chrisp65 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 well that does look uncannily like me no tell tale edit, you bang ta rights boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 I would say do lines, but they're banned now too. My year 8 maths teacher had me filling in squared paper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Don't worry Tony, it's perfectly normal for a Tory's numbers not to add up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Don't worry Tony, it's perfectly normal for a Tory's numbers not to add up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 I will not try and be clever on VT I will not try and be clever on VT I will not try and be clever on VT I will not try and be clever on VT I will not try and be clever on VT I would have done more but my dog ate my keyboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 From memory, and it's a while ago, I left school with 3 O Levels English Lit Art English Lang I think I got a half decent CSE in maths, but I genuinely can't remember. I did not do 6th form! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 oh, and cycling proficiency, back when that was proper hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Don't worry Tony, it's perfectly normal for a Tory's numbers not to add up *Round of applause* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAqyf7a4xFMShame he didn't snap his neck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Michael Gove is planning to cut down on resits at GCSE level to stop giving people more than one chance to try and succeed after they've failed. This is Michael Gove's 4th attempt at trying to make a successful education system after failing previously. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 Michael Gove is planning to cut down on resits at GCSE level to stop giving people more than one chance to try and succeed after they've failed. This is Michael Gove's 4th attempt at trying to make a successful education system after failing previously. It's a good job he's not taking a GCSE in education reform otherwise he'd be stuffed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted June 11, 2013 Share Posted June 11, 2013 He really hasn't done his coursework. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post bickster Posted June 12, 2013 Author Moderator Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2013 This idea that removal of coursework is a good thing? Where did it come from? So Gove is saying that it is unimportant to give kids experience in using libraries, doing research, using the internet for its academic side, its much more important to pass tests, so much more important that they have decided to abandon the concept. They want to turn kids into parrotsExam reform is a good thing but this isn't reform, it's retrograde. Almost like something UKIP would come up with, harking back to a golden age. Utter ideological headline grabbing drivel as usual but then again I expect nothing less from our morally bankrupt politician 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 using the internet for its academic side, is that posh talk for stealing your coursework off the interweb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Margaret Hodge really is the worst kind of politician there is, an unabridged hypocrite. Quite happy to play to the gallery when questioning companies like Starbucks about tax avoidance, less happy or able to answer questions about her own family's activities. http://order-order.com/tag/hodge/ That criticism is completely out of order. Mrs Hodge's family earned their wealth from years of punishingly hard work and unstinting self-sacrifice. I happen to know that as long ago as the 1980s, she was forced to place an advert in "The Lady" for a nanny, so great were the demands on her own time. Her family clearly have the right to engage in tax planning. In fact, they have a clear moral duty to their children to do so. Were they not to do so, the fruits of their labours would not be preserved, but would instead be frittered away on things like teaching assistants for bored, gum-chewing youths, nursing staff to deal with the slack-jawed oafs who cram our A&E departments, care workers for the unproductive elderly...the list goes on. Instead, the family wealth will be judiciously spent on tastefully furnished homes, subsidising the arts through for example going to the opera, and the like. All of these things provide gainful employment, not least for accountants. People have no right to press their grubby noses against her windows, in the hope of finding some small indiscretion with which to lambast her. I am sure her affairs and those of her family are entirely compliant with the law, and I hope that no-one for a moment imagines otherwise. The charge of hypocrisy comes about simply because she presides over a committee which asks a few questions about whether corporations have paid what some consider to be "enough" tax, whatever that may be. But someone has to do the job. And that person must be chosen from among our Members of Parliament (excluding the ones like Dennis Skinner, obviously). It is central to the credibility of our representative democracy that these questions should be seen to be asked, even if the answers are never forthcoming. If this didn't happen, then people might think that the system is somehow rigged against them and in favour of a global elite. No good can come of such seditious ideas. Somebody therefore has to play the part of going through the motions of holding these firms to account, and it has fallen to Mrs Hodge to do that. Why should the person who carries out this role be penalised, by being denied the benefits of efficient tax planning, or else publicly mocked for so-called "hypocrisy"? Should she give away all her worldly goods to the poor, and live in a cave like some demented hermit? Because that is where your argument leads. Should we have in her place, not someone who is au fait with the world of wealth creators, but someone who probably doesn't have two offshore accounts to rub together, and who is completely unable to empathise with the constraints that global companies must juggle with? Someone who is probably motivated by sheer jealousy, and who wants to take more in tax from people who have achieved a certain level of comfort? Do you want parliamentary committees which try to go beyond a few set pieces, and actually demand change? Be careful what you wish for. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I think the system goes about teaching Shakespeare the wrong way. At school the barely comprehensible archaic English left me cold tbh. Later my respect for his body of work grew, as I realised how many good stories/films were based on these tales. Show the kids cool stuff that's relevant to them, then point out where the ideas came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurricanado Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Something needed changing, the exams were getting stupid easy and if you failed them first time around, you could keep on going back untill you didn't fail. The history change is quite good as well, british history should be taught in our schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I think the system goes about teaching Shakespeare the wrong way. At school the barely comprehensible archaic English left me cold tbh. Later my respect for his body of work grew, as I realised how many good stories/films were based on these tales. Show the kids cool stuff that's relevant to them, then point out where the ideas came from. Totes agree with this. I still haven't recovered from being forced to read Shakespeare as a kid. Jane Austen was ruined for me as well. Don't give a 14-year-old a book like 'Emma', with some clearing in the woods playing the piano forte for the local vicar. Boooooring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mjmooney Posted June 12, 2013 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2013 One of the objections to this is that it will "disadvantage less able pupils". Isn't that the whole point of exams? Make them harder, I say. Get back to university only being for clever kids (on a full grant, not a loan), instead of something to keep the unemployment figures down. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts