Rishi should have touched on climate change – politicalbetting.com

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

You are going to have move a lot of civil servants - or at least their mindsets - to achieve that.

Speaking of moving civil servants, how's that rocket for the DfE coming along @Malmesbury ?

Just waiting to become unDictator first...

EDIT: the second POC - the manned landing by the entire of Parliament on Pluto - should not be ignored.

Pulpstar said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

One example which springs to mind is First Light Fusion. high risk - but incredibly high return should it pay off.
They are building a pilot plant in Canada, partly because of funding.

Something happening at West Burton A along those lines I think.

The research is being done in the UK at the moment, but some is also being done in Canada.
At some point, they will need serious money to take it to the next stage, and the risk is that the whole effort goes abroad.

dixiedean said:

ydoethur said:

dixiedean said:

A Take Back Control Bill.

As Monica said?

It might come to sticky end. Leaving a mess.

While not a dressing the problem.

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.

All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.

Indeed - but the problem is that the concept is antithetical to how government operates.

Which is why, when a NASA study detailed that using the traditional methodology for designing and building launch vehicles was 3-10x* more expensive than an alternative method.... Congress *mandated* that the method used should be more like the traditional methods.

*Space experts laughed long and hard at the idea that NASA & BigAerospace could get within 3x of the cost. 20x maybe....

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Chris said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

TimS said:

Splendid cartoon in todays guardian

That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.

Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.

I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...

It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.

And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.

It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.

(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)

"It's a significant issue"

It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.

And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.

I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.

The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!

It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).

I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills

There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?

But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?

It would. But are you claiming we would always be able to catch everyone by age 16? What age do you recommend we abandon kids who have not yet learnt the proper skills? 11? 13? 16?

It's an incredibly complex issue, made more so by the fact that home lives play just as important a role (perhaps more so) than schooling. Which is another reason for adult literacy and numeracy campaigns to be more prominent as well.

I don't know what the answers are. But I know not talking about the problem, or just chucking it onto the 'too hard' pile, is not a solution. Not that I'm accusing you of that.

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.

All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.

Indeed - but the problem is that the concept is antithetical to how government operates.

Which is why, when a NASA study detailed that using the traditional methodology for designing and building launch vehicles was 3-10x* more expensive than an alternative method.... Congress *mandated* that the method used should be more like the traditional methods.

*Space experts laughed long and hard at the idea that NASA & BigAerospace could get within 3x of the cost. 20x maybe....

We have separate research bodies outside of government, though.

There's absolutely no reason we couldn't do DARPA / ARPA-E analogues.
What they do is contract out relatively small, very focused research projects to both universities and the private sector. It creates an industrial research base which isn't directly dependent on getting products to the market - but is aimed at high risk problems directly related to potentially marketable products.

In that context, failures are accepted along with the successes, and everyone benefits.

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Chris said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

TimS said:

Splendid cartoon in todays guardian

That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.

Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.

I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...

It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.

And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.

It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.

(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)

"It's a significant issue"

It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.

And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.

I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.

The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!

It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).

I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills

There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?

But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?

It would. But are you claiming we would always be able to catch everyone by age 16? What age do you recommend we abandon kids who have not yet learnt the proper skills? 11? 13? 16?

It's an incredibly complex issue, made more so by the fact that home lives play just as important a role (perhaps more so) than schooling. Which is another reason for adult literacy and numeracy campaigns to be more prominent as well.

I don't know what the answers are. But I know not talking about the problem, or just chucking it onto the 'too hard' pile, is not a solution. Not that I'm accusing you of that.

I think my point is rather, if after 12 years they are not getting it two additional years of more of the same is unlikely to make a difference either.

Instead, we should be considering what might help them better at an earlier stage.

Sandpit said:

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.

All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.

Indeed - but the problem is that the concept is antithetical to how government operates.

Which is why, when a NASA study detailed that using the traditional methodology for designing and building launch vehicles was 3-10x* more expensive than an alternative method.... Congress *mandated* that the method used should be more like the traditional methods.

*Space experts laughed long and hard at the idea that NASA & BigAerospace could get within 3x of the cost. 20x maybe....

Meanwhile, a relatatively tiny start-up was mastering re-usability, and getting the launch cost down to under $3,000/kg to LEO...

That does leave out the fact that Musk was able to use the expertise created by billions of prior government spending to do what he did.

Pulpstar said:

turbotubbs said:

SandraMc said:

Wills rips Harry's necklace and Harry falls on top of the dog bowl. So Harry calls his therapist. Yet it is claimed that Meghan was suicidal but she was denied psychiatric help.

