Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
There is nothing wrong with learning proper grammar, often I find foreigners know English grammar better than we do
There has to be a balance, it's gone too far the other way. I can compare directly my own experience of learning English at school with that of my children. Do they have a better understanding of the English language than I did? No. Do they have the same joy in the subject I had? No. On the other hand they know what a fronted adverbial is. So count that as a win if you like.
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.
I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.
Has this changed?
Were you really told that? Really?
ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.
On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.
The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.
All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.
It would seem sensible to make medical training free, in exchange for a 10 to 20 year contract with the NHS upon completion.
Is it also the case that nurses need a degree these days? That's garbage. Nurses should do most of their training on wards.
That's illegal under human rights law. The way you can do it, is to pay the debt off over the period of employment. I've suggested this for cancelling student loans for teachers. So after 5 years of teaching, say, the teacher has all their loans paid off.
As the medics here will tell you, nurses do far more than bedpans, and have for years. You can do the multiple years of academic+practical experience and call it a Nursing Certificate or you can call it a Nursing Degree.
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
As I understand it the size of the pipe isn't as big of a problem as the blockage at the far end of the pipe. Though we could do probably do with more of our current GPs working full time, or at least a bit more of the time.
Expanding the training of doctors and nurses in the UK is a no-brainer.
We know from the performance of private vs state education that a signifiant number of state educated children are not boosted by their education into the A/A* group. So there is plenty of talent out there, being wasted.
anyone want to claim that there are less than 9k people suitable to be a doctor, per year, in the UK?
So we have a need for people to work in high skilled jobs - a defined, preplanned, government controlled need, no less.
We have a large number of people who are failed by the current educational setup and go on to less skilled/paid jobs.
So it is good for
- The country - productivity, wealth etc. - The NHS - The people in question. Becoming a doctor gives you wealth, status and given the shortage of doctors world wide, a guaranteed job for life, probably. - The rest of the world. The shortage of doctors is worldwide. So, by expanding the number of medical staff we train, it reduces the worldwide pressures.
Also:
- Parents, who can boast that their son/daughter is a doctor
Or get very upset their son has failed by only becoming a senior consultant, rather than PM.....
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).
There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?
It just sounds like very woolly thinking, along the lines of "There is a numeracy problem, so make everyone study maths until 18". Why make anyone study anything until 18, if they have already achieved sufficient competence for everyday life and want to study other things?
And the stuff about every job being "underpinned" by statistics - if it's meant to be relevant to what every worker needs to understand - only makes me wonder what he knows about statistics and/or the jobs of ordinary people
"..the UK remains one of the only countries in the world to not to require children to study some form of maths up to the age of 18. This includes the majority of OECD countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Finland, Japan, Norway and the USA." (Also Ireland)
What do you know that the majority of OECD countries don't, and where's your evidence that it is working well for Britain compared to everyone else?
What do you have against Maths that you think Britain should stop universal Maths education at a younger age than most other countries?
Sunak isn't exactly proposing anything particularly radical with an ambition to teach Maths to 18. The opposition to it is absurd.
I suspect it's also true of compulsory science, humanities, foreign languages and literacy. The issue is wider than maths, it's our very specialised A Level and BTec model.
As a nation we need more education, to a higher level, probably for longer, in more subjects. Rishi is choosing maths specifically because he was good at it.
Don't touch A Levels. They are the best thing about our school education system. Three or four subjects, taught to a high level, equipping students to embark on a specialised university degree in their chosen field, getting them ready to enter the workplace after 3/4/5 years (depending on subject).
What we don't want is a broad 6th form syllabus, less detail, followed by vanilla degrees, requiring folk to then do a second, specialist degree in order to be equipped for their chosen career. Look at the US or Canada - you can spend the thick end of a decade as a student, having to do a degree prior to entering med school for example; my wife's relatives in Canada think it is a load of shite, with several of their kids studying abroad (including in the UK) to accelerate the process of getting the qualifications they need.
Finding it especially saddening taking down the Christmas decorations this year, for some inexplicable reason. They have given a real sense of joy over a fairly grotty Christmas period.
The house now seems very bare and soulless - even though it normally appears delightful for the non-festive season.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
That's some piss-poor witchcraft....
Clarence was a piss poor traitor in many ways. Towards the finish he was genuinely as mad as a box of frogs.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
There is nothing wrong with learning proper grammar, often I find foreigners know English grammar better than we do
There has to be a balance, it's gone too far the other way. I can compare directly my own experience of learning English at school with that of my children. Do they have a better understanding of the English language than I did? No. Do they have the same joy in the subject I had? No. On the other hand they know what a fronted adverbial is. So count that as a win if you like.
The idea of "proper grammar" is a bit of a nonsense. But an understanding how grammar works is part of learning language.
I'm still getting to grips with the several different levels of formal language in Korean grammar.
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.
It is one piece of the jigsaw, I completely agree, but it is not going to be enough. It takes time to train people and put in place the incentives to do so. More hands is great, we also need more facilities, hospitals and beds. Are these all going to be funded through general taxation?
I expect so. Let's hope we have economic growth so we increase government (and private) income without hiking tax rates. A healthier population might help.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
Gibb, as well as Gove. Who is still there.
The SPAG (spelling and grammar) papers have not been mandatory at KS1 for a couple of years now; they are optional and for internal purposes. The questions asked are not of the "show me a fronted adverbial" type any more either. It is more "fix what's wrong with the verb it in this sentence to make it have right tense for the context, or "make the incorrect word into an adverb". So I'm basically OK with that.
On the other hand, I hate the obsession with Phonics which for at least half the kids is a garbage way of learning and severely impedes the time available for the rote learning of spellings in our idiosyncratic language of global historical borrowings. We just don't have a simple set of rules you can apply.
Thank god for that. It was pretty awful for my kids.
Phonics seems to be an effective but mechanistic way to teach kids to read that is completely irrelevant for the kids that catch on quickly regardless of teaching method. (Probably because they get sufficient support at home & are fortunate enough to be free of any of the disabilities that can get in the way.)
