Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

“Probability factor of one to one. We have normality. I repeat: we have normality. Anything you stil

SystemSystem Posts: 12,162
edited May 2021 in General
image“Probability factor of one to one. We have normality. I repeat: we have normality. Anything you still can’t cope with is therefore your own problem” – politicalbetting.com

There has been much talk, since the advent of the vaccines, of a ‘return to normal’ in our lives with many organisations, not least Government, pressing for getting things back on track as soon as safely possible particularly in areas such as education. And whilst there is much debate about what is or is not ‘safely possible’ and at what point normality should return, no one seems to have asked whether we actually want to go back to normal or whether, specifically with regard to education, we might look upon the events of the last 14 months as an opportunity rather than a curse. Whether we should grasp this unique opportunity to make a fundamental change to some important aspects of our education system. 

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    edited May 2021
    First. Interesting header, thanks Richard. How much would this cost? Children start school at 4/5 as it’s state subsidised child care.

    You know some people actually plan to have children towards the end of September as it’s been shown that such children do better at school.

    But a friend of mine - who’s daughter was born in September - did say that it costs you an extra year of child care.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,561
    edited May 2021
    Thought-provoking piece Richard. Not sure that education cold move fast enough to take advantage of the lost year of schooling to implement it, but would be interested to hear the views of the teaching contingent on here.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    It is an interesting idea but not sure how parents would react to having their children at home for the extra years

    Also I am not sure it is likely unless it becomes the policy of one of the main parties
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    Interesting piece, and thought provoking. The bit unsaid though, is that most families now have both parents working, which would be a hugely complicating factor and negatively affect the ‘middle 80%’
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,779
    An interesting idea. I think we could learn a lot from other countries who do things differently, seemingly with better outcomes. In this as in a lot of areas I suspect a golden opportunity to do things differently post-Covid will be squandered. Having a government whose ideas have barely progressed beyond the 19th century won't help.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,189
    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I suspect it is part of the urgency HMG is injecting into the process
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,189

    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I suspect it is part of the urgency HMG is injecting into the process
    It's not a ramping up though.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I suspect it is part of the urgency HMG is injecting into the process
    It's not a ramping up though.
    Maybe just politics
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,787
    Mr. Pulpstar, I'm amazed you're surprised a political thing being inaccurately described given how many years ill-informed journalists and duplicitous (or just plain wrong) politicians confused deficit and debt.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,589
    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I think they can get them now if they go online.

    Some people will not bother to do that but its there if they want to.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,648
    On topic. Good grief, no. Two more years of the blighters!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,319

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    With reference to exams, one possible casualty of the pandemic is the GCSE system. It was in poor health before and the hammer blows dealt to the credibility of the whole system in the last two years is likely to be terminal. However, there remain difficult questions to answer about what could replace it. (I am sure you will be gutted to hear that exam boards are also very much in the firing line, having foolishly said they will take the same amount of money to issue certificates despite doing no actual work).

    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    malcolmg said:


    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.

    Interesting to see the 60% number is hardly mentioned and we are "told" once we are doubly vaccinated, we are protected against the variants. If I had received Pfizer, in all fairness, I'd feel happy but with AZ, I'm much less confident.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,589
    malcolmg said:

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
    Have you been getting your data from Chris ?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    On absolute numbers versus percentages: on the Covid dashboard, the seven day rolling total for Covid deaths has increased by 43% in a week - which is exactly the sort of number that could be used to whip up a panic.

    In fact, all this means is that 60 people died from Covid in the last seven days, compared with 42 the previous week. A collection of individual disasters, but statistical noise on the scale of the nation.

    Meanwhile, hospital admissions are trending up only fractionally, the total number in hospital is still trending downwards at the moment, and it's becoming increasingly obvious as the days pass that the spread of the disease from the major loci of infection is glacial. This is not a repetition of the Kent Plague and there is no reason to suppose that it will become so.

    As you say, the argument has been shifted from "the NHS will collapse and there'll be mountains of corpses if we don't lock down" to "Covid will clog up the hospitals and prevent them from clearing the backlog of everything else if we don't lock down." It's just an excuse from that fraction of public opinion that wants to keep locking down forever. Enough.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    Not totally off-topic, Rishi Sunak is about to become the most popular man in staffrooms up and down the country:

    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-extended-school-day-plan-hit-lack-cash
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I suspect it is part of the urgency HMG is injecting into the process
    It's not a ramping up though.
    Nudge therapy
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    I think most over 40s will have had there second job by the 21st, though maybe not with the 'Plus 2 weeks'
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638
    edited May 2021
    ydoethur said:



    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    edited May 2021
    malcolmg said:

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
    It is not over but I argue that we need facts including hospitalisation numbers, vaccine status, and deaths and certainly Richard Horton was quietly confident that the 21st June can be met with maybe one or two requirements around mask wearing and social distancing

    I believe Nicola is considering moving Glasgow to tier 2

    We cannot eliminate covid anymore than flu and we need to adjust and live with it
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,747
    Does this proposal not ignore that in those countries it is the norm for children to be attending educational settings from a very young age, in the form of nurseries / play schools?

    Whatever happened to the Early Years being the most important segment of “education”, without which full potential will never be attained?

    Seems a horribly socially regressive policy.