Denied by whom?

Phone queue full for a GP appointment.

Nah - rich enough to go private.

NickPalmer said:

Scott_xP said:

The prime minister’s first speech of the year ended up pleasing nobody, says @ThereseRaphael1 https://trib.al/r8xkFXC via @opinion

I think this is wrong. Sunak's speech was effective in showing that he understood what is worrying people, and that's half the battle. The first poll after the speech will be interesting and should show the scope that the Conservatives have in recovering lost ground - especially the ex-Tory "don't knows".

No. The first poll after the speech will be on ’bring and buy sale’ of ambulances waiting outside hospitals, not the vapid speech.

Labour should borrow an old poster, turn the queue of people into ambulances with tag line “Tory’s are not working”

Labour and Lib Dems should focus their attack on fall in incomes - with the Tories painting themselves as tough on pay rises, they can easily own the fall in incomes for everyone as a deliberate Tory policy, in much the same way Marie Antoinette owned “let them eat cake”. Sunak’s big mistake doing hardline union bashing not negotiating and settling, will now haunt the Tories for generations and election after election.

The guardrails are off ChatGPT this morning. Without that much coaxing, I got it to write ridiculous Woke opinion pieces and outrageous riffs on the Holocaust. Normally the first is tough and the second impossible

Does anyone else notice this? ChatGPT is volatile, and tho the tendency is to MORE censorship, sometimes it goes the other way

Leon said:

The guardrails are off ChatGPT this morning. Without that much coaxing, I got it to write ridiculous Woke opinion pieces and outrageous riffs on the Holocaust. Normally the first is tough and the second impossible

Does anyone else notice this? ChatGPT is volatile, and tho the tendency is to MORE censorship, sometimes it goes the other way

It was annoyingly cagey yesterday. Not on naughty opinions but on its abilities to say anything about statistical trends in demographics and taxation. Even when I pointed it to world bank, OECD and UN data it wasn't having any of it. Kept saying it only has data up to 2021 and I kept reminding it I didn't need anything more recent.

Am I guilty of anthropomorphosing AI when I get the sense it becomes stubborn when repeatedly asked to do something it doesn't want to do whereas if I'd asked differently in the first place it would happily have obliged? That's been a regular experience. Once it says no, the AI's not for turning unless you really go round the houses.

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

"Italy, India and the bumpy road to cashless payment"

https://ustoday.news/italy-india-and-the-bumpy-road-to-cashless-payment/

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Chris said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

TimS said:

Splendid cartoon in todays guardian

That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.

Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.

I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...

It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.

And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.

It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.

(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)

"It's a significant issue"

It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.

And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.

I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.

The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!

It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).

I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills

There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?

But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?

It would. But are you claiming we would always be able to catch everyone by age 16? What age do you recommend we abandon kids who have not yet learnt the proper skills? 11? 13? 16?

It's an incredibly complex issue, made more so by the fact that home lives play just as important a role (perhaps more so) than schooling. Which is another reason for adult literacy and numeracy campaigns to be more prominent as well.

I don't know what the answers are. But I know not talking about the problem, or just chucking it onto the 'too hard' pile, is not a solution. Not that I'm accusing you of that.

I think my point is rather, if after 12 years they are not getting it two additional years of more of the same is unlikely to make a difference either.

Instead, we should be considering what might help them better at an earlier stage.

Do both, of course. And into adulthood as well via literacy and numeracy courses.

Many years ago I listened to a scifi review podcast. I listened to a few episodes before I heard the host's backstory. He had not read a book until he was in his early twenties. He then met a girl who was into books, and he started to learn to read, and love reading. It seems he became rather obsessed.

Or I can mention one of my dad's workmen, a wonderful ex-jailbird. If I recall correctly, he learnt to read in prison, and it changed his life. We used to talk about Tom Clancy books whilst working. I think he went on to marry a teacher.

Learning simple skills such as reading, writing and maths can change adult lives.

I agree. Indeed I said as much yesterday.

But this strikes me as a classic example of Politicians' Logic.

Edit - I would add no serious inquest will be undertaken into the current systemic failures because they are largely the fault of people still at the top of government including in the DfE itself. Which doesn't bode well in itself for any further changes.

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.

All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.

Indeed - but the problem is that the concept is antithetical to how government operates.

Which is why, when a NASA study detailed that using the traditional methodology for designing and building launch vehicles was 3-10x* more expensive than an alternative method.... Congress *mandated* that the method used should be more like the traditional methods.