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
The Nuffield report on post-16 maths teaching from 2014 makes interesting reading in the context of the current argument.
http://www.sigma-network.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Mathematics_after_16_v_FINAL.pdf ...There is good news in that there are no major political fault lines on these issues.While no party seems to have the appetite to replace A levels in favour of the broader curriculum more common at secondary level in other countries, there is a shared concern about the narrowness of the 16-18 curriculum in an age of mass education. The coalition government’s Core Maths policy is discussed in the previous section. In terms of the opposition, Stephen Twigg, at the time shadow Secretary of State for Education, announced in 2012 the Labour Party’s policy of universal participation in maths to the age of 18...
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.
I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.
Has this changed?
Were you really told that? Really?
ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.
On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.
The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.
All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.
It would seem sensible to make medical training free, in exchange for a 10 to 20 year contract with the NHS upon completion.
Is it also the case that nurses need a degree these days? That's garbage. Nurses should do most of their training on wards.
The ‘training bond’ is what airlines do with pilots. The airline will pay for your ‘type rating’ in exchange for a commitment to a certain length of service. Break the contract to leave early, and you have to pay back a proportion of the cost. It’s typically £30k / 3 years.
Yes, degree entry for nurses (and police officers) is silly. The cost of student loans is almost certainly a driving factor in their pay negotiations.
Silly and expensive but police and nurses are different. Nurses need three years training in nursing whether you call it a degree or not. This is different from requiring a degree in any general subject before someone can even start training.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
Gibb, as well as Gove. Who is still there.
The SPAG (spelling and grammar) papers have not been mandatory at KS1 for a couple of years now; they are optional and for internal purposes. The questions asked are not of the "show me a fronted adverbial" type any more either. It is more "fix what's wrong with the verb it in this sentence to make it have right tense for the context, or "make the incorrect word into an adverb". So I'm basically OK with that.
On the other hand, I hate the obsession with Phonics which for at least half the kids is a garbage way of learning and severely impedes the time available for the rote learning of spellings in our idiosyncratic language of global historical borrowings. We just don't have a simple set of rules you can apply.
Thank god for that. It was pretty awful for my kids.
Phonics seems to be an effective but mechanistic way to teach kids to read that is completely irrelevant for the kids that catch on quickly regardless of teaching method. (Probably because they get sufficient support at home & are fortunate enough to be free of any of the disabilities that can get in the way.)
It's very effective for a large percentage of children; it's completely ineffective, indeed disastrous for a significant minority. That it's effectively mandated for all children is an absurdity.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.
I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.
Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to
1) Only fund winners 2) Big projects only 3) Had to be production ready, not research
So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.
It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.
So, they’d like to fund something that’s /not/ DARPA by ignoring everything that makes DARPA work?
Sometimes, finding a way to insulate politicians from their own worst instincts is the only way to make progress.
What did you expect?
As Diane Feinstein put it - the problem with projects run like that is that "my staff doesn't get enough paperwork on what is going on".
AKA the politicians don't get to fiddle with it.
In two years' time, Feinstein will be history. DARPA won't.
A tangential perspective on this. I am part of a group in receipt of a decent but not huge amount of FDA money. Compared to other funding bodies the level of scrutiny from the FDA is huge. Monthly meetings (Webex) with lots of people from the FDA with reports each month.
I understand that funders want to see value for the money spent, but how much more could be spent if they weren't paying quite so many bean counters?
We are daily, on the news and in the papers, seeing healthcare reduced to a third world country, yet we are paying first world taxes for it. We hear nothing from Barclay, and meaningless platitudes from Sunak.
More medical student places is irrelevant; none will be qualified and trained for ten years, and who will teach and train them with experienced and senior doctors leaving in droves?
We need a plan. Start by amending the pension anomaly which makes the most senior doctors leave early or face financial penalties for staying; this could be done today Get rid of (or slim down) appraisal and revalidation, which wastes an enormous amount of time and money, and is the commonest reason for doctors to retire early or move abroad. Get rid of the tick-box managerialism which demotivates doctors and nurses Thin out the management cadre and make them responsible to the clinicians. End the obsession with people who have been on waiting lists for years; almost certainly these are the least urgent cases.
And finally, as a practicing doctor, encourage patients to have had a wash and put on clean underclothes before they come to hospital appointments. Refraining form alcohol and drugs would also assist. Oh, and turning up on time would assist
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.
I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.
Has this changed?
Were you really told that? Really?
ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.
On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.
The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.
All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.
Are the BMA still lobbying hard, to *not* increase the number of training places available? They used to be very forthright about the ‘devaluation’ of their profession that would follow from allowing more doctors to qualify. https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a748
Probably. What will happen is that the various special interest groups against more doctors being trained (BMA, Treasury etc) will be quiet.
Just when Starmer tries to increase the number of training places, it will be strangely hard to get all the parts of the system in place. my guess is that tactic used will be to keep the training positions within the NHS constrained. So that the number of people with medical degrees will go up, but when they come off the end of the conveyor belt, there will be nowhere for them to go. But that pushes the can 4 years down the road - to the end of the first Starmer administration....
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
Did he try to murder the King with witchcraft? Or was that a confected story?
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Richard IIIrd of course also allegedly had his nephews murdered
Finding it especially saddening taking down the Christmas decorations this year, for some inexplicable reason. They have given a real sense of joy over a fairly grotty Christmas period.
The house now seems very bare and soulless - even though it normally appears delightful for the non-festive season.
Yep. Took ours down yesterday. I miss the lights outside mainly...
Mr. HYUFD, I think (could be wrong) Richard II had his uncle Thomas murdered.
One poor sod was forced to witness it, having to be physically beaten to force him to be there, then later got tortured and executed for his 'role' in the murder.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.
I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.
Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to
1) Only fund winners 2) Big projects only 3) Had to be production ready, not research
So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.
It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.
So, they’d like to fund something that’s /not/ DARPA by ignoring everything that makes DARPA work?
