keg Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 I suppose this thread reflects one of this countries ills and that is a complete loss of respect for teachers . If the parents among us have these views then what hope for the kids ? There is an agenda to denigrate the public services and it has been executed most effectively reading these depressing posts . I don't there is. What is clear is that the public sector in general seem to think that they should be immune from any of the commercial realities the rest of the population are open to. At least that's the impression given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) If you pay peanuts you get monkeys, broad generalisation I know as there are many "Tim Nice-but-Dim" types in high earning jobs... We don't pay peanuts. We taxpayers pay a great deal of money, more than our economy can generate, but we get a whole tribe of bureaucrat monkeys riding the national education bandwagon. Yet the villain is always the parsimonious taxpayer isn't it? Especially those taxpayers who have been so selfish as to get on in life. Its never the system that needs streamlining and reforming so that it is not catastrophically wasteful and actually works, and decentralising so that it is accountable to the people who pay for it and have to use it. No, its just nasty selfish taxpayers being tight as usual and failing to embrace the socialist principle. Perhaps we should go on strike. Edited July 24, 2014 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catweazle Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 You didn't read my post. My children go to schools outside of the catchment to where we live because my wife took a bullet to go to church on Sundays so they could get into the right state schools. I reckon anyone can have a go at that plan. As for the sink estates, Grammar schools were traditionally the way out for the bright kids with aptitude but the left did for the majority of the Grammar schools. What chance does a bright, motivated kid have to get his / her deadbeat parents to make that effort ? You have applied brains and effort to beat a failing system, many kids don't have parents like you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 You didn't read my post. My children go to schools outside of the catchment to where we live because my wife took a bullet to go to church on Sundays so they could get into the right state schools. I reckon anyone can have a go at that plan. Yeah, everyone has a day off and a car to go to the nearest one eh? As for the sink estates, Grammar schools were traditionally the way out for the bright kids with aptitude but the left did for the majority of the Grammar schools. Must try harder, Perhaps detention will generate something more than this flimsy rant? Excellent riposte, I can see no holes in your reply, no siree! We don't pay peanuts. No, but if their pay descends to peanuts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 I take it you accept that Grammar schools were there for all, were a traditional escape and a way out for bright kids from poor families and that Grammar schools were systematically destroyed by socialist governments who saw them as elitist? To suggest that the plan I am working to is somehow beyond the reach of others / all because 'not everyone has a day off on Sunday or a car' isn't the best argument I've seen put forward so far. I worked with a babymother from a rotten estate when I worked in town. She did everything (on her own) and sacrificed everything for her two kids - she was very religious and very fierce. Her kids both did well in education (with her 100% involved and interested) and they went on to red brick universities and their lives will be very different to their mother's. I genuinely believe that anyone can do that but it requires a high level of commitment and self sacrifice. We're heading way off topic and are now talking about a narrow minority from sinkhole estates, and that's probably not the best cross section to look at when considering an education system for the majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 the day people are no longer allowed to strike/protest about their working conditions then its safe to say they will have everyone by the balls and you may as well be living in china Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxie Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Both Labour and Conservative governments supported comprehensive education,in fact Margaret Thatcher established more comprehensive schools than any other politician when she was Minister for Education in the Heath government.Whilst Grammar schools provided excellent education for their pupils the Secondary Modern schools were pretty poor in general.Public opinion created comprehensive education,politicians of both shades responded to the clamour for change in the Education system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aris Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 I think the way grammar schools USED to be was probably wrong. How they are today is different. Technically 'grammar schools' don't exist, but what do exist are schools which are selective. In days past you wrote the 11plus - if you did well you went to a grammar, if you didn't you went to a scrap-heap type of school and were not expected to amount to much. My wife recently interviewed some ex pupils from our local primary school - all in their 70's and 80's now. One thing that was so so clear was how that 11+ exam affected their lives and how they felt pretty much worthless after not passing it. This is wrong IMHO. I'm all for streaming bright kids into "grammar" type schools (my son goes to a selective grammar after all), but the ones who don't go to grammars should not be left on the scrap heap as they pretty much were, and there should not be an emphasis on the only way to be a 'success' is go to go a grammar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 the day people are no longer allowed to strike/protest about their working conditions then its safe to say they will have everyone by the balls and you may as well be living in china Nonsense. Unlike China here we have contracts and employment laws, tribunals and ombudsmen. "Workers rights" have never been so well protected. Tax-payers rights are yet to be conceived. I'd like to protest about my pay and conditions. I haven't had a pay rise in 7 years. But I'm an wicked self-employed free-marketeer, not a "key-worker" so there's no-one I can hold to ransom. I just have to get off my backside and get on with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Agree with Gimlet on this, we have one of the most protected and regulated labour markets around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted July 26, 2014 Report Share Posted July 26, 2014 (edited) I think the way grammar schools USED to be was probably wrong. How they are today is different. Technically 'grammar schools' don't exist, but what do exist are schools which are selective. In days past you wrote the 11plus - if you did well you went to a grammar, if you didn't you went to a scrap-heap type of school and were not expected to amount to much. My wife recently interviewed some ex pupils from our local primary school - all in their 70's and 80's now. One thing that was so so clear was how that 11+ exam affected their lives and how they felt pretty much worthless after not passing it. This is wrong IMHO. I'm all for streaming bright kids into "grammar" type schools (my son goes to a selective grammar after all), but the ones who don't go to grammars should not be left on the scrap heap as they pretty much were, and there should not be an emphasis on the only way to be a 'success' is go to go a grammar. I think you are looking for Utopia! Edited July 26, 2014 by TIGHTCHOKE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted July 26, 2014 Report Share Posted July 26, 2014 To suggest anyone that doesn't go to a grammar school is on a scrap heap is both bizarre and statistically incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted July 26, 2014 Report Share Posted July 26, 2014 Life is what you make it and equality of opportunity is now at an all time high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chady Posted July 26, 2014 Report Share Posted July 26, 2014 Are the teachers still on strike lol? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickS Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 No, I am sitting in a 5* hotel in Venice, having travelled here on the Orient Express. What is the point of striking now? Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 No, I am sitting in a 5* hotel in Venice, having travelled here on the Orient Express. What is the point of striking now? Nick Good for you. I like Venice. On another note, received the letter I was told I would, regarding why my son (didn't mention my daughter for some reason) was absent from school on the day of the teachers strike. It would seem the only penalty is that his absence will be registered as 'unauthorised', so not as sinister as the initial letter implied. Am considering my reply. May ask if the absence of teachers on the same day will be registered as 'unauthorised'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Good for you. I like Venice. On another note, received the letter I was told I would, regarding why my son (didn't mention my daughter for some reason) was absent from school on the day of the teachers strike. It would seem the only penalty is that his absence will be registered as 'unauthorised', so not as sinister as the initial letter implied. Am considering my reply. May ask if the absence of teachers on the same day will be registered as 'unauthorised'. Tell them your children were on strike in protest at standards and conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashman1 Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Your children probably learnt more at home atb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poontang Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 No, I am sitting in a 5* hotel in Venice, having travelled here on the Orient Express. What is the point of striking now? Nick Good job the railway staff weren't on strike eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STOTTO Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Ah teachers, I hated every one of them when I was at school, nearly as much as they hated me I think! Looking at control in the classroom and childrens bad behaviour and how it is dealt with now to how it was when I was at school I have no idea how on earth the teachers cope. In order to restore control to teachers in the classroom environment thereby allowing 99% of the profession to come off medication and actually be able to teach the kids something give them back the big stick to beat the vile little ########s with. It worked for me, being in receipt of well-deserved pain is an education in itself!! I respect their right to strike by the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickS Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Sully, when the NUT called their members out, the rest of us had to be in school during normal hours, not "dressed down", even if we had no classes to actually teach. In my view, this is entirely appropriate. When I entered teaching in the late 1980's, there was a similar protracted dispute. Given my view that strikes do not really hit the people responsible for the grievance, I joined a non-striking union, the ATL. If I thought it would do any more than annoy parents and deprive kids of their education, I would reconsider. The flip-side of this is that I expect parents to send their kids to school when it is open and not take them out on holidays. Education provided free at the point of delivery is a privilege that is too precious to squander and is only a dream for many millions across the world. We should value it. Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Education provided "free" - I wonder where the rest of my taxes go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Sully, when the NUT called their members out, the rest of us had to be in school during normal hours, not "dressed down", even if we had no classes to actually teach. In my view, this is entirely appropriate. When I entered teaching in the late 1980's, there was a similar protracted dispute. Given my view that strikes do not really hit the people responsible for the grievance, I joined a non-striking union, the ATL. If I thought it would do any more than annoy parents and deprive kids of their education, I would reconsider. The flip-side of this is that I expect parents to send their kids to school when it is open and not take them out on holidays. Education provided free at the point of delivery is a privilege that is too precious to squander and is only a dream for many millions across the world. We should value it. Nick Niks When the NUT called their members out of my childrens school, the rest of us received letters saying that as it was uncertain until the day of the strike which classes and which pupils would be affected, it was necessary for all pupils to attend,but it would be advisable for all parents to be contactable in the event that children were effected and subsequently sent home. In my view, this is entirely inappropriate. Despite the fact my children are of the age now (the youngest only just) that they do not require babysitting at home, if this strike had happened a couple of years ago it would have entailed either my partner or myself taking the time off work without pay, but I do know several who had to take time off and lost income as a result. As I'm assuming teachers are salaried they were then paid for the time they spent on strike? I told both my kids that if the teachers were on strike I didn't see the point in going to school simply to get sent home again. As a result I received an ominous letter stating I would be receiving another letter in which I was expected to explain the reason for their absence. I received that letter yesterday, although it was nothing ominous in all honesty; simply a request to supply a reason in lieu of my son being recorded as an 'unauthorised' absence. I'm still considering my answer. Your grievance is with the government, so maybe those aggrieved teachers would be more effective camping outside Camerons house or parliament during half term, or some other time when it would have no effect on parents or pupils, but would be a thorn in the side of those responsible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keg Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 Sully, when the NUT called their members out, the rest of us had to be in school during normal hours, not "dressed down", even if we had no classes to actually teach. In my view, this is entirely appropriate. When I entered teaching in the late 1980's, there was a similar protracted dispute. Given my view that strikes do not really hit the people responsible for the grievance, I joined a non-striking union, the ATL. If I thought it would do any more than annoy parents and deprive kids of their education, I would reconsider. The flip-side of this is that I expect parents to send their kids to school when it is open and not take them out on holidays. Education provided free at the point of delivery is a privilege that is too precious to squander and is only a dream for many millions across the world. We should value it. Nick Good point well made! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimlet Posted July 27, 2014 Report Share Posted July 27, 2014 (edited) Education provided "free" - I wonder where the rest of my taxes go? Free at the point of delivery. Call it pre-paid. I suspect pre-payment public services, like pre-payment electricity meters, serving as they do a captive clientele who are unable to take their custom elsewhere, operate at deliberately inflated rates. We'll never know, of course, because we are not allowed to see the books. Edited July 27, 2014 by Gimlet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.