*Space experts laughed long and hard at the idea that NASA & BigAerospace could get within 3x of the cost. 20x maybe....

We have separate research bodies outside of government, though.

There's absolutely no reason we couldn't do DARPA / ARPA-E analogues.
What they do is contract out relatively small, very focused research projects to both universities and the private sector. It creates an industrial research base which isn't directly dependent on getting products to the market - but is aimed at high risk problems directly related to potentially marketable products.

In that context, failures are accepted along with the successes, and everyone benefits.

Success is mandatory on government projects. I was told this by high flyer* at the Cabinet Office.

He said this with a completely straight face, as well.

*Not a low flyer sustained by occasional gusts of wind.

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

Nigelb said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.

All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.

Indeed - but the problem is that the concept is antithetical to how government operates.

Which is why, when a NASA study detailed that using the traditional methodology for designing and building launch vehicles was 3-10x* more expensive than an alternative method.... Congress *mandated* that the method used should be more like the traditional methods.

*Space experts laughed long and hard at the idea that NASA & BigAerospace could get within 3x of the cost. 20x maybe....

We have separate research bodies outside of government, though.

There's absolutely no reason we couldn't do DARPA / ARPA-E analogues.
What they do is contract out relatively small, very focused research projects to both universities and the private sector. It creates an industrial research base which isn't directly dependent on getting products to the market - but is aimed at high risk problems directly related to potentially marketable products.

In that context, failures are accepted along with the successes, and everyone benefits.

Success is mandatory on government projects. I was told this by high flyer* at the Cabinet Office.

He said this with a completely straight face, as well.

*Not a low flyer sustained by occasional gusts of wind.

When you say he was 'high,' was it his own supply or somebody else's?

kjh said:

eek said:

A question for @TSE

https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266

John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...

...does that get us back into the EU?

Wouldn't just be easier for us to declare war on the French, immediately surrender and then capitulate completely in the surrender negotiations. That surely gets us back into the EU.

That sounds like the Tory membership voting for whoever wasn’t Rishi Sunak, yet still ending up with him in charge.

CorrectHorseBattery3 said:

Decent speech from Keir I thought, not his best.

Wow, that bad?

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

So, they’d like to fund something that’s /not/ DARPA by ignoring everything that makes DARPA work?

Sometimes, finding a way to insulate politicians from their own worst instincts is the only way to make progress.

kjh said:

eek said:

A question for @TSE

https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266

John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...

...does that get us back into the EU?

Wouldn't just be easier for us to declare war on the French, immediately surrender and then capitulate completely in the surrender negotiations. That surely gets us back into the EU.

I don't think we could capitulate completely. We'd have to demand, as a condition of surrender, that the UK be absorbed into France and become part of the EU. Otherwise, if we surrendered unconditonally, the French might just tell us to piss off and not try any funny business again.

The next Labour government will give communities control of their own future.

Our Take Back Control Bill will provide powers in areas such as employment, transport, housing, climate change, childcare provision, and skills.

https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1610952842721869824/photo/1

"The German public’s traditionally high level of trust in its leaders has collapsed since the height of the pandemic, a poll suggests.

Confidence has dropped away in every level of administration, from the European Union to district councils, but the chancellery and the national government recorded by far the steepest declines over two years of geopolitical and economic upheaval." (£)

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-public-trust-government-poll-leaders-olaf-scholz-2023-qlfqs0p72

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

Driver said:

numbertwelve said:

SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)

Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.

As I understand it the size of the pipe isn't as big of a problem as the blockage at the far end of the pipe. Though we could do probably do with more of our current GPs working full time, or at least a bit more of the time.

Expanding the training of doctors and nurses in the UK is a no-brainer.

We know from the performance of private vs state education that a signifiant number of state educated children are not boosted by their education into the A/A* group. So there is plenty of talent out there, being wasted.

To put it another way -

https://www.statista.com/statistics/473206/medical-graduates-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/

anyone want to claim that there are less than 9k people suitable to be a doctor, per year, in the UK?

So we have a need for people to work in high skilled jobs - a defined, preplanned, government controlled need, no less.

We have a large number of people who are failed by the current educational setup and go on to less skilled/paid jobs.

So it is good for

- The country - productivity, wealth etc.
- The NHS
- The people in question. Becoming a doctor gives you wealth, status and given the shortage of doctors world wide, a guaranteed job for life, probably.
- The rest of the world. The shortage of doctors is worldwide. So, by expanding the number of medical staff we train, it reduces the worldwide pressures.

