LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

1…8485878990…1098

Comments

  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 12,911
    Jezyboy said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    I would think very few cabinet ministers have any discretion in spending taxpayers' money though.
    FTFY
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    Interestingly Henry Ford is reckoned to have done the opposite by creating masses of jobs to create masses of cars.

    Of course the people buying Model Ts weren’t spaffing their money on avocados and accepted delayed gratification to buy their black car
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    Interestingly Henry Ford is reckoned to have done the opposite by creating masses of jobs to create masses of cars.

    Of course the people buying Model Ts weren’t spaffing their money on avocados and accepted delayed gratification to buy their black car
    The birth/scaling up of a new industry driving up employment is the polar opposite of efficiency gains in existing industries reducing employment.

    Don’t get me wrong, the markets drive efficiency and my own employment is predicated on driving efficiency so I’m no Luddite.

    I just recognise this is a problem the market has no answer for.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    Jezyboy said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    I would think very few people have absolutely zero discretionary spending though.
    You’d be wrong.
    And those with some, but very limited, discretionary spend aren’t going to try and support some intangible notion of sustainable farming over some form of leisure spend / saving.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    morstar said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    Interestingly Henry Ford is reckoned to have done the opposite by creating masses of jobs to create masses of cars.

    Of course the people buying Model Ts weren’t spaffing their money on avocados and accepted delayed gratification to buy their black car
    The birth/scaling up of a new industry driving up employment is the polar opposite of efficiency gains in existing industries reducing employment.

    Don’t get me wrong, the markets drive efficiency and my own employment is predicated on driving efficiency so I’m no Luddite.

    I just recognise this is a problem the market has no answer for.
    And if you believe there is nothing more efficient than the market then we are entering a new phase and the Govt is railing against it by shaking down the magic money tree to keep people in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

    The general population today are better off than they ever have been but their perception is different so they are not happy with their lot in life.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    Interestingly Henry Ford is reckoned to have done the opposite by creating masses of jobs to create masses of cars.

    Of course the people buying Model Ts weren’t spaffing their money on avocados and accepted delayed gratification to buy their black car
    The birth/scaling up of a new industry driving up employment is the polar opposite of efficiency gains in existing industries reducing employment.

    Don’t get me wrong, the markets drive efficiency and my own employment is predicated on driving efficiency so I’m no Luddite.

    I just recognise this is a problem the market has no answer for.
    And if you believe there is nothing more efficient than the market then we are entering a new phase and the Govt is railing against it by shaking down the magic money tree to keep people in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

    The general population today are better off than they ever have been but their perception is different so they are not happy with their lot in life.
    I agree with a lot of that. I do believe the state has a place in facilitating things though which you don’t.
    I think broadband provision needs state influence in very much the same way public transport etc. do otherwise we end up with no access in many areas.

    I agree changes are coming and the government should be ensuring we are positioned to benefit rather than be hurt by change. As you say, they are protecting a fantasy status quo.

    But I don’t pretend to have easy answers to the right balance between state and markets. Nationalisation drives poor quality whereas pseudo markets such as utilities and even the NHS, simply drive profiteering based on exploitation of national assets/monopolies.

    Our current government is simply corrupt. They claim to favour free market ideology, allowing them to withhold spending on the vulnerable whilst looting the public coffers to the benefit of mates.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    morstar said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    morstar said:

    briantrumpet said:

    rjsterry said:

    This 7-year plan for UK farming. Some good and some bad, but I see cakeism is alive and well. The gist seems to be weaning off subsidies which would be fine if the US and EU were also winding down theirs, but... they're not. At the same time farmers will be encouraged to put their efforts into environmental stewardship, pulling them in the opposite direction to the need to compete against subsidised overseas producers.
    Is the end result us importing all our food while we pay farmers to maintain a kind of natural theme park?


