This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
| croydon proud |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mstrobez
Love him or hate him, Corbyn came across excellently tonight and Theresa was embarrassing. I think this will be a closer run thing than many Tories expect. cameron, osborne, boris,,,,,uber?
|
|
| croydon proud |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Cucking Funt
More embarrassment for another Labour luminary as yet another skeleton emerges from their already full-to-bursting closet. How anyone with even a modicum of sense could vote for these c*nts is beyond me. Have you read the daily mail two page spread about the conservative bullingdon club boys,,camerom prime minister, osborne,,chancellor. and boris london mayor,,,,breaking london taxi laws to ,,,errrr, how can i put it,, not line their own pockets or further their careers,,,,how anyone could vote for this rabble,,who might be inside if they wernt members of the bullingdon club,,,is beyond me! yes, all have disappeared bar boris,,our foreign secretary god help us,,,and i dont dislike theresa,,,seems nice enough, but really,,,with a CONSERVATIVE pm relying on the BRITISH TAX PAYER to pay for a companys staffs wages , worth $66 billion, via tax credits, just because his childs godmother is head of the company breaking London taxi laws that have exhisted for hundreds of years is unbelievable,,do you really want to pay for a company worth £66 billion staff wages? Just because they arent actually based in the uk, yet they have 130000, yes one hundred and thirty thousand drivers, and they dont actually appear to be a taxi company, have denied it, ony an app,,unbelievable!
|
|
|
Originally posted by Mstrobez
Love him or hate him, Corbyn came across excellently tonight and Theresa was embarrassing. I think this will be a closer run thing than many Tories expect. Not what I saw from last night's interviews. One candidate spent the time defending her policies and that she changes her mind when needs to. The other spent the time trying, and failing, to explain why he supports terrorists and how he wouldn't defend Britain. Make of it what you will.
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
| hedgehog50 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mstrobez
Love him or hate him, Corbyn came across excellently tonight and Theresa was embarrassing. I think this will be a closer run thing than many Tories expect. I think Paxman was the most embarrassing actually. No in depth questioning, just a load of goading in an attempt to get a response with questions about what they have said and done in the past rather than what they intend to do in the future.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
|
Originally posted by croydon proud
Have you read the daily mail two page spread about the conservative bullingdon club boys,,camerom prime minister, osborne,,chancellor. and boris london mayor,,,,breaking london taxi laws to ,,,errrr, how can i put it,, not line their own pockets or further their careers,,,,how anyone could vote for this rabble,,who might be inside if they wernt members of the bullingdon club,,,is beyond me! yes, all have disappeared bar boris,,our foreign secretary god help us,,,and i dont dislike theresa,,,seems nice enough, but really,,,with a CONSERVATIVE pm relying on the BRITISH TAX PAYER to pay for a companys staffs wages , worth billion, via tax credits, just because his childs godmother is head of the company breaking London taxi laws that have exhisted for hundreds of years is unbelievable,,do you really want to pay for a company worth £66 billion staff wages? Just because they arent actually based in the uk, yet they have 130000, yes one hundred and thirty thousand drivers, and they dont actually appear to be a taxi company, have denied it, ony an app,,unbelievable! Are,,,you,,,related,,,to,,,roonsterocker? (I'd be livid with that bias if I were you as well)
COYP |
|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
I think Paxman was the most embarrassing actually. No in depth questioning, just a load of goading in an attempt to get a response with questions about what they have said and done in the past rather than what they intend to do in the future. Some showing off deep inside him now and playing to the audience. I didn't really learn much from the whole night. The problem with it was the audience didn't get the opportunity to ask more questions to May's or Corbyn's answers.
COYP |
|
|
Originally posted by croydon proud
Grammar schools are a meritocracy, pass the 11+ and your in, no matter your background.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Bearcage
Grammar schools are a meritocracy, pass the 11+ and your in, no matter your background. There is another thread on this point. Try reading Born to Fail. Nowadays almost all entrants to Grammar schools have been tutored. As a result entry is heavily dependent upon the income and capability of the parents. Children from less educated parents have very little chance. Paying for Grammar schools is therefore a tax on everyone that almost exclusively favours the better off.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Bearcage
Grammar schools are a meritocracy, pass the 11+ and your in, no matter your background. If Grammar schools were really a meritocracy then the statistics from them would be more balanced. Innate intelligence is not attuned to the class structure. They are nothing but an opportunity for the middle classes to cement their positions of advantage but in this instance with the assistance of the state. If someone has worked their way into the middle classes (a rarer outcome today) then that's a success story and not a negative but the state should not be involved in favouring one class over another. The brightest can be easily catered for from within a comprehensive system. Again, Finland proves all the arguments for Grammars are nothing to do with what is best but instead about the 'I'm alright' mentality. And that is not a meritocracy. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 9.26am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| hedgehog50 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
If Grammar schools were really a meritocracy then the statistics from them would be more balanced. Innate intelligence is not attuned to the class structure. They are nothing but an opportunity for the middle classes to cement their positions of advantage but in this instance with the assistance of the state. If someone has worked their way into the middle classes (a rarer outcome today) then that's a success story and not a negative but the state should not be involved in favouring one class over another. The brightest can be easily catered for from within a comprehensive system. Again, Finland proves all the arguments for Grammars are nothing to do with what is best but instead about the 'I'm alright' mentality. And that is not a meritocracy. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 9.26am) Easily? Depends on which comprehensive you end up in. Some are worse than some of the secondary moderns used to be. You keep on about Finland, have a look at Singapore, 11+ style system, thought to be by some experts the best in the world with no obvious bias towards wealth.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
If Grammar schools were really a meritocracy then the statistics from them would be more balanced. Innate intelligence is not attuned to the class structure. They are nothing but an opportunity for the middle classes to cement their positions of advantage but in this instance with the assistance of the state. If someone has worked their way into the middle classes (a rarer outcome today) then that's a success story and not a negative but the state should not be involved in favouring one class over another. The brightest can be easily catered for from within a comprehensive system. Again, Finland proves all the arguments for Grammars are nothing to do with what is best but instead about the 'I'm alright' mentality. And that is not a meritocracy. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 9.26am) But they don't right now.
