Off-Topic III: The Revengening!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

Like Holland in teh 60s/70s if you want a see-change of what you do, then it is going to be costly and not popular, but wait a decade and the benefits will start to come in thick and fast.

As right leaning as my political views are, power stations should be built by the state for the state, the ridiculous strike prices that have been awarded to recent nuclear contracts are a disgrace.

---

Extend compulsory state ownership toooooooo......

Power, Water, Public Transport.

None of the above should be subject to private profit motive. Kind of goes against the point of them. Especially public transport. As I've demonstrated before, someone working on the minimum wage in Tunbridge Wells simply cannot take up a much better paying job in London without some kind of financial assistance, on account the commute is an extortionate £474.30.

For added perspective that's £24.30 more than the rent I pay on my flat.

And as many people working on the minimum wage come from less affluent backgrounds, the chance of them having access to that sort of money from friends and family is lower. So you get people trapped in their local job economy through no fault of their own.

Subisidised train fares on Government run services now please. Get some employment market mobility going. The economy needs it.

but doesn't musical skill go in grades in the same way?

I was talking to a foreign friend about public transport and he said it costs him about six pounds to do a journey equivalent in distance to York-London but with much smaller populations on either end. Ours is outrageously expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychosplodge

but doesn't musical skill go in grades in the same way?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eldargal

I was talking to a foreign friend about public transport and he said it costs him about six pounds to do a journey equivalent in distance to York-London but with much smaller populations on either end. Ours is outrageously expensive.

---

Yup. A strong public transport infrastructure is what's needed, and centrally run.

I for one would mind a lot less the shoddy service I receive on the rare occasions I get the train to work if I knew there wasn't some fat git laughing his socks off as he counts my money, and decides to make more cuts to investment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eldargal

I was talking to a foreign friend about public transport and he said it costs him about six pounds to do a journey equivalent in distance to York-London but with much smaller populations on either end. Ours is outrageously expensive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Mystery

Extend compulsory state ownership toooooooo......

Power, Water, Public Transport.

None of the above should be subject to private profit motive. Kind of goes against the point of them. Especially public transport. As I've demonstrated before, someone working on the minimum wage in Tunbridge Wells simply cannot take up a much better paying job in London without some kind of financial assistance, on account the commute is an extortionate £474.30.

For added perspective that's £24.30 more than the rent I pay on my flat.

And as many people working on the minimum wage come from less affluent backgrounds, the chance of them having access to that sort of money from friends and family is lower. So you get people trapped in their local job economy through no fault of their own.

Subisidised train fares on Government run services now please. Get some employment market mobility going. The economy needs it.

---

It is crazy. As a comitted car owner, when I consider running costs, I largely ignore ved and insurance since I would be paying them regardless of if I made a journey or no.

As soon as I am in the car with another adult who would be a full fare payer it works out cheaper for me to drive and park in the city centres. That is the crux of the matter before you consider the cost of the inconvience of carrying shopping,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

It is crazy. As a comitted car owner, when I consider running costs, I largely ignore ved and insurance since I would be paying them regardless of if I made a journey or no.

As soon as I am in the car with another adult who would be a full fare payer it works out cheaper for me to drive and park in the city centres. That is the crux of the matter before you consider the cost of the inconvience of carrying shopping,

---

Absolutely.

Take T Wells again. I'm lucky enough to live slap bang in the centre of town. Pretty much everything is walking distance for me, and I have a dedicated parking space with my flat - off road too, which is nice.

But Cinema? Oh that's out on the industrial estate. And the Buses? They sort of run out that way, when they can bothered to (it's notorious for the service not showing up). Oh, and it's about £3.50 for a trip of just under two miles....each way.

But cinema has free parking, so I'll just take my car from now on. Job jobbed, and even more strain put on the worst bits of road T Wells has to offer (industrial estate, constantly redeveloped in every way, except for the roads....)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

It is crazy. As a comitted car owner, when I consider running costs, I largely ignore ved and insurance since I would be paying them regardless of if I made a journey or no.