    Great chunks of the UK are already a kind of natural theme park - most of the prettiest parts of the UK aren't competitive in world terms, but the kind of farms people *say* they like (smaller, family farms), have preserved the nature of great swathes of land whilst producing food too, albeit propped up by subsidy. (The most extreme example of these are the in the National Parks.)

    Part of the problem is that most consumers are hypocrites: they like small farms and pretty countryside, but go into the supermarkets and buy everything on special offer and from 'essentials' lines, without asking how food is produced so cheaply.
    I sort of agree but bahaviours don’t happen in isolation.

    For many, wages are low, housing is expensive. You have literally no option but to buy cheap.
    Buying cheap supports mass, low quality produce and low value jobs paying low wages.

    The circle is complete.

    The market has no solution for this.
    Interestingly Henry Ford is reckoned to have done the opposite by creating masses of jobs to create masses of cars.

    Of course the people buying Model Ts weren’t spaffing their money on avocados and accepted delayed gratification to buy their black car
    The birth/scaling up of a new industry driving up employment is the polar opposite of efficiency gains in existing industries reducing employment.

    Don’t get me wrong, the markets drive efficiency and my own employment is predicated on driving efficiency so I’m no Luddite.

    I just recognise this is a problem the market has no answer for.
    And if you believe there is nothing more efficient than the market then we are entering a new phase and the Govt is railing against it by shaking down the magic money tree to keep people in the manner to which they have become accustomed.

    The general population today are better off than they ever have been but their perception is different so they are not happy with their lot in life.
    I agree with a lot of that. I do believe the state has a place in facilitating things though which you don’t.
    I think broadband provision needs state influence in very much the same way public transport etc. do otherwise we end up with no access in many areas.

    I agree changes are coming and the government should be ensuring we are positioned to benefit rather than be hurt by change. As you say, they are protecting a fantasy status quo.

    But I don’t pretend to have easy answers to the right balance between state and markets. Nationalisation drives poor quality whereas pseudo markets such as utilities and even the NHS, simply drive profiteering based on exploitation of national assets/monopolies.

    Our current government is simply corrupt. They claim to favour free market ideology, allowing them to withhold spending on the vulnerable whilst looting the public coffers to the benefit of mates.
    We are more or less agreeing. The Boomers had a lot less disposable income but the economy was growing nicely and everybody felt their lot was getting better. Millennials have a far higher standard of living but they feel they have the God given right to have a higher standard of living than their parents so moan about it.

    The Uk got rich at the expense of the rest of the world and now refuses to accept the good times are over.

    On a brighter note you could argue we are living in a meritocracy the benefits of which can be measured by the whining of the losers. By which I mean that generations of the same family would follow their father into the same industry and due to things getting cheaper be better off. Now if your Essex boy does not follow his father into the print industry and becomes a money broker earning £250k then there is no reason his offspring should achieve the same standard of living despite their expensive education. Of course when he dies they will inherit which will allow them to retire early.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,955
    Fixed term parliament act is being amended

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-fixed-term-parliaments-act-repeal-bill
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,899
    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 41,491
    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    Owning the libs!

    All that matters isn’t it?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 73,869
    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    If Eton were to go out of its way to produce an equivalent to Trump, it would look remarkably similar to Johnson.
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 28,233
    rick_chasey said:

    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    If Eton were to go out of its way to produce an equivalent to Trump, it would look remarkably similar to Johnson.
    TBF, I think I remember Eton having a fairly low opinion of him as well.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    rjsterry said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    If Eton were to go out of its way to produce an equivalent to Trump, it would look remarkably similar to Johnson.
    TBF, I think I remember Eton having a fairly low opinion of him as well.
    exactly what I was thinking

    I thought that academically he was a low achiever at Oxford
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 18,613
    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    If Eton were to go out of its way to produce an equivalent to Trump, it would look remarkably similar to Johnson.
    TBF, I think I remember Eton having a fairly low opinion of him as well.
    exactly what I was thinking

    I thought that academically he was a low achiever at Oxford

    I suspect that laziness and overconfidence in his own intellect didn't help him.
    https://www.facebook.com/unanglaisendiois
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 73,869
    rjsterry said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Pross said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I caught a bit of pmqs today - he's very bad at it.