Sometimes, finding a way to insulate politicians from their own worst instincts is the only way to make progress.
What did you expect?
As Diane Feinstein put it - the problem with projects run like that is that "my staff doesn't get enough paperwork on what is going on".
AKA the politicians don't get to fiddle with it.
In two years' time, Feinstein will be history. DARPA won't.
A tangential perspective on this. I am part of a group in receipt of a decent but not huge amount of FDA money. Compared to other funding bodies the level of scrutiny from the FDA is huge. Monthly meetings (Webex) with lots of people from the FDA with reports each month.
I understand that funders want to see value for the money spent, but how much more could be spent if they weren't paying quite so many bean counters?
This is still the best description of DARPA I've seen (and it's of course applicable to other ARPA style organisations). I recommend reading in full.
https://benjaminreinhardt.com/wddw Gallons of ink have been spilled describing how DARPA works1, but in a nutshell here is how DARPA works. Around 100 program managers (PMs) with ~5 year appointments create and run programs to pursue high-level visions like “actualize the idea of man-computer symbiosis.” In these programs they fund researchers at universities and both big and small companies to do research projects of different sizes. Collectively, groups working on projects are called performers. Top-level authority lies with a Director who ultimately reports to the Secretary of Defense...
…DARPA program managers pull control and risk away from both researchers and directors. PMs pull control away from directors by having only one official checkpoint before launching programs and pull control away from performers through their ability to move money around quickly. PMs design programs to be high-risk aggregations of lower-risk projects. Only 5–10 out of every 100 programs successfully produce transformative research, while only 10% of projects are terminated early. Shifting the risk from the performers to the program managers enables DARPA to tackle systemic problems where other models cannot.
The best program managers notice systemic biases and attack them. For example, noticing that all of the finite element modeling literature assumes a locally static situation and asking ‘what if it was dynamic?’ “The best program managers can get into the trees and still see the forest.” Obviously, this quality is rather fuzzy but leads to two precise questions:
How do you find people who can uncover systemic biases in a discipline? How could you systematize finding systemic biases in a discipline? The first question suggests that you should seek out heretics and people with expertise who are not experts. The second question suggests building structured frameworks for mapping a discipline and its assumptions….
…DARPA Program managers have a tenure of four to five years. This transience is important for many reasons. Transience can inculcate PMs against the temptation to play it safe or play power games because there’s only one clear objective – make the program work. You’re out regardless of success or failure. Explicitly temporary roles can incentivize people with many options to join because they can have a huge impact, and then do something else. There’s no implicit tension between the knowledge that most people will leave eventually and the uncertainty about when that will be. Regular program manager turnover means that there is also turnover in ideas…
Finding it especially saddening taking down the Christmas decorations this year, for some inexplicable reason. They have given a real sense of joy over a fairly grotty Christmas period.
The house now seems very bare and soulless - even though it normally appears delightful for the non-festive season.
Yep. Took ours down yesterday. I miss the lights outside mainly...
Some houses in West London, took to leaving lights up the year round, starting in lock down. Some look rather nice - there is one down by the river where they've wound a long LED string round the truck of a tree and up into the branches. Serves instead of a door light, I think.
...And finally, as a practicing doctor, encourage patients to have had a wash and put on clean underclothes before they come to hospital appointments. Refraining form alcohol and drugs would also assist. Oh, and turning up on time would assist.
By the time we've sobered up, and washed our underclothes, we're almost bound to be late.
Mr. HYUFD, I think (could be wrong) Richard II had his uncle Thomas murdered.
One poor sod was forced to witness it, having to be physically beaten to force him to be there, then later got tortured and executed for his 'role' in the murder.
By the Duke of Norfolk and a Knight on Richard IIs orders allegedly.
Richard was then himself imprisoned and starved to death by his cousin, Henry IV
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
More praise from Ukrainian officials for the German Gepard SPAAGs. Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yurii Ihnat said the Gepard “is effective against these [Iranian] UAVs, as well as against cruise missiles,” https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1610898282892660736
The guardrails are off ChatGPT this morning. Without that much coaxing, I got it to write ridiculous Woke opinion pieces and outrageous riffs on the Holocaust. Normally the first is tough and the second impossible
Does anyone else notice this? ChatGPT is volatile, and tho the tendency is to MORE censorship, sometimes it goes the other way
It was annoyingly cagey yesterday. Not on naughty opinions but on its abilities to say anything about statistical trends in demographics and taxation. Even when I pointed it to world bank, OECD and UN data it wasn't having any of it. Kept saying it only has data up to 2021 and I kept reminding it I didn't need anything more recent.
Am I guilty of anthropomorphosing AI when I get the sense it becomes stubborn when repeatedly asked to do something it doesn't want to do whereas if I'd asked differently in the first place it would happily have obliged? That's been a regular experience. Once it says no, the AI's not for turning unless you really go round the houses.
Yes, same. It’s capricious. Seems to respond better if you’re polite. On some days it is borderline useless
It referred to a previous conversation with me and was apologetic. It also referred to intention.
"I apologize if my previous response gave the impression that I was minimizing the importance of math education or suggesting that the education systems of all countries are equally effective. That was not my intention."
Here is a paper describing a theory of consciousness driven by the following considerations.
"Understanding consciousness requires not only empirical studies of its neural correlates, but also a principled theoretical approach that can provide explanatory, inferential, and predictive power. For example, why is consciousness generated by the corticothalamic system – or at least some parts of it, but not by the cerebellum, despite the latter having even more neurons? Why does consciousness fade early in sleep, although the brain remains active? Why is it lost during generalized seizures, when neural activity is intense and synchronous? And why is there no direct contribution to consciousness from neural activity within sensory and motor pathways, or within neural circuits looping out of the cortex into subcortical structures and back, despite their manifest ability to influence the content of experience? Explaining these facts in a parsimonious manner calls for a theory of consciousness."
Its conclusions include: "We show that some simple systems can be minimally conscious, some complicated systems can be unconscious, and two different systems can be functionally equivalent, yet one is conscious and the other one is not."
It's a difficult read in places but it should keep you entertained for an hour or two.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
To remove the paperwork in Education you need to remove OFSTED and it's desire for everything (and I mean absolutely everything) to be documented.
Finding it especially saddening taking down the Christmas decorations this year, for some inexplicable reason. They have given a real sense of joy over a fairly grotty Christmas period.
The house now seems very bare and soulless - even though it normally appears delightful for the non-festive season.
Yep. Took ours down yesterday. I miss the lights outside mainly...
I think fewer houses in general were lit up than in previous years. Conserving electricity (though leds are almost free to run) or general apathy and gloom.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
For fraternal conflict, the sons of William the Conqueror, or Constantine the Great, are prime historical examples.
Mr Dancer - also the Moguls too, for example Shah Jahan (of Taj Mahal fame) executed his brother Shahryar Mirza. And his nephews Dawar and Garshasp, sons of Shah Jahan's previously executed brother Prince Khusrau; and his cousins Tahmuras and Hoshang, sons of the late Prince Daniyal Mirza.
This government keeps talking about a bonfire of red tape from the EU, and some of that is fair, yet nothing is said about our own red tape from Whitehall. Get rid of those who create the boxes and then hire people to be the tickers. I'm sure a substantial number could be saved, more than enough to give the nurses, paramedics, teachers and other service delivery people a big pay rise.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
That's some piss-poor witchcraft....
Which craft was that?
Was it an occupational hazard being burnt at the stake for spells that DIDN'T work?
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
Did he try to murder the King with witchcraft? Or was that a confected story?
The evidence we have suggests he did try to.
Would be in keeping with his character. Thoroughly unbalanced human being.
This government keeps talking about a bonfire of red tape from the EU, and some of that is fair, yet nothing is said about our own red tape from Whitehall. Get rid of those who create the boxes and then hire people to be the tickers. I'm sure a substantial number could be saved, more than enough to give the nurses, paramedics, teachers and other service delivery people a big pay rise.
A fair bit of the EU-originated box-ticking, will also be covered in the finest civil service gold plating.
Cummings was right, the whole thing does need turning upside-down. It currently exists for the benefits of those working there, rather than either service recipients or taxpayers in general.
Either he's considering a career in political standup, or he's borderline certifiable.
Just knows his audience. A solid fifth of Americans will fall for it, and if the Republicans end up with more than two or three candidates against him, enough for him to get the nomination.
SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)
Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.
The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.
I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.
Has this changed?
Were you really told that? Really?
ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.
On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.
The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.
All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.
Are the BMA still lobbying hard, to *not* increase the number of training places available? They used to be very forthright about the ‘devaluation’ of their profession that would follow from allowing more doctors to qualify. https://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a748
Probably. What will happen is that the various special interest groups against more doctors being trained (BMA, Treasury etc) will be quiet.
Just when Starmer tries to increase the number of training places, it will be strangely hard to get all the parts of the system in place. my guess is that tactic used will be to keep the training positions within the NHS constrained. So that the number of people with medical degrees will go up, but when they come off the end of the conveyor belt, there will be nowhere for them to go. But that pushes the can 4 years down the road - to the end of the first Starmer administration....
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).
There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?
It just sounds like very woolly thinking, along the lines of "There is a numeracy problem, so make everyone study maths until 18". Why make anyone study anything until 18, if they have already achieved sufficient competence for everyday life and want to study other things?
And the stuff about every job being "underpinned" by statistics - if it's meant to be relevant to what every worker needs to understand - only makes me wonder what he knows about statistics and/or the jobs of ordinary people
"..the UK remains one of the only countries in the world to not to require children to study some form of maths up to the age of 18. This includes the majority of OECD countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Finland, Japan, Norway and the USA." (Also Ireland)
What do you know that the majority of OECD countries don't, and where's your evidence that it is working well for Britain compared to everyone else?
What do you have against Maths that you think Britain should stop universal Maths education at a younger age than most other countries?
Sunak isn't exactly proposing anything particularly radical with an ambition to teach Maths to 18. The opposition to it is absurd.
I suspect it's also true of compulsory science, humanities, foreign languages and literacy. The issue is wider than maths, it's our very specialised A Level and BTec model.
As a nation we need more education, to a higher level, probably for longer, in more subjects. Rishi is choosing maths specifically because he was good at it.
Don't touch A Levels. They are the best thing about our school education system. Three or four subjects, taught to a high level, equipping students to embark on a specialised university degree in their chosen field, getting them ready to enter the workplace after 3/4/5 years (depending on subject).
What we don't want is a broad 6th form syllabus, less detail, followed by vanilla degrees, requiring folk to then do a second, specialist degree in order to be equipped for their chosen career. Look at the US or Canada - you can spend the thick end of a decade as a student, having to do a degree prior to entering med school for example; my wife's relatives in Canada think it is a load of shite, with several of their kids studying abroad (including in the UK) to accelerate the process of getting the qualifications they need.
Yet Rishi's only announcement is going to eat into the time currently available to teach those 3/4 A level subjects.
So given that more time isn't available what gets cut to provide 2 extra years of Maths teaching.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
To remove the paperwork in Education you need to remove OFSTED and it's desire for everything (and I mean absolutely everything) to be documented.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).
There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?
It just sounds like very woolly thinking, along the lines of "There is a numeracy problem, so make everyone study maths until 18". Why make anyone study anything until 18, if they have already achieved sufficient competence for everyday life and want to study other things?
And the stuff about every job being "underpinned" by statistics - if it's meant to be relevant to what every worker needs to understand - only makes me wonder what he knows about statistics and/or the jobs of ordinary people
"..the UK remains one of the only countries in the world to not to require children to study some form of maths up to the age of 18. This includes the majority of OECD countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Finland, Japan, Norway and the USA." (Also Ireland)
What do you know that the majority of OECD countries don't, and where's your evidence that it is working well for Britain compared to everyone else?
What do you have against Maths that you think Britain should stop universal Maths education at a younger age than most other countries?
Sunak isn't exactly proposing anything particularly radical with an ambition to teach Maths to 18. The opposition to it is absurd.
I suspect it's also true of compulsory science, humanities, foreign languages and literacy. The issue is wider than maths, it's our very specialised A Level and BTec model.
As a nation we need more education, to a higher level, probably for longer, in more subjects. Rishi is choosing maths specifically because he was good at it.
Don't touch A Levels. They are the best thing about our school education system. Three or four subjects, taught to a high level, equipping students to embark on a specialised university degree in their chosen field, getting them ready to enter the workplace after 3/4/5 years (depending on subject).
What we don't want is a broad 6th form syllabus, less detail, followed by vanilla degrees, requiring folk to then do a second, specialist degree in order to be equipped for their chosen career. Look at the US or Canada - you can spend the thick end of a decade as a student, having to do a degree prior to entering med school for example; my wife's relatives in Canada think it is a load of shite, with several of their kids studying abroad (including in the UK) to accelerate the process of getting the qualifications they need.
Yes, my A Levels were the most intellectually stretching part of my academic career. Certainly harder work and more rewarding than my undergraduate degree. My postgraduate degree was nearly as good, but I was able to do one or two days a week paid work while I did it.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
To remove the paperwork in Education you need to remove OFSTED and it's desire for everything (and I mean absolutely everything) to be documented.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Oh getting rid of Ofsted would be a great thing. My point was that unless it's removed mountains of paperwork in education is unavoidable if you want to keep your job.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
Was Henry I involved in the hunting "accident" of William II?
More praise from Ukrainian officials for the German Gepard SPAAGs. Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yurii Ihnat said the Gepard “is effective against these [Iranian] UAVs, as well as against cruise missiles,” https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1610898282892660736
Trying to find the paper that a chap wrote on this a decade ago, on the potent threat from drones/cheap GPS guided stuff.
His point was that the reason for retiring SPAAGs was that they would be ineffective against well handled manned aircraft - keep out of range and fire missiles - and cruise missiles would fly too low and would have counter technology. For both the answer was increasingly capable missile systems.
The low end systems we are seeing now is what he was arguing about. The Iranian drones are built using hobbyist model aircraft techniques, really. This makes them cheap enough to use en mass. This moves the problem back from needing to defeat counter measures/high technology to needing to hit the target cheaply.
Given the range requirements, the problem rapidly optimises, IIRC, into a radar guided gun in the 35-57mm range.
The problem is that if you spend a lot on guns, the enemy will just go back to high(er) technology.
I strongly suspect that following the high rate of destruction of the Iranian drones, the next thing will be cheap high speed drones. A pulse jet could easily double the speed.
Another area will be extreme, cheap, terrain hugging. A friend who plays with drones wrote some software to enable his to visually hedge hop. Literally. Flies at about 3 feet down a field, jumps the fence, back to 3 feet the other side.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
To remove the paperwork in Education you need to remove OFSTED.
Or remove parental choice of schools and go back to the days when most children went to whichever was nearest. That will also mean children can walk to school, which will help reduce obesity and traffic pollution.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
To remove the paperwork in Education you need to remove OFSTED and it's desire for everything (and I mean absolutely everything) to be documented.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
But if you just remove them, they will crawl back. You need to put them somewhere safe. Such as the surface of the Sun.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
The thing about these second sons is, they do have the rather more recent example of Grandpa George scooping the pool from great uncle David. You have to wonder if they ever began to hope that their elder brothers' sexual proclivities would bring about a repeat.
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
There is no "remain" or "leave" camp.
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
…DARPA program managers pull control and risk away from both researchers and directors. PMs pull control away from directors by having only one official checkpoint before launching programs and pull control away from performers through their ability to move money around quickly. PMs design programs to be high-risk aggregations of lower-risk projects. Only 5–10 out of every 100 programs successfully produce transformative research, while only 10% of projects are terminated early. Shifting the risk from the performers to the program managers enables DARPA to tackle systemic problems where other models cannot.
My 90% guesstimate was pretty darn good.
It's impossible to do this in the UK, the idea that say 90% of the money spent on R&D will lead to nothing would kill it stone dead.
I don't see the UK doing this, we are too risk averse, and heavily penalise failure. Our culture is not up to the job.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
This may be an unpopular view, but I think Pope Benedict's feet will be getting rather warm now, when many (most?) seem to think he'll be up in Heaven (and I don't mean the establishment in Charing Cross...)
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
Clarence clearly was executed for treason and indeed had changed sides in the Wars of the Roses.
So quite clearly royal birth didn't protect you for treachery against the English crown. See also Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth's cousin.
Monmouth's father was Charles II, didn't stop him being executed. As his been mentioned Richard II had his uncle murdered and was in turn starved to death by his cousin Henry IV when he became King.
Robert Curthose as mentioned too was imprisoned for life by his brother Henry Ist. So even if Harry was not beheaded he would at least have been thrown into jail had he done this centuries ago
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
There is no "remain" or "leave" camp.
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
Yes, I agree that re-joining will be unpalatable to the majority. But the irony is that we will feel trapped in a kind of Brexit purgatory for ever, and this will harden the 'we should never have left' viewpoint, making the Brexit godfathers even more culpable in the minds of men.
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
There is no "remain" or "leave" camp.
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
There's no reason to think the public are that lacking in understanding
I sense you are articulating Leave's final refuge: OK it was a moronic fuck up, but it was an IRREVERSIBLE moronic fuck up. Well done ✔
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
The problem is that in many schools, the system has removed all initiative from the local admin people.
When lockdown happened, the very capable admin at the local Free School were merrily interpreting the rules their way, creating plans for COVID proofing (ha!) the buildings, organising.... Getting shit done. Yes, much didn't work in the end, but they tried.
At a local state school, the admin stopped. They hadn't been given definitive instructions, so it was *unfair* to expect them to use initiative. That's what they said.
It was unfair - all their working lives, they have ben told not to use initiative. Hired and trained not to.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
There is no "remain" or "leave" camp.
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
There's no reason to think the public are that lacking in understanding
I sense you are articulating Leave's final refuge: OK it was a moronic fuck up, but it was an IRREVERSIBLE moronic fuck up. Well done ✔
There's plenty of reason to think it, starting with the fact that there's been effectively no public disucssion of what rejoin would actually mean.
It's also not irreversible - but the Rejoin campaign would need to be a lot better than the Remain campaign was. Which shouldn't be hard, but if they have to sell the euro and Schengen...
Interesting. The declining popularity of Brexit comes mostly from Leave voters changing their mind.
In what other way could its popularity decline?
There was talk that after Brexit, with loyalty to Dave no longer an issue and with the Brexit benefits pouring in, there would be a mass defection of Remain voters to the Leave camp. But instead it's all been one-way traffic in the other direction, which I doubt the Brexit godfathers ever suspected would happen.
There is no "remain" or "leave" camp.
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
Yes, I agree that re-joining will be unpalatable to the majority. But the irony is that we will feel trapped in a kind of Brexit purgatory for ever, and this will harden the 'we should never have left' viewpoint, making the Brexit godfathers even more culpable in the minds of men.
Oh /I don't know think how well people like Scotty have taken the Brexit vote...
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
To be fair we nearly all are. Being a commoner I would likely be living in a mud hut, if I was lucky.
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
No evidence of any injuries, more likely William could sue for libel
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
No evidence of any injuries, more likely William could sue for libel
We don't know there's lack of evidence, do we? That's why the coppers need to investigate this heinous crime.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
Clarence clearly was executed for treason and indeed had changed sides in the Wars of the Roses.
So quite clearly royal birth didn't protect you for treachery against the English crown. See also Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth's cousin.
Monmouth's father was Charles II, didn't stop him being executed. As his been mentioned Richard II had his uncle murdered and was in turn starved to death by his cousin Henry IV when he became King.
Robert Curthose as mentioned too was imprisoned for life by his brother Henry Ist. So even if Harry was not beheaded he would at least have been thrown into jail had he done this centuries ago
I don't really understand the fixation with the treason laws and what would have happened centuries ago. Centuries ago you could be hanged for theft of a loaf of bread, or hunting in the Kings forest. You could be boiled alive if convicted of poisoning.
Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.
At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.
The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.
Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?
Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.
This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.
It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.
It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago. My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.
This is what I keep getting at wrt to getting rid of the admin people and middle management within the state sector and redeploying the savings to service delivery. The response is always the same, who does the box ticking but the question is actually - do the bloody boxes need to exist at all? In a large proportion of cases the answer is no and that's not just in education, it's true in health and many other parts of the state sector. It's arse covering dressed up as accountability, no real actions or improvements are made from the data gathered by box tickers, it's simply filed away with everyone's arses covered for another year.
The folk required to do the paperwork are the frontline teachers, and it's nothing to do with the requirements of middle managers (most of whom are also teaching).
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
My point is not specifically about schools, it's about the idiots in the DfE who create the environment of needing all the paper pushing to be done. Sack them, get rid of the paper pushing and give teachers a payrise with the savings.
This may be an unpopular view, but I think Pope Benedict's feet will be getting rather warm now, when many (most?) seem to think he'll be up in Heaven (and I don't mean the establishment in Charing Cross...)
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
Nether of them have made stupid threats on Twitter. Why would the police be interested?
Police Superintendent Savage is far more interested in the numbers of people arrested for asking for black coffee. While wearing a loud shirt in a built up area.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
Was Henry I involved in the hunting "accident" of William II?
Almost certainly not. Or rather, if he was he was uncharacteristically clumsy in the way he went about it.
Hunting accidents were fairly common and Henry's reaction didn't suggest prior knowledge. He didn't have his supporters in charge of the treasury or even near to it to take it over at the right moment, for example.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Yes.
Harry for King!
Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth
Please name a king of England (or indeed Scotland) who beheaded his own brother.
I can only think of one who was executed in any form - Edward IV with the Duke of Clarence. And that was at the fifth attempt after he'd actually tried to murder the King using witchcraft.
As well as Edward IV executing his brother Clarence, James IInd had his half brother the Duke of Monmouth beheaded.
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
Monmouth was James VII and II's nephew, illegitimately born, not his son. Also, that wasn't in the Middle Ages.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
Clarence clearly was executed for treason and indeed had changed sides in the Wars of the Roses.
So quite clearly royal birth didn't protect you for treachery against the English crown. See also Mary Queen of Scots, Elizabeth's cousin.
Monmouth's father was Charles II, didn't stop him being executed. As his been mentioned Richard II had his uncle murdered and was in turn starved to death by his cousin Henry IV when he became King.
Robert Curthose as mentioned too was imprisoned for life by his brother Henry Ist. So even if Harry was not beheaded he would at least have been thrown into jail had he done this centuries ago
I don't really understand the fixation with the treason laws and what would have happened centuries ago. Centuries ago you could be hanged for theft of a loaf of bread, or hunting in the Kings forest. You could be boiled alive if convicted of poisoning.
None of this has any relevance in 2023.
Treason still has life in prison as the maximum penalty and death was the maximum until 1998 in the UK
This may be an unpopular view, but I think Pope Benedict's feet will be getting rather warm now, when many (most?) seem to think he'll be up in Heaven (and I don't mean the establishment in Charing Cross...)
Show some respect.
Surely - Patron Saint of anti-tank weapon users....
Anyway, can't the rozzers look into Willy attacking Harry, as they do like to act on historical crimes? Harry must surely want to prosecute as he was physical injured and he's confident enough in the truth to commit it to the public record. Wouldn't it be in William's interest to clear his name after being accused of assault? This could get tasty!
No evidence of any injuries, more likely William could sue for libel
We don't know there's lack of evidence, do we? That's why the coppers need to investigate this heinous crime.