    If you want to delay the transition to adulthood and the workplace, personally I’d rather the delay is at the end not the beginning, with compulsory national service. It would do wonders for self discipline and national cohesion.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:



    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.
    Mileage in that, too.

    And get rid of some rubbish along the way. The Faculty of English at Cambridge is one we could well do without.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    Pulpstar said:

    Just worked out that on present trends all over 50s should be offered 2 doses by June 21st.
    Why is this being sold as a "ramping up" ?
    It requires about 350k seconds a day

    86,400 seconds a day, surely? ;)
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,648
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:



    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.
    So the rich go to uni and poor work. You’ll go far in Conservative politics.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874

    stodge said:



    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.

    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    What's the answer then, my friend?

    Ideally, we'd all have a much better understanding of numbers and be able to properly process statistics but as I suspect, rather like a 200-seat Lib Dem majority, that ain't happening any time soon, we need to see absolute data published.

    What, for example, would be a more meaningful way of assessing the size of the UK economy? GDP per capita - the absolute size of the economy, I'm not sure but there must be something able to provide an accurate picture.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,826
    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    I have repeatedly banged on about the level of output being the thing to look at. To be fair investors are looking at percentage returns based on when you entered the market.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638
    edited May 2021
    Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:



    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.
    So the rich go to uni and poor work. You’ll go far in Conservative politics.
    No, even most of the 1% would struggle to fund a child at university paying fees, accommodation and student costs up front. I don't think I could have done so, for one, let alone two.

    Nearly everyone at uni would have taken a double gap year working, rich or poor. It would add a lot of discernment to their decision to go to university.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    ydoethur said:

    With reference to exams, one possible casualty of the pandemic is the GCSE system. It was in poor health before and the hammer blows dealt to the credibility of the whole system in the last two years is likely to be terminal. However, there remain difficult questions to answer about what could replace it. (I am sure you will be gutted to hear that exam boards are also very much in the firing line, having foolishly said they will take the same amount of money to issue certificates despite doing no actual work).

    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    I think this is exactly the right solution and I believe this is what happens in France. Although they officially enter the education system at 3, the first 3 years are non-academic and emphasise play and socialisation.

    One of the problems in the UK, as I found with my two kids, is that reception year is being used by schools to start kids on formal learning - perhaps to improve the school's overall performance although on that I am not sure. There was certainly lots of emphasis, with corresponding pressure on parents, to make sure children could read before they started in Year 1.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    stodge said:

    stodge said:



    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.

    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    What's the answer then, my friend?

    Ideally, we'd all have a much better understanding of numbers and be able to properly process statistics but as I suspect, rather like a 200-seat Lib Dem majority, that ain't happening any time soon, we need to see absolute data published.

    What, for example, would be a more meaningful way of assessing the size of the UK economy? GDP per capita - the absolute size of the economy, I'm not sure but there must be something able to provide an accurate picture.
    The problem is when people like journalists, who are supposed to know this stuff, don’t understand it and don’t pick up on misleading stats.

    If, every time a politician spoke of “paying down the deficit”, or other such bollocks, they got called out on it, it would soon stop happening.

    Expect to see much use of GDP/capita stats in the coming years, if the rumours of 1.5m fewer people in the UK than before the pandemic turn out to be true.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424
    edited May 2021

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    Sandpit said:

    Interesting piece, and thought provoking. The bit unsaid though, is that most families now have both parents working, which would be a hugely complicating factor and negatively affect the ‘middle 80%’

    I think in answer to both yourself, Big_G and Mark, the key would be to have provision, within the education system so without additional cost to the parents, of non-educational preschool facilities where the emphasis is on play rather than learning. As I said in my reply to ydoethur, it is a system used in a number of European countries, seemingly with great success.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374

    ydoethur said:

    With reference to exams, one possible casualty of the pandemic is the GCSE system. It was in poor health before and the hammer blows dealt to the credibility of the whole system in the last two years is likely to be terminal. However, there remain difficult questions to answer about what could replace it. (I am sure you will be gutted to hear that exam boards are also very much in the firing line, having foolishly said they will take the same amount of money to issue certificates despite doing no actual work).

    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    I think this is exactly the right solution and I believe this is what happens in France. Although they officially enter the education system at 3, the first 3 years are non-academic and emphasise play and socialisation.

    One of the problems in the UK, as I found with my two kids, is that reception year is being used by schools to start kids on formal learning - perhaps to improve the school's overall performance although on that I am not sure. There was certainly lots of emphasis, with corresponding pressure on parents, to make sure children could read before they started in Year 1.
    It’s nothing to do with overall performance - in fact, it probably slows their development in terms of reading and writing. It’s because OFSTED crucify them if they don’t see learning happening.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,786
    edited May 2021
    malcolmg said:

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
    In terms of the AZ that was after only a short period of time after the jab. It is reasonable to assume, although not a foregone conclusion, that this will rise. Remember the AZ has been as effective as the other jabs after time, unlike the first figures given.

    Also remember the percentages given are after 3 weeks whereas the vaccine will be giving some protection after a shorter period of time. I was told at my first jab of AZ that it was 70% effective after 1 week (against what was then pre any variant). Although I have to say I haven't seen that figure anywhere else, but I assume (but don't know) it is a progression of protection and not a sudden jump.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    Foxy said:

    Interesting header, but problems at both ends of the age range. Those extra two years at home would be very different in different social classes. Some would have lives of rich cultural learning, reading, drawing, dreaming etc. Others would be sitting on the sofa playing x box and watching YouTube cartoons, arriving aged 7 at school with no social skills.

