Education Systems
popeye
news:4124f9f6$0$192$db0f...@news.zen.co.uk... thread headed: *most rubbish
teenagers - on now - ch5*
This thread (and other recent ones) question today's education system.
There's ranting, moaning, and much wringing of hands about it all.
Yet the examination results, teaching and learning standards have been
generally applauded just last week.
Let's look at examinations: if they are getting easier, then more children
pass them...that's a popular accusation that goes along with the disparaging
comparison with the *hard* exams of the past.
The funny thing is that this is all about restricting children's potential!
Let's assume children sat hard exams, so a few passed and most failed. This
leaves us with a large population of uneducated idiots to grow up and post
on newsgroups; children who failed were denied getting further education.
The few who passed went happily onwards and upwards.
Clearly, the old system was not-very-good for the country, the people and
the future.
The present system may well have *Graduations* for part-time HNCs, and allow
more children to get through to further education -- is that such a bad
thing? Is it merely and just about the Government keeping the unemployment
figures down?
I don't think so. I think it has to be seen as a good thing that children
are not-denied their potential. This statement is made in the knowledge
that recent primary teaching methods are being adopted upline, and that
there is better integration between secondary and primary, and between
colleges and schools.
These teaching methods rely on a *different approach* to intelligence from
that of the bad-old days. Children are encouraged to realise that they are
individual, with individual intelligences and skills.
One child will say they are intelligent at mathematics because they are good
with numbers and enjoy working with them, another child will say they are
intelligent with sport because they are good at games and athletics. And so
it goes on - each child feels they have specialised intelligence, so there's
NO COMPETITION with their peers nor with the system itself.
As they further their education, they may not be *good* at reading, writing
or any of the *traditional* school ways, but these are addressed without the
old pressures...there are not given special emphasis, and always the student
feels that they have skills and positive attributes that can be used to gain
qualifications, high level education and build careers later in life.
Today's education system recognises far more *real* problems than was the
case way back when. If there are allergies, deficiencies, phobias, they are
taken into account -- some children simply cannot write well, so the Local
Authority issue laptops (why should they be written off for having a single
easily-overcome failing?).
If we compare a population of today's pupils with that of the past, there
would probably be the same number or proportion of those good at maths, good
at English and so forth. However, as children were measured against a
standard model in the past -- and it was used to separate the wheat from the
chaff, we cannot compare today's system with that, for today's system does
not measure a pupil against a standard, and the system is not about denying
potential, rather it aims to encourage and develop whatever children have in
them.
It is therefore a serious misjudgement to attempt to compare them -- silly
to make today's kids do examinations from the 50s and 60s... hey, it's just
as silly as getting adults (who had a 50s or 60s education) to do today's
examinations!
-popeye
popeye
"popeye" <pop@y.e> wrote in message
news:cg92ts$gdd$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "\¯`·.¸biz¸.·´¯/" <so...@ma.baws.net> wrote in message
I would also like to add that children in the 50s and 60s had the pressure
of living upto the school standard, hard exams., and discipline, but those
of the 70s and 80s had that as well as a greater pressure from employers and
parents.
This of course, led to stress-related conditions, psychological problems and
even suicides.
The result of which was an attempt to supply an education system that
prepared children better for today's world (a world filled with sex,
violence, paedophilia, multi-culturalism, post-Christianity,
single-parenthood, easy credit, gadgets and so forth).
I guess it was not an easy task to come up with an education system that did
not make children afraid of punishment, add stigmas and emphasise the
negatives.
The education system we have is not, and cannot be perfect or stable, in
line with the modern world, it has to be in constant flux to simply keep up.
It is most certainly better for the people of the future -- regardless of
religious persuasion, background culture, mothertongue, legitimacy,
disfigurement, ailments and disabilities (unlike the schooling of the past).
Perhaps some people feel that the encouragement of today's children to have
self-confidence, assurance of intelligence and positive approaches to
realising their potential has made arrogant, cheeky thugs...
...but then again, read some of the posts on this ng to see the
psychological effects of the old system of belting and discipline come out
in the form of bigotry, insults, conclusion-jumping, miscomprehension, and
half-baked arguments! lol! -popeye
Blackthorn
> news:cg92ts$gdd$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > "\¯`·.¸biz¸.·´¯/" <so...@ma.baws.net> wrote in message
> > news:4124f9f6$0$192$db0f...@news.zen.co.uk... thread headed: *most
> rubbish
> > teenagers - on now - ch5*
> >
> > This thread (and other recent ones) question today's education system.
> > There's ranting, moaning, and much wringing of hands about it all.
> >
> > Yet the examination results, teaching and learning standards have been
> > generally applauded just last week.
> >
> > Let's look at examinations: if they are getting easier, then more
children
> > pass them...that's a popular accusation that goes along with the
> disparaging
> > comparison with the *hard* exams of the past.
> >
> > The funny thing is that this is all about restricting children's
> potential!
Setting easy exams gives the illusion that there is more potential amongst
the weaker pupils whilst making the achievements of the stronger
meaningless.
btw what will you do for posts the day google goes down?
rob...@freeserve.co.uk
Exactly so.
In the last 5 years 300,000 pupils have sat the Standard Grade exam
in English and only one has failed! It makes a mockery of the whole
system.
Crazy Aljy
news:dt0ii016lib947f4u...@4ax.com...
> Exactly so.
> In the last 5 years 300,000 pupils have sat the Standard Grade exam
> in English and only one has failed! It makes a mockery of the whole
> system.
Technically, it was a pass. My teachers just didn't like me. ;)
--
Regards,
Crazy.
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/crazy.aljy
kochanski
wrote:
>> > The funny thing is that this is all about restricting children's
>> potential!
>
> Setting easy exams gives the illusion that there is more potential
> amongst
> the weaker pupils whilst making the achievements of the stronger
> meaningless.
That's it in a nutshell - by rewarding everyone you devalue the efforts of
the people who try harder. It's a human trait to quantify and measure
things, so it seems natural to quantify human efforts. But currently it's
not 'pc' because you might upset someone's feelings. It's crazy. It's like
comparing Olympic athletes with someone who's got a swimming certificate.
Both are worthy to the individual but in terms of social acheivement I'd
say the person who trains bloody hard for years is more worthy of respect.
It's the same with the education system - by creating Mickey Mouse
certificates you're just pandering to people's egos, you're not actually
rewarding effort, acheivement, hard work. So what's the point?
I'd like to know how many of those 97% who passed Standard Grades had
basic English and arthmetic skills. The basic tools of adult life in the
modern world.
popeye
"kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
I am surprised that you take this redundant view still. It is not about
*rewarding* effort and hard work for the few at the expense of the many!
Are you saying that you would be pleased with a system that is elitist? A
system that produces a majority of failures? Why would anyone (let alone
your good self) applaud all that?
I am not opposing you; I do think it is important that the education system
teaches the *basic tools* as you say...but why does that have to be at the
expense of all that is good about today's education? -popeye
sme
It is only through people failing that we can change things to improve.
> I am not opposing you; I do think it is important that the education
> system teaches the *basic tools* as you say...but why does that have
> to be at the expense of all that is good about today's education?
What is good about todays education system when a young person leaves
school without being able to spell or count? Technology is great in so
far as young people can use it to get by but what happens when it isn't
available?
--
sme
"It'll never last..."
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/glasgowng/
kochanski
>
> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> I'd like to know how many of those 97% who passed Standard Grades had
>> basic English and arthmetic skills. The basic tools of adult life in the
>> modern world. -kochanski
>
> I am surprised that you take this redundant view still. It is not about
> *rewarding* effort and hard work for the few at the expense of the many!
> Are you saying that you would be pleased with a system that is elitist?
> A system that produces a majority of failures? Why would anyone (let
> alone
> your good self) applaud all that?
I'm not applauding producing a system of failures, it's the education
system that's producing failures by doling out certificates that are
effectively meaningless in the real world. If kids leave school without
the basic ability to read and write, then they *are* failures. They won't
handle adult life very well. Giving them a certificate to say they're
great isn't doing them any favours.
It's not elitist, it's a case of ensuring every child who leaves school is
equipped to deal with the world we have created for them. The education
model of the 50s/60s (in fact, stretching back further) was not perfect
but it equipped more children with the basics. Working class children had
the ability to read and write by the time they reached their 11+ and were
divided accordingly. I don't see how abandoning that to let kids express
their individuality over the most basic numeracy and literacy can benefit
anyone, least of all society.
> I am not opposing you; I do think it is important that the education
> system
> teaches the *basic tools* as you say...but why does that have to be at
> the
> expense of all that is good about today's education? -popeye
It doesn't have to be at the expense, the two are not mutually exclusive.
