General Election

[oafc0000]

So in a 30 minute lesson having 5 less children means the teacher gets to spend 0.2 minutes (or 12 seconds) longer per child- I can't really see that making a big difference. If you are teaching to the whole class (like dictation) does it matter if there are 30 or 50 kids in it? Private schools do well because one of the things known about intelligence is that some of it is hereditary so those people who can afford to send their kids to private schools, who are probably more intelligent than average themselves, give their kids a leg up no matter what school they go to. Private schools do well because they can attract the better teachers as there is on average less unruliness in a private school, 3 or 4 of the teachers at my old school had doctorates I doubt many state schools have that many even if they are twice the size.

 

Incidentally your point about class size in private schools well I'll be damned your figure plucked from your head that they have on average a class size of 13-16 must be true. Well I can tell you from my own personal experience of private schools that is nonsense. At A-level (bearing in mind I did the 3 sciences and maths- which wasn't all that popular) 3 of my classes had class sizes more in the region of 18-20, I'll admit one did have 8 but that was Maths and it was spilt on ability and you needed an A* at GCSE or done a weird pseduo as level type thing to qualify. At GCSE level (so after 1997) my private school had class sizes of 20-25. At primary level one of my classes had 30 kids in it and I'd take the whole class versus some smaller primary state school with 15 in it every time. I'm sure others on this board who went to private schools will probably say the same about their class size.

 

Incidentally I think exams have gotten easier in some subjects and harder in others but if you give kids one chance to shine and they do well don't blame the exams for getting easy blame the system. Plus I had a bit of a nightmare in one of my a-level papers taken in lower 6th I was able to redo it 6 months later and got 100% not because I knew more but I had a better day- you let kids redo the modular exams without consequences and obviously the results are going to get better.

 

You don't half put out some rubbish at times. If it isn't half baked and false medical advice its stuff like this. I can't even be arsed replying to you properly, I just don't have the time to waste.

 

As for plucking numbers out of thin air these numbers where quoted to me from a number of prep schools I have been speaking to / looking into recently. As I said above, I am considering my options regarding my own children.

Edited April 15, 2010 by oafc0000

[oafc0000]

I love the blindness to try and win a point which is clearly incorrect just so you can push the 'Vote Labour' thing to a bunch of people that mostly don't give a toss.

 

If you don't give a toss why bother posting on the subject ?

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

If you don't give a toss why bother posting on the subject ?

 

[garcon]

I wonder if that weaselly lying little sh*t Woolas is worried yet. He ought to be.

 

 

 

 

 

(It's worth remembering he only got in because Liebour fixed the constituency boundaries...)

Edited April 15, 2010 by garcon

[oafc0000]

I wonder if that weaselly lying little sh*t Woolas is worried yet. He ought to be.

 

 

 

 

 

(It's worth remembering he only got in because Liebour fixed the constituency boundaries...)

 

I would imagine the Libs are hot after that seat...

 

Hasn't he had the seat since 97 ?

Edited April 15, 2010 by oafc0000

[garcon]

I would imagine the Libs are hot after that seat...

Oh yes...

 

Hasn't he had the seat since 97 ?

Yep, after a brief check, according to Wiki the seat was formed in 97. So I suppose I can't blame Liebour...

Edited April 15, 2010 by garcon

[beag_teeets]

Big night for the Lieb-Dims tonight.

[garcon]

Reading on, they've been paying with the boundaries again, losing Milnrow and gaining part of Alexandra.

 

Woolas' real concern should be that the Lib Dems won all 9 wards in the constituency at the last locals in May 2008.

[garcon]

Big night for the Lieb-Dims tonight.

Do I get a prize for spotting the typo there...?

 

First of three debates, probably be a bit of a let down generally with no killer blows landed.

 

It's a big night for all three. Clegg has everything to gain and really very little to lose - unlike the other two.

 

 

[oafc0000]

Do I get a prize for spotting the typo there...?

 

First of three debates, probably be a bit of a let down generally with no killer blows landed.

 

It's a big night for all three. Clegg has everything to gain and really very little to lose - unlike the other two.

 

I will be honest and say I don't like these debates. They are not democratic in my opinion and they totally pander to the party system I despise so much.

 

That said, I will be watching and will be interested to see how it effects the polls.

[Crusoe]

Clegg has to give a credible performance. Fail at that tonight and he may as well not bother turning up for the rest. I know many people who'll — understandably, although I disagree — only consider voting for a party that has a chance of winning power (or at least are so committed to Labour or the Conservatives that they'd only ever vote for someone else if it prevented the other from winning), and they're exactly the people who Clegg has to convince.

 

Me, I'm struggling. I've made a decision to go with a purely principled vote (bugger tactical voting, nothing will ever change if I swallow bile and carry on voting to stop parties I dislike winning) but I'm struggling; the two parties I'm left with both have individual policies I disagree with or think are unworkable, so it's all down to how I prioritise their policies now.

