- Files: GIF, JPG, PNG, Maximum:1000 KB, Thumbnails: 600x600 pixels
- Currently 3004 unique user posts. View catalogue
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]
Posting mode: Reply [First 100 posts][ Reply ]
343 posts omitted. First 100 posts shown.
Expand all images.
|>>|| No. 51150
Young adults in England have scored among the lowest results in the industrialised world in international literacy and numeracy tests.
A major study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows how England's 16 to 24-year-olds are falling behind their Asian and European counterparts. England is 22nd for literacy and 21st for numeracy out of 24 countries.
Unlike other developed countries, the study also showed that young people in England are no better at these tests than older people, in the 55 to 65 age range. When this is weighted with other factors, such as the socio-economic background of people taking the test, it shows that England is the only country in the survey where results are going backwards - with the older cohort better than the younger.
Cue lots of finger pointing and nothing changing.
|>>|| No. 51152
The Decline in action. This is why I know ITZ COMING. Idiocracy was more a prophecy than a comedy, although a happy upbeat censored version of the grim reality ahead. Expect a steady degeneration in both the individual and society as time goes on. Eventually the huge inertia push we've been coasting on will run out. Eventually it will get to the stage people will struggle to simply maintain what they inherited. Then the final collapse and mass deaths as babies become "the other white meat". That's assuming they don't simply wipe themselves out with a neat NBC solution before then.
|>>|| No. 51153
I hope someone will blame it on mass immigration.
|>>|| No. 51154
Overcrowding in classrooms as a consequence of immigration and resources being spent on pupils who don't have English as a first language won't have helped, but not enough to have a significant impact.
Many people my age are unable to conjugate verbs. It's hardly surprising that a system that wants to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator, where children are taught to pass tests that are continually dumbed down by competing exam boards instead of actually engaging their brains and thinking critically and the government solution has been to throw money at it instead of putting any real strategy in place has been a complete clusterfuck.
|>>|| No. 51155
The real cause world wide is the dilution of the neo-hybridisation gene in modern homo sapiens. Soon the melonhead's project will come back under their control after spiralling wildly and wonderfully outwards and free for some time.
>where children are taught to pass tests
That is the nub of the problem. It's not that the tests are dumbed down, etc., rather that the education system is geared to pass tests. Not to educated people. If they knew the exact questions to be used that year they wouldn't even teach you anything beyond memorising parrot-fashion the key answers. You'd learn those, get a bit of paper and think yourself clever, but forget it all within a couple of months after the exam and have done nothing to improve your mind or capabilities in the long term.
|>>|| No. 51156
>the education system is geared to pass tests. Not to educated people.
I'm guessing you participated in the study.. Thicko.
|>>|| No. 51157
>It's not that the tests are dumbed down, etc., rather that the education system is geared to pass tests.
That wouldn't be a problem if the tests were any good.
Nobody complains that driving instructors are only teaching people how to pass their driving test, because we broadly accept that the driving test is a good measure of driving ability. Teaching to the test is only a problem when you're testing for the wrong things.
The problem at present is that we have multiple exam boards, who compete with each other to sign up schools for their particular exams. The schools are highly motivated to improve their exam results, so in turn the exam boards are motivated to dumb-down their exams. Lots of people have a strong incentive to dole out good results to bad candidates, but few are strongly motivated to prevent the devaluation of exams. It's a classic tragedy of the commons. There are many ways of fixing this situation, some of which have already been implemented, some of which are simply politically untenable.
Things are generally getting better under Gove, but most people within and without the system don't see it that way. GCSE grades fell last year for the first time in two decades, because of stricter marking of exams. Great news for the integrity of the GCSE system, bad news for the teaching unions, who rely on being able to argue "Of course teachers are good at their jobs, exam results get better every year".
|>>|| No. 51158
There are no greats today. The system is not geared to allow them.
|>>|| No. 51161
>That wouldn't be a problem if the tests were any good.
Except that isn't the case, and you well know it. The only consequence of a "better" test would be that schools would teach people to pass the "better" test.
|>>|| No. 51163
I enjoy how everyone believes they were successfully educated but everyone younger is clearly just a thicko trained to pass a test. Sometimes I'm amazed that so many people haven't realise this and decided to get off the roundabout, It's a cycle that has been happening probably before and during Mr Butler deciding to give us all a decent education.