We all have our own talents and of course they should be rewarded. But
hard work should also be rewarded over a fuck-you attitude. I'm not saying
abandon everything and revert to the old fashioned way - today's education
system must reflect today's world - but I definitely think the current
set-up of rewarding the most simple common-sense tasks isn't much benefit
to anyone.
kochanski
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk:
>> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
>>> I'd like to know how many of those 97% who passed Standard Grades had
>>> basic English and arthmetic skills. The basic tools of adult life in
>>> the modern world. -kochanski
>>
>> I am surprised that you take this redundant view still. It is not
>> about *rewarding* effort and hard work for the few at the expense of
>> the many! Are you saying that you would be pleased with a system that
>> is elitist? A system that produces a majority of failures? Why would
>> anyone (let alone your good self) applaud all that?
>
> It is only through people failing that we can change things to improve.
Ah, and that as well ;o)
>> I am not opposing you; I do think it is important that the education
>> system teaches the *basic tools* as you say...but why does that have
>> to be at the expense of all that is good about today's education?
>
> What is good about todays education system when a young person leaves
> school without being able to spell or count? Technology is great in so
> far as young people can use it to get by but what happens when it isn't
> available?
That's exactly my point. I was given a calculator at primary school to
help with multiplication and percentages. I never have a calculator on me
when I'm in the supermarket, checking my bank statement to see if the bank
are diddling me, etc. Basic, basic skills.
Oso
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
What is wrong with passing someone back a piece of work an saying "It isn't
good enough"?
By rewarding indolence in the child, giving them a big gold star for nothing
ingrains the "I want it handed to me on a plate" syndrome. The child does
not strive to achieve and thinks that doing the bare minmum is acceptable.
If any of you had watched "Bad Lads Army", you will have seen the result of
this in Kypriatu (sp?), the idle lad from London. Reward good work and
effort, you get results, reward indolence then indolence is obtained. When
a child tries hard, even if they don't get it correct, then you praise that
childs effort but do not reward the result.
> I am not opposing you; I do think it is important that the education
system
> teaches the *basic tools* as you say...but why does that have to be at the
> expense of all that is good about today's education? -popeye
But what you propose negates even the basics. Rewarding all to pander egos
rewards failure. Straight talking can change attitudes.
As I have said in the past, I helped my neighbour with her degree. When she
started, she could do the basics of reading and writing but couldn't
structure an essay and that was with a GCSE in English. You would have
thought that an A pass in English would mean that the recipient could
structure an essay. She just got her results, a 2:1 from Nottingham Trent
University where she would have been lucky to get an Ordinary degree had I
not helped her. When we started she could assimilate the knowledge but
could not present it. After her first two essays which I helped her on, the
University called her in to question her about the essays and the change in
style and structure. She told them that she had shown the essays to her
neighbour who had taken her original essays and torn them to shreds for both
content and style and had told her in no uncertain terms that they were
crap. This she took as a HUGE wake up call and it had made her realise that
her work was not good enough. I got a phone call from her after she got the
results to thank me for all the help and before I left Luton, she gave me a
litre bottle of Malt whisky as a thank you for giving her that kick up the
arse. Praise effort but reward results.
--
Oso
Fidei Coticula Crux
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 19/08/04
popeye
> On 23 Aug 2004 11:01:12 GMT, sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote:
>
> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk:
> >> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
Right, let's think this through a bit more... you have a population of
children in the 1950s or 1960s (whatever) and they are taught the basics and
sit hard exams....what do you get?
That's right, you get a small number of children passing the exams because
they responded to that style of teaching. they managed to cope, and through
hard work and effort, they learned these basics and passed the exams. Well
done them!
But what of the rest? Those who did not respond to the teaching? those who
couldn't *get it*? or those who didn't make the effort?
That's right, they did not get rewarded; they failed. They were discarded.
With no chance of further education, they were deposited into the wide and
cruel world to fend for themselves without a grasp of the basics.
Clearly, as there can only be a few passes, and a few complete failures, the
bulk of the children passing through such an education system were not *good
enough*, learned a few basic skills and dumped as failures.
They continue, even today, believing they are not-good-at maths, English,
this or that. It is a tragedy! I have met many adults who have returned to
education through work schemes, open university etc, who suddenly realise
that they ARE NOT quite as daft as they were LEAD TO BELIEVE!
I think that you want people to learn the basics, but I suspect that you
want everyone to come out passing the exams, so you want a higher pass
rate...
If you don't want a higher pass rate, then you want elitism, you want only a
few to be allowed on, you want most people to fail and to have not learned
those beloved basics.
See what I mean? -popeye
Blackthorn
> They continue, even today, believing they are not-good-at maths, English,
> this or that. It is a tragedy! I have met many adults who have returned
to
> education through work schemes, open university etc, who suddenly realise
> that they ARE NOT quite as daft as they were LEAD TO BELIEVE!
*Led* to believe.
> I think that you want people to learn the basics, but I suspect that you
> want everyone to come out passing the exams, so you want a higher pass
> rate...
>
> If you don't want a higher pass rate, then you want elitism, you want only
a
> few to be allowed on, you want most people to fail and to have not learned
> those beloved basics.
>
> See what I mean? -popeye
No, just wtf do you know about it? You've got plenty of opinions but what
the hell do you actually know about education?
popeye
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:43:13 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
> We all have our own talents and of course they should be rewarded. But
> hard work should also be rewarded over a fuck-you attitude. I'm not saying
> abandon everything and revert to the old fashioned way - today's education
> system must reflect today's world - but I definitely think the current
> set-up of rewarding the most simple common-sense tasks isn't much benefit
> to anyone. -kochanski
If you have a strict exam system, then only a few will pass and most will
fail. Do you see that this is elitist? That this is harmful to many for the
rest of their lives?
Perhaps the modern method of passing exams (without the bell-curve
standardisation) - i.e. a pass-mark is a good thing? Especially if the exam
is not set to be a filter, or a way of allowing a few swots through. If the
exam really and trully does just test the child's knowledge, then you have
what-you-seem-to-want - everyone passes because they have displayed a set
certain level of knowledge (basic).
In the meantime, there is the other matter of producing a population that
believes in itself and it's value to society (as opposed to believing that
they are not-good- at maths and never will be, or that they are
*failures*). -popeye
sme
>
> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:opsc6mobsxz3rd9p@kryten...
>> On 23 Aug 2004 11:01:12 GMT, sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote:
>>
>> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in
>> > news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk:
>> >> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >> news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
> <snipped out bit>
<< Another snipped out bit to show it doesn't help if you can't see what
you are replying to!>> :-)
> See what I mean? -popeye
You are trying to make out things are black and white though. They
aren't. In your scenario my parents are the castaways, the discarded
ones, the failures.
My da still struggles to write a proper sentence (maybe that's where i
get it from?) but in the last 6 months he's figured out how to use the
net.
People find their level, somewhere they are comfortable with. We all want
a job paying Ł100,000's a month but we don't want the responsibility. How
many people when looking for jobs look at the wage and decide it is too
much for them? Without looking at the actual job description?
People are taught at school the same thing. Some take it in and go on to
further education, some can't be bothered and go on to the dole. Others
take in the stuff at school but never find any need for it in their
everyday lives.
Personally i think qualifications at school are overrated anyway. Since
secondary i've always said they should offer apprenticeships from 3rd
year on. Something which is practical and really educational. The
American scholarship set up is a good model. People should be able to go
to a college which deals in a specific theme. Sience and maths,
literature, mechanical & engineering, sports, etc. It wouldn't be for a
specific career path but it would help them get on the right road for
learning.
When i was at school i had to pick a Science. Why? I ended up picking
Physics and Chemistry coz my pals where going to them. Got an O level in
both. But for what purpose? I only did it coz my pals were going and i
had to pick one.
People who fail to do what is required of them by law shouldn't be
rewarded. People who surpass what is required of them should be. What is
wrong with that?
sme
news:Xns954ECA17A639...@130.133.1.4:
p.s. i started posting this at 7. Then went for my tea about 7:30. I
don't know what possesses you to sit and post massive long post like this
all the time Popeye!! :-)
popeye
"sme" <s...@spamcity.com> wrote in message
news:Xns954ECA17A639...@130.133.1.4...
That is the most intelligent post so far in this debate. You are spot on.
Thanks (a breath of fresh air as always sme) ! -popeye
popeye
> sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote in
> news:Xns954ECA17A639...@130.133.1.4:
>
> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgddcj$a1p$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk:
> >
> >>
> >> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> >> news:opsc6mobsxz3rd9p@kryten...