    At the top end too we would see an extension of childhood into the mid Twenties, shortening the time in the world of work, at a time of increasing dependency ratios. Mare parents would have to stay at home and fewer workers would be supporting them, and the increasing burden of retired Boomers.

    It would not be shortening the time in the world of work, just moving it back towards what it was only a decade or so ago.

    I am 55. A decade ago I would, by now, have had 10 years left before I could take my pension. Now it is 12 years and will probably be 13 or 14 before I actually get there. I don't in any way object to this but it is undeniably the case that the official working life has increased by 2 or 3 years. If I were a woman I believe it has increased by 7 or 8 years. Under those circumstances I think it is reasonable to look at the start of our working lives - and particularly our educational provision - and see what could be done to make things better for our children.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,787
    King Cole, at school I think we only got as far as brackets first, otherwise left to right.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638
    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    A lot of entry level jobs require little training, for example the hospitality sector.

    I worked in a Wimpy bar for a summer in the early Eighties. The training took an hour.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    ydoethur said:

    Not totally off-topic, Rishi Sunak is about to become the most popular man in staffrooms up and down the country:

    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-extended-school-day-plan-hit-lack-cash

    Interesting that Nottingham University have just announced that they are extending the teaching day by 1 hour from next academic year so it will officially be 9-6 and also introducing classes on Saturdays.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,822

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Hang on, I thought Boris is in charge, not his critics? If we mistakenly extend the restrictions on June 21st the responsibility lies with him and his government, not people who have not got over Brexit.....
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638

    Foxy said:

    Interesting header, but problems at both ends of the age range. Those extra two years at home would be very different in different social classes. Some would have lives of rich cultural learning, reading, drawing, dreaming etc. Others would be sitting on the sofa playing x box and watching YouTube cartoons, arriving aged 7 at school with no social skills.

    At the top end too we would see an extension of childhood into the mid Twenties, shortening the time in the world of work, at a time of increasing dependency ratios. Mare parents would have to stay at home and fewer workers would be supporting them, and the increasing burden of retired Boomers.

    It would not be shortening the time in the world of work, just moving it back towards what it was only a decade or so ago.

    I am 55. A decade ago I would, by now, have had 10 years left before I could take my pension. Now it is 12 years and will probably be 13 or 14 before I actually get there. I don't in any way object to this but it is undeniably the case that the official working life has increased by 2 or 3 years. If I were a woman I believe it has increased by 7 or 8 years. Under those circumstances I think it is reasonable to look at the start of our working lives - and particularly our educational provision - and see what could be done to make things better for our children.
    Yes, but we don't have the dependency ratio of a decade ago, and particularly so now that Brexit has stopped free movement. One consequence of Brexit is that people will need to work for more years.

    I am not convinced either that working at age 18 is a worse deal than university.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    malcolmg said:

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
    Of course, the end point of that argument is that, given the vaccines don't offer 100% protection, we must keep locking down forever because otherwise some of the remaining vulnerable will die. That's not sensible.

    There was only one original aim and justification for restrictions, and that was to spare the hospitals from collapse. There is no evidence from the way that the Indian variant has spread thus far, and the very modest increases in total hospitalisations that it has caused even in an epicentre of infection like Bolton, to suggest that such a danger exists. So we should go on.

    The alternative - masks and social distancing for the rest of time - isn't acceptable. Covid is never going away. We have to learn to live with it.
    It is noticeable how little focus there has been on what has actually happened in Bolton. At the forefront of the "India variant" surge, a relatively low vaccinated population (against the countrywide numbers of a few weeks ago, let alone now, over its peak and numbers now falling rapidly, and how many hospitalisations and deaths as a result?).

    And yet there are still people trying to argue that there are plausible scenarios where we end up with national hospitalisations and deaths higher than second wave peaks!!! (albeit as has been noted - others are fine tuning their arguments to imply that pretty much any COVID linked hospitalisations cannot be coped with).

    It is worth, I think, noting that the numbers currently recorded as being in hospital with COVID are identical to the numbers admitted within the last seven days. Suggests perhaps a large number of people presenting with a positive test and pretty minor/non serious symptoms, and therefore operating a high turnover rate?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424

    ydoethur said:

    Not totally off-topic, Rishi Sunak is about to become the most popular man in staffrooms up and down the country:

    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-extended-school-day-plan-hit-lack-cash

    Interesting that Nottingham University have just announced that they are extending the teaching day by 1 hour from next academic year so it will officially be 9-6 and also introducing classes on Saturdays.
    One of my nieces, who teaches there, will be delighted!
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,581

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424

    King Cole, at school I think we only got as far as brackets first, otherwise left to right.

    If there's any interest I could perhaps post one of the puzzles and see what we get from the cognoscenti here!
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368

    ydoethur said:

    Not totally off-topic, Rishi Sunak is about to become the most popular man in staffrooms up and down the country:

    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-extended-school-day-plan-hit-lack-cash

    Interesting that Nottingham University have just announced that they are extending the teaching day by 1 hour from next academic year so it will officially be 9-6 and also introducing classes on Saturdays.
    That's as much to do with increasing students numbers while avoiding the need to build additional buildings as anything else.