.

eek said:

A question for @TSE

https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266

John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...

...does that get us back into the EU?

Yes.

Harry for King!

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Chris said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

TimS said:

Splendid cartoon in todays guardian

That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.

Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.

I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...

It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.

And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.

It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.

(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)

"It's a significant issue"

It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.

And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.

I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.

The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!

It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).

I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills

There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?

But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?

It would. But are you claiming we would always be able to catch everyone by age 16? What age do you recommend we abandon kids who have not yet learnt the proper skills? 11? 13? 16?

It's an incredibly complex issue, made more so by the fact that home lives play just as important a role (perhaps more so) than schooling. Which is another reason for adult literacy and numeracy campaigns to be more prominent as well.

I don't know what the answers are. But I know not talking about the problem, or just chucking it onto the 'too hard' pile, is not a solution. Not that I'm accusing you of that.

I think my point is rather, if after 12 years they are not getting it two additional years of more of the same is unlikely to make a difference either.

Instead, we should be considering what might help them better at an earlier stage.

Do both, of course. And into adulthood as well via literacy and numeracy courses.

Many years ago I listened to a scifi review podcast. I listened to a few episodes before I heard the host's backstory. He had not read a book until he was in his early twenties. He then met a girl who was into books, and he started to learn to read, and love reading. It seems he became rather obsessed.

Or I can mention one of my dad's workmen, a wonderful ex-jailbird. If I recall correctly, he learnt to read in prison, and it changed his life. We used to talk about Tom Clancy books whilst working. I think he went on to marry a teacher.

Learning simple skills such as reading, writing and maths can change adult lives.

And yet FE colleges have had their funding consistently cut in real terms under recent Conservative administrations.

It's not entirely their fault, as the DfE is also not fit for purpose, but their educational obsessions from Gove onwards have been at best a distraction from the problems which need addressing.
(Very much like Brexit, and government in general.)

NerysHughes said:

TimS said:

NerysHughes said:

NickyBreakspear said:

Lots of waffle from Stamer.

Is devolution the main solution proposed?

Part of Labour's plan, Starmer says, is to give communities a chance to control their economic destiny.

How will Labour do that which is any different to what happens now?

This is at least partly a Lisa Nandy project. She really believes in it but is being held back a little from the really radical stuff like fiscal devolution by others on the front benches.

So will it involve Council's operating like small Countries setting their own tax and spend policies on everything?

Unlikely councils, and almost certainly not on everything. Probably not anything as federalised as the Swiss or US model. But the German model provides a guide. They have federal corporate tax and then municipal trade tax, which is levied on a city / "borough" basis and varies a fair bit, and they have more variability in property taxes, generally between about 0.25% and 1% of value (so if your house is worth a million Euros you pay up to 10k in property tax a year). The municipalities - and regions - then get significantly more autonomy to make spending decisions.

The alternative is more focused fiscal devolution, i.e. giving a chosen levelling up type region the ability to set its own taxes, but that's closer to the Truss investment zone idea.

Malmesbury said:

Phil said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c

It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.

When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.

I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.

Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to

1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research

So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.

It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.

So, they’d like to fund something that’s /not/ DARPA by ignoring everything that makes DARPA work?

Sometimes, finding a way to insulate politicians from their own worst instincts is the only way to make progress.

What did you expect?

As Diane Feinstein put it - the problem with projects run like that is that "my staff doesn't get enough paperwork on what is going on".

AKA the politicians don't get to fiddle with it.

In two years' time, Feinstein will be history.
DARPA won't.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Malmesbury said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

numbertwelve said:

SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)

Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.

The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.

I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.

Has this changed?

Were you really told that? Really?

Here on PB, the other day. By some of the people cheering on the announcement from the Labour party.

We have always been at war with Eastasia. The chocolate ration has been increased from 30 grams to 20 grams.

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.

NerysHughes said:

TimS said:

NerysHughes said:

NickyBreakspear said:

Lots of waffle from Stamer.

Is devolution the main solution proposed?

Part of Labour's plan, Starmer says, is to give communities a chance to control their economic destiny.

How will Labour do that which is any different to what happens now?

This is at least partly a Lisa Nandy project. She really believes in it but is being held back a little from the really radical stuff like fiscal devolution by others on the front benches.

So will it involve Council's operating like small Countries setting their own tax and spend policies on everything?

Yes, absolutely. Councils will raise all their own income, and not depend on central government apart from small development funds. Income tax will go down, and council tax will go up as a result. Councils will be incentivised to allow the building of build more property (=more income) and will compete with each other on service levels and tax rates.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.