> >>> On 23 Aug 2004 11:01:12 GMT, sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in
> >>> > news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk:
> >>> >> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> >>> >> message news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
> >> <snipped out bit>
> >
> > << Another snipped out bit to show it doesn't help if you can't see
> > what you are replying to!>> :-)
> >
> >
> >> See what I mean? -popeye
> >
> > You are trying to make out things are black and white though. They
> > aren't. In your scenario my parents are the castaways, the discarded
> > ones, the failures.
> >
> > My da still struggles to write a proper sentence (maybe that's where i
> > get it from?) but in the last 6 months he's figured out how to use the
> > net.
> >
> > People find their level, somewhere they are comfortable with. We all
> > responsibility. How many people when looking for jobs look at the wage
> > and decide it is too much for them? Without looking at the actual job
> > description?
> >
> > People are taught at school the same thing. Some take it in and go on
> > to further education, some can't be bothered and go on to the dole.
> > Others take in the stuff at school but never find any need for it in
> > their everyday lives.
> >
> > Personally i think qualifications at school are overrated anyway.
> > Since secondary i've always said they should offer apprenticeships
> > from 3rd year on. Something which is practical and really educational.
> > The American scholarship set up is a good model. People should be able
> > to go to a college which deals in a specific theme. Sience and maths,
> > literature, mechanical & engineering, sports, etc. It wouldn't be for
> > a specific career path but it would help them get on the right road
> > for learning.
> >
> > When i was at school i had to pick a Science. Why? I ended up picking
> > Physics and Chemistry coz my pals where going to them. Got an O level
> > in both. But for what purpose? I only did it coz my pals were going
> > and i had to pick one.
> >
> > People who fail to do what is required of them by law shouldn't be
> > rewarded. People who surpass what is required of them should be. What
> > is wrong with that?
> >
>
> p.s. i started posting this at 7. Then went for my tea about 7:30. I
> don't know what possesses you to sit and post massive long post like this
I know, must have something to do with the fact that I am presently
bedridden ;( and have no idea about satellite tv (although I am trying to
get something sorted out) -popeye
tomScotland
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
> news:cgddcj$a1p$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>
>
>> They continue, even today, believing they are not-good-at maths,
>> English, this or that. It is a tragedy! I have met many adults who
>> have returned to education through work schemes, open university
>> etc, who suddenly realise that they ARE NOT quite as daft as they
>> were LEAD TO BELIEVE!
>
> *Led* to believe.
LOL, good one. Japseye has been plonked, I urge you all to do the same. I
think he is LB in disguise.
--
The following is a true story -
only the address has been changed, to protect the guilty
tomScotland - stick this in yer fusebox!
blog - http://musicalsnobbery.blogspot.com
stop your grinnin' and drop YOUR LINEN to reply
ATC
> will fail.
Only if they haven't been properly prepared for the exam . I don't want to
see kids sent to exams to fail but I do want passing those exams to stand
for something .
Oso
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
>
> "sme" <s...@spamcity.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns954ECA17A639...@130.133.1.4...
> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgddcj$a1p$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk:
> >
> > >
> > > "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:opsc6mobsxz3rd9p@kryten...
> > >> On 23 Aug 2004 11:01:12 GMT, sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in
> > >> > news:cgchnq$8ch$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk:
> > >> >> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > >> >> news:opsc6j5napz3rd9p@kryten...
> > > <snipped out bit>
> >
> > << Another snipped out bit to show it doesn't help if you can't see what
> > you are replying to!>> :-)
> >
> >
> > > See what I mean? -popeye
> >
> > You are trying to make out things are black and white though. They
> > aren't. In your scenario my parents are the castaways, the discarded
> > ones, the failures.
> >
> > My da still struggles to write a proper sentence (maybe that's where i
> > get it from?) but in the last 6 months he's figured out how to use the
> > net.
> >
> > People find their level, somewhere they are comfortable with. We all
want
How
> > many people when looking for jobs look at the wage and decide it is too
> > much for them? Without looking at the actual job description?
> >
> > People are taught at school the same thing. Some take it in and go on to
> > further education, some can't be bothered and go on to the dole. Others
> > take in the stuff at school but never find any need for it in their
> > everyday lives.
> >
> > Personally i think qualifications at school are overrated anyway. Since
> > secondary i've always said they should offer apprenticeships from 3rd
> > year on. Something which is practical and really educational. The
> > American scholarship set up is a good model. People should be able to go
> > to a college which deals in a specific theme. Sience and maths,
> > literature, mechanical & engineering, sports, etc. It wouldn't be for a
> > specific career path but it would help them get on the right road for
> > learning.
> >
> > When i was at school i had to pick a Science. Why? I ended up picking
> > Physics and Chemistry coz my pals where going to them. Got an O level in
> > both. But for what purpose? I only did it coz my pals were going and i
> > had to pick one.
> >
> > People who fail to do what is required of them by law shouldn't be
> > rewarded. People who surpass what is required of them should be. What is
> > wrong with that? -sme
>
> That is the most intelligent post so far in this debate. You are spot on.
> Thanks (a breath of fresh air as always sme) ! -popeye
>
C'mon popeye-juggle cats with my earlier post!
Janie Thomson
"Oso" <osobear(spamtrapped)@(another)ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:gEuWc.2852$G61....@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
He can't. It's westie's turn with the cats this week.
--
Janie
http://www.janie-thomson.co.uk
janiethomson at janie-thomson dot co dot uk
popeye
"ATC" <c4l...@spamblockonetel.com> wrote in message
news:2ov20uF...@uni-berlin.de...
Why?
(I'm not being oblique or trolling, I really would like to know why -- did
Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael etc site exams? Did they pass
them? Would they have not got into art school or university because they
couldn't produce a *proper* essay?) -popeye
ATC
Art IMO is not something which can be taught . ( I know , my art teacher
tried ) and Da Vinci was definately an educated man . Where his education
came from though ,I don't know .
I think you will find , that in their days , there were far more what you
would call failures as education was mainly for the rich .
Janie Thomson
That's not failure though, is it? You can't fail if you aren't given the
opportunity to try. *That's* what elitist education is about. It's not
elitist to give everyone the same opportunity to learn and reward those who
succeed.
Oso
And at the same time not reward those whose work is not up to standard.
kochanski
<ja...@janie-thomson-spam.co.uk> wrote:
>> I think you will find , that in their days , there were far more what
>> you would call failures as education was mainly for the rich .
>>
>
> That's not failure though, is it? You can't fail if you aren't given the
> opportunity to try. *That's* what elitist education is about. It's not
> elitist to give everyone the same opportunity to learn and reward those
> who succeed.
Well said, you.
kochanski
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgddcj$a1p$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk:
> People find their level, somewhere they are comfortable with. We all want
> a job paying £100,000's a month but we don't want the responsibility. How
> many people when looking for jobs look at the wage and decide it is too
> much for them? Without looking at the actual job description?
I'm the opposite, I look at the wage and think 'f*ckin hell, I'm not
getting out of bed for 5 quid an hour'!
> Personally i think qualifications at school are overrated anyway.
I agree actually. I worked bloody hard at school on my Highers and I
haven't applied any of the knowledge I learned in my last year at school
anywhere in my adult life. It was a means to an end, because I wanted to
go on to further education. As it turned out it was a waste of time - I'd
probably still be in the same place I am now if I hadn't taken my Highers.
And as my cousin is testament to, I could've also flunked my Standard
Grades and still got into college and produce some meaningless certificate
to impress employers with, with the minimum of effort.
> Since
> secondary i've always said they should offer apprenticeships from 3rd
> year on. Something which is practical and really educational.
And I've always said the education system should equip people with other
adult skills - parenting, budgeting, relationships etc. The basics I've
harped on about can, and should be, well in place by the end of primary
school. Heck, I could read, write and tell the time before I even got to
primary school, so it doesn't take 7 years to put all that in place.
Secondary school should be about preparing someone for life and work,
something useful that would benefit the majority.
> People who fail to do what is required of them by law shouldn't be
> rewarded. People who surpass what is required of them should be. What is
> wrong with that?
Spot on wee sme. Not just a pretty face eh? ;o)
Jim
news:2ous6gF...@uni-berlin.de...
Followers of this thread who don't read the Sunday Herald may be interested
in Ian Bell's article this week,
http://www.sundayherald.com/44158
in which he attacks the current focus on exams.