    Durham introduced a similar scheme 3 or so years ago.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    That costs businesses money though - and as we continually see commented elsewhere UK businesses want the finished product and not raw material.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    moonshine said:

    Does this proposal not ignore that in those countries it is the norm for children to be attending educational settings from a very young age, in the form of nurseries / play schools?

    Whatever happened to the Early Years being the most important segment of “education”, without which full potential will never be attained?

    Seems a horribly socially regressive policy.

    If you want to delay the transition to adulthood and the workplace, personally I’d rather the delay is at the end not the beginning, with compulsory national service. It would do wonders for self discipline and national cohesion.

    It is not regressive at all. The point is that we have been eating into that socialisation period by effectively pushing the educational starting age back to 4.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638
    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    I think too that Universities have demonstrated that distance learning off campus is viable. White collar apprenticeships and part time distance learning of modular degrees sounds a better system.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264
    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    It has been restarted over the past few years. The top 20ish accounting firms all provide very attractive apprenticeship packages.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,822

    Foxy said:

    Interesting header, but problems at both ends of the age range. Those extra two years at home would be very different in different social classes. Some would have lives of rich cultural learning, reading, drawing, dreaming etc. Others would be sitting on the sofa playing x box and watching YouTube cartoons, arriving aged 7 at school with no social skills.

    At the top end too we would see an extension of childhood into the mid Twenties, shortening the time in the world of work, at a time of increasing dependency ratios. Mare parents would have to stay at home and fewer workers would be supporting them, and the increasing burden of retired Boomers.

    It would not be shortening the time in the world of work, just moving it back towards what it was only a decade or so ago.

    I am 55. A decade ago I would, by now, have had 10 years left before I could take my pension. Now it is 12 years and will probably be 13 or 14 before I actually get there. I don't in any way object to this but it is undeniably the case that the official working life has increased by 2 or 3 years. If I were a woman I believe it has increased by 7 or 8 years. Under those circumstances I think it is reasonable to look at the start of our working lives - and particularly our educational provision - and see what could be done to make things better for our children.
    The reason we need to work more years at the end is the proportion of workers to non workers is too low to generate enough tax to sustain things. If we had capacity to allow people to work fewer years at the start of their career we wouldn't need to make people work more years at the end of their career in the first place.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,786

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    Always has been. Can't do the arithmetic without it. Obviously it doesn't matter re x & / or + & -, but helps make a memorable word to remember it by if you can't remember but it should be obvious.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374

    ydoethur said:

    Not totally off-topic, Rishi Sunak is about to become the most popular man in staffrooms up and down the country:

    https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-extended-school-day-plan-hit-lack-cash

    Interesting that Nottingham University have just announced that they are extending the teaching day by 1 hour from next academic year so it will officially be 9-6 and also introducing classes on Saturdays.
    Surprised it wasn’t that already. At Aber the last lectures finished at 6, and although we didn’t have lectures on Saturday we had exams then.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    The other point which I touch upon only in passing due to space constraints is that under the current scheme we are asking teenagers to take some of the most important exams in their lives exactly at the point when they are going through the most extensive physical and emotional changes of their lives. I certainly believe that if we do nothing else, then moving the main exams to 18 will help hugely with teenage mental health.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    The only prime I can see there is 37. But I don't understand the rest of the question!
    'O' Level Maths 1954.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,920
    edited May 2021
    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better off financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    Does your grandson get into trouble if he writes ‘Amazon?’
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,787
    King Cole, ha, I was bad at maths even when I was at school, but could use a little distraction, so feel free to post away.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,638
    edited May 2021

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:



    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.
    So the rich go to uni and poor work. You’ll go far in Conservative politics.
    No, even most of the 1% would struggle to fund a child at university paying fees, accommodation and student costs up front. I don't think I could have done so, for one, let alone two.

    Nearly everyone at uni would have taken a double gap year working, rich or poor. It would add a lot of discernment to their decision to go to university.

    Two year degrees, with short holidays. It used to be claimed that dons needed the long holidays for research but these days, especially at the top places, academics barely see students anyway, with most teaching being conducted by non-research lecturers and post-docs.

    You were half-right about finishing schools: what does it matter that our Prime Minister knows Latin? But the other half is trade-schools for engineers, lawyers and doctors. These should be returned to, well, trade schools. Apprenticeships, articles and evening classes!

    Then the universities can get on with research and maybe we can catch up with China and America.
    I think that the research aims of universities and undergraduates are increasingly divergent, with farming of undergraduates to non research academics on short contracts, as a way of propping up the finances.

    I think the current financing of Higher Education is a growing crisis for students, universities and government alike. A good editorial in the Guardian on this today.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/30/the-guardian-view-on-funding-universities-the-market-model-isnt-working
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874

    stodge said:


    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.

    I have repeatedly banged on about the level of output being the thing to look at. To be fair investors are looking at percentage returns based on when you entered the market.
    Very interesting point.

    I've been around long enough (unfortunately) to remember how every month's trade figures were seen as a barometer of economic health. I believe Roy Jenkins thought Labour lost the 1970 election because the purchase of two aircraft made the trade figures look very bad just before polling day (I'm not convinced).

    In the 80s it was all about monetary supply indicators such as M4 and M0 and the like.

    Then it was public borrowing numbers in the 2010s.

    We've always had unemployment numbers and inflation numbers though these have waxed and waned in significance over the decades.