Being 22nd is completely meaningless if the other countries are all first world countries and are improving as we are. A better bench mark would be a study based on historical improvement. But the rags know doom and gloom sells better then cheery so there we are.
|>>|| No. 51164
There are plenty. Mythologising and thorough examination of legacies doesn't tend to take place until after the fact. In 50 years the 2010s will be the good old days and senile cunts will insist that the world's gone to hell in a handcart whether it has or not.
|>>|| No. 51165
I passed my gcses 5 years ago and I was most definitely trained for the test.
|>>|| No. 51166
So what? If the test requires a deep and rounded understanding of the subject, then the only way to 'cheat' by teaching to the test is to impart a deep and rounded knowledge of the subject. The problem is that our current exams generally test whether you have memorised the 'right' answer rather than whether you have the skill to perform a specified task.
Take English Lit, for example. Currently, students are required to comment on a selection of texts, most of which they have previously studied in their Anthology. The inevitable result is that students are coached to memorise suitable talking points. What happens if the students are presented with a completely fresh selection of unfamiliar tests for each exam? The only way to teach to that test is to teach your students how to read and understand any text, which is the whole bloody goal of the English Lit syllabus.
In mathematics, students are presented with problems in a very fixed and predictable format, which allows them to memorise a formula and plug in the values without really understanding the mathematical principles that underly it ("plug and chug" to use the jargon). It's easy to knock that on the head completely, by presenting questions where the correct method isn't immediately obvious. Students who have memorised a method without understanding it are incapable of identifying applications for that method without prompting in all but the most trivial of cases.
None of this is hypothetical. The International Baccalaureate Diploma is taught widely and uses examination methods that make exam prep and memorisation ineffective. They test for skills, not knowledge. It's not a hard problem to solve, it's just that most people in the system don't want to solve it at all. The exam boards are paid by the schools, the schools want high grades, so the exam boards provide what they're paid for - soft exams that are easy to teach to. Pay a bit more and they'll tell teachers how to cheat.
|>>|| No. 51167
>Being 22nd is completely meaningless if the other countries are all first world countries and are improving as we are. A better bench mark would be a study based on historical improvement.
Im guessing you didn't read the OP where it clearly says we're the only nation going backwards and also that young people are no more literate or numerate than 55-65 year olds.
I have a son (6) and it doesn't fill me with confidence when I see work on display in the corridors at his school with errors from the teaching staff on them (such as 'ankel' on a diagram of the body) or when his teacher writes 'your doing really well!' in his reading log. I'd say at least half of the people I know who have gone into teaching are complete thickos who shouldn't be anywhere near a classroom.
|>>|| No. 51169
Everyone I know who is doing a PGCE this year was hardly a stellar intelligence. Is better teachers the answer, lads?
|>>|| No. 51172
I've been through training with these people for a good while and in the process got to know many teachers or future teachers. So many of them were thick as fuck and the rest low to average at best (and quite a few only capable of functioning in their narrow area of focus or rote memory and hopelessly out of depth beyond it). I have no idea what has happened to the standards in this area, but obviously they don't have much to choose from nowadays. It can't possibly be the pay and benefits as they are exeptional for the low requirements and they have plenty candidates trying to get in, more than positions available. The only reasonable conclusion is that these idiots really are the cream of the crop and those destined to try and raise the next crop. Depressing.
|>>|| No. 51173
>the only reasonable conclusion is that these idiots really are the cream of the crop
Or that they are being selected with other priorities, such as their ability to engage with and control children.
|>>|| No. 51175
More likely because they blend in with the children. They can barely control their bowel movements. Don't be such a twat.
|>>|| No. 51179
>More likely because they blend in with the children
It boiled my piss when the teachers tried to be down with the kids, mainly because that meant being lenient with the loveable rogues to the detriment of those who actually wanted to learn. Then again, I was a swot.
|>>|| No. 51181
I had a teacher, a 21st Century teacher, who once barked at a classmate to sit up straight. I still can't quite believe it today.
|>>|| No. 51183
Teachers can be engaging and informative. Honestly all it takes is a personality hovering slightly above the low end of the autistic spectrum and the most basic interest in your subject. Not being a permanently miserable prick is bonus.
The science department was primo in my school. Full of charismatic and interesting teachers. And one 50 something woman that constantly looked like she was a bit pissed. Not at all surprisingly I got straight B's in my three sciences. Hey! That's not bad coming from a school with a 17% pass rate.