He makes some of the same anti-elitist points as popeye, though not
necessarily from the same perspective. As a Socialist, he sees a hidden,
right-wing agenda in calls for tougher exams, suspecting they would lead to
a return to selection, along with "maximum subsidy for private schools, an
end to local government control of education, and as much taxpayer-funded
aid to the private sector invasion of schools as can be gouged from the
citizenry."
He also reminds us of 1970's public information campaigns against adult
illiteracy, which some people seem to have forgotten in their admiration for
old-style schooling.
I tend to agree with popeye that a "pass/fail" system is bad for the country
as a whole, in that it risks undermining the confidence that is necessary
for self-improvement. Scotland suffers badly from this lack of
self-confidence, which results in poor economic perfomance indicators such
as the low business start-up rate. We punish poor pupils, yet many of the
people who succeed in business are not academic, while bright students aim
for nice, safe jobs which contribute little to the development of the
economy. Fear of failure holds us all back.
If we want to succeed as a nation, we should encourage all pupils to learn
how to succeed on a personal level by setting goals which they stand a
chance of reaching. This needn't discourage the bright pupils, and could
actually help them to set their sights higher - those who need to see others
failing to boost their own self-esteem are not worth bothering about.
kochanski
> "Blackthorn" <nena...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> He also reminds us of 1970's public information campaigns against adult
> illiteracy, which some people seem to have forgotten in their admiration
> for old-style schooling.
There was also the ridiculous experiment in the 60s that taught pupils the
phonetic spellings of words that totally screwed them up... But on the
whole, learning in a disciplined way is IMO a more productive way. I was
schooled in the 80s. For the alphabet, the times tables, spelling etc. we
did it repeatedly and kept doing it until each member of the class had a
star beside their name on the class chart. What's so wrong with that
system? Of course people fell through the net, not all teachers are
committed, not all kids turn up, not all kids have a happy home life and
take the pressures to school with them. But a structured system of the
basics is surely a positive way. They've got plenty of time to express
their individuality in the playground, in gym class, in art classes, in
drama etc.
> If we want to succeed as a nation, we should encourage all pupils to
> learn
> how to succeed on a personal level by setting goals which they stand a
> chance of reaching. This needn't discourage the bright pupils, and could
> actually help them to set their sights higher - those who need to see
> others
> failing to boost their own self-esteem are not worth bothering about.
I don't imagine anyone wants to see someone fail to 'boost their own
self-esteem'. But those who put in more effort should get more out.
Rewarding everyone collectively doesn't acheive anything. It's all very
well setting goals that they can reach, but, ok, an example:
A pupil leaves school with a grade 6 standard grade English. Another
leaves with a grade 1. They have both effectively passed their exam (even
though they've sat 2 different exams, one easier than the other) and are
entitled to tell employers they have a Standard Grade in English. Both
these pupils go for the same job, but one obviously has a better grasp of
English than the other, and all other things equal, it seems they have the
same grasp of English. How is that fair?
Nobody *ever* asked me what grades I got at school so to all intents and
purposes I have a Standard Grade in English for which I studied for and
tried hard to pass, but so has the Foundation student who arsed around and
couldn't be bothered to try, or just perhaps couldn't grasp the concept of
the teaching, in which case, why should they carry the same certificate as
someone who does fulfil the criteria?
popeye
"Jim" <no-...@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:412b0...@127.0.0.1...
Good post, Jim. I didn't know about that particular article, but then again
it is certainly a current *hot topic* lol! It would be pretty difficult to
avoid the education debate as it takes up so much radio and TV airtime, so
much bandwidth and is all over the papers too!
I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled ages ago,
along with the other teeny-brains in this ng), but seeing it here makes me
feel sorry for her; it is a shame when anyone gets into that weird mindset.
I wonder if she uses radio show phone-ins with similar comments, or writes
in to the readers' letters with that attitude... then again, I suppose it
may be more about possessiveness (perhaps they consider this ng to be their
special, personal property or domain -- maybe they don't let just anyone in
to their wee gang and are hell-bent on chasing people away). Sad.
My advice Jim, is to just ignore these few "regulars" -- put them in your
killfile, and continue to post positively. -popeye
kochanski
> I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled ages
> ago, along with the other teeny-brains in this ng),
Oh man, this should be good!!! ;-D
*awaits Blackthorn posting her teeny-brain response*
popeye
"Janie Thomson" <ja...@janie-thomson-spam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2ovefaF...@uni-berlin.de...
We're not discussing elitist education per se, rather we're banging on about
general, supposedly open state/public education being inherently elitist as
its sole purpose is to to educate but as a selection process. -popeye
popeye
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:25:39 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
>
> > I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled ages
>
> Oh man, this should be good!!! ;-D
>
Nothing personally against Blackthorn and co, just that they rarely post
anything... they just reply/respond to discussions, butting in to either
insult or to get the hijack the thread with their me-me-me
attention-seeking....which is fair enough; they can do what they like. It
doesn't bother me, but I can't afford to waste any more time reading or
engaging with them on that basis, so I ignore them and let them get on with
it on their own! No trouble at all ;-) -popeye
kochanski
>
> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:opsc8ioadbz3rd9p@kryten...
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:25:39 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
>>
>> > I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled
>> ages
>> > ago, along with the other teeny-brains in this ng) -popeye
>>
>> Oh man, this should be good!!! ;-D
>>
>> *awaits Blackthorn posting her teeny-brain response* -kochanski
>
> Nothing personally against Blackthorn and co, just that they rarely post
> anything...
I was referring to the fact you feminised him and implied he was a
youngster :p
popeye
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:51:51 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
>
> >
> > "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:opsc8ioadbz3rd9p@kryten...
> >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 12:25:39 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled
> >> ages
> >> > ago, along with the other teeny-brains in this ng) -popeye
> >>
> >> Oh man, this should be good!!! ;-D
> >>
> >> *awaits Blackthorn posting her teeny-brain response* -kochanski
> >
> > Nothing personally against Blackthorn and co, just that they rarely post
>
> I was referring to the fact you feminised him and implied he was a
lol! *now I see* hehehehe
I can explain this one, lol! If I do not know the gender, or if the gender
is in doubt, I default to *she* in much the same way as many people default
to *he*... why not? It makes perfect sense to me...*she* contains all the
letters you might need! If it turns out to be a *he*, then consider the *s*
to be silent! lol! As a woman of a "certain" age, I think I have 'paid my
dues' and can do what I like. So there! lol! ;-) -popeye
west-ender
As a woman of a "certain" age, I think I have 'paid my
> dues' and can do what I like. So there! lol! ;-) -popeye
Good God!...you're no a wummin!
--
Take teeth out to reply.
west-ender
> I didn't see the original Blackthorn comment (as she was killfiled ages
ago,
> along with the other teeny-brains in this ng
Watch it, newbie...
> My advice Jim, is to just ignore these few "regulars" -- put them in your
> killfile, and continue to post positively. -popeye
}o[
Oh, giving advice now, is it...?
Wally
> I suppose it may be more about possessiveness
> (perhaps they consider this ng to be their special, personal property
> or domain -- maybe they don't let just anyone in to their wee gang
> and are hell-bent on chasing people away). Sad.
>
> My advice Jim, is to just ignore these few "regulars" -- put them in
> your killfile, and continue to post positively. -popeye
What a fucking pompous control freak. How long have you been on usenet?
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Mazza
Wally <cedar_...@hotmail.com> rattled on thusly:
> popeye wrote:
>
>> I suppose it may be more about possessiveness
>> (perhaps they consider this ng to be their special, personal property
>> or domain -- maybe they don't let just anyone in to their wee gang
>> and are hell-bent on chasing people away). Sad.
>>
>> My advice Jim, is to just ignore these few "regulars" -- put them in
>> your killfile, and continue to post positively. -popeye
>
> What a fucking pompous control freak. How long have you been on
> usenet?
Long enough to needle the needleworkers, ho ho! :)
http://tinyurl.com/42oec
http://tinyurl.com/66cze
How fucking annoying must you be to be booted out of a needlework
newsgroup??
M.
--
Psycho killer, qu'est que c'est?
kochanski
<west-ende...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
> news:cgfbk0$9ri$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>
> As a woman of a "certain" age, I think I have 'paid my
>> dues' and can do what I like. So there! lol! ;-) -popeye
>
> Good God!...you're no a wummin!
:-O What she said! :-O
Janie Thomson
> On 23 Aug 2004 18:51:57 GMT, sme <s...@spamcity.com> wrote:
>
> > "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in news:cgddcj$a1p$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk:
> > People find their level, somewhere they are comfortable with. We all
want
> > a job paying £100,000's a month but we don't want the responsibility.
How
> > many people when looking for jobs look at the wage and decide it is too
> > much for them? Without looking at the actual job description?