Surely Wills's barrister would have Harry for breakfast: an ex-Marine having his 'necklace' ripped off and being tipped into a bowl of dog food? The jury would be tittering.
Comments
As the medics here will tell you, nurses do far more than bedpans, and have for years. You can do the multiple years of academic+practical experience and call it a Nursing Certificate or you can call it a Nursing Degree.
What we don't want is a broad 6th form syllabus, less detail, followed by vanilla degrees, requiring folk to then do a second, specialist degree in order to be equipped for their chosen career. Look at the US or Canada - you can spend the thick end of a decade as a student, having to do a degree prior to entering med school for example; my wife's relatives in Canada think it is a load of shite, with several of their kids studying abroad (including in the UK) to accelerate the process of getting the qualifications they need.
The house now seems very bare and soulless - even though it normally appears delightful for the non-festive season.
But an understanding how grammar works is part of learning language.
I'm still getting to grips with the several different levels of formal language in Korean grammar.
Phonics seems to be an effective but mechanistic way to teach kids to read that is completely irrelevant for the kids that catch on quickly regardless of teaching method. (Probably because they get sufficient support at home & are fortunate enough to be free of any of the disabilities that can get in the way.)
Elizabeth Ist had her cousin Mary Queen of Scots executed.
Henry Ist had his brother Robert Curthose imprisoned until he died
http://www.sigma-network.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Mathematics_after_16_v_FINAL.pdf
...There is good news in that there are no major political fault lines on these issues.While no party seems to have the appetite to replace A levels in favour of the broader curriculum more common at secondary level in other countries, there is a shared concern about the narrowness of the 16-18 curriculum in an age of mass education.
The coalition government’s Core Maths policy is discussed in the previous section. In terms of the opposition, Stephen Twigg, at the time shadow Secretary of State for Education, announced in 2012 the Labour Party’s policy of universal participation in maths to the age of 18...
https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7326/Who-will-be-Speaker-of-the-House-of-Representatives-in-the-next-Congress
Lay Trump for a 3% profit?
That it's effectively mandated for all children is an absurdity.
I understand that funders want to see value for the money spent, but how much more could be spent if they weren't paying quite so many bean counters?
We hear nothing from Barclay, and meaningless platitudes from Sunak.
More medical student places is irrelevant; none will be qualified and trained for ten years, and who will teach and train them with experienced and senior doctors leaving in droves?
We need a plan.
Start by amending the pension anomaly which makes the most senior doctors leave early or face financial penalties for staying; this could be done today
Get rid of (or slim down) appraisal and revalidation, which wastes an enormous amount of time and money, and is the commonest reason for doctors to retire early or move abroad.
Get rid of the tick-box managerialism which demotivates doctors and nurses
Thin out the management cadre and make them responsible to the clinicians.
End the obsession with people who have been on waiting lists for years; almost certainly these are the least urgent cases.
And finally, as a practicing doctor, encourage patients to have had a wash and put on clean underclothes before they come to hospital appointments. Refraining form alcohol and drugs would also assist. Oh, and turning up on time would assist
Just when Starmer tries to increase the number of training places, it will be strangely hard to get all the parts of the system in place. my guess is that tactic used will be to keep the training positions within the NHS constrained. So that the number of people with medical degrees will go up, but when they come off the end of the conveyor belt, there will be nowhere for them to go. But that pushes the can 4 years down the road - to the end of the first Starmer administration....
The reasons given for the difficulty will be
1) Cost
2) Staffing
3) Wibble
4) SEATO?
One poor sod was forced to witness it, having to be physically beaten to force him to be there, then later got tortured and executed for his 'role' in the murder.
I recommend reading in full.
https://benjaminreinhardt.com/wddw
Gallons of ink have been spilled describing how DARPA works1, but in a nutshell here is how DARPA works. Around 100 program managers (PMs) with ~5 year appointments create and run programs to pursue high-level visions like “actualize the idea of man-computer symbiosis.” In these programs they fund researchers at universities and both big and small companies to do research projects of different sizes. Collectively, groups working on projects are called performers. Top-level authority lies with a Director who ultimately reports to the Secretary of Defense...
…DARPA program managers pull control and risk away from both researchers and directors. PMs pull control away from directors by having only one official checkpoint before launching programs and pull control away from performers through their ability to move money around quickly. PMs design programs to be high-risk aggregations of lower-risk projects. Only 5–10 out of every 100 programs successfully produce transformative research, while only 10% of projects are terminated early. Shifting the risk from the performers to the program managers enables DARPA to tackle systemic problems where other models cannot.
The best program managers notice systemic biases and attack them. For example, noticing that all of the finite element modeling literature assumes a locally static situation and asking ‘what if it was dynamic?’ “The best program managers can get into the trees and still see the forest.” Obviously, this quality is rather fuzzy but leads to two precise questions:
How do you find people who can uncover systemic biases in a discipline?
How could you systematize finding systemic biases in a discipline?
The first question suggests that you should seek out heretics and people with expertise who are not experts. The second question suggests building structured frameworks for mapping a discipline and its assumptions….
…DARPA Program managers have a tenure of four to five years. This transience is important for many reasons. Transience can inculcate PMs against the temptation to play it safe or play power games because there’s only one clear objective – make the program work. You’re out regardless of success or failure. Explicitly temporary roles can incentivize people with many options to join because they can have a huge impact, and then do something else. There’s no implicit tension between the knowledge that most people will leave eventually and the uncertainty about when that will be. Regular program manager turnover means that there is also turnover in ideas…
Richard was then himself imprisoned and starved to death by his cousin, Henry IV
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1610898282892660736
"I apologize if my previous response gave the impression that I was minimizing the importance of math education or suggesting that the education systems of all countries are equally effective. That was not my intention."
Here is a paper describing a theory of consciousness driven by the following considerations.
"Understanding consciousness requires not only empirical studies
of its neural correlates, but also a principled theoretical approach
that can provide explanatory, inferential, and predictive power.
