Things that piss you off that shouldn't

[Ingram85]

Risso settle down chap. Your looking like a bit of a you know what.

[leviramsey]

Wrestling isn't fake... it's just a bunch of loud no-necks who don't know how to fight very well.

[Dr_Pangloss]

Mass collective apathy.

The lack of any kind of being bothered about anything that is wrong and an injustice.

For example. The government do all kinds of shitty corrupt things without having to be transparent about any of it. They're currently forcing primary schools to be privately owned by pretending they're very bad from inspections. But these inspections are not public and no one can find out why a school can go from outstanding to special measures and hence requiring private sponsorship because the DfE don't have to say why. It's the ultimate definition of corruption. Yet while we should be marching on Westminster with pitchforks we're all just sat on the sofa or bog with fiddle devices.

The thing that pisses me off the most: I'm as guilty as anyone.

What really grinds my gears is not just the blatant practice of governments and private companies of collecting masses of data on us and destroying any semblance of privacy, but the supine, dribbling, moronic word removed who excuse it on the grounds of 'having nothing to hide'.

Edited September 16, 2013 by Dr_Pangloss

[Dr_Pangloss]

 

I always thought VT's Wrestling crowd were talking the piss in a 'knowing wrestling is bollocks but we'll take it seriously for the lulz' kind of way, a bit like Con with Bannan.

 

Well, all a lot of people judge it by is WWE, which is aimed at children these days so it is to see why they think it's a load of nonsense and the VT wrestling is just for humour as well. And yes, the best workers are the ones who can make it look real without hurting each other at all.

 

But to dismiss it all as completely fake is just ridiculous. A lot of wrestling holds have the potential to seriously injure somebody or even kill them, like when Chris Benoit lost his mind and killed his son using his finishing hold. When some people copy what they see on TV and end up getting paralysed. Then you read stories of people seeing a wrestler in a bar or somewhere and getting in their faces about how wrestling is fake and they could fight them, then when they get beaten into a pulp, they run off to the police saying "Oh, but he's a professional wrestler".

 

It's probably a waste of time me writing any of this but wrestling is not as fake as people love to claim it is. Predetermined, yes. Fake, no.

 

It's very fake, just watch this, FAKE

 

[darrenm]

No. Technically teachers get paid in the holidays. But they don't get paid for the holidays. They get their money for term time, equally split into 12 payments.

The stuff about the hours was me getting confused and misinterpreting something somebody in the staff room said. Where I am right now, I don't need to know how much I'm getting paid and if I get those figures wrong, it hardly reflects on my teaching ability. I am, by Gove's own standards, outstanding at the moment in time.

How about you stop being so disrespectful and patronising? What the heck have I done to deserve it?

But with the greatest respect to you, the whole 'teachers don't get paid for holidays' was quite clearly nonsense. If you get a salary then you do get paid for holidays, just that your contracted rate is based around working a certain amount of hours per year.

I worry about the teachers teaching my kids when I see their spelling and grammar. Trying to swing an invalid argument doesn't get you to that level yet ;-)

[StefanAVFC]

As I said technically, you do. I think we're all hung up on the pedantry of this 'argument'.

 

I'm going to leave it now, because it's pretty pointless, lets be honest

[snowychap]

...some guff about 39 weeks of 55 hours.  Which of course, is in excess of the EU working time directive.

Unless they opt out?

...they don't get paid for the holidays

Do teachers get 5.6 weeks statutory holiday pay and school holidays? Is the contractual holiday entitlement the school holiday period? If so, what if they have to take a day off in term time? Edited September 16, 2013 by snowychap

[snowychap]

Mass collective apathy.

The lack of any kind of being bothered about anything that is wrong and an injustice.

For example. The government do all kinds of shitty corrupt things without having to be transparent about any of it. They're currently forcing primary schools to be privately owned by pretending they're very bad from inspections. But these inspections are not public and no one can find out why a school can go from outstanding to special measures and hence requiring private sponsorship because the DfE don't have to say why. It's the ultimate definition of corruption. Yet while we should be marching on Westminster with pitchforks we're all just sat on the sofa or bog with fiddle devices.

The thing that pisses me off the most: I'm as guilty as anyone.

Are the inspections and the criteria on which they are based not subject to FoI requests? If not, how come?

[darrenm]

Mass collective apathy.

The lack of any kind of being bothered about anything that is wrong and an injustice.

For example. The government do all kinds of shitty corrupt things without having to be transparent about any of it. They're currently forcing primary schools to be privately owned by pretending they're very bad from inspections. But these inspections are not public and no one can find out why a school can go from outstanding to special measures and hence requiring private sponsorship because the DfE don't have to say why. It's the ultimate definition of corruption. Yet while we should be marching on Westminster with pitchforks we're all just sat on the sofa or bog with fiddle devices.

The thing that pisses me off the most: I'm as guilty as anyone.

Are the inspections and the criteria on which they are based not subject to FoI requests? If not, how come?