>
> I'm the opposite, I look at the wage and think 'f*ckin hell, I'm not
> getting out of bed for 5 quid an hour'!
>
> > Personally i think qualifications at school are overrated anyway.
>
> I agree actually. I worked bloody hard at school on my Highers and I
> haven't applied any of the knowledge I learned in my last year at school
> anywhere in my adult life. It was a means to an end, because I wanted to
> go on to further education. As it turned out it was a waste of time - I'd
> probably still be in the same place I am now if I hadn't taken my Highers.
> And as my cousin is testament to, I could've also flunked my Standard
> Grades and still got into college and produce some meaningless certificate
> to impress employers with, with the minimum of effort.
I have to confess I didn't work as hard at school as I might have, so my
Higher grades are lower than they could have been if I'd worked harder.
Having my folks split up in the middle of it all probably didn't help, but
most of the responsibility was mine. I could still have gone to uni
straight away but, since it would have put a severe financial strain on my
mother and I didn't have any one thing that grabbed me enough to put us both
through that, I got a job. Five years later, with a bit of experience of
life and financial independence, I went to university and discovered the
absolute joy of learning because you are interested in learning. It's never
too late, and I really feel for the kids at exam time every year with the
"if I don't pass my life is over" attitude. It's such bollocks!
>
> > Since
> > secondary i've always said they should offer apprenticeships from 3rd
> > year on. Something which is practical and really educational.
>
> And I've always said the education system should equip people with other
> adult skills - parenting, budgeting, relationships etc.
Hurrah! I so agree. Not to mention teaching them to *think*. Another life
skill is learning to fail. Not striving to fail, obviously, but learning to
deal with the consequences, and how you go forward from there. How you
handle your defeats/mistakes in life is as important as your successes.
kochanski
> It is all well intentioned, and changes seek to fix or improve. With
> that
> in mind, it must be understood that there was enough "wrong" with the
> older
> systems to cause radical change.
Indeed there must, but the current system is far from an improvement in
many areas IMO.
> English as a school subject can be filled with plays, poems and the
> like, or
> it can be filled with clauses, gerunds, past participles and semi-colons.
It can be filled with both...
> These are quite different approaches IMO...what about communication?
> Spelling is (to me) not an indication of intelligence. Spelling,
> grammar,
> pronunciation and so forth are not in themselves ends, they matter only
> because they can assist in clearer communication. Even communication is
> not
> an end in itself. You have to have ideas that you want to share in the
> first instance... what's the point of anything that interferes with
> that? -popeye
I thought Higher English was a complete waste of time, I hated it, yet I
love writing and reading other people's literature. The English I learned
on the Higher curriculum was just about analysing someone else's work and
reproducing the arguments that the teachers/examiners wanted to hear. We
weren't encouraged to read our own interpretations and there wasn't a
single bit of creativity involved. I was really disappointed with that
course.
Mazza
kochanski <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> rattled on thusly:
I think we probably have an ex-sheet metal worker in knickers crying over
his keyboard after those cutting remarks you two...
...don't worry Popeye, hold yer head up high, have a shave and for fuck's
sake tuck yer balls back in!
popeye
Now I'm puzzled! What's going on? My being a female is far from a stunning
bit of news... I can recall kochanski calling me *wee* (what if I am?), what
man has such small feet? -- a wee boy? wet.ender (when talking about the ng
stats) mentioned that we were all intelligent women (or words to that
effect). In addition to which I have repeatedly protested (but soon gave
up) being referred to as *he* and *him* in many posts, and even called
myself a *wee lassie* (obviously when talking about the distant past) ...
what more can I do? People (want to) make assumptions, despite being told
they are making assumptions (or so it would seem). In here no-one treads
carefully, no-one asks before sooting off remarks! -popeye
Wally
> Long enough to needle the needleworkers, ho ho! :)
>
> How fucking annoying must you be to be booted out of a needlework
> newsgroup??
I can see how the rank stupidity of a rube can be annoying. The fact that
the stupid bastard decided to spam a needlework group with 'news' of a
weaving web site leaves one wondering if there actually is discernible brain
function to counteract the compulsive, attention-seeking crud that s/he/it
spews out. This self-absorbed erse waves the 'me-me-me' banner more than
I've seen in a long time. Almost every post shouts...
Look at me! Look at my posts! Regard the wide range of my googlified
discourse! I'm so inte-fucking-lectual!! Look at me! Me! Me! Yes, me!!
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Wally
>>> Good God!...you're no a wummin!
>> :-O What she said! :-O
> Now I'm puzzled! What's going on? My being a female is far from a
> stunning bit of news...
"Popeye" is the name of a *male* cartoon charcter, you fucking idiot. What
on earth possesses you to think people would draw the low-probability
inference?
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
kochanski
>
> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:opsc8s21g8z3rd9p@kryten...
>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:35:55 GMT, west-ender
>> <west-ende...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> > Good God!...you're no a wummin!
>>
>> :-O What she said! :-O
>
> Now I'm puzzled! What's going on? My being a female is far from a
> stunning
> bit of news... I can recall kochanski calling me *wee* (what if I am?),
I call lots of people wee, it's a term of affection rather than a literal
description. Given that I myself am 'wee' most adults are bigger than me!
> In here no-one treads
> carefully, no-one asks before sooting off remarks! -popeye
It was the name. Popeye. He's a bloke, innit.
kochanski
Calm the beans Wally m'dear. It's only usenet, no need to get so personal.
o <== here, have an ascii chill pill
Wally
> Calm the beans Wally m'dear.
If the beans were any more calm, they'd be in a coma.
> It's only usenet, no need to get so personal.
It's not personal, it's just a slagging amongst workaday usenet folk (not
that poophead quite qualifies for the term 'usenet folk', being a rube 'n'
all, but s/he/it might progress to the first rung of the ladder some
day...).
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Blackthorn
> If we want to succeed as a nation, we should encourage all pupils to learn
> how to succeed on a personal level by setting goals which they stand a
> chance of reaching. This needn't discourage the bright pupils, and could
> actually help them to set their sights higher - those who need to see
others
> failing to boost their own self-esteem are not worth bothering about.
Absolutely Jim, the problem at the moment is that some of the exams are so
easy that low ability pupils who do little work are not only able to pass
but to achieve the same top grade (not just to pass) as a bright pupil who
slogs his/her guts out, that's not right.
GPC
<2p1647F...@uni-berlin.de>
<Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:45:09 +0100>
> Look at me! Me! Me! Yes, me!!
>
Why .
Blackthorn
My original thought was below the belt, so I'll "leave it, she's not worth
it".
kochanski
wrote:
> <uk.local.glasgow , Blackthorn , nena...@yahoo.co.uk>
> <2p1adiF...@uni-berlin.de>
> <Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:58:19 +0100>
>
>> My original thought was below the belt,
>>
>
> Your brain is at a different location to every other guy ? .
Every other guy?! Every guy I've met keeps his brain below his belt...
Blackthorn
> Nothing personally against Blackthorn and co, just that they rarely post
> anything... they just reply/respond to discussions, butting in to either
> insult or to get the hijack the thread with their me-me-me
> attention-seeking....
Oh the irony. What could be more attention-seeking than posting non-stop
paraphrased snippets from the web putting yourself forward as an expert on
everything? It's not a sign of weakness to not know/not care/not have an
opinion about something, (anything?) In my experience someone who pretends
to be an expert on everything actually knows very little about anything in
particular.
>which is fair enough; they can do what they like. It
> doesn't bother me, but I can't afford to waste any more time reading
Again, what irony.
tomScotland
Oh Jesus............H...................Christ. A wummin! A wummin? Well
that is indeed a surprise. Why choose a male character name if yer a wummin?
She really is strange.
--
The following is a true story -
only the address has been changed, to protect the guilty
tomScotland - stick this in yer fusebox!
blog - http://musicalsnobbery.blogspot.com
stop your grinnin' and drop YOUR LINEN to reply
tomScotland
This gets better.........
ATC
Well it wouldn't do to keep them anywhere you're not looking . ;)
ATC
Ok , I'll bite , why tinbasher ?
Blackthorn
news:2p1f5bF...@uni-berlin.de...
> > I think we probably have an ex-sheet metal worker in knickers crying
> > over his keyboard after those cutting remarks you two...
> >
> > ...don't worry Popeye, hold yer head up high, have a shave and for
> > fuck's sake tuck yer balls back in!
> >
> > M.
>
> Ok , I'll bite , why tinbasher ?
(I'm guessing) it's just any masculine type job turned trannie. i.e. it
could be coal-miner, rugby player etc.