    Sample waste of a question from a Scottish MP - basically "you are a bit like a used car salesman" in those words. Worse reply "I think the gist of the question was that he wants to undo brexit - it's not going to happen!".

    The one I heard a couple of months ago Starmer asked a reasonable question and Boris's reply was basically that Starmer is a terrorist sympathiser. It's the first time I can recall the PM being asked to retract a comment (which he didn't, he just doubled up on it). His default for any question from an opposition MP seems to be to launch an attack on them, it's very Trumpian.
    If Eton were to go out of its way to produce an equivalent to Trump, it would look remarkably similar to Johnson.
    TBF, I think I remember Eton having a fairly low opinion of him as well.
    Not mutually exclusive
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 73,869
    Here you go SC - even Friedman agrees

    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    rick_chasey said:

    Here you go SC - even Friedman agrees

    I think you are extrapolating a lot from a single sentence to think that he would have been a cheerleader for record breaking levels of borrowing.

    A day or so ago you agreed it was highly dangerous but was preferable to less than optimum growth and a big wedge to bung your mates.
  • pinkbikini
    pinkbikini Posts: 876
    Ah, Williamson raises his head above the parapet now he can give some ‘good’ news. Everything is good again re. education.

    He avoided explicitly crediting Brexit for the vaccine approval, but had clearly read Spaffer’s rushed jingoism briefing notes.

    He still doubles down on the Gove fallacy that exams are the best way to assess pupils. And he offered a ‘cast-iron’ guarantee that GCSEs and A-Levels would be happening in England in the summer. Risky, but welcome news, assuming he’s being honest.

    Topics for exams will be agreed in advance to help mitigate pupils’ missed learning opportunities. Great. Why’s this taken so long? When will schools actually be informed about the topics? Errm, at some point.

    FFS, how is this guy still in the role?
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Exams are the best way to test maths or knowledge based subjects to create a dependable national standard. Excessive use of course work benefits those who can afford extra curricular support or teachers grading for maximum personal benefit. Do you ever wonder why predicted grades are higher than actuals rear in year out?

    I went to a shit school and got to university as I was bright and the national system was not rigged against me. Tarquin's tutor could not turn up to the exam hall or deal with the pressure for them.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 73,869
    john80 said:

    Exams are the best way to test maths or knowledge based subjects to create a dependable national standard. Excessive use of course work benefits those who can afford extra curricular support or teachers grading for maximum personal benefit. Do you ever wonder why predicted grades are higher than actuals rear in year out?

    I went to a censored school and got to university as I was bright and the national system was not rigged against me. Tarquin's tutor could not turn up to the exam hall or deal with the pressure for them.

    Not that you have a chip on your shoulder about it.

    All formats favour some people over others.

    Exams favour people who have rapid recall.

    Have a bit more imagination - what’s wrong with a more continuous assessment like they do in other countries, for example?
    _
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 28,233
    And have been nursing that chip ever since by the looks of it. Wait till you here about private schools!
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,195
    The only guy I knew who got extra out of school tuition was the son of a single mother nurse. Tutoring is hardly the preserve of the fabulously weathly middle class.

  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 28,233
    Jezyboy said:

    The only guy I knew who got extra out of school tuition was the son of a single mother nurse. Tutoring is hardly the preserve of the fabulously weathly middle class.

    And even if it were, so what? People with some disposable income spending it on an attempt to get their children better exam results - what awful people.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • pinkbikini
    pinkbikini Posts: 876
    john80 said:

    Exams are the best way to test maths or knowledge based subjects to create a dependable national standard. Excessive use of course work benefits those who can afford extra curricular support or teachers grading for maximum personal benefit. Do you ever wonder why predicted grades are higher than actuals rear in year out?