Only heavily redacted versions where the details are appropriate to the individual requesting the FOI. The actual reports are secret.

[snowychap]

Only heavily redacted versions where the details are appropriate to the individual requesting the FOI. The actual reports are secret.

Though I may be at odds with his reasoning, I probably tend to agree with Mr Blair that he was an idiot and a nincompoop.

Really, what the hell is the point in redactions (from an FoI point of view, that is)? It's not the same idiocy that has civil servants claiming protection under the DPA, is it?

Edited September 16, 2013 by snowychap

[chrisp65]

I've just had a quick read through some teachers' contract terms and some NUT explanations of them.

Barking mad result of too many years of unions and petty officials being given too much time to nit pick through tiny detail.

 

full time teachers must agree to be available to work 195 days of the year, of which they must teach on 190 days, unless agreed otherwise.

of those 195 days they must carry out work duties for 1245 hours 45 minutes plus a flexible contingency of 19 hours 20 minutes.

breaks of up to 20 minutes 5 days a week for a maximum of 38 weeks are included in these hours.

these hours also include parent evenings

these hours also include 5,700 minutes allocated as 5 and 10 minute periods before and after lessons, breaks and lunch 

 

and it goes on and on and on

 

they are allowed 6 sheets of paper to wipe their arse, but can only shit for a maximum of 148 minutes in any one term

 

micro management gone mad

 

note: this isn't a pop at anybody, it's a shout of sympathy for anyone hoping to inspire little lives only to find they are allocated 32.5 minutes per week to do that, providing they've filled out a form first and didn't take up the option of a free lunch on Wednesday

[snowychap]

they are allowed 6 sheets of paper to wipe their arse, but can only shit for a maximum of 148 minutes in any one term

That ought to be a statutory clause in each and every employment contract (for term read 4 month period).

[StefanAVFC]

The profession has become more about hoop jumping than teaching to be honest. You have to stick to the exact curriculum regardless of whether there's a better method or a clearer method. Under the new rules as well, all subjects have to come under one topic. So you can't just do random unrelated maths. It has do with the topic. Say that was 'The Egyptians', all the maths would have to have an Egyptian theme. 

 

An example of this (which came up today) is long multiplication. The new curriculum states that we just have to teach the kids the method. (this looks clearer written down )

 

21

34x

--------

84

630

-------

714

 

In the 2nd row, we put a 0 in (because we're multiplying by 30). Under the new curriculum, we don't tell the kids WHY the 0 is put in. Just that it goes in. Gove wants to make the kids be able to retain methods rather than understand numbers. If they forget the method, then that's that. They won't understand why numbers do what they do, just the way you put them into a systematic method to get an answer. That's not bloody teaching. Maths is my specialism within my teaching so I'm particularly passionate about it.

 

I'm just in it to make a difference on lives, not necessarily to make them good at assessment. I feel like years of government meddling has made schooling more about how many tests our kids can pass, rather than 'what can they learn?'

Edited September 16, 2013 by StefanAVFC

[snowychap]

You don't tell people why? Surely that means you don't instruct people how to actually multiply numbers?

[Risso]

That doesn't seem right.  It's certainly not how my daughter is being taught multiplication, or the techniques my wife learned on her PGCE last year.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

This thread.

[tonyh29]

That doesn't seem right. It's certainly not how my daughter is being taught multiplication, or the techniques my wife learned on her PGCE last year.

Or my boys school either fwiw Edited September 16, 2013 by tonyh29

[StefanAVFC]

Nope. You just teach them the method. Not why it works, just that it does. It's bloody ridiculous. The logic is to cram as much in as you can and just teaching them a method is far quicker than taking your time and making them understand why the numbers do what they do.

 

I'd prefer to use the grid method where the kids can see why and how the numbers are multiplied.

 

Same question.

 

     30   4

20 600 80

1   30   4

 

Add them together. Bish bash bosh. But nope. Not allowed.

 

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6316142

 

Good article on it.

 

The grid method isn't efficient even though it's clean and concise. I agree that chunking is bollocks but that's neither here nor there. The first method I used is 'efficient' in their eyes, but doesn't show how you've actually multiplied the numbers.

 

ANDDDD the curriculum. See pages 128 and 143

 

Apologies: it's this link. Same principle though.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/239849/PRIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf

That doesn't seem right.  It's certainly not how my daughter is being taught multiplication, or the techniques my wife learned on her PGCE last year.

 

It's coming in from 2014. In the new curriculum. As clearly stated. Risso and Tony, 0/10 for reading comprehension . I know that for a fact because I was told it today by a maths professor.

Edited September 16, 2013 by StefanAVFC

[Ingram85]

That doesn't seem right.  It's certainly not how my daughter is being taught multiplication, or the techniques my wife learned on her PGCE last year.

 

The new way I'm assuming is under the new curriculum Sphincter Lips has constructed. May be wrong.

[Risso]

You said:  "an example of this (which came up today) is long multiplication".

 

It therefore rather seemed you were talking about the status quo, rather than plans for a year's time.