Mitch
<c4l...@spamblockonetel.com> wrote:
Me tae. I'm an ex tinbasher, are we not allowed feelings? Anyway, It's
no me that's the poof, It's ma husband. :0)
popeye
> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 16:39:54 +0100, popeye <pope@y.e> wrote:
>
> >
> > "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:opsc8s21g8z3rd9p@kryten...
> >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:35:55 GMT, west-ender
> >> <west-ende...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Good God!...you're no a wummin!
> >>
> >> :-O What she said! :-O
> >
> > Now I'm puzzled! What's going on? My being a female is far from a
> > stunning
> > bit of news... I can recall kochanski calling me *wee* (what if I
>
> I call lots of people wee, it's a term of affection rather than a literal
> description. Given that I myself am 'wee' most adults are bigger than
>
> > In here no-one treads
> > carefully, no-one asks before sooting off remarks! -popeye
>
lol! Assumptions! What to make of kochanski? or Oso? or ...(you get the
picture). Gender is hardly the important factor anyway, so you are forgiven
for thinking I am a man with incredibly small feet or that I am gay because
I keep mentioning male friends etc. Just as I am sure to be forgiven for
not-assuming everyone in here is a male. And if anyone thinks Popeye the
sailor man (and cartoon character) was actually posting on this ng, then
what can I do about it? lol! -popeye
popeye
lol! I see Mazza's still posting despite the fact that I have killfiled her!
lol! -popeye
popeye
"Mitch" <Ji...@hame.com> wrote in message
news:240820041930013932%Ji...@hame.com...
> In article <2p1f5bF...@uni-berlin.de>, ATC
> <c4l...@spamblockonetel.com> wrote:
>
> > Mazza wrote:
> > > In news:opsc8s21g8z3rd9p@kryten,
> > > kochanski <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> rattled on thusly:
> > >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 13:35:55 GMT, west-ender
> > >> <west-ende...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
> > >>> news:cgfbk0$9ri$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> As a woman of a "certain" age, I think I have 'paid my
> > >>>> dues' and can do what I like. So there! lol! ;-) -popeye
> > >>>
> > >>> Good God!...you're no a wummin!
> > >>
> > >> :-O What she said! :-O
> > >
> > > I think we probably have an ex-sheet metal worker in knickers crying
> > > over his keyboard after those cutting remarks you two...
> > >
> > > ...don't worry Popeye, hold yer head up high, have a shave and for
> > > fuck's sake tuck yer balls back in!
> > >
> > > M.
> >
> >
> >
> Me tae. I'm an ex tinbasher, are we not allowed feelings? Anyway, It's
Hey, come on, Mitch, there's no need to sue language like that -- certainly
not as Mazza is a self-confessed homosexual. Deary me, leave him/her
alone! -popeye
doogie
> Mazza wrote:
> > In news:2p0vofF...@uni-berlin.de,
> > Wally <cedar_...@hotmail.com> rattled on thusly:
> >> popeye wrote:
> >>
> >>> I suppose it may be more about possessiveness
> >>> (perhaps they consider this ng to be their special, personal
> >>> property or domain -- maybe they don't let just anyone in to their
> >>> wee gang and are hell-bent on chasing people away). Sad.
> >>>
> >>> My advice Jim, is to just ignore these few "regulars" -- put them in
> >>> your killfile, and continue to post positively. -popeye
> >>
> >> What a fucking pompous control freak. How long have you been on
> >> usenet?
> >
> > Long enough to needle the needleworkers, ho ho! :)
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/42oec
> > http://tinyurl.com/66cze
> >
> > How fucking annoying must you be to be booted out of a needlework
> > newsgroup??
> >
> > M.
>
>
> This gets better.........
No it doesnt. I might be sad and have a boring nightjob, but I am not
as sad as you a$$holes!!! Your getting me fucking angry now, so why
dont you give it a rest at long last for fux sake and get a fuckin
life!!! I know you dont give a fuck for anybody you sad fannies but
your getting on my tits with the big fuckin witch hunt. Its done to
death now its not fuckin funny any more. If I ever find out where you
are it will be my great pleasure to teach you some fuckin basic
education. Good on you Popeye at least I like your stuff and nothing
these twats have said stands up as anyone can check easily enough.
They dont fuckin realise how totally stupid they look!!!!!!!!!!!
ENOUGH!!
Crazy Aljy
"Blackthorn" <nena...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2p19eeF...@uni-berlin.de...
Just curious on account of my own schooling (or lack of it). How would you
define a "low ability pupil"?
That's the tag teachers gave me, which was a bit weird considering they
hardly knew who I was. School bored the $h1t out of me, so I rarely went.
(Second worst attendance in my primary school's history. The top
bunker-offer refused to go unless he got a lift in a police car. So he told
me, anyway.) If anything, I think I got a better education out of not being
there.
I left with nothing more than a 5th year leavers certificate. Now I've got
more certificates than most of my old classmates, none of which mean any
more to me than the envelope they're stuffed into. (I mean the certificates.
I couldn't fit my classmates into the envelope ;) )
Does anybody else happen to agree with my opinion that compulsary schooling
ought to be abolished? Or that other arrangements should be made for kids
who would rather work for a living than sit listening to some old fart using
teaching methods that they find almost impossible to understand?
I know compulsary education was set up to avoid the scenario where kids are
forced out to work because their parents need the money, but if the kid is
getting no benefit from it and *genuinely* wants to work, then why not?
Maybe even get those kids doing unpaid, strictly monitored and regulated,
voluntary work, so there's no incentive for the parents to push them into
it?
--
Regards,
Crazy.
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/crazy.aljy
tomScotland
Chew me, owl boy.
Oso
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message news:cgghc6$qm$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> > It was the name. Popeye. He's a bloke, innit. -kochanski
>
> lol! Assumptions! What to make of kochanski? or Oso? or ...(you get the
> picture). Gender is hardly the important factor anyway, so you are
forgiven
> for thinking I am a man with incredibly small feet or that I am gay
because
> I keep mentioning male friends etc. Just as I am sure to be forgiven for
> not-assuming everyone in here is a male. And if anyone thinks Popeye the
> sailor man (and cartoon character) was actually posting on this ng, then
> what can I do about it? lol! -popeye
>
Before I jump to a conclusion upon an assumption, are you saying I make
assumptions? ;)
Anyway, I thought you would have kill-filed me, being as you refuse to
juggle cats with me anymore. :(
--
Oso
Fidei Coticula Crux
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 19/08/04
popeye
"doogie" <doogieh...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8681107d.04082...@posting.google.com...
> "tomScotland" <tom29YO...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<2p1d59F...@uni-berlin.de>...
> > Mazza wrote:
> > > In news:2p0vofF...@uni-berlin.de,
> > > Wally <cedar_...@hotmail.com> rattled on thusly:
> ENOUGH!!
More than enough... I'm not bothered in the slightest; why would anything on
an ng make any difference to me? I find this ng light-hearted and sometimes
downright hilarious and (as I've said before) as such, it's helped me a
great deal to get through grief and serious illness. Even quarrels and
bickering serve to take my mind off far more serious problems. When things
bog down too much or get boring, then I either ignore or killfile. Nothing
personal (why on earth would it be?), just exercising my right to use the ng
as well as software features provided! lol! Chill; it's having NO negative
effect! Honestly! -popeye
Mazza
doogie <doogieh...@yahoo.co.uk> rattled on thusly:
Doogie,
Is that a vein on your forehead? You might want to get that checked...
M.
--
Psycho killer, qu'est que c'est?
Mazza
Blackthorn <nena...@yahoo.co.uk> rattled on thusly:
What he said... Just an amusing image that popped into me head is all :)
popeye
"Oso" <osobear(spamtrapped)@(another)ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:reYWc.43$T83...@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
news:cgghc6$qm$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
> > > It was the name. Popeye. He's a bloke, innit. -kochanski
> >
> > lol! Assumptions! What to make of kochanski? or Oso? or ...(you get the
> > picture). Gender is hardly the important factor anyway, so you are
> forgiven
> > for thinking I am a man with incredibly small feet or that I am gay
> because
> > I keep mentioning male friends etc. Just as I am sure to be forgiven for
> > not-assuming everyone in here is a male. And if anyone thinks Popeye
the
> > sailor man (and cartoon character) was actually posting on this ng, then
> > what can I do about it? lol! -popeye
> >
>
> Before I jump to a conclusion upon an assumption, are you saying I make
> assumptions? ;)
>
> Anyway, I thought you would have kill-filed me, being as you refuse to
lol! Well, just like most folks, I guess, as levels of ignoring/not-reading
(often based on the header/ topic) increase, eventually it makes sense to
filter out the user completely. So I may not read every-single-thing you
publish, but as you do contribute to debates and post stuff that is
interesting or makes me laugh, you're not killfiled (yet) ;-)
You seem like a fair enough persona to me; at least you stay on topic, have
something valid to say, and it's OK to disagree/ agree without world war
three starting lol!