    It's almost as though our knowledge of the economy may be expanding but we fall back into one single indicator to help us understand what's going on.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264
    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    In my experience the areas where degrees are now absolutely necessary to get a job, but not to do it are the areas where there are no formal qualifications or exams.

    Areas like Marketing, PR, Events, Sales etc are awful for it.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    53
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    HYUFD said:



    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice

    I'm left with the unsettling thought that at 18, many adults don't actually know what their career path is going to be.

    I didn't.

    The additional period of University education (with all the life lessons as well as the academic ones) can help to confirm future career paths.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,581

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    The only prime I can see there is 37. But I don't understand the rest of the question!
    'O' Level Maths 1954.
    43, 53, 73 and 83 are also primes.

    I didn't know what triangular numbers are but my grandson did and rattled them off. 1,3,6, 10 ... They make triangles. Add two consecutive triangular numbers and you get squares. Imagine putting the two triangles together. Only relevant ones here are 36 and 78.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,822
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    53. (78 triangular, 64 square)

    Unless she is a pedant as it be could 36 both triangular and square leaving more options for prime as the question didnt specify that the square and triangular are different numbers.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,036
    edited May 2021
    FPT:

    Fishing said:

    Nimbys raise there head again. The MP questioning the need of East West Rail because of the pandemic , is just trying to find an excuse to cancel the final phase of the scheme for linking Oxford to Cambridge. The first two phases involve refurbishing/rebuilding the original route. They cant do that for the bit between Sandy and Cambridge because the rail line has been built on. A new line is needed.

    Not because of overcrowded existing rail lines, but because of overcrowded roads and this area of England (ROSE or Rest of South East England) has long been one the highest areas of population growth. The line is not about avoiding going into London, but is about connecting existing towns and allowing greater links between them and the people who want to travel between them.

    It is expected that several million more people will move to be near Oxford, Aylesbury, Milton Keynes, Bedford and Cambridge in the coming decades, all high tech growth zones.

    The new east west expressway has been given the chop (well the bit between Milton Keynes and Oxford, though the weasel words alternative schemes were used, so expect more expensive widening schemes that increase capacity less and several new dual carriageways that don't link up into one scheme, that people will bitch about in decades to come.

    The new stretch of railway is proposing to demolish a hundred or so house inBedford to allow it be six tracked through the town and the line would swing North East and Then East to Cambourne (one of Cambridges main housing growth areas and then south around to approach to cambridge to the South allowing it to connect directly to the newly proposed Cambridge South and the Biomedical cluster there. Cambridge is the countries top high tech growth cluster and needs to be expended rapidly to allow it to grow. It needs a lot of infrastructure.

    The absence of a motorway linking Cambridge, Milton Keynes and Oxford is absolutely stark raving bonkers!

    The notion that more rail connections to London is what the nation needs instead of connections like that is absolute insanity.

    I swear this won't end until there is a moratorium on any civil servants working in London. Then they'd realise there's a country outside the capital.
    Given the huge amounts of London-generated money that subsidises the rest of the country, if anything it's the other way around. Transport spending is spare change compared to the welfare bill.
    "London-generated" money when the overwhelming majority of the entire nations civil service etc infrastructure, business HQs etc is located in London. So the wages of those are accrued to the entire country, because they're supposed to be working for us, while their expenditure gets spent in London based companies with a multiplier effect as a result.
    You're completely wrong. I can't be bothered to fact check it all, but the "overwhelming majority" of the nation's civil service isn't based in London - only about a fifth is (92,000/456,000). And far from the "overwhelming majority" of businesses being based in London, only 19% are. I'm not sure what point you're making in the second half - why the 80% of civil servants outside London don't cause a multiplier effect while the 20% based there do, I'm not sure. Nor why the huge welfare bill in the rest of the country doesn't have a multiplier effect either?

    London incontestably hugely subsidises the rest of the country.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,585
    edited May 2021
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    53

    The allowable squares are 36 and 64
    The allowable triangles are 36, 45, 78
    The allowable primes are 37, 43, 47, 53, 67, 73, 83

    64, 78, 53 is the only combination that fits.

    Edit to remove spoiler tag, as loads of others got it too.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    The only prime I can see there is 37. But I don't understand the rest of the question!
    'O' Level Maths 1954.
    I’m thinking the prime is 53, the square is 64 (eight squared) and the triangular 78.

    Equally, I do not see why a ten year old needs to do an exercise in logic as part of maths.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
    There are a whole swathe of industrial specialist occupations where you actually do need a degree to understand even the basics of what you are doing. Indeed they have now been caught up in the inflationary process so that you can't get a job without a Masters of a PhD - which given the degree of specialisation involved does seem a step too far.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424
    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    Pharmacy used to have a real mix of options;
    1) 5 O levels, then two years articles, during which one did the Intermediate professional exams at evening classes (remember them?), then two years F/t study to the professional exams.
    2) 3/4 A levels, then the 2 year course, then one year articles.
    3) 3 A levels, then a degree, plus the professional Law examination, then a year's articles.

    Nowadays it's 3 A levels, followed by a four year Masters degree, then a years very carefully supervised and examined pre-registration year.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,148
    FPT:
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    People wanting to use HS1 to the continent from the Midlands and North are probably better served by using Midland Main Line into St Pancras, and just going down the escalator. Far nicer than the walk from Euson with luggage. Far more locations served too.