[Stitch_KTF]

More Kids realise they need to get good grades to move on in life and social conditions allow them to focus on there education. Facilities are better, funding improved etc. The growth of the internet has provided children with a fantastic tool to learn and grow. When I was a kid all I had was a £5 revision booklet my parents could not afford. Now kids have tons of help at the touch of a button for free.

 

The torys will for the first time reverse these trends. Funding will be cut, no doubt.

 

 

Here's a question. Why isn't it that, given modern technologies and the internet in particular, education funding can't be cut whilst (ahem) maintaining a decent service?

 

Have a think about that one.

Edited April 15, 2010 by Stitch_KTF

[opinions4u]

Here's a question. Why isn't it that, given modern technologies and the internet in particular, education funding can't be cut whilst (ahem) maintaining a decent service?

 

Have a think about that one.

Actually, your one liner about education sums up everything that is wrong about the public finances. And this dates back to the days of Conservative governments too.

 

Every time a new law is passed, it invariably adds cost to the public purse, be that a local council, police force, education authority or whatever.

 

It is rare that new legislation allows a public body to stop doing something. In other words the taxpayer gets cost upon cost upon cost. Never anything that will save money.

 

Not really surprising that national insurance rises, pension funds get taxed more, the scope and rate of VAT widens, personal allowances remain unmoved, new taxes get invented for things like insuring your home (against burglars nicking stuff because the state didn't lock them up last time they nicked stuff) and so on.

 

It's strange. In my house if I have to spend more money on one thing then I have to spend less on something else. Why doesn't running the country seem to work like that?

Edited April 15, 2010 by opinions4u

[oafc0000]

Here's a question. Why isn't it that, given modern technologies and the internet in particular, education funding can't be cut whilst (ahem) maintaining a decent service?

 

Have a think about that one.

 

The internet is a resource no substitute for a teacher etc...

[Crusoe]

First thought on the debate:

 

Nick Clegg looks like a Carphone Warehouse salesman turned Jehovah's Witness doorstepper.

 

David Cameron looks nervous.

 

Gordon Brown looks like he's wearing a purple tie. And it's squint.

 

These opening speeches are like Just A Minute. The delivery seems stilted and artificial, like they're being really careful not to repeat themselves or hesitate. Only Brown sounds remotely naturally paced and has any gravitas.

[Crusoe]

Hmm. Cameron's saying nothing, Brown's saying stuff that in past years could have been Conservative policies, Clegg is saying whatever he thinks people want him to say (mercenary, soundbite politics). That disappoints me a lot; I was hoping he'd display some kind of principled backbone and offer a real alternative, but he's just another one of three salesman offering variations on a theme.

[leeslover]

The internet is a resource no substitute for a teacher etc...

It should be in some instances. It would be a disgrace if kids were leaving school without doing some of their work on computers and on line. They should be usingthem as part oftheir normal routine, not as a separate subject

[Matt]

If you don't give a toss why bother posting on the subject ?

He never said he didn't give a toss.

[beag_teeets]

Cameron is really struggling, looks rattled.

[Crusoe]

Brown seems calmest. Clegg seems most flustered to me. He's just regurgitating soundbites, nothing of substance, just Four Yorkshireman one-downmanship. Cameron's saying absolutely nothing at all, nothing of any substance. Brown and Cameron have landed a couple of nice jabs on each other and Clegg.

 

All as bad as each other on this showing. The immigration debate was soul-destroying.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

I can't tell who's winning. It's not an hour old yet, but it feels like it's been going on for three.

 

On second thoughts, Clegg is winning because he's been on the telly for an hour when he's got no chance of being Prime Minister.

 

I'm totally neutral, but he's winning this one hands down.

[Crusoe]

Brown and Cameron are acting out Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots. Clegg only looks good because he's not either of them. I was seriously considering a Lib Dem vote but I worry that he just says whatever he thinks people will vote for at the time; nothing more principled behind it.

[leeslover]

Clegg is like a bloke trying to impress girls by being, "different," from his mates when they are being lairy

[Crusoe]

The questions from the audience increasingly sound like contestants on Blind Date. "Politician number three, what assurance can you give that..." etc.

 

Cameron's beating the government waste drum a bit too long and hard.

[24hoursfromtulsehill]

Brown and Cameron are acting out Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots. Clegg only looks good because he's not either of them. I was seriously considering a Lib Dem vote but I worry that he just says whatever he thinks people will vote for at the time; nothing more principled behind it.

 

Glad to hear it - but I reckon he'll get many many takers just because he's not Brown and he's not Camoron.

 

Example: neither Camoron nor Brown can say that they can't afford Trident because the other will take them to pieces on foreign policy and defence. Clegg can say that, because he'll never have to make the decision to sacrifice foreign policy objectives. It's got nothing to do with the virtue or otherwise of Trident, but Clegg is able to say the daring thing.