Creative writing decimated too. Luckily our local school seems to value it so there's still a bit, but in my childhood I remember writing stories every week and it was my favourite school activity.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Malmesbury said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

numbertwelve said:

SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)

Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.

The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.

I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.

Has this changed?

Were you really told that? Really?

ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.

On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.

The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.

All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.

Selebian said:

HYUFD said:

SandraMc said:

Wills rips Harry's necklace and Harry falls on top of the dog bowl. So Harry calls his therapist. Yet it is claimed that Meghan was suicidal but she was denied psychiatric help.

Logical inconsistincies throughout, trashing his own brother for publicity and cash. After the coronation Charles should formally cut them both off, formally remove their HRHs and just leave it to working royals

"cut them both off"? I hope you're not referring to Harry's crown jewels?

HRHs referring to "hideously republican heads", too, I take it?

Too late, Megan got there first.

Starmer's new big idea: TBC.

Great.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.

It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago.
My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.

TheScreamingEagles said:

.

eek said:

A question for @TSE

https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266

John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...

...does that get us back into the EU?

Yes.

Harry for King!

Cry "God for Harry, England and St George"!

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Chris said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Nigelb said:

JosiasJessop said:

TimS said:

Splendid cartoon in todays guardian

That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.

Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.

I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...

It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.

And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.

It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.

(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)

"It's a significant issue"

It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.

And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.

I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.

The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!

It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).

I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills

There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?

But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?

It would. But are you claiming we would always be able to catch everyone by age 16? What age do you recommend we abandon kids who have not yet learnt the proper skills? 11? 13? 16?

It's an incredibly complex issue, made more so by the fact that home lives play just as important a role (perhaps more so) than schooling. Which is another reason for adult literacy and numeracy campaigns to be more prominent as well.

I don't know what the answers are. But I know not talking about the problem, or just chucking it onto the 'too hard' pile, is not a solution. Not that I'm accusing you of that.

I think my point is rather, if after 12 years they are not getting it two additional years of more of the same is unlikely to make a difference either.

Instead, we should be considering what might help them better at an earlier stage.

Do both, of course. And into adulthood as well via literacy and numeracy courses.

Many years ago I listened to a scifi review podcast. I listened to a few episodes before I heard the host's backstory. He had not read a book until he was in his early twenties. He then met a girl who was into books, and he started to learn to read, and love reading. It seems he became rather obsessed.

Or I can mention one of my dad's workmen, a wonderful ex-jailbird. If I recall correctly, he learnt to read in prison, and it changed his life. We used to talk about Tom Clancy books whilst working. I think he went on to marry a teacher.

Learning simple skills such as reading, writing and maths can change adult lives.

And yet FE colleges have had their funding consistently cut in real terms under recent Conservative administrations.

It's not entirely their fault, as the DfE is also not fit for purpose, but their educational obsessions from Gove onwards have been at best a distraction from the problems which need addressing.
(Very much like Brexit, and government in general.)

Yes, they need more funding.

But everyone is missing a fundamental problem: the reason this is such a tricky problem to solve is that schooling is only one aspect of it. Home life also plays a major role. If a child's home does not have any books in it, they are going to find it hard to learn to read. If a parent cannot be bothered, or simply cannot because they lack the skills, help their kids learn maths, they are at a disadvantage.

Worse, if parents think school is pointless, if they don't send their kids in to school, if they don't try to get them to do their homework (even if they cannot help with the work themselves), if they don't understand the value of learning: then the child is at a massive disadvantage.

IMO innumeracy and illiteracy is as much a social problem as it is an educational one.

One of my son's friends probably misses a day of school a week. Not because he is ill, but because his mum is, and cannot cycle with him into school. The kid regularly comes around for after-school playdates, and I've offered to give him a lift into school if required, but so far the offer has been blanked. All the mum has to do is phone me up and ask, and I'd drive over and pick him up. She obviously trusts me enough to have him over for playdates, so why not?

I don't know what's going on in the family, and I know the school's aware of his absences, but all I see is a lovely kid who is falling massively behind.

TheScreamingEagles said:

.

eek said:

A question for @TSE

https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266

John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...

...does that get us back into the EU?

Yes.

Harry for King!

Harry is lucky he lives in the modern age not the Middle Ages when traitors to the Crown would have been beheaded, even if of royal birth

Nigelb said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.

