Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sir Tigger KC]

The problem with equality of outcome is that it will inevitably peg achievers back rather than bring less able people up to their level.

......and just because a person does well it doesn't necessarily mean they will be a selfish bastard and keep everything for themselves.

Some wealthy people are also philanthropic......some less so. Human nature is both malignant and benign.

Edward Colston for example.     Although he'll now be remembered for how he accumulated his wealth rather than how he spent it. 

That's if he's remembered at all, given the attempts to erase parts of history that a certain section of society don't like. 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I passed my 11+ exam and went to a grammar school. I didn't go on to university, probably because I was too thick.

My mother's friend had a couple of kids who didn't pass the 11+ and this woman then decided the 11+ exam was elitist, because not everybody could go to a grammar school.
.
Her solution was simple. No child should go to a grammar school unless every child went to a grammar school. This way no child would feel left behind. This is an example of how equality of outcome works. Crazy really.

The 'opportunity' to go was there for all.......and this 'opportunity' was not related to wealth. In fact, many poor and working class kids went to grammar school, and did well in life because of it.


I have seized some opportunities, and missed others that I still kick myself for. It's called life. 

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Getting rid of Grammars in most of the country was the worst blow to social mobility in the UK in living memory.
Luckily we still have a few in Essex which both my kids benefitted greatly from.
They were retained across Norn Irn when they were killed off in England, but once Blair put former IRA murderers, who are all devout socialists in Govt, and they then took over education, they started to dismantle the system for purely dogmatic reasons.
A great shame. 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

As a psychology aside:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_control

It's a long read but, in a loosely political sense, I see the 'left' aligned with an external locus of control (where the government or whoever decides your outcome) and the 'right' aligned with an internal locus of control (where you decide your outcome). The rope-and-ladder analogy is similar.

Ok, it's been a long day at work and I'm not sure if I'm making this clear, so I'll leave it there and reflect further.

There is also something called 'confirmation bias' which we all use.

We are sure we are right about something, so we 'confirm' we are correct by speaking with somebody who we already know thinks the same way.

We make sure to avoid or dismiss people who we know will think differently.

We are all guilty of this.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Not me.I dont need to speak to anyone else to confirm Im right. 

[Rangie]

Hated every minute at school, but have done alright in my estimation, that's all that counts.

[Nick W]

Getting rid of Grammars in most of the country was the worst blow to social mobility in the UK in living memory.
Luckily we still have a few in Essex which both my kids benefitted greatly from.
They were retained across Norn Irn when they were killed off in England, but once Blair put former IRA murderers, who are all devout socialists in Govt, and they then took over education, they started to dismantle the system for purely dogmatic reasons.
A great shame. 

We still have some in Kent, including the one I went to. One problem is that grammar schools - selective schools is the current and surprisingly accurate term - were meant to be only one part of a system, and some of the other parts are long since missing. All they do now is suck money and talent(pupils and teachers) away from other, bigger schools.


We shouldn't forget that grammar schools were meant to provide appropriately educated school leavers for white collar jobs with the top few percent sent to university, in the same way that technical schools(the biggest missing part) did for prospective tradesmen. Both the boys(they're almost always single sex, which is another outmoded decision) grammar schools here were started as that: one to teach maths for new naval officers(after 300 years it's still called Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School and known as The Math) and what is now Holcombe Academy(another badly implemented, expensive and generally questionable idea) that was Chatham Technical High School for Boys when I started there in 1981. It had been founded to do the same thing for boys expected to get apprenticeships in the dockyard. By that time it was a grammar school in all but name, which was changed in summer 1982 to Chatham Grammar School for Boys - there was already one for girls.


Another problem is that pupils for these schools are selected when they're ten years old, and I doubt you'll find anyone who would approve of such deliberate social engineering of children at that age in any other way. That includes me and the other 3 members of my immediate family who all went to grammar schools. Their time has gone, but instead of improving the remaining schools and the education they provide, the time, effort and money had been spent on increasing the middle management and bureaucracy. The NHS has suffered similarly


The Labour push to send everyone to university, even for education that was better done on the job or as traditional apprenticeships, has done the education and employment of school leavers no favours either.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

