kas_tippler
Well-Known Member
Cheers
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Post General Election Thread
- Thread starter Ducado
- Start date
Cheers
Paul Lake's Left Knee
Well-Known Member
This thread is proof that the only thing worse than a bad loser, is a bad winner. The lack of class being shown by those on the winning side of the general election result is quite disgusting.
Last edited:
hilts
Well-Known Member
The extreme posters always ruin it for the rest, I would have thought boredom may have set in by now, if the election had gone the other way the same shit would ensue, not sure there are any winners here
Ducado
Well-Known Member
This thread is proof that there is only thing worse than a bad loser, is a bad winner. The lack of class being shown by those on the correct side of the general election result is quite disgusting.
I would just leave them too it mate, the whole forum can see what utter cocks some people are, and give them a wide berth in future
The thing is, this forum has always had lively debate on a number of subjects but in the end we put our differences behind us and carry on being friendly with each other despite knowing that on some subjects we disagree, never have I seen people rubbing other peoples noses in it like this thread it's quite unseemly
malg
Well-Known Member
If MPs want more then maybe they should fuck off to the private sector and earn it? They're public servants, and as such they earn a certain wage. I'd suggest they're paid very well. There's fuck all wrong with £140k - and there's a few added bonuses as well.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...imes-the-prime-ministers-salary-10169400.html
You run the country you get paid £140k, some dentists get up to 500k. This is from the Indie, not some ravin right wing rag.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
And they have a gold plated pensionIf MPs want more then maybe they should fuck off to the private sector and earn it? They're public servants, and as such they earn a certain wage. I'd suggest they're paid very well. There's fuck all wrong with £140k - and there's a few added bonuses as well.
hilts
Well-Known Member
I would just leave them too it mate, the whole forum can see what utter cocks some people are, and give them a wide berth in future
The thing is, this forum has always had lively debate on a number of subjects but in the end we put our differences behind us and carry on being friendly with each other despite knowing that on some subjects we disagree, never have I seen people rubbing other peoples noses in it like this thread it's quite unseemly
The Middle East and pelligrinis managerial capabilities would suggest otherwise
urmston
Well-Known Member
As someone who is a 'qualified' teacher, I don't see a problem with 'unqualified' staff.
Apart from the practical experience in the classroom while on teaching practice, teacher training courses are a waste of time, full of mumbo jumbo about Piaget, child psychology and that year's educational fads and buzzwords. The courses are a doddle to pass, and are not intellectually demanding at all - just churn out four or five essays full of the required politically correct waffle and that's it. There is no training related to your degree's area of expertise such as English or Physics. You are assumed to have your subject knowledge from university.
An average, new 'unqualified' teacher straight out of university could go to a school in a lovely, affluent, middle class place full of pleasant children with normal social skills and be able to keep control of a class and teach effectively from day one.
A 'qualified' teacher, with years of classroom experience in a school in an inner city dump used by the feral children of the underclass will often have classes which no person can control properly or teach to an adequate standard.
The safeguard against schools using any old 'unqualified' staff, paying them poorly and hoping to save money is that such a policy is unlikely to attract and motivate staff of good quality, 'qualified' or not, and results will nosedive. And if that happens the school gets into trouble with the government. So we won't be seeing any minimum wage teachers sent from the job centre and under threat of losing their benefits any time soon.
Apart from the practical experience in the classroom while on teaching practice, teacher training courses are a waste of time, full of mumbo jumbo about Piaget, child psychology and that year's educational fads and buzzwords. The courses are a doddle to pass, and are not intellectually demanding at all - just churn out four or five essays full of the required politically correct waffle and that's it. There is no training related to your degree's area of expertise such as English or Physics. You are assumed to have your subject knowledge from university.
An average, new 'unqualified' teacher straight out of university could go to a school in a lovely, affluent, middle class place full of pleasant children with normal social skills and be able to keep control of a class and teach effectively from day one.
A 'qualified' teacher, with years of classroom experience in a school in an inner city dump used by the feral children of the underclass will often have classes which no person can control properly or teach to an adequate standard.
The safeguard against schools using any old 'unqualified' staff, paying them poorly and hoping to save money is that such a policy is unlikely to attract and motivate staff of good quality, 'qualified' or not, and results will nosedive. And if that happens the school gets into trouble with the government. So we won't be seeing any minimum wage teachers sent from the job centre and under threat of losing their benefits any time soon.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
urmston
Well-Known Member
@urmston
What's your knowledge of either School Direct or Teach First, and secondly how long ago did you do your training?
I know enough about today's schools.
And here is a recent article about PGCE courses.
https://www.timeshighereducation.co...e-pgce-is-a-teaching-turn-off/2008913.article
They are at least as useless and bad as when I did mine, probably worse if I believe what some younger teachers tell me. I attended a state funded short university course in 2010 for 'returning' teachers, and that was as poor as my PGCE course, stuffed full of irrelevant theory and faddish jargon, presumably designed to give the course some bogus academic respectability.
Here is another article which says exactly what I, and many other teachers think of their PGCE year.
http://www.learningspy.co.uk/featured/times-changin-can-improve-pgce/
It was only after several years of teaching that I was able to see my PGCE course for the utter waste of time it was. It wouldn’t be true to say I learned nothing: I had to actively unlearn all the rubbish I’d picked up before I could get on with the business of being a half-way decent teacher.
I don't think a teacher is particularly 'qualified', except legally, after a PGCE course, and the move towards in school training is a very good idea.