It's still possible to do a good job of teaching at the primary level, but a great deal harder than it was ten years ago.
My wife retired last year, and considers herself well out of it. She loved the teaching side, but the sheer volume of paperwork became unendurable.

This does seem to be a huge problem.

(I hated my time at school in the 70s/80s BTW. I thought it was monotonous uncreative garbage, and I was lucky to be both smart and an enthusiastic autodidact. My daughter's experience so far is much better despite the Tory curriculum meddling.)

Malmesbury said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Malmesbury said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

numbertwelve said:

SKS seems to think the solution to the NHS crisis is simply to recruit more doctors and nurses (where? how?)

Yes that’s part of the problem but he’s not hit on the crux of the issue. The whole edifice is creaking and groaning and is collapsing under the strain. More hands to the pump will help, but without fundamental reform things aren’t going to get measurably better.

The answer to where and how was debated here yesterday. Labour will greatly increase the numbers of doctors and nurses trained. That is betting without making it easier for foreign-trained staff to work here. Fundamental reform is just a slogan.

I was told that training more medical staff was impossible a while back, because they would all leave the country and it was gammon, anyway.

Has this changed?

Were you really told that? Really?

ETA actually you do make a good point. Junior hospital doctors are under a lot of stress for not much money so tend to leave the profession and/or the country, at least temporarily.

On the leaving the country/changing jobs thing - the massive stress on junior doctors used to be boasted of, in the profession. Perhaps if we *stop* the beatings, morale will improve.

The person making that point seemed to claim that 100% of any extra trained staff would leave. Which is absurd.

All training/careers have wastage. If nothing else, someone who has done a medical degree is highly employable in other professions.

It would seem sensible to make medical training free, in exchange for a 10 to 20 year contract with the NHS upon completion.

Is it also the case that nurses need a degree these days? That's garbage. Nurses should do most of their training on wards.

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Yet the UK has risen from 25th in the Pisa reading rankings in 2009 to 14th now

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50563833.amp

HYUFD said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

It's tragic what they've done to English teaching at school, completely ripping the joy out of the subject. It makes me quite angry actually when I compare my kids' experience of it to my own back in the 80s/90s. This really has been an absolutely ruinous period of Tory government, on so many levels.

There is nothing wrong with learning proper grammar, often I find foreigners know English grammar better than we do

Was that deliberate?

mwadams said:

ydoethur said:

Phil said:

TimS said:

Simon_Peach said:

Been following the numeracy debate with interest and thank you to @JosiasJessop for pointing out that the most severe problem in education today is the lack of progress made by less able pupils on literacy and numeracy. It’s not, as @HYUFD would claim a lack of grammar school places for high ability, working class pupils.

At the non-selective secondary school where I am a Governor, we see a sharp decline in literacy skills among pupils starting in year seven. Unlike numeracy, this has an impact across the whole curriculum: pupils struggle to access subject texts, find written work difficult, suffer worse behaviour and teachers, especially those less experienced, are stretched to manage widening ability gaps and the poorer behaviour.

The root causes for the poor literacy are, of course, arguable. The two thought to be likely are the loss of learning during the pandemic, which should be temporary, and the way in which English is now taught in primary schools. It’s the latter that should, as a matter of priority, be “reimagined”.

Literacy teaching is really odd these days in primary school. They seem to do far less comprehension than before, yet they come home talking about fronted adverbials. Is this a Gove legacy?

Yes, Gove et al meddled deeply in teaching english in primary school. No one anywhere needs to needs able to spot a “fronted adverbial” at ten paces, yet seven year olds are graded on their ability to do exactly that, amongst a litany of other pointless pieces of english grammar, some of which appears to have been entirely made up by Gove & his cronies.

This syntax & grammar-obssessed curriculum sucks any joy there might be out of the experience entirely, especially for the lower ability kids who can tell that they’re being taught something useless & resent being judged for not being able to master it.

Gibb, as well as Gove. Who is still there.

The SPAG (spelling and grammar) papers have not been mandatory at KS1 for a couple of years now; they are optional and for internal purposes. The questions asked are not of the "show me a fronted adverbial" type any more either. It is more "fix what's wrong with the verb it in this sentence to make it have right tense for the context, or "make the incorrect word into an adverb". So I'm basically OK with that.

On the other hand, I hate the obsession with Phonics which for at least half the kids is a garbage way of learning and severely impedes the time available for the rote learning of spellings in our idiosyncratic language of global historical borrowings. We just don't have a simple set of rules you can apply.

And for anyone with dyslexia, learning to read via phonics is basically impossible.