Gervase Phinn, retired longtime primary schools inspector and author, has admitted (I was there) that teacher lesson ratings are a lottery; Chris Woodhead, former Chief Inspector of Schools, has recently said that OFSTED is a waste of time; primary heads have this year overwhelmingy voted to get rid of SATS.
So I thought I'd revisit the notion of corporal punishment, too. Here in the UK, we had a tiny but influential pressure group called STOPP (Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment). Its spokesman was a Tom Scott*, who used to teach in London. What do I find in the Guardian online?:
One of the leading figures in the campaign to abolish corporal punishment was Tom Scott, then a teacher in Tower Hamlets, east London, who helped set up Stopp, the Society of Teachers Opposed to Physical Punishment. Scott is believed to have quit teaching since, and retrained as a theatre director.
I've watched it all happen. The replacement of CSEs and O levels by GCSEs; the move towards, then away from continuous assessment; phonics as obligatory, then phonics as career suicide, then phonics as essential again; book-burning by heads of English in secondary schools (literally) to ensure that coursebooks could never again be used, followed by the fay ce que voudras English curriculum; then the "we'll sort the teachers out" National Curriculum; then the exploitation of the need for new textbooks by commercial publishers; then the teaching of sciences coalescing into a general science, the withering of maths, combined with introduction of PC characters in the SATS assessments to mix-in multicultural social issues...
Tosspots.
___________________________________________________
*I don't know whether he's the same Tom Scott who ran the Eye Theatre and/or later joined the BBC's whizzy digital department...
Friday, June 05, 2009
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Fight
James has posted on liberty recently - an issue that underlies and will outlast all the economic turmoil of the recent and soon to come years. The prophets foretold this a century and more ago - the langorous and progressively enfolding embrace of the octopus...
Would it even be possible to hold the American revolution today? The Boston Tea Party? Imagine if George III had been able to sit in his palace across the ocean, look at the security-camera footage, press a button, and freeze the bank accounts of everyone there. Oh, well, we won’t be needing another revolt, will we? But the consequence of funding the metastasization of government through the confiscation of the fruits of the citizen’s labor is the remorseless shriveling of liberty.
Read more from the excellent and usually sharply funny Mark Steyn.
Would it even be possible to hold the American revolution today? The Boston Tea Party? Imagine if George III had been able to sit in his palace across the ocean, look at the security-camera footage, press a button, and freeze the bank accounts of everyone there. Oh, well, we won’t be needing another revolt, will we? But the consequence of funding the metastasization of government through the confiscation of the fruits of the citizen’s labor is the remorseless shriveling of liberty.
Read more from the excellent and usually sharply funny Mark Steyn.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
History Revisited?
I have just finished re-watching Jacob Bronowski's wonderful 'The Ascent of Man' series, which I first saw as a teenager.
In his segment on Isaac Newton, he notes that Newton couldn't get the attention of the rich and influential in his middle years. The reason was that there was little interest in science and technology, since so many were making fortunes in the South Sea Bubble scam.
It struck me at that moment that the disinvestment in science and technology in the US and UK for the past 30 years may be due to a similar set of cicumstances, since so much money was being conjured out of thin air, first in the dotcom bubble, and then in artificial housing prices.
In his segment on Isaac Newton, he notes that Newton couldn't get the attention of the rich and influential in his middle years. The reason was that there was little interest in science and technology, since so many were making fortunes in the South Sea Bubble scam.
It struck me at that moment that the disinvestment in science and technology in the US and UK for the past 30 years may be due to a similar set of cicumstances, since so much money was being conjured out of thin air, first in the dotcom bubble, and then in artificial housing prices.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Welcome, the Gurkhas
If we're not a country fit for heroes, we're a country fit for nothing. By righting this injustice, we have recovered a little of our honour.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
The biggest bubble: human population
I've been watching BBC1's "Countryfile" and there was a reference to some CO2 reduction target, required because the world's population will be 9 billion by some date.
This is cart before horse. If we don't want the world to become composed solely of (a) people (b) things we need for food and drink c) weapons and (d) radioactive and otherwise polluted and barren desert, we need to:
1. limit human population growth...
2. ... without creating demographic gender imbalance
3. ... or demographic age imbalance
I read "Blueprint for Survival" in a Penguin edition in the 70s. One point it discussed, which had not occurred to me, was that the deceleration - population stabilisation/reduction - has to be slow and planned, otherwise we will develop serious imbalances that will destroy the economy and trigger a crash - a real, lethal one, not just the loss of some savings.
Time - time long overdue - for a plan to tackle this super-bubble. Wind farms and CO2 targets are near-irrelevancies.
This is cart before horse. If we don't want the world to become composed solely of (a) people (b) things we need for food and drink c) weapons and (d) radioactive and otherwise polluted and barren desert, we need to:
1. limit human population growth...
2. ... without creating demographic gender imbalance
3. ... or demographic age imbalance
I read "Blueprint for Survival" in a Penguin edition in the 70s. One point it discussed, which had not occurred to me, was that the deceleration - population stabilisation/reduction - has to be slow and planned, otherwise we will develop serious imbalances that will destroy the economy and trigger a crash - a real, lethal one, not just the loss of some savings.
Time - time long overdue - for a plan to tackle this super-bubble. Wind farms and CO2 targets are near-irrelevancies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)