Ha! Love that film.
|>>|| No. 51184
They should have probably asked nicely, but pupils should definitely be reminded to sit straight.
|>>|| No. 51188
It's a great film. I first saw just the final scene or two when I was about 11 after sneaking into my dads room to watch TV. Probably had a worryingly significant impact on my future opinions and actions with regards to authority.
And for that one person who might be thinking "what the hell are they talking about?!", the film is if...., from 1968. Malcolm McDowell's first feature.
|>>|| No. 51191
My science teachers at school were completely uninspiring and turned me off the subject. Thinking about it, apart from one maths teacher they were all average at best.
One day we had a substitute teacher and he was absolutely brilliant. He was taking us for history and decided to teach us about the Charge of the Light Brigade, although we didn't know this until after he had pushed over his desk, stormed out of the room and then charged back in, shouting and pretending to be on horseback.
|>>|| No. 51192
Alright there Captain Hardcastle. Who gives a toss what position they sit in, as long as they're listening?
|>>|| No. 51194
Right, well thank fuck for Mr Walcott telling us not to slouch for a single period each week, because the rest of our lives don't count, eh?
|>>|| No. 51195
Well, that's how schools work. You learn stuff there and try to use it in your everyday life. In that case the lesson was don't slouch or your spine is fucked. You should have taken this seriously.
|>>|| No. 51196
The ending is probably the most glorious things someone of our(?) generation could have watched as a child. The semi-imaginary sex sequence wasn't bad to see either.
|>>|| No. 51197
No, if it were knowledge designed to be imparted it would have been on the curriculum and the lesson plan. I don't know what kind of military school you went to where they taught you by screaming orders at you.
And my spine is just fine, old man.
|>>|| No. 51202
So when is the penny going to drop that we should be doing a lot more to help the chances of our younger generation?
Who am I kidding, it never is, we're just going to sit around blaming "kids these days" for being such lazy bastards until we're a bankrupt, third world shithole like Greece.
|>>|| No. 51203
What's the point in going to the effort of improving education standards over the long-term when you can import better skilled workers from overseas right now?
There'll need to be a docile underclass to work as cleaners and in care homes to wipe the arses of all the Polish doctors and businessmen when they retire. The well off will still be alright, mind.
|>>|| No. 51204
Not the guy you are replying to but just wanted to say thanks for the link. Really interesting.
I remember watching some Youtube video about how squatting prevents many rectal problems as well.
|>>|| No. 51205
help doesn't mean chucking money at them
public funds are so top heavy... How much government spending is dedicated to oldies do you think? Half?
|>>|| No. 51206
I passed my GCSE's a decade ago and I was definitely taught to pass a test in some, if not all, of my subjects. It was more of a memory test then actually trying to make you think critically.
Then again, my degree wasn't much different. Weeks of lecturers repeating slides verbatim followed by a final session where they'd cover their arses and tell you what questions would be in the exam.
|>>|| No. 51426
I remember all my mates bitching about some A-level exam and how it was "unfair" and how the stuff they learned wasn't even on the test and how everyone got to do a nice easy one after that.
And then I looked and the test would have been easy for anyone who actually understood the concept instead of just fact bytes.
|>>|| No. 51427
Was it one of the sciences? When I was at college, 7 years ago, I remember a few people moaning that the biology/chemistry exams were too hard and they'd got Ds and Es when they'd got As and A*s at GCSE.
|>>|| No. 51466
The reason this is happening is the shift from English centric education to making sure the immigrants get more funding to understand our language. It has fuck all to do with people being smarter or less educated than previous generations but more to do with the fact that every foreign speaking student is given extra funding which is from the same pool as the British funding.
That means if you have 10 kids all in a class with a budget of £100 for the class but 3 of those students require £30 a head for translators and extra tutors from the state, the other 7 are left sharing 1/10th the budget. That is why African and Asian students from immigrant families are now doing better than ever but natives are progressively getting worse. It has fuck all to do with the nationality of the student and instead has everything to do with foreigners getting 3-4 times the funding that their British counterparts would get.
