Same old Tories - completely out of touch

[alfredmizen]

Privilege comes in respect of grammar schools because the more wealthy can afford the private tutors who coach the kids to pass the entrance exams. The entrance exams don't test ability, they test rote learning and if you practice enough past papers then it is relatively easy to succeed in them..

Grammar schools tend to be in areas of relative wealth so costs such as transport, uniforms, school trips etc. become an issue for poorer families.

Yes they are now, they weren't before the policy to close them .

 

[Hastings gull]

Perhaps entrance exams could be changed to reflect ability rather than rote learning? I just feel that we as a society are far too quick to write off any suggestion that education could be improved by teaching different things to different people. Which just leads to a dumbing down of society as a whole in my view.

Absolutely -accept that children are different, have differing needs and cater for them all differently, but do it fairly.

 

[El Presidente]

Perhaps entrance exams could be changed to reflect ability rather than rote learning? I just feel that we as a society are far too quick to write off any suggestion that education could be improved by teaching different things to different people. Which just leads to a dumbing down of society as a whole in my view.

Agree with you totally in theory. The pedagogical problems in designing such tests are enormous though. We have an edukashun system that is geared towards 'teaching to the exam' rather than concetrating on giving kids a toolkit of skills that allow them to disaggregate, assimilate, apply theory to scenarios, present, communicate using different media, work in teams and so on. The latter is much more difficult to assess objectively, and if you try to teach it there's the danger of being attacked by the 3 'R's brigade for dumbing down learning, when the opposite is actually the objective.

 

[beorhthelm]

Agree with you totally in theory. The pedagogical problems in designing such tests are enormous though. We have an edukashun system that is geared towards 'teaching to the exam' rather than concetrating on giving kids a toolkit of skills that allow them to disaggregate, assimilate, apply theory to scenarios, present, communicate using different media, work in teams and so on. The latter is much more difficult to assess objectively, and if you try to teach it there's the danger of being attacked by the 3 'R's brigade for dumbing down learning, when the opposite is actually the objective.

i was under the impression, maybe false, that psychometric aptitude tests do a good job of working round the "teach to the test" pitful. you can learn what they are about, their structure, but have to be good at them to get high scores (though that in itself is a problem for those that aren't good).

 

[GT49er]

Perhaps entrance exams could be changed to reflect ability rather than rote learning?

They were, years ago. They're pretty much IQ tests rather than tests of the child's knowledge of history, geography, etc. Even back in the early 60s (January 1960 in my case - you can't get earlier 60s than that!) the 11 plus was mostly an IQ type test. Not a million miles different (except perhaps in degree of difficulty) from the test I took for MENSA, many years later.

 

[El Presidente]

i was under the impression, maybe false, that psychometric aptitude tests do a good job of working round the "teach to the test" pitful. you can learn what they are about, their structure, but have to be good at them to get high scores (though that in itself is a problem for those that aren't good).

True. I'm not sure they are appropriate for 10 and 11 year olds though.

As for the old 11+, they are published (or will leak out) and so can be coached.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Thanks for this -fascinating insight. I do feel that there is some contradiction here - on the one hand you can recall vividly when quoting facts that back up your agenda, but then talk of faded memories. The fact that you as a seven year old did not know why there was setting, does not mean that the process was not rigorous. My 6 year old granddaughter took part in government tests on her reading ability last summer, and was just asked to read 40 words outside of the class; she had no idea of the significance, so you would not have known had there been surreptitious testing of your ability.
I too recall 2 sets and like you was in the better group, believe it or not, and even at a young age at Stanford Road Primary School being aware that other children had differing backgrounds and abilities. Most in my class passed the 11+ and went on to the school which is now known as Baswick. I do recall some movement either way, particularly at the end of the second year, when we returned to school and found that some boys were no longer there. I have to be careful, as some are Albion fans and may read this, but I did have friends who came from the less wealthy parts of Brighton, so my experience is that there was social movement. Also, the argument put forward, not by your self, I know, that grammars are only ever in the wealthiest parts was not true in Brighton -Westlain served East Brighton admirably -my mum taught there, and often talked about how working class parents would give such incredible support, as they were so pleased and proud that their child could gain good qualifications.
Where perhaps the system went wrong, was that grammars seemed to get the lion's share of any funding and I recall the brand new 6th form Common Room being built during my time there, over the path alongside, which I think is still standing. I personally would be happy to see a system of grammars and whatever you want to call the alternative, as it is quite obvious that children are different and should be treated so. If the other schools were to be properly financed, and, given that these children would not be academic, and in many cases have little interest in learning about coffee bean farmers in Columbia, much coaching were in place to start, say, apprenticeships, then there is every chance that non-academic children would have far greater motivation.

Cheers for that. Between us we may have achieved perspective

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Yes they are now, they weren't before the policy to close them .

This. For my sins, I spent five years at GILLINGHAM Grammar School...