Hey, we all get pissed off from time to time, as I said before, I'm not all
that great when I'm in pain or premenstrual, but that's fair enough, innit?
Most folks are like that (even on Usenet). We all have ups and downs. So I
wouldn't killfile you unless there were no *ups* ;-)
I don't know what you mean by 'juggle cats', but I'm up for
anything.... -popeye
Oso
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
>
> I don't know what you mean by 'juggle cats', but I'm up for
> anything.... -popeye
>
Arguing with you is like juggling cats. Impossible because every time you
go to grab one out of the air it has changed position. :D
popeye
>
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
> news:cghmj8$ute$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >
>
> > I don't know what you mean by 'juggle cats', but I'm up for
> > anything.... -popeye
> >
>
> Arguing with you is like juggling cats. Impossible because every time you
> go to grab one out of the air it has changed position. :D
lol! Might be worth a try, see what happens etc. -popeye
west-ender
news:2p15kqF...@uni-berlin.de...
> ...don't worry Popeye, hold yer head up high, have a shave and for fuck's
> sake tuck yer balls back in!
LOL
--
Take teeth out to reply.
west-ender
news:2p1647F...@uni-berlin.de...
> googlified
?!? Is that a word??
Wally
>> googlified
> ?!? Is that a word??
Well, if 'to google' can be used as a verb, wouldn't 'googlified' be a valid
derivation? Or should it be...
googled
googulated
googleised
googleiferated
etc
?
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
west-ender
news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> Does anybody else happen to agree with my opinion that compulsary
compulsory
schooling
> ought to be abolished?
Good grief. No.
listening to some old fart using
> teaching methods that they find almost impossible to understand?
Nonetheless, the methods are *not* difficult to understand. Kids are lazy.
Wake Up! Pay Attention!
> I know compulsary education was set up to avoid the scenario where kids
are
> forced out to work because their parents need the money
No it wasn't.
> but if the kid is
> getting no benefit from it and *genuinely* wants to work, then why not?
They have to be able to read, write and count to a greater or lesser degree.
They are of no use to an employer otherwise. It is *not* difficult to learn
these things. We have been doing it for thousands of years.
> Maybe even get those kids doing unpaid, strictly monitored and regulated,
> voluntary work, so there's no incentive for the parents to push them into
> it?
Oh yeah, that's the way forward, for sure...
You are a nutter AICM£5.
Learn, ya buggers! LEARN!!
kochanski
>
> "kochanski" <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>> It was the name. Popeye. He's a bloke, innit. -kochanski
>
> lol! Assumptions! What to make of kochanski?
She was the female love interest of Lister in Red Dwarf, originally played
by Scottish actress/singer Claire Grogan. (who is currently snogging the
face off some bird at the Embra festival *rolls eyes*). I thought
eeeeeveryone knew that!
> And if anyone thinks Popeye the
> sailor man (and cartoon character) was actually posting on this ng, then
> what can I do about it? lol! -popeye
lol! I didn't think it was the *real* popeye, I just imagined you to be an
old, ex-Navy bloke. With big hands and a swallow tattoo.
kochanski
<osobear(spamtrapped)@(another)ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> "popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
> news:cghmj8$ute$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>>
>
>> I don't know what you mean by 'juggle cats', but I'm up for
>> anything.... -popeye
>>
>
> Arguing with you is like juggling cats.
That's just cruel. Don't juggle cats.
Also wanted to say, dunno if anyone remembered last week I mentioned a
disturbingly graphic pic of a deid dug on the cover of the local paper.
Update - people were so disgusted, that many have fingered the dog's owner
and have contacted the paper, police and SSPCA, all naming the same bloke.
They're now taking it up as a criminal matter. Thank goodness there are
still some compassionate people around.
kochanski
>> This gets better.........
>
> No it doesnt. I might be sad and have a boring nightjob, but I am not
> as sad as you a$$holes!!! Your getting me fucking angry now, so why
> dont you give it a rest at long last for fux sake and get a fuckin
> life!!! I know you dont give a fuck for anybody you sad fannies but
> your getting on my tits with the big fuckin witch hunt. Its done to
> death now its not fuckin funny any more. If I ever find out where you
> are it will be my great pleasure to teach you some fuckin basic
> education. Good on you Popeye at least I like your stuff and nothing
> these twats have said stands up as anyone can check easily enough.
> They dont fuckin realise how totally stupid they look!!!!!!!!!!!
> ENOUGH!!
Don't take it so seriously mate. Popeye isn't bothered, why should you be?
west-ender
> Also wanted to say, dunno if anyone remembered last week I mentioned a
> disturbingly graphic pic of a deid dug on the cover of the local paper.
> Update - people were so disgusted, that many have fingered the dog's owner
> and have contacted the paper, police and SSPCA, all naming the same bloke.
> They're now taking it up as a criminal matter. Thank goodness there are
> still some compassionate people around.
Whodunnit?
kochanski
Seems it was the dog's owner, but they're not naming him or divulging too
much in case it prejudices the case.
Mazza
I still do! ;)
Mazza
kochanski <dontspam_...@blueyonder.co.uk> rattled on thusly:
> Update - people were so disgusted, that many have fingered the
> dog's owner
Flippin' heck - I knew it was odd round your way but... blimey!
M.
Blackthorn
"Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>
> news:2p19eeF...@uni-berlin.de...
> > "Jim" <no-...@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:412b0...@127.0.0.1...
> >
> > > If we want to succeed as a nation, we should encourage all pupils to
> learn
> > > how to succeed on a personal level by setting goals which they stand a
> > > chance of reaching. This needn't discourage the bright pupils, and
> could
> > > actually help them to set their sights higher - those who need to see
> > others
> > > failing to boost their own self-esteem are not worth bothering about.
> >
> > Absolutely Jim, the problem at the moment is that some of the exams are
so
> > easy that low ability pupils who do little work are not only able to
pass
> > but to achieve the same top grade (not just to pass) as a bright pupil
who
> > slogs his/her guts out, that's not right.
>
> Just curious on account of my own schooling (or lack of it). How would you
> define a "low ability pupil"?
A pupil with less ability than average.
Wally
>> lol! I didn't think it was the *real* popeye, I just imagined you to
>> be an old, ex-Navy bloke. With big hands and a swallow tattoo.
> I still do! ;)
We'll know for sure when s/he/it starts going "hyuk, hyuk, hyuk", with the
little pipe waggling about in the gub.
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Crazy Aljy
>
> "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> >
you
> > define a "low ability pupil"?
>
> A pupil with less ability than average.
A bit difficult to work out who fits into that category then, isn't it? At
age 12 or less, I may have been useless at the stuff they were teaching at
school, but I doubt very much if the teachers took into account my hobby of
reconditioning old valve radio sets - definitely not covered in the school
curriculum back then. Maybe I should have told them about it, eh?
Every wean has his/her own interests and abilities. Dismiss those, you don't
get the full picture and can easily pass a kid off as a "low ability pupil".
It seems to me that's exactly what schools do, albeit unintentionally.
Crazy Aljy
"west-ender" <west-ende...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:lF0Xc.98$h53...@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
> "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>
>
> > Does anybody else happen to agree with my opinion that compulsary
>
> Good grief. No.
Don't tell me. It's bad enough when they're on holiday, right? ;-)
> listening to some old fart using
> > teaching methods that they find almost impossible to understand?
>
> Nonetheless, the methods are *not* difficult to understand. Kids are lazy.
> Wake Up! Pay Attention!
Yes miss ;)
Maybe you're right about the methods, but I couldn't figure them out. One
teacher I had gave me a sheet with a load of arithmetic stuff that required
the use of long division - something I'd never done before. She used the
word DAMSON to explain it to us. Divide, Add, Multiply, Subtract, can't
remember what O and N stood for. What she got back from me was an A4 sheet
of paper littered with numbers, all to do with the first sum. She'd told us
to repeat something in this damson thing, but I couldn't figure out where I
was supposed to stop.
That's not lazy. That's confussled!
> > I know compulsary education was set up to avoid the scenario where kids
> are
> > forced out to work because their parents need the money
>
> No it wasn't.
You're right, but that was part of the thinking behind it. At least that's
what they taught me in school.