    Depends where you’re starting from. For Leicester, yes, that probably would work. How about the West Midlands? The nearest connections I have to the Midland main line are Derby or Leicester. To get to Leicester means at least one change - either at Tamworth or Birmingham, depending on where I start from.

    When HS2 is built, I can go direct from Stafford, which is seven miles away.
    Leicester, Derby, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds all have direct services to St Pancras.
    Yes, and none of them are easy to get to from Canncok. All would mean at least two changes.
    Where's Canncok? SeantT or one of his ghosts might like it !

    (Bank Holiday !)
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    edited May 2021
    Chameleon said:

    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    In my experience the areas where degrees are now absolutely necessary to get a job, but not to do it are the areas where there are no formal qualifications or exams.

    Areas like Marketing, PR, Events, Sales etc are awful for it.
    WTF does a Sales man need a degree - unless it's in psychology...

    In fact in all those areas (outside events) the only degree that would be relevant is human psychology and how to trigger appropriate reactions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    MattW said:

    FPT:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    People wanting to use HS1 to the continent from the Midlands and North are probably better served by using Midland Main Line into St Pancras, and just going down the escalator. Far nicer than the walk from Euson with luggage. Far more locations served too.

    Depends where you’re starting from. For Leicester, yes, that probably would work. How about the West Midlands? The nearest connections I have to the Midland main line are Derby or Leicester. To get to Leicester means at least one change - either at Tamworth or Birmingham, depending on where I start from.

    When HS2 is built, I can go direct from Stafford, which is seven miles away.
    Leicester, Derby, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds all have direct services to St Pancras.
    Yes, and none of them are easy to get to from Canncok. All would mean at least two changes.
    Where's Canncok? SeantT or one of his ghosts might like it !

    (Bank Holiday !)
    I’m blaming autocorrect again.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    eek said:

    Chameleon said:

    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    In my experience the areas where degrees are now absolutely necessary to get a job, but not to do it are the areas where there are no formal qualifications or exams.

    Areas like Marketing, PR, Events, Sales etc are awful for it.
    WTF does a Sales man need a degree - unless it's in psychology...
    To impress the customers?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,920

    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
    There are a whole swathe of industrial specialist occupations where you actually do need a degree to understand even the basics of what you are doing. Indeed they have now been caught up in the inflationary process so that you can't get a job without a Masters of a PhD - which given the degree of specialisation involved does seem a step too far.
    I would suggest most such jobs in industry could be learnt on the job after A levels with some vocational training alongside, unless you are doing very high level and complex research and experiments in which case your job is similar to academia anyway
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,581
    IshmaelZ said:

    53

    Correct!
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375

    ydoethur said:

    With reference to exams, one possible casualty of the pandemic is the GCSE system. It was in poor health before and the hammer blows dealt to the credibility of the whole system in the last two years is likely to be terminal. However, there remain difficult questions to answer about what could replace it. (I am sure you will be gutted to hear that exam boards are also very much in the firing line, having foolishly said they will take the same amount of money to issue certificates despite doing no actual work).

    An alternative approach to your suggestion on a starting age might be, instead of starting school later, changing the focus until age seven to be more like reception. Games. Play. Enjoying themselves. That could start the learning later and at the same time get round the issues with childcare.

    I think this is exactly the right solution and I believe this is what happens in France. Although they officially enter the education system at 3, the first 3 years are non-academic and emphasise play and socialisation.

    One of the problems in the UK, as I found with my two kids, is that reception year is being used by schools to start kids on formal learning - perhaps to improve the school's overall performance although on that I am not sure. There was certainly lots of emphasis, with corresponding pressure on parents, to make sure children could read before they started in Year 1.
    I'm sympathetic to this view, and to your header in general.

    The challenge is as follows, I think. By the age of 4, quite a lot of kids are already behind their peers in respect of speech, reading, writing etc. For kids from disadvantaged backgrounds, they can begin to make up ground through formal schooling. For the kids of middle class or aspirational parents, that's not really an issue. So there is a risk that the entrenched gap begins widening if formal learning is delayed for those kids with poor speech/reading/writing etc. For the most disadvantaged kids, formal learning can't really come to soon if they are to prosper. Not sure how the French deal with this, as I'm sure it will be the same over there.

    Really, if we could only educate the parents to educate their kids.....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,920
    Chameleon said:

    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    In my experience the areas where degrees are now absolutely necessary to get a job, but not to do it are the areas where there are no formal qualifications or exams.

    Areas like Marketing, PR, Events, Sales etc are awful for it.
    There are CIM qualifications in Marketing but again vocational which can be done on the job
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited May 2021
    alex_ said:

    malcolmg said:

    I posted this on the last thread in response to @Scott_xP

    Consistent but provide the evidence

    Hospital admissions, vaccine status, age profile, and outbreak areas are essential information

    Yesterday an argument was being put forward that as the NHS has such a backlog which they are starting to address, they cannot accept any rise in covid patients

    Now that is turning the narrative on its head, and on that basis the Country will be locked down for months, even years, and it is just not acceptable

    I was angry and a rebel yesterday, largely because the media and independent sage have taken over the narrative with their zero covid, eliminate covid strategy, which is just not feasible and in order to convince many millions of citizens, including myself, that we have to have further delays there has to be far more transparent figures on hospital admissions

    Of course I would comply with restrictions if it is proven they are needed, but I am not persuaded by those who seem to have taken over the agenda

    Let us not forget that there are many opponents of Boris driven by many who have not come to terms with Brexit, that to prevent the 21st June opening would see it as a political win to their cause, and it is not being driven by the actual clinical reality

    I would include Independent Sage and large parts of the broadcast media in that category
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
    Since this post I have just listened to Richard Horton of the Lancet on Sky, largely endorsing my position on this and the opening on the 21st June

    He said we can be optimistic about the 21st June, as the number of covid cases are not resulting in increasing admissions and it looks as if the link has been broken

    The presenter then provided various percentage increases and he simply said quoting percentages was misleading and the absolute numbers are pertinent and necessary.