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I had the benefit of a Grammar school education and the picture you paint does not reflect my experience. I went to St Nicholas primary in Portslade. There were 2 classes in each year. I had no idea I was in the 'A' stream till after the 11 plus results. There were 6 boys and 7 girls our of a class of 30 (my class) who passed the exam. In the 'B' stream there were no passes. One of the girls who passed, who lived in Mile Oak, was sent to the secondary modern because her parents did not think a grammar school was the right place for a working class girl (in the words of the girl ' that's where the snobs go to school'). Her initials are SF.

During my entire time at HGSB, there were NO boys transferred in for 'doing well' at a secondary modern. We had one boy transferred in for a short period after he had been expelled from all nearby schools, but he didn't stay long (poor little sod was horribly neglected at home).

Back to the selection process, in my class at St Nick's, we were coached by the teacher by doing mock IQ tests every week for the entire 4th year. Some of us found we went from mid 60s to over 90% in every test by the Spring. I am not sure the B stream were coached. It would be interesting to find out.

the other interesting thing is that the A and B streams were set in the first year when we were age seven. This was not based on any entry test (the kids came from portslade county infants in the man, but also from other infants' school). I was never testd at any time. But the class compositions never changed at any time in the 4 years at junior school. So I have no idea how the streams were set. I guess I was extraordinarily lucky, especially as I was classed as 'remedial' for a time when I was at infants school (I was bored and deliberately wrote badly, and the teachers were too thick to realise I was bored, not 'subnormal').

Overall, getting to Grammar school transformed my life, but the process by which I got in was entirely opaque, and seemed to invole a process of selection and hot housing that was not disclosed tp parents or children, and was presumably arranged by and for the benefit of the junior school. It is a very long time ago now but I almost wonder whether we were streamed on scruffiness, level of nutrition and general smell (i.e., class). I remember one boy, initials RW, in the B stream, proudly showing us, at break time, the scar on his hand caused by having a cigarette stibbed out in him when he 'joined a gang'. He was nine at the time. Another boy from the B stream (initials with held) was, according to himself,, engaged in flagrante with his 8 year old sister. All this was 'other world' stuff to 'A stream' types, so my guess is that there was streaming at 7 done by class. I am not sure this is what May has in mind when she advocates a return to Grammar schools. She is as old as me and probably has a similar faded memory of the past. Leave it, would be my advice. Times have changed, thankfully.

I was at St Nicks too. I went there aged 8, when my parents split up. I went into a B stream but within one term moved up to the A stream. I don't remember doing lots of old exams except for the maths questions, which was a good way of practising decimals and fractions, in any case.

The 11+ that I took in 1959 was in three parts, maths, English and then a form of IQ test. Some of that could be learned by rote, but also needed application skills.
I passed and went to HCGS in Neville Road. There were girls from Hove, Portslade, Hassocks, Hurspierpoint & Burgess Hill.
My recollections are far more like Hastings gull's than yours.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I was at St Nicks too. I went there aged 8, when my parents split up. I went into a B stream but within one term moved up to the A stream. I don't remember doing lots of old exams except for the maths questions, which was a good way of practising decimals and fractions, in any case.

The 11+ that I took in 1959 was in three parts, maths, English and then a form of IQ test. Some of that could be learned by rote, but also needed application skills.
I passed and went to HCGS in Neville Road. There were girls from Hove, Portslade, Hassocks, Hurspierpoint & Burgess Hill.
My recollections are far more like Hastings gull's than yours.

Hmmm, food for thought. As a matter of interest, do you consider it was colder in the 60s? Frost on the pavements on the way to school in September? Winters to avoid? Summers with chilly being a bonus? My recollection was of constatn shivering in summer, and chill blains in winter. Perhaps I'm one of the odd ones who think that life is better now . . . Anyway, I like your posts. Some good put downs of the loony contingent

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Hmmm, food for thought. As a matter of interest, do you consider it was colder in the 60s? Frost on the pavements on the way to school in September? Winters to avoid? Summers with chilly being a bonus? My recollection was of constatn shivering in summer, and chill blains in winter. Perhaps I'm one of the odd ones who think that life is better now . . . Anyway, I like your posts. Some good put downs of the loony contingent

Yes it was colder, & I got awful chilblains. I remember ice patterns on the inside of my bedroom window. The winter of 63 was particularly bad.
Do you remember Mr Slack? I struggled with some spelling tests when I first went to St Nicolas, but he helped me tremendously with little tips on how to learn difficult words.

 

[portslade seagull]

From Theresa May's conference speech.

The opening paragraph:

81 days ago, I stood in front of Ten Downing Street for the first time as Prime Minister, and I made a promise to the country.

I said that the Government I lead will be driven not by the interests of a privileged few, but by the interests of ordinary, working-class families. People who have a job, but don’t always have job security. People who can just about manage, but worry about the cost of living and getting their kids into a good school. And this week, we’re going to show the country that we mean business.

Insert almost half hour speech entirely about Brexit...Final paragraph:

So let’s have a great week here in Birmingham this conference. Let’s get this plan for Brexit right. Let’s show the country we mean business. And let’s keep working to make Britain a country that works not for a privileged few but for everyone in this great country.