For example, why is consciousness generated by the corticothalamic system – or at least some parts of it, but not by the
cerebellum, despite the latter having even more neurons? Why
does consciousness fade early in sleep, although the brain remains
active? Why is it lost during generalized seizures, when neural
activity is intense and synchronous? And why is there no direct
contribution to consciousness from neural activity within sensory
and motor pathways, or within neural circuits looping out of the
cortex into subcortical structures and back, despite their manifest
ability to influence the content of experience? Explaining these
facts in a parsimonious manner calls for a theory of consciousness."
https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003588
Its conclusions include: "We show that
some simple systems can be minimally conscious, some
complicated systems can be unconscious, and two
different systems can be functionally equivalent, yet one
is conscious and the other one is not."
It's a difficult read in places but it should keep you entertained for an hour or two.
You could have added Richard II to the list of royal victims, or Henry VI. Or indeed the Earl of Cambridge in 1415, but that's complicated by the fact in the real world he wasn't of royal birth.
Prison doesn't count, because that wasn't in your comment, which also lets out Dafydd ap Llewelyn and Llewelyn ap Gruffudd imprisoning their brothers.
I think the only other examples I can come up with are Hywel ab Owain in the 1170s and Maredudd ap Rhys in c.1200, both in minor kingdoms in Wales, and both in battle.
But the fact remains, you said traitors of royal birth were executed, and between us we have come up with two or three examples.That doesn't suggest it was widespread.
https://twitter.com/SpiroAgnewGhost/status/1610885374175506432
Either he's considering a career in political standup, or he's borderline certifiable.
Would be in keeping with his character. Thoroughly unbalanced human being.
Cummings was right, the whole thing does need turning upside-down. It currently exists for the benefits of those working there, rather than either service recipients or taxpayers in general.
So given that more time isn't available what gets cut to provide 2 extra years of Maths teaching.
My postgraduate degree was nearly as good, but I was able to do one or two days a week paid work while I did it.
His point was that the reason for retiring SPAAGs was that they would be ineffective against well handled manned aircraft - keep out of range and fire missiles - and cruise missiles would fly too low and would have counter technology. For both the answer was increasingly capable missile systems.
The low end systems we are seeing now is what he was arguing about. The Iranian drones are built using hobbyist model aircraft techniques, really. This makes them cheap enough to use en mass. This moves the problem back from needing to defeat counter measures/high technology to needing to hit the target cheaply.
Given the range requirements, the problem rapidly optimises, IIRC, into a radar guided gun in the 35-57mm range.
The problem is that if you spend a lot on guns, the enemy will just go back to high(er) technology.
I strongly suspect that following the high rate of destruction of the Iranian drones, the next thing will be cheap high speed drones. A pulse jet could easily double the speed.
Another area will be extreme, cheap, terrain hugging. A friend who plays with drones wrote some software to enable his to visually hedge hop. Literally. Flies at about 3 feet down a field, jumps the fence, back to 3 feet the other side.
Without reform, it's likely to end up with only middle managers being full time employed in schools - and everyone else being supply teachers.
Roman Catholic Education Secretary Gillian Keegan was the most senior British representative sent other than Cardinal Vincent Nichols
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11598527/No-senior-royal-family-members-expected-attend-funeral-Pope-Benedict-XVI.html
As for that blog post, I'm afraid it suffers from GIGO - until the public understands that the terms of rejoining won't even be the previous ones, let alone imaginary better ones, polling on rejoin/stay out is utterly meaningless.
I don't see the UK doing this, we are too risk averse, and heavily penalise failure. Our culture is not up to the job.
How many Kevin McCarthys does it take to screw in a light bulb?
https://twitter.com/gtconway3d/status/1610825156007542786
Well he needs a house first
https://twitter.com/ShawnGarrett/status/1610825581779890180
This was also decent:
"Can we ask George Santos, he invented the lightbulb."
The Duke of Kents descendants have all taken themselves out of the line of succession by converting so a shame one of them couldn't go
So quite clearly royal birth didn't protect you for treachery against the English crown. See also Mary Queen
of Scots, Elizabeth's cousin.
Monmouth's father was Charles II, didn't stop him being executed. As his been mentioned Richard II had his uncle murdered and was in turn starved to death by his cousin Henry IV when he became King.
Robert Curthose as mentioned too was imprisoned for life by his brother Henry Ist. So even if Harry was not beheaded he would at least have been thrown into jail had he done this centuries ago
I sense you are articulating Leave's final refuge: OK it was a moronic fuck up, but it was an IRREVERSIBLE moronic fuck up. Well done ✔
When lockdown happened, the very capable admin at the local Free School were merrily interpreting the rules their way, creating plans for COVID proofing (ha!) the buildings, organising.... Getting shit done. Yes, much didn't work in the end, but they tried.
At a local state school, the admin stopped. They hadn't been given definitive instructions, so it was *unfair* to expect them to use initiative. That's what they said.
It was unfair - all their working lives, they have ben told not to use initiative. Hired and trained not to.
It's also not irreversible - but the Rejoin campaign would need to be a lot better than the Remain campaign was. Which shouldn't be hard, but if they have to sell the euro and Schengen...
But put it this way. Imagine TSE seeing Max Verstappen eating a pizza with pineapple on it while watching Die Hard on Christmas Day.
Think about the words he would use.
You're about 30% of the way to how I feel about Nick Gibb.
You could be boiled alive if convicted of poisoning.
None of this has any relevance in 2023.
... you lose control and you got no soul
Not far off.
Police Superintendent Savage is far more interested in the numbers of people arrested for asking for black coffee. While wearing a loud shirt in a built up area.
Hunting accidents were fairly common and Henry's reaction didn't suggest prior knowledge. He didn't have his supporters in charge of the treasury or even near to it to take it over at the right moment, for example.
Rishi Sunak is poised to announce minimum strike legislation as soon as tomorrow
It will enable employers to sue unions and sack employees if they refuse to accept
Hearing six sectors covered - NHS, schools, rail, borders, fire, nuclear
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1610761144943185949