|
|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Easily? Depends on which comprehensive you end up in. Some are worse than some of the secondary moderns used to be. You keep on about Finland, have a look at Singapore, 11+ style system, thought to be by some experts the best in the world with no obvious bias towards wealth. Again, the comprehensive system in the UK needs a overhaul if it is to model itself on successes like Finland. The rather obvious reasons I promote Finland rather than Singapore is two fold. One Finland is European rather than Asian and hence the culture is more adaptable to those educational methods. Two by being a comprehensive Finland isn't excluding people. Everyone gets to access the best teachers regardless of ability. It produces the more educated workforce rather than the class system we have here where essentially where the school you went to and the network you can access gets you the job. Singapore is successful but...It's far more like Northern Ireland in its near half population coverage than England..But Northern Ireland isn't knocking anyone out of the park...the culture is different...Here only five percent of children go to Grammars. Again, the private tuition industry there is significant and disadvantages lower income children. Also, twenty percent of the national budget goes into education....The focus, mad testing level and pressure is on another level. Finland produce a far more relaxed system that's just as good. And essentially I believe in systems that can actually produce meritocracy rather than produce it just for a select, mostly middle class, few. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 11.38am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
But they don't right now. I don't really have a problem with your feelings on that. I had a similar crap experience as a child in a comprehensive having to put up with peers who didn't want to learn. There is a significant and disruptive minority of families within the state sector who don't want the pressure and effort that comes with actually maximising their children's education...they want them to get through it and get a job..the family culture is transmitted to their children..What the system will tolerate the system will get. The system is shaped by the law in how it deals with these families....I should of course mention that the state sector also has plenty of wonderful families with great kids. What I'm talking about is how I believe the state should progress with education.....What we should design for the future. Personally I don't blame anyone for seeking the best education for their children as that is time limited....What I'm talking about is what the system should be....not what we have....I suppose I'm being idealistic and envious of fairer systems. Even the top comprehensives here have very few children on free school meals....they find the ways to exclude using their own methods. Grammars in reality are an ideological backwater. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 11.36am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
I don't really have a problem with your feelings on that. I had a similar crap experience as a child in a comprehensive having to put up with peers who didn't want to learn. There is a significant and disruptive minority of families within the state sector who don't want the pressure and effort that comes with actually maximising their children's education...they want them to get through it and get a job..the family culture is transmitted to their children..What the system will tolerate the system will get. The system is shaped by the law in how it deals with these families....I should of course mention that the state sector also has plenty of wonderful families with great kids. What I'm talking about is how I believe the state should progress with education.....What we should design for the future. Personally I don't blame anyone for seeking the best education for their children as that is time limited....What I'm talking about is what the system should be....not what we have....I suppose I'm being idealistic and envious of fairer systems. Even the top comprehensives here have very few children on free school meals....they find the ways to exclude using their own methods. Grammars in reality are an ideological backwater. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 11.36am) I share your ideals but I just don't think society will ever allow an environment where all sections of it will happily send their offspring to one place for education.
|
|
| jamiemartin721 |
|
|---|---|
|
We shouldn't need private schools or grammar schools, the fact that we do and keep arguing for the later, to me suggests that our education system hasn't actually improved at all in 30 years, but continued to be more about achieving scores, than producing educated young people with the necessary basic intellectual skills for society or higher education. Grammar schools aren't the solution - We need to address the problems of the education system (funding, class size, teachers, special needs education and special programs targeted at failing students to at least give them some hope in the society to which they are going to be released. Those that would have benefitted from grammar schools, will probably be those who come out of schools and attend higher education (even if its to retake their GCSEs). They're not in need of 'saving from the system' because the second stage of the education system will pick them up (College) and provide them with a recovery route.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
|
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger
I share your ideals but I just don't think society will ever allow an environment where all sections of it will happily send their offspring to one place for education. All true. I think any new system would have to be designed first and shown to work before those with mroe would support it. I can't see it happening anytime soon.....If anything May appears to be eyeing up the Northern Irish system. Still it makes for an interesting discussion. Having worked as an teacher in the secondary school system it's quite depressing to see how it all works and how little it's changed. Edited by Stirlingsays (30 May 2017 12.07pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| jamiemartin721 |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by matt_himself
Not what I saw from last night's interviews. One candidate spent the time defending her policies and that she changes her mind when needs to. The other spent the time trying, and failing, to explain why he supports terrorists and how he wouldn't defend Britain. Make of it what you will. What 30 odd years ago. Shouldn't the questions be about policies now, and the election, rather than his relationship with Sinn Fein in the 80s. Maybe for fairness we should look at the collusion between the UK security services and the UVF and others.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
What 30 odd years ago. Shouldn't the questions be about policies now, and the election, rather than his relationship with Sinn Fein in the 80s. Maybe for fairness we should look at the collusion between the UK security services and the UVF and others. When it comes to being Prime minister there should be no statute of limitations to forgive past behaviour. Can Tony Blair come back in 2033? Only in Catholic heaven hopefully.
|
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.