The only way to end this system would be to simply force schools to have zero tolerance policies on non english speaking people. The Independant and the Guardian had a similar article on the same subject with white boys being lower scoring than their African and Asian counterparts at a GCSE level.
|>>|| No. 51473
The Pupil Premium (which is what I think you're referring to) goes to any kid who has been registered for free school meals now or in the past 6 years; 'Looked After Children'; and - notably - children of ARE BRAVE BOIYS in the armed services. So nothing to do with speekin forrin.
|>>|| No. 51475
I don't think he's on about funding. I think he's saying that extra resources need to be spent on non-native pupils with poor English and they're benefiting from this one-to-one tuition, to the detriment of the rest of the class.
|>>|| No. 51476
I know you are not him, but I would dearly love to see: A) actual examples of this happening on a mass scale, including where whites are excluded from basic language catch up, and B) budget numbers. Because he really comes across as a dribling bellend. But hey, what do I know. I only know 4 teachers, I am sure he knows many more.
|>>|| No. 51479
>including where whites are excluded from basic language catch up
Oh, I know that's not happening. At my son's primary school (he's in Year 2) they have dedicated sessions for the shy kids and ones in speech therapy in order to help them develop.
|>>|| No. 51490
OK, so considering the extra resources issue - I know of various 'catch up' and 'acceleration' schemes, and they are targeted at ALL kids whose language skills are below national expectations. So that means any kid who isn't exposed to speaking, reading and writing correct English at home, which means quite a lot of white English kids from deprived areas, as well as the more obvious ones who don't speak English at home.
I've been a teacher for just over a year now, so my experience is still limited; but living and working in areas with high non-English ethnicities I've yet to see any kid - white, black or brown - given special treatment on account of their ethnicity. It is only on their specific individual needs.
|>>|| No. 51948
This is all the result of the promotion of materialism and the feminization of the education system so as relational subjects are more emphasized than the hard sciences and mathematics.
|>>|| No. 51950
Godwin's Law. Looks as if you lost your chance to provide a counter-argument before you could even mount one.
(A good day to you Sir!)
|>>|| No. 51951
I couldn't be bothered any more. I mean you drop in all the /pol/ buzzwords—materialism, feminisation (with a Z), comparing STEM to liberal arts, etc. I give you a 4/10. It needs more subtly.
|>>|| No. 52186
The UK is falling behind global rivals in international tests taken by 15-year-olds, failing to make the top 20 in maths, reading and science.
I read a decent article the other day saying that maybe, just maybe, we should stop undermining teachers by saying what a shit job they're doing and telling kids that they're thick as pig shit.
|>>|| No. 52187
The teachers ARE terrible though. Massively overpaid for the little work and poor efforts they put in. It is more insular and self-serving than MPs or the police. When a teacher screws up big time it's a luxury fast track gravy train to early retirement for "health" reasons.
|>>|| No. 52189
Don't give us it, m8. You lot don't do anything when there's a sniff of a holiday or you aren't getting extra money. You go on strike more often than the fucking French.
|>>|| No. 52191
I went to a comprehensive in South Wales and they were without question my worst years. It was chaos. The experiences you had came down to numbers, how many you had in your class, how willing teachers were to push you over a C grade level. Some were genuinely unpleasant people, others were doing the best with what they had.
If I had to approach the problem, it would be a total overhaul. Nothing about our current system of standardised testing makes much sense. Groups of people are arbitrarily stuck together. In all of my time there I don't remember a single passionate word uttered about a subject, a wise word said about the future, or a caring word offered to a student. The exception was maybe one assembly to commemorate a girl who had taken her own life.
The entire thing made me ambivalent about teachers, but certainly shattered any faith I may have had in our institutions.
|>>|| No. 52192
>The experiences you had came down to numbers
I've heard they don't teach eight in Welsh schools and just use nine instead.
|>>|| No. 52193
>Nothing about our current system of standardised testing makes much sense.
It's high time this was acknowledged - it leads to shit teaching, shit teachers, and poor international results. Nothing short of a complete overhaul is going to fix it.
|>>|| No. 52225
I've heard very sensible proposals for changing the system to levels of ability and education based, rather than simply age based. There was a TED talk on this that was worth watching, it should come up if you look on youtube. Teachers would probably welcome a serious overhaul aimed at educating people properly rather than passing tests and hitting marks for statistics and political reasons.
|>>|| No. 52226
The function of schools is to inculcate obedience and discourage independent thought. It conditions children to hate books and learning. Children are learning machines, and in an information age, have to be strongly discouraged from this, otherwise they'd be a threat to the talentless hacks that run the country.