    I went to a censored school and got to university as I was bright and the national system was not rigged against me. Tarquin's tutor could not turn up to the exam hall or deal with the pressure for them.

    Exams are important (probably should be given the most weight) but when used exclusively are not the best way, IMO, to assess pupils. Coursework can also be assessed centrally (although I’m sure it costs more - probably the main reason Gove started to remove it).

    Tarquin’s tutor (nice chip, by the way) could have coached him in exam technique and syllabus, thus relieving the pressure significantly and giving him a competitive advantage.

    Obviously I’m not a teacher, but I’d argue that coursework teaches vital skills that are directly applicable to university and working life.

    Anyhow, that wasn’t my main point. c.6mths of teaching time left, huge uncertainty over examinable curriculum, Williamson still gives no guidance. We’re into the Xmas hols soon. It’s an issue that he’s presumably been briefed on and been planning since March 2020. But still no clarity on topics. Why not?
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    pinkbikini said:

    Ah, Williamson raises his head above the parapet now he can give some ‘good’ news. Everything is good again re. education.

    He avoided explicitly crediting Brexit for the vaccine approval, but had clearly read Spaffer’s rushed jingoism briefing notes.

    He still doubles down on the Gove fallacy that exams are the best way to assess pupils. And he offered a ‘cast-iron’ guarantee that GCSEs and A-Levels would be happening in England in the summer. Risky, but welcome news, assuming he’s being honest.

    Topics for exams will be agreed in advance to help mitigate pupils’ missed learning opportunities. Great. Why’s this taken so long? When will schools actually be informed about the topics? Errm, at some point.

    FFS, how is this guy still in the role?

    Name a Brexiteer or friend of Carrie who you think would do a better job...

    Outside of politics he would call himself a consultant and attend a lot of networking events where nobody would understand quite what he did.

    In Spaffers Govt he is Top 10
  • elbowloh
    elbowloh Posts: 7,078
    john80 said:

    Exams are the best way to test maths or knowledge based subjects to create a dependable national standard. Excessive use of course work benefits those who can afford extra curricular support or teachers grading for maximum personal benefit. Do you ever wonder why predicted grades are higher than actuals rear in year out?

    I went to a censored school and got to university as I was bright and the national system was not rigged against me. Tarquin's tutor could not turn up to the exam hall or deal with the pressure for them.

    They also favour people who aren't sick on the day, who don't struggle under pressure or aren't just having a shitty time at that moment.
    Felt F1 2014
    Felt Z6 2012
    Red Arthur Caygill steel frame
    Tall....
    www.seewildlife.co.uk
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,955
    Isn't the issue with course work that the boundary between assistance and cheating is quite blurry?
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    elbowloh said:

    john80 said:

    Exams are the best way to test maths or knowledge based subjects to create a dependable national standard. Excessive use of course work benefits those who can afford extra curricular support or teachers grading for maximum personal benefit. Do you ever wonder why predicted grades are higher than actuals rear in year out?

    I went to a censored school and got to university as I was bright and the national system was not rigged against me. Tarquin's tutor could not turn up to the exam hall or deal with the pressure for them.

    They also favour people who aren't sick on the day, who don't struggle under pressure or aren't just having a shitty time at that moment.
    If you are sick you can resit it as is the standard practice. Last time I checked Schools were not dragging people out of hospital for a maths exam. You cannot account for someone having a shitty time unless you want it to be abused massively. If you think you can please spell out how you would police this and what it would cost.
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Jezyboy said:

    The only guy I knew who got extra out of school tuition was the son of a single mother nurse. Tutoring is hardly the preserve of the fabulously weathly middle class.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-10-23/u-k-national-tutoring-service-tutoring-shouldn-t-be-a-middle-class-privilege

    This journalist concluded differently to your random survey of a few people.

Categories