The selection process changed for the better in the early 90,s.
The system which had been in place for decades, and the one my Daugher passed in its last year, the 11+ under was open to manipulation by Promary schools.
Example = Child 1 scores 98% in the exam and child 2 (parent is a school governer) scores 88%. School then grades them both as group A and they both get an average of one anothers scores - 93%.
They both pass and go to Grammar school, but child 2 shouldnt have done.
The following year a new system was introduced, and was the one my Son took. All pupils who want to take the 11 plus go to a local Grammar school on a Saturday morning and take three exams.
If there are 100 places available, the 100 who got the highest score in the exams are offered the places.
Very simple and very fair.
The fly in the ointment is till parents paying for professional coaching, although that isnt as easy under the new system, as the old system was mainly verbal reasoning rather than three different subjects.
We couldnt afford coaching, so swmbo bought all the relevant materials, taught herself the contents, then taught the kids in the evenings.
Nothing to stop other parents doing the same. Its a matter of priorites and commitment I suppose.
The n

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I should add that most of my time at grammar school was not productive.

I spent most of my time being either caned or slippered, when not suspended.

I was a bit of a rogue.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Although not perfect I believe grammar schools were pretty fair.

Kids attended based on ability and merit. There were no financial barriers.

Affirmative action for students, as in the USA, really boils my piss along with women only shortlists. If students are not there on academic merit they will and do struggle.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Getting rid of Grammars in most of the country was the worst blow to social mobility in the UK in living memory.
Luckily we still have a few in Essex which both my kids benefitted greatly from.
They were retained across Norn Irn when they were killed off in England, but once Blair put former IRA murderers, who are all devout socialists in Govt, and they then took over education, they started to dismantle the system for purely dogmatic reasons.
A great shame. 

We still have some in Kent, including the one I went to. One problem is that grammar schools - selective schools is the current and surprisingly accurate term - were meant to be only one part of a system, and some of the other parts are long since missing. All they do now is suck money and talent(pupils and teachers) away from other, bigger schools.


We shouldn't forget that grammar schools were meant to provide appropriately educated school leavers for white collar jobs with the top few percent sent to university, in the same way that technical schools(the biggest missing part) did for prospective tradesmen. Both the boys(they're almost always single sex, which is another outmoded decision) grammar schools here were started as that: one to teach maths for new naval officers(after 300 years it's still called Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School and known as The Math) and what is now Holcombe Academy(another badly implemented, expensive and generally questionable idea) that was Chatham Technical High School for Boys when I started there in 1981. It had been founded to do the same thing for boys expected to get apprenticeships in the dockyard. By that time it was a grammar school in all but name, which was changed in summer 1982 to Chatham Grammar School for Boys - there was already one for girls.


Another problem is that pupils for these schools are selected when they're ten years old, and I doubt you'll find anyone who would approve of such deliberate social engineering of children at that age in any other way. That includes me and the other 3 members of my immediate family who all went to grammar schools. Their time has gone, but instead of improving the remaining schools and the education they provide, the time, effort and money had been spent on increasing the middle management and bureaucracy. The NHS has suffered similarly


The Labour push to send everyone to university, even for education that was better done on the job or as traditional apprenticeships, has done the education and employment of school leavers no favours either.

Not sure of the exact figure but I believe about 4% attended university when I left school. University recruited the best of the best, and it was all completely free.

Blair's idea that 50% should go to university is ridiculous. It means everyone and the 'cat's mother' can go, and then end up working at Burger King because they can't get the job they wanted.

[Broomies Mate]

Not sure of the exact figure but I believe about 4% attended university when I left school. University recruited the best of the best, and it was all completely free.

Blair's idea that 50% should go to university is ridiculous. It means everyone and the 'cat's mother' can go, and then end up working at Burger King because they can't get the job they wanted.

Add to that the ridiculous courses on offer.......... A University Education used to mean something.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

Not sure of the exact figure but I believe about 4% attended university when I left school. University recruited the best of the best, and it was all completely free.

Blair's idea that 50% should go to university is ridiculous. It means everyone and the 'cat's mother' can go, and then end up working at Burger King because they can't get the job they wanted.

Add to that the ridiculous courses on offer.......... A University Education used to mean something.

Oxford and the other one ......it still can. But other than these I think are better career options out there.

[Doctor Gollum]

Left handed puppetry, German Polka history and underwater basket weaving all being more use than a Sociology degree

[BazaJT]

I finished up at the local Comprehensive and left at end of 5th year with a few "O" levels and a couple of C.S.E.s.First maths lesson and it was the deputy headmistress teaching it and as she got to my name on the register she looked at me and said "Are you any relation to Ian and Martin?" and I said "Yes miss they're my older brothers" at which her head went into her hands and she said "Oh,god another one" I knew then I was bound to go far at that school