    He said on the 12th January there were 4,500 plus admission to hospital and on the 25th May just 133, which is way down and though there may be a small rise in hospitalisation, at the moment there is reason for hope and urgent attention to providing second doses to the 1-9 group is correct.

    Currently 48.1% of adults have received their second dose.

    At last, the voice of sanity and not from a quarter that anybody could say is a fan of Boris or HMG.

    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    Given AZ only gives 60% and pfizer 85% safety re Indian variant, that leaves an awful lot of people vulnerable. Bolton they found at least 10% of hospitalisations had had two vaccines but still got it bad. Far from over yet.
    Of course, the end point of that argument is that, given the vaccines don't offer 100% protection, we must keep locking down forever because otherwise some of the remaining vulnerable will die. That's not sensible.

    There was only one original aim and justification for restrictions, and that was to spare the hospitals from collapse. There is no evidence from the way that the Indian variant has spread thus far, and the very modest increases in total hospitalisations that it has caused even in an epicentre of infection like Bolton, to suggest that such a danger exists. So we should go on.

    The alternative - masks and social distancing for the rest of time - isn't acceptable. Covid is never going away. We have to learn to live with it.
    It is noticeable how little focus there has been on what has actually happened in Bolton. At the forefront of the "India variant" surge, a relatively low vaccinated population (against the countrywide numbers of a few weeks ago, let alone now, over its peak and numbers now falling rapidly, and how many hospitalisations and deaths as a result?).

    And yet there are still people trying to argue that there are plausible scenarios where we end up with national hospitalisations and deaths higher than second wave peaks!!! (albeit as has been noted - others are fine tuning their arguments to imply that pretty much any COVID linked hospitalisations cannot be coped with).

    It is worth, I think, noting that the numbers currently recorded as being in hospital with COVID are identical to the numbers admitted within the last seven days. Suggests perhaps a large number of people presenting with a positive test and pretty minor/non serious symptoms, and therefore operating a high turnover rate?
    With regard to Bolton - we can find out the situation in the hospital there from the dashboard.

    The Bolton NHS Foundation Trust presently reports 41 Covid patients, including 8 on ventilation. The equivalent numbers from the January peak were 150 and 15.

    Now, the trend in hospitalisations in Bolton is still heading gradually upwards, but we can also see from the case rate data that infections are now probably past their peak, so hospital admissions should also peak in the next couple of weeks, and then start declining again. There is nothing in the data to suggest that Bolton will end up back in the same pickle that it was during the November or the January peaks.

    Moreover, because most of the country is barely affected by the Indian variant in the first place (because it isn't present in many areas, and is failing to spread significantly in others,) it means that there is no possibility of healthcare services being overwhelmed, even if a locality were theoretically to suffer a worse outbreak than Bolton at some point in the future. If 90% of the country has almost no Covid patients left - for example my big local hospital, Addenbrooke's in Cambridge, reports having precisely zero Covid patients at the moment - then, in extremis, excess patients can be loaded into a flotilla of ambulances and redistributed from an under pressure hospital to those with the resources to cope.

    The situation appears eminently manageable, and as time passes and the effects of the vaccination project continue to spread through the population (to say nothing of the very important effect of warmer, dryer weather,) there's no particular reason to suppose that it won't remain so.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,787
    I also hadn't heard of triangular numbers before. I am not sure I see the utility.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    Bless My Dear Aunt Sally.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    Chameleon said:

    eek said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Solicitors and especially accountancy firms are reimplementing apprenticeships. Its other businesses that never used to require a degree that now insist on it for zero actual valid reason - it's just another filter.
    In my experience the areas where degrees are now absolutely necessary to get a job, but not to do it are the areas where there are no formal qualifications or exams.

    Areas like Marketing, PR, Events, Sales etc are awful for it.
    WTF does a Sales man need a degree - unless it's in psychology...
    To impress the customers?
    It's something I spend my entire life trying to get salesmen to do correctly.

    Don't try and impress them - just work out if they need our products and disqualify those that don't ASAP so you don't waste time selling to them
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374

    I also hadn't heard of triangular numbers before. I am not sure I see the utility.

    That’s missing the points.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,148

    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
    There are a whole swathe of industrial specialist occupations where you actually do need a degree to understand even the basics of what you are doing. Indeed they have now been caught up in the inflationary process so that you can't get a job without a Masters of a PhD - which given the degree of specialisation involved does seem a step too far.
    I would have thought we all know that now.

