OFSTED.

The whole shower is a bunch of incompetent box-tickers. They are dedicated to an Politically Correct LGBTWTF agenda set by a bunch of people who think that failure deserves to be rewarded.

Example, friend's wife works in a crap inner city school in Manchester. She gets a bad OFSTED report because of the number of kids who are illiterate and can barely count to 10 aged 6. What OFSTED doesn't take account of is that about 50% of the kids are from one parent families or else extremely dysfunctional families.

One particular instance is that she has had a number of children who have not been properly toilet trained, not to mention the others who can't actually use a knife or fork at the table.

A bigh achievement is actually getting these kids to recognise the alphabet and be able to count to 100 and do basic addition / subtraction.

But OFSTED have TARGETS and TARGETS MUST BE MET
As a classroom teacher OFSTED would not have given her an individual grade, they don't really do that any more.
They screw things up by looking at the whole school. It doesn't really matter what systems and processes the school has in place, if the staff do not meet them, the whole thing fails. OFSTED are part of the problem, but it just feeds the whole culture of fear and numbers. They are called the dementors for a reason.
 
The difficulty with teaching history is that just when you thought you’d covered it, more happens...
Or it gets rewritten...
In your, and my, day, university was attended by smart people, now it is dumbed down to accommodate the masses who left school with dumbed down O and A Levels.
Nobody in education listens to the business community when they say that degrees are not to be taken at face value, hence the pre-interview stage written and oral tests that many employers wisely set. Even with the tests weeding out those genuine graduates who nevertheless have fourth grade writing skills the interviews weed out the others, for example, an entitled young lady with a genuine first in art history who stated, with sincerity, that the post of historical researcher at a renowned museum would pay her bills while she "reached for her dream", becoming a party planner in Ibiza. It did give her puzzled pause that the interviewing trio were not gushing encouragement, or even smiling. However, it was her earnest belief that Henry VIII was a Mormon with eight wives, and her answer to "How many world wars were there in the twentieth century?" , answer, "Four, The Great War , WW1, WW2, and The Cold War." that ended the interview with a "Thank you for your time, and good luck."
She complained that the interview infringed her human rights by the employment of 'trick questions', I know because I was the station officer she tried to report it to as a crime.
 
No such thing as a trick question - just thick people. Did you try to charge her with wasting Police time?

Personally written and verbal tests would suit me a lot better than a standard interview or looking at my CV. Sometimes I wonder if those graduates from non STEM/other heavy academic backgrounds have unfair advantage as they have spent less time working, and more time socialising.
 
Thanks for the concern. It's just a job and none of the little shits will come to my funeral.

The real difference with teaching and every other job I mentioned is if I **** up, no one dies. I have a seriously easy ride compared to most other public sector jobs and I'm well aware of it.
There were a couple of teachers whos funerals I would happily have attended, if only to satisfy myself the knobs were actually dead
 
Last edited:
In your, and my, day, university was attended by smart people, now it is dumbed down to accommodate the masses who left school with dumbed down O and A Levels.
Nobody in education listens to the business community when they say that degrees are not to be taken at face value,
Er, yes we do, otherwise we wouldn't bother interviewing people before offering them a job. There is that hilarious witticism of "those who can't do, teach" but interviews for a teaching job tend to be a bit more robust than a checklist of:
speaks English?
has degree?
has pulse?

Yes, I'm bitching and moaning because I've had a chat about my target groups today. I have a number of students in key classes that have target grades of 8s (which is an A* in the old version) which are based on how the kids did in Year 6 SATs (they are currently in Year 10). There is more chance of Juncker and Farage having a gay marriage with an ISIS vicar than those students achieving their target grades.

I ******* wish my appraisal was based on that sort of shit. "Well, Mr Ortholith, 4 years ago you spent most of that year recovering from major surgery and eating codeine pills like they were smarties. Bearing that in mind, we think a succesful target for you is to stay awake for an 8 hour day and not dribble when you're bored."
 
Rant of the day - I got my wrist smacked for not marking enough books often enough. The argument is that educational research shows that quality feedback is the most powerful strategy for increasing attainment, therefore we should give feedback more often.

That position is all good and sensible. What then happens is that feedback gets implemented as a policy and must be done a minimum number of times per term. More feedback = better, surely?

Not in my opinion. Real quality feedback, where you analyse what someone has done, identify and highlight misconceptions and then provide constructive criticism takes a long time. If someone has written a page of answers (open ended questions, not multiple choice) every lesson it takes a good 10 minutes to actually read through, work out what they can and can't do and then say what needs to be fixed. The average class is around 30 students so 5 hours of work to do a set of books properly which is obviously unsustainable.