> > but if the kid is
> > getting no benefit from it and *genuinely* wants to work, then why not?
>
> They have to be able to read, write and count to a greater or lesser
degree.
> They are of no use to an employer otherwise. It is *not* difficult to
learn
> these things. We have been doing it for thousands of years.
My old man taught me to read before I started school. My writing skills
probably came about through all the reading I did, coupled with a wee bit of
help from my old man. As for counting, I never was much good at it, but what
I did learn wasn't picked up in a classroom. If anything, being taught in
the days when decimalisation was being brought in just made things more
difficult. I still use feet and inches, pounds and ounces, etc., because
that's all my parents understood.
Besides, I'm not entirely convinced that counting is absolutely necessary
these days. I can use mathematics to plot out a circle on a computer, but I
haven't a blinkin' clue how the computer is working it all out. For general
counting, provided you know how to use a calculator, you'll get by.
> > Maybe even get those kids doing unpaid, strictly monitored and
regulated,
> > voluntary work, so there's no incentive for the parents to push them
into
> > it?
>
> Oh yeah, that's the way forward, for sure...
Something tells me that's a no, but why not? The time I spent in school was
wasted. What I wanted was to get a job, but the law said no, so my time
spent bunking off was also wasted (or would have been if I hadn't put it to
good use). Better to do something constructive than hiding away from the
polis and school board all day every day, don't you think?
> You are a nutter AICM£5.
Not quite. I'm still trying for the certificate ;)
Any chance of expanding on AICM£5? Never noticed that one b4.
> Learn, ya buggers! LEARN!!
Yipee! We agree on something! :-)
popeye
"Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
>
> "Blackthorn" <nena...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:2p413dF...@uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> > news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > >
> > > Just curious on account of my own schooling (or lack of it). How would
> > > you define a "low ability pupil"?
<snipped out bit>
> Every wean has his/her own interests and abilities. Dismiss those, you
don't
> get the full picture and can easily pass a kid off as a "low ability
pupil".
> It seems to me that's exactly what schools do, albeit
unintentionally. -Crazy Aljy
*Did* and *intentionally* (insert as replacements into last sentence)...
that's the point w.r.t. today's education system (refer: thread starting
post). Completely agree.-popeye
ATC
And I Claim My £5
popeye
"Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> Does anybody else happen to agree with my opinion that compulsary
schooling
> ought to be abolished? Or that other arrangements should be made for kids
> who would rather work for a living than sit listening to some old fart
using
> teaching methods that they find almost impossible to understand? -Crazy
Aljy
Interesting idea, and not-all-that-crazy when you think about it. Obviously
it would be difficult in practice as few kids actually desire
schooling! -popeye
>
> I know compulsary education was set up to avoid the scenario where kids
are
> forced out to work because their parents need the money, but if the kid is
> getting no benefit from it and *genuinely* wants to work, then why not?
> Maybe even get those kids doing unpaid, strictly monitored and regulated,
> voluntary work, so there's no incentive for the parents to push them into
> it? -Crazy Aljy
It's refreshing to see some *thinking out of the box* instead of
regurgitating the well worn old polarised debates. New ideas are certainly
needed, and people-centred ones are always better than forcing square peg
kids to fit into round hole systems, IMHO. Go on, run with it - build a
case - how would it be done? -popeye
Crazy Aljy
> Crazy Aljy wrote:
> > Any chance of expanding on AICM£5? Never noticed that one b4.
>
> And I Claim My £5
Thanks, but I'm skint. Sorry.
Crazy Aljy
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
>
> "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> news:GQ8Xc.553$ni7...@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...
> >
> > "Blackthorn" <nena...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:2p413dF...@uni-berlin.de...
> > >
> > > "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> > > news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > > >
> don't
> > get the full picture and can easily pass a kid off as a "low ability
> pupil".
> > It seems to me that's exactly what schools do, albeit
> unintentionally. -Crazy Aljy
>
> *Did* and *intentionally* (insert as replacements into last sentence)...
> that's the point w.r.t. today's education system (refer: thread starting
> post). Completely agree.-popeye
Nope! I meant it the way I said it.
"Do", because even now, schools don't take account of what children do
outside the school gates.
"Unintentionally", because having done a bit of teaching myself, I know how
easy it is to forget there's life beyond the subject you teach.
Crazy Aljy
"popeye" <pope@y.e> wrote in message
>
> "Crazy Aljy" <crazy...@home.2day> wrote in message
> news:mrSWc.141$EK...@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> schooling
> > ought to be abolished? Or that other arrangements should be made for
kids
> > who would rather work for a living than sit listening to some old fart
> using
> > teaching methods that they find almost impossible to understand? -Crazy
> Aljy
>
> Interesting idea, and not-all-that-crazy when you think about it.
Obviously
> it would be difficult in practice as few kids actually desire
> schooling! -popeye
Part of what I was getting at was just that. Maybe it was just me, but I
always got the impression most kids were bored out of their skulls in
school. All three schools I went to (when I bothered to turn up) were
branded with the same "Colditz" label. How can anyone "desire" anything
other than escape in surroundings like that?
> > I know compulsary education was set up to avoid the scenario where kids
> are
> > forced out to work because their parents need the money, but if the kid
is
> > getting no benefit from it and *genuinely* wants to work, then why not?
> > Maybe even get those kids doing unpaid, strictly monitored and
regulated,
> > voluntary work, so there's no incentive for the parents to push them
into
> > it? -Crazy Aljy
>
> It's refreshing to see some *thinking out of the box* instead of
> regurgitating the well worn old polarised debates. New ideas are
certainly
> needed, and people-centred ones are always better than forcing square peg
> kids to fit into round hole systems, IMHO. Go on, run with it - build a
> case - how would it be done? -popeye
It's nothing new. Just a matter of expanding on something that already
exists. They call it "work experience", but it could just as easily be
college courses, training courses along similar lines to the ones adults
have access to, or some activity the kid dreams up him/herself provided
there's adequate supervision and it's genuinely going to be of benefit in
later life.
I don't know the situation now, but when I was at school, art was a
compulsary subject. Fat lot of good that would be to somebody who wanted to
be a vet. Better sending them down to Cardonald Cat & Dog Home or something
for a bit of hands-on experience. Make sense?
kochanski
> "Do", because even now, schools don't take account of what children do
> outside the school gates.
And why should they? They're there to teach the skills that are a
requirement of the adult world we have created for them. Being able to
read and write is more useful to the population as a whole than being able
to fix radios. I did a lot of arts and crafts outside of school, it was
nothing to do with school and why should it be, quite frankly? But while I
was at school my ability to learn and display my learning was a legitimate
requirement of my schooling. That's the way it has to be, not least
logistically for one teacher controlling a class of 30 or 50.
If you disagree with that style of teaching you are perfectly at liberty
to teach your kids at home. They don't *have* to go to school if you can
prove to the education department that you're fulfilling their basic
educational needs.
Wally
> And why should they? They're there to teach the skills that are a
> requirement of the adult world we have created for them. Being able to
> read and write is more useful to the population as a whole than being
> able to fix radios. I did a lot of arts and crafts outside of school,
> it was nothing to do with school and why should it be, quite frankly?
Arts and crafts should be included at school - there are plenty of folks who
go on to make a living out of it. Art is like music - it's everywhere and,
like snippets of music in adverts and incidental music in films, often goes
relatively unnoticed - wallpaper is art, carpets and rugs are art, most
packaging of goods is art, the plates we eat off, the chairs we sit on, the
posters that entice us to go to concerts and plays, etc, etc. There's far
more to it than just drawing and painting.
I got a 'D' for my O-Grade Art (technically a fail). I also got a 'D' for
English. A couple of months after I got the results in, I received a revised
set of results, in which English had been upgraded to a 'C' - apparently,
there was an opportunity to appeal a result and the school did this on my
behalf, choosing English on the basis that it would be a more useful badge
for getting a job. If I'd known, and been given the choice, I would have
picked Art for the upgrade. It pissed me off and discouraged me from taking
it further.
--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk
kochanski
> I don't know the situation now, but when I was at school, art was a
> compulsary subject. Fat lot of good that would be to somebody who wanted
> to
> be a vet. Better sending them down to Cardonald Cat & Dog Home or
> something
> for a bit of hands-on experience. Make sense?
When I was at school, at various times, I wanted to be a nurse, a
haematologist, a hairdresser, a graphic artist, a lab technician, a
computer programmer, a journalist, a mechanic, and a librarian. Should the
school have pandered to my whims and sent me out on various courses when
the fancy took me? Would that be logistically possible? And what employer
would want a 10 year old kid to nanny while they're trying to run a
business?