    Can't make vacccines with a GCSE in drama...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,787
    Mr. eek, ha, I've got a degree in psychology and would be an awful salesman (as proven by the books...).
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,521
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
    There are a whole swathe of industrial specialist occupations where you actually do need a degree to understand even the basics of what you are doing. Indeed they have now been caught up in the inflationary process so that you can't get a job without a Masters of a PhD - which given the degree of specialisation involved does seem a step too far.
    I would suggest most such jobs in industry could be learnt on the job after A levels with some vocational training alongside, unless you are doing very high level and complex research and experiments in which case your job is similar to academia anyway
    Um no. The amount of general background knowledge you would need would be far in excess of what could be taught to you 'on the job'. The problem being that 'on the job' they are already teaching you the next stage which is the specific proprietary and job specific stuff, none of which you could start to understand without having studied the subject in depth previously.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,581
    edited May 2021
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    stodge said:


    Furthermore, it is good that the presenter was corrected on using percentages against absolute numbers.

    We need a lot more of this in fairness to everyone.

    The use of statistics as propaganda is as old as the hills unfortunately.

    The reporting of economic data, in particular, is skewed by the use of percentages rather than the use of absolute numbers and relies on widespread ignorance of numbers.

    One example, if you assume the economy as a number is 100 - a fall of 20% takes you down to 80 but if the next figure is a rise of 20%, many will think that takes you back to 100 - no, it takes you back to 96 so you are still 4% behind where you were.

    That won't be reported because big percentage increases look good and sound good and being the cynic I am, I imagine it's the message the Government will want to see repeated through the summer.
    Even smart people's usage of data can be absolutely shocking.

    I was talking to a doctor friend a while back who couldn't get his head around the difference between adding 50% and subtracting it not being the same.
    Ever since lockdown started the 'u3a--keeping in touch' Facebook site has carried a daily mathematical puzzle, posted by the Chair of Barnsley u3a. There were originally, and still are spasmodically, arguments about the order in which a series of mathematical actions should be performed.
    For example, I dimly recollect being taught to go from left to right, but apparently now there's something called BODMAS; 'brackets, orders, division, multiplication, addition, subtraction' for the older or uninitiated.

    Nowadays most people get the puzzles 'right' most of the time, but at the beginning there could be a wild variety of answers, mine included.
    I've been helping my ten-year old grandson with his maths.

    He had to help me with this one:

    Tasmin writes down three two-digit integers. One is square, one is prime and one is triangular. She uses the digits 3,4,5,6,7,8 exactly once each. Which prime does she write?
    Does your grandson get into trouble if he writes ‘Amazon?’
    Even I had to check to see what a Triangular number is

    The squares can only be 36 or 64 (49 and 81 aren't options)
    Triangular numbers are 36, 45,78 (55,66 use the same digits)
    Primes are 37, 43, 47, 53, 67

    but this has little to do with maths - it's a logic problem based on 3 datasets.

    Yes but maths sometimes uses logic e.g. proofs by contradiction. This question is from the 2019 Junior Mathematical Challenge, Q16. My grandson has done the whole paper.
    EDIT: ...says a proud grandfather!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,374
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    MrEd said:

    Sandpit said:

    stodge said:

    Foxy said:


    Learning those social skills is one of the important features of early Primary School. Learning to read is probably worth it too.

    I am taking an increasingly jaded view of higher education in Britain. It seems an expensive way to run a finishing school for the middle classes.

    I would suggest that no one is eligible for a Student Loan until they have worked for two years, proven by NI contributions. People would only go if they really wanted to do so, rather than drift into it.

    The problem with this idea is employers won't employ someone who they will have to train - most 18 year olds have no idea what the world of work is all about - and then two years later that individual will likely leave and never be seen again.

    Some organisations do this and recognise this in terms of professional development - you get a newly qualified surveyor for example, who comes to work for you for two or three years while he or she is getting more professional qualifications and then moves on but at least they've got some professional knowledge and are keen to impress and learn so they are valuable.

    You would need some form of incentive to employers to employ these "pre-students".
    I think the answer is more white-collar apprenticeships, of the type we see in law and accounting, combining work and formal study - rather than companies hiring graduates with little experience.

    For many, three years living away racking up £50k of debt just isn’t economic value.

    There’s room for both systems, but the starting point has to be employers not insisting on degrees as part of the recruitment process.
    Re Richard’s article, very thought provoking. I’m with the suggestion that schools provide facilities so children can be dropped off but that formal education starts at 7, with socialising / playing the priority before.

    Re the adult education, the problem with this country is we send too many to university. Decades ago, you could become a solicitor or an accountant by leaving school and being apprenticed. It would be good to see that restarted.
    Really you only need a degree to become an academic, secondary school teacher (for A Level), barrister and judge, doctor and surgeon or senior civil servant or to go into the Church.

    For most other jobs you would probably be better of financially and skills and experience wise after university doing a higher level apprenticeship combined with vocational training than a university degree but it should be up to individual choice
    There are a whole swathe of industrial specialist occupations where you actually do need a degree to understand even the basics of what you are doing. Indeed they have now been caught up in the inflationary process so that you can't get a job without a Masters of a PhD - which given the degree of specialisation involved does seem a step too far.
    I would have thought we all know that now.

    Can't make vacccines with a GCSE in drama...
    Not true. You can make vaccines with a GCSE in drama as long as you *also* have GCSEs in biology, chemistry, physics and maths.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,581

    I also hadn't heard of triangular numbers before. I am not sure I see the utility.

    https://nrich.maths.org/10010
This discussion has been closed.