The solution? Give minimal feedback, ideally some sort of number code or multiple choice box tick sheet. That allows people to flick through work and provide 'feedback' relatively quickly. It is purposely designed to hit all of the policy points and not to actually improve learning. Some might argue that defeats the whole point of 'quality feedback' in the first place and it's become a case of the tail wagging the dog.
 
Last edited:
In your, and my, day, university was attended by smart people, now it is dumbed down to accommodate the masses who left school with dumbed down O and A Levels.
Nobody in education listens to the business community when they say that degrees are not to be taken at face value, hence the pre-interview stage written and oral tests that many employers wisely set. Even with the tests weeding out those genuine graduates who nevertheless have fourth grade writing skills the interviews weed out the others, for example, an entitled young lady with a genuine first in art history who stated, with sincerity, that the post of historical researcher at a renowned museum would pay her bills while she "reached for her dream", becoming a party planner in Ibiza. It did give her puzzled pause that the interviewing trio were not gushing encouragement, or even smiling. However, it was her earnest belief that Henry VIII was a Mormon with eight wives, and her answer to "How many world wars were there in the twentieth century?" , answer, "Four, The Great War , WW1, WW2, and The Cold War." that ended the interview with a "Thank you for your time, and good luck."
She complained that the interview infringed her human rights by the employment of 'trick questions', I know because I was the station officer she tried to report it to as a crime.
art history?

aka my first degree.
 
Rant of the day - I got my wrist smacked for not marking enough books often enough. The argument is that educational research shows that quality feedback is the most powerful strategy for increasing attainment, therefore we should give feedback more often.

That position is all good and sensible. What then happens is that feedback gets implemented as a policy and must be done a minimum number of times per term. More feedback = better, surely?

Not in my opinion. Real quality feedback, where you analyse what someone has done, identify and highlight misconceptions and then provide constructive criticism takes a long time. If someone has written a page of answers (open ended questions, not multiple choice) every lesson it takes a good 10 minutes to actually read through, work out what they can and can't do and then say what needs to be fixed. The average class is around 30 students so 5 hours of work to do a set of books properly which is obviously unsustainable.

The solution? Give minimal feedback, ideally some sort of number code or multiple choice box tick sheet. That allows people to flick through work and provide 'feedback' relatively quickly. It is purposely designed to hit all of the policy points and not to actually improve learning. Some might argue that defeats the whole point of 'quality feedback' in the first place and it's become a case of the tail wagging the dog.
I found judicious use of 'the ladder' appropriate.

Once on that first rung the little f*ckers knew they best improve pronto.

They had one chance to get off that first rung or they'd be moving through the others with great speed. I prided myself in ensuring that once moving they kept moving, either back to the start point or through all the grades to 'face melter' with the head.

There was a reward direction too. First rung was pretty liberally given but second was nails (dip box) after that they'd probably get to pay on the head from the head.

I found these books invaluable.


 
I found judicious use of 'the ladder' appropriate.

Once on that first rung the little f*ckers knew they best improve pronto.

They had one chance to get off that first rung or they'd be moving through the others with great speed. I prided myself in ensuring that once moving they kept moving, either back to the start point or through all the grades to 'face melter' with the head.
Edit - have reread, was being a spastic. Sanction escalation is very much a thing (it's sanctions, not punishments).

My issue is that whatever we do parents always know better. We've already had parents emailing in saying (paraphrased) "My child says they got all of the questions on topic X correct, we told you they should have been put in for the higher paper". ******* amazing parents that know what the questions were in the exam paper before teachers are even allowed to see the paper, never mind how they know how their kid has done months before results day.

That and the hooha I had at making my class line up outside without jackets after it had snowed because they wouldn't shut up has convinced me that whatever is done, someone somewhere will send an email to a boss of mine whining.

On the books, I've had two copies of Sue Cowley's and both have been nicked by NQTs. I tried reading Sun Tzu and gave up after 20 minutes.
 
Behaviour ladders? They're everywhere aren't they?
Yep, I was being an idiot as mine is now called something stupid like an escalation triangle. I wasn't really listening in the briefing but I do have the colourful posters in my room.
 
I give tours to young soldiers around the military museum in which I work and am amazed at how poor their grasp of British history is.

Last week I gave a tour to twenty seven SATT's, of that number only three had ever heard of Field Marshal Montgomery and only one of the Battle of El Alamein. Only two knew we had fought the Japanese during the Second World War. The only one who knew of Arnhem saw it on a film.

Several thought that British involvement in WWII ended with the Battle of Britain and after the Americans joined the War they did all the fighting.

They thought we simply went into our Anderson shelters or the London Underground, ate rations and listened to Vera Lyn whilst the Americans sent a Band of Brothers to Save Private Ryan.

What on earth are they teaching at school?

Cardinal
No wonder people arent signing up.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top