From this perspective, schools are doing a spectacular job. It's not enough to say there needs to be change- the hierarchical nature of society needs to be overthrown.
|>>|| No. 52230
I can't believe for all those years of school education we still experience steady progress in almost every area. It's almost as if you were absolutely wrong, anarchylad.
|>>|| No. 52232
Not him, but are you being fucking serious? I'm off to bed, but have sources a-go-go on this one.
|>>|| No. 52761
40% of new teachers leave the profession within 5 years. Looks like it's a mix of kids being unruly shits who demand 'respect', poor training and too much dross only deciding to become teachers because they think it will be an easy ride/they're not fit to do anything else.
|>>|| No. 52762
Right. Poor pay for the time they work and generally low morale when contrasted with other avenues of employment couldn't possibly be a factor though. Let's blame those shithead kids and those lazy cunt teachers.
Are you a Tory voter, by any chance?
|>>|| No. 52763
>Poor pay for the time they work
That's a myth. True the average working week during term time for a teacher is 50 hours, but they only work 39 weeks a year so it averages out at 37.5 hours a week.
|>>|| No. 52765
>Do you honestly think that teachers just go on holiday as soon as the kids break up, put their feet up and the marking, lesson planning and training plus other administrative work does itself? Oh, you.
No, I look at the facts instead, which is what my previous post was based upon:-
The Teacher's Workload Diary survey, which was last carried out by the Department of Education in 2010, showed that the average secondary school teacher worked about fifty hours a week during term time.
You also seem to be overlooking PPA time - all of the teachers I know get at least one afternoon a week during timetabled teaching hours set aside for marking and preparation. They complain that they work long hours during term time, but they also acknowledge that the time off makes up for it.
|>>|| No. 52766
>all of the teachers I know get at least one afternoon a week during timetabled teaching hours set aside for marking and preparation
I can see that working at secondary level, but how would you do that in primary, where pupils have the same teacher all week?
|>>|| No. 52767
It's a statutory requirement that 10% of a teacher's timetabled teaching time is set aside for PPA. This is purely anecdotal, but there's seems to be a lot more emphasis on teaching assistants in primary schools nowadays.
|>>|| No. 52768
>£15.44 for primary school teachers
That's £31k a year, not a bad wage.
|>>|| No. 52769
TAs are not normally allowed to teach unsupervised, even during their teacher's PPA time. Source: a frustrated registered teacher working as a TA.
|>>|| No. 52773
The starting salary for a teacher is just under £22k (or up to just over £27k in London). That Graun link has the average salary as £31k for a primary school teacher and just under £37k for a secondary school teacher.
|>>|| No. 52774
Depends on what you mean by "paid". Permanent teachers are paid a monthly salary based on a 39-week year, which is used to work out the hourly rate.
|>>|| No. 52911
39 hours? The way most teachers I've spoken to tell it they work 7-7 every day, thanks to the ceaseless workload of "marking". In my opinion it serves them right for giving kids so much work, it only comes back to bite them in the arse it seems.
|>>|| No. 52913
Scroll up a little:-
>True the average working week during term time for a teacher is 50 hours, but they only work 39 weeks a year so it averages out at 37.5 hours a week.
|>>|| No. 52943
I don't know anyone could raise kids in the UK unless they can afford private school. It seems immoral.
|>>|| No. 52977
Grammar schools seem alright, too bad they no longer exist in most places.
|>>|| No. 54877
After what happened in Leeds last week there's been a couple of primary school kids putting bleach in their teacher's drink, some lasses in Wales excluded for plotting to kill their teacher and a couple of lasses arrested in Manchester for bringing a knife in to school.
Is killing your teacher going to be the new in 'thing' or is it just they're being reported more often in light of recent events?
|>>|| No. 54878
Because the sheeple reacted so emotionally strongly to the Leeds woman and all bought the Sun or whatever, they're now focusing on such stories and sensationalising them as much as possible. The bleach story was ridiculous, the Mirror was making the kids out to be like a Mexican cartel gang.
DANGER TO ARE KIDS REVEALED IN HERE BUT ONLY IF YOU BUY THIS NEWSPAPER FOR 50P WE PROMISE WE ARE NOT ONLY INTERESTED IN MONEY
[ Return ] [ Entire Thread ] [ First 100 posts ] [ Last 50 posts ]