Woeful keynote speech, taking half hour to endlessly repeat what could have been said in 5 minutes flat before moving on to address other issues.

But the thing that tickles me is her little bit on "ordinary, working-class families." You know..."People who own their own home, but worry about paying the mortgage."

Er, Theresa, have you not noticed the millions of in work benefit recipients who currently have no chance of ever owning their own home, unless of course they're lucky enough to be in scarcely available Social Housing. You've help at hand for them of course, by embarking on another disastrous round of 'Right to Buy' to screw the next generation over even more than this current one who have been left out in the cold.

Have you not noticed the current Housing Benefit budget Theresa I think there might just be an Elephant in the room somewhere.



Same old Tories. No idea what reality is like for millions of working people.

Remember the...Keep a spare can of petrol in the garage in case the tanker drivers strike. Of course, we all have a garage, surely to God.

Or this absolute gem in the midst of, what was it?, 4 million unemployed?:




Or good old Norman Lamont. Just remember folks, it was a price well worth paying Gideon didn't agree though, apparently


Absolutely laughable.

Equally the same for both main parties

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

If right to buy had been part of a comprehensive housing policy, whereby the housing stock was increased by national/local government as houses were sold to previous tenants, then it could have worked.

Instead local authorities have had budget cuts so the affordable housing stock pool is diminished , nimbyism rules in areas of relative wealth because the existing homeowners have a higher proportion of professionals who know how to use the system (for example in my village a proposal for 375 new homes was defeated https://mobberleyrams.wordpress.com) which makes it more expensive to move up the ladder, exacerbating the problem at the lower end of the market) and private sector developers are sitting on huge swathes of land because if they delay building properties then it increases the price of the homes they're presently constructing.

There is a huge building programme taking place in my part of the world. There are new estates springing up on the edge of a lot of villages (including the most beautiful and formerly NIMBY like) and the small towns are growing exponentially. I don't know the situation further into Norfolk but I do know you can buy a 3 bedroom detached house for less than 250k. Whilst I completely agree that any sold council homes should have been replaced in the past (rather than used as a money raiser) I'm not sure that the housing crisis is a crisis outside London and the South East. Framing national policy on the basis of a regional problem would be a mistake in my opinion.

 

[Titanic]

They may well be 'out of touch' with some people.. but the latest ICM / Guardian poll, taken after the party conferences, shows them to have the 2nd widest margin between them and the Labour party ever in the history of ICM polls (only Gordon Brown in June 2008 polled worse at 25% and a 20% margin!):

Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
UKIP: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

They may well be 'out of touch' with some people.. but the latest ICM / Guardian poll, taken after the party conferences, shows them to have the 2nd widest margin between them and the Labour party ever in the history of ICM polls (only Gordon Brown in June 2008 polled worse at 25% and a 20% margin!):

Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
UKIP: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)

It's OK, the party now has hundreds of thousands of fully paid up student activists and Trotskyites who have their fingers on the pulse of all voter concerns.............................Preaching to the converted counts for double in the polling booths and the opinion polls are just an evil Tory plot anyway.

 

[Tubby-McFat-Fuc]

How much you want to bet?

Can you not see the bigger picture then? The clue is in the the word SOCIAL Housing.

Another left wing looney spouting off without looking at history.

Don't forget under the last Labour Government, lead by the ****wit Blair, house prices doubled, and then in same cases doubled again. Not to mention opening the doors to most of Europe to come and live here.

That is why we have a housing crisis, and why prices are so high. But you blame the Tories, because you are too thick to see the wider picture!!

 

[Ernest]

They may well be 'out of touch' with some people.. but the latest ICM / Guardian poll, taken after the party conferences, shows them to have the 2nd widest margin between them and the Labour party ever in the history of ICM polls (only Gordon Brown in June 2008 polled worse at 25% and a 20% margin!):

Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
UKIP: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)

CLUTCHING at straws AGAIN

 

[Moshe Gariani]

CLUTCHING at straws AGAIN

Quite. We might as well not bother with any further elections - the pollsters have spoken.

 

[Titanic]

Quite. We might as well not bother with any further elections - the pollsters have spoken.

Don't the pollsters usually underestimate Tory support as well... because of the shyster tory phenomenon or whatever it is they call it?

You are probably right. It looks like it is all over bar the shouting.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Another left wing looney spouting off without looking at history.

Don't forget under the last Labour Government, lead by the ****wit Blair, house prices doubled, and then in same cases doubled again. Not to mention opening the doors to most of Europe to come and live here.

That is why we have a housing crisis, and why prices are so high. But you blame the Tories, because you are too thick to see the wider picture!!

That's a lot of us must be thick, then.

Who instigated the Right to Buy in the first place?

And who has consistently not allowed the income received by Local Authorities to be used for building new housing stock. It is 6 years since there was a Labour Government, and even longer since it was Blair. Not a great deal has been done in the intervening time to address any perceived problem.