The education system is broken. A child could come out significantly smarter attending school for 3 hours per day, 3 days a week and with better prospects simply by improving how we educated them.
Forcing them in school for long periods is simply a means to assist both parents working and they outsource much of the childs upbringing to the state which along with teaching methods helps them conform, be obedient and submit to authority.
Hahaha - Ukip party conference erupts into a fist fight
The new face of British Politics
Is no one going to comment on UKip?
My god what the hell is going on. I suppose we should not be surprised when the thugs of the BNP and EDL try to look respectable by joining UKip. There is more latent thuggery in rw people who claim theyre respectable than in any other grouping. They believe in arming yourself, they believe in wars to solve problems and force to resolve disputes as we've seen today.
Kippers have always been an embarrassment.
With regards to UKIP fighting seems a bit ridiculous but I suppose there may be qualifying grounds if it were a passionate debate over the future if the world, less so if it was a personal argument that got out of hand.
I wouldn't advocate violence ever when other ways to resolve. Many politicians now are out for self interest if only they'd fight for what was right rather than either comply or fight each other.
I'm not sure what's the problem with grammar schools that people have. I mean if it does not divert funding away from Comprehensives, then what's the problem? Just more choice.
The counterargument is that we already have some ways of selective education. Firstly in schools there may be an element of streaming where those at the top of their ability are in one group and the also rans are in another. However the major sticking point is that there is a good school premium on house prices. That is because they are prepared to pay an additional lump sum to ensure that their child receives the best start.
Plus, nobody gets told how they perform in the test- clearly those who secure a place passed but no scores are revealed, if the school has 150 places and a thousand children pass the test, are there 850 failures?
How about that its only the middle classes that will be able to take this up/or will use their muscle and that theyve paid for home tutoring
How about that its once again putting individual "choice" above the needs of a community or the country
How about that when the most academically successful have been creamed off by grammar schools the effect on the schools without these pupils will be to make them less successful
How about that it will not improve social mobility
Is going to a lesser University due to your A-level grade means you're being told you're a failure at 18?
Is failing a Mathematics exam in 1st grade means being told you're a failure at 6?
Is not passing the early rounds of a job interview means being told you're a failure at 35?
What's the point of having varying academic abilities in just 1 class, studying the same thing?
The main problem with grammar schools is the exclusivity. It's a really narrow minded view on education and means children miss out on so many other academic avenues for them to explore.
It's not the 40's any more. There's more to learning that teaching grammar.
Follow the Nordic model and set up the education system to have two tracks. One for students who have academic interests and abilities, and the other for students who prefer vocational-based education.
Failing a job interview, failing a professional exam, failing GCSE's, failing A levels, failing to get into a University or College, failing to get into a football team, failing to get into a band or stage show, failing to get a girl you fancy to go out with you.
Pretty much anything can be seen as a failure if you have a negative attitude.
So we ban anything that can be considered as failure so not to hurt anybody's feelings?. That's communism - but that doesnt work either.
Nobody puts a community or country above their own interests - nobody on the entire planet.
So according to todays Times Rooney has avoided £3m of tax. This is it now. Sums up the whole country. Rampant individualism allied to greed both of which have been given state approval by govts stretching back to 1979.
Last edited by GrottonRed; 8-10-16 at 11:49. Reason: fixed quote format
Speaking of academics, xenophobia is rapidly becoming all the rage it seems:
Have we seen a vote where turkeys have voted for Christmas and have done so by an overwhelming majority.
In international law one nation cannot use its courts to go after another nation and their citizens.
However not only has the Capitol building opened this door with the Justice against Sponsored Terrorism Act they also ignored warnings from Obama and the law of unintended consequences that by enacting this law opens up the American government to law suits from other countries.
The main premise of the Bill was to allow families of 9-11 victims to sue the Saudi government for providing training, funds, etc. to the organisers and perpetrators of that terrorist act.
Yes the clue is in the name so limited to terrorism but terrorism is in the eye of the beholder so could we see families in locations like Afghanistan, Syria and Somalia taking the U.S. government to court due to the drone strikes or special forces conducting raids.
To overturn Obama's veto only one person voted against the bill and two abstained. Everyone else voted for it despite Obama's warnings.
Now it may be that due to a nervousness that voting against the 9-11 families and policies aimed to protect America from 9-11 will be political suicide. However, any elected official should also consider that there will be times when public opinion is opting for one choice but that is not the correct choice so they should vote the other way.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|