As soon as I am in the car with another adult who would be a full fare payer it works out cheaper for me to drive and park in the city centres. That is the crux of the matter before you consider the cost of the inconvience of carrying shopping,

---

^this, unbelievably this. And then when you consider time differences and if you actually want to buy anything...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

You see this is where I get confused by it all. The complaint is that you cannot run schools from whitehall, and yet you have a static appraisal system, which you seem in favour of, that is a one model fits all from whitehall. Surely, it is better to have a local head setting proper agreed goals so they can decide at a local level what is important or no. Afterall, what is the point in every teacher working to get the additional senco points if the school does not have any senco pupils?

My goals are aligned to my companies goals, if I do well, then the company gains efficiency savings, if I do excellently, then they get the efficiency savings but they increase their marketability. Thus making the company even more profitable. It is in the best interest of my company to align goals to make me as effective as possible. Now, if the others that I worked with did what I do, then we would not be developing to meet all the needs of our service users, so my colleague has very different goals to me, she managed all of hers but not as well as me so didn't get the same size pay lift.

For what it is worth I do not think that using a strict average pupil score is a good method for performance measurement. After all, you are dependent on those who taught before you. You can't really except a pupil to hit a "C" in english lit. if they arrive in your class being unable to read or write.

Perhaps the issue of automatic progression through school years should be looked at.

---

The Whitehall targets are very generic for each band, things like 'makes significant contribution to the wider school community'. Each individual then sets appropriate SMART targets at the annual review following discussion with their line manager. So that could include anything from taking assemblies to running training sessions for other staff to setting up a drug awareness programme. The idea is each one contributes both to the professional development of the individual and ultimately improving the experience kids have at school. I'm not opposed to top down control on a state level, the problem comes when you have demagogue in charge with a VISION and no understanding of how education actually works beyond his own private school education 30 odd years ago who has in interest in considering alternative approaches.

I agree entirely with you on the grades. When students have GCSE target grades in Art based on their performance in English at the end of Year 6, they aren't very reliable targets. Especially when primary schools are 'massaging' their SAT results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildeybeast

The Whitehall targets are very generic for each band, things like 'makes significant contribution to the wider school community'. Each individual then sets appropriate SMART targets at the annual review following discussion with their line manager. So that could include anything from taking assemblies to running training sessions for other staff to setting up a drug awareness programme. The idea is each one contributes both to the professional development of the individual and ultimately improving the experience kids have at school. I'm not opposed to top down control on a state level, the problem comes when you have demagogue in charge with a VISION and no understanding of how education actually works beyond his own private school education 30 odd years ago who has in interest in considering alternative approaches.

I agree entirely with you on the grades. When students have GCSE target grades in Art based on their performance in English at the end of Year 6, they aren't very reliable targets. Especially when primary schools are 'massaging' their SAT results.

---

So assuming that you have a reasonable boss/head teacher how would it be different if the head set the targets?

I also think that there is an issue with too much examining and not enough learning. The trouble with that is that how can you determine how much a pupil has learned other than through an examination? Then you end up teaching kids how to pass exams rather than instilling knowledge. It is unfortunate, that as far as the school's prestige/budget is concerned, they need to have good grades, as far as employeers are concerned they want kids with good grades. But in reality they need pupils with good knowledge.

There was a classic example, a lad came into my school with an A* in maths at year 7. His parents were furious and demanded a meeting with the head of maths because their little johnny was then placed in the bottom set in year 8. The reason that was given, and supported by management was that while little johnny may have a good attainment in an exam he did not understand the subject.

My bugbear is the lack of vocational courses open to those not academically inclined.

How many wee wasters are out there because the power that be foisted a purely academic curriculum on them, when they'd have been better off learning a useful trade?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

So assuming that you have a reasonable boss/head teacher how would it be different if the head set the targets?

---

Having dealt with a similar situation on the American side of the pond, the answer is "if reasonable bosses were at least as common as 2-headed unicorns, we wouldn't have a problem with them running the show."

Michael Brown shot six times

[url]http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28839522[/url]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirsten

Michael Brown shot six times

[url]http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28839522[/url]

---

yeah and whats worst, TWICE in the HEAD.

It's things like that which make me glad here in the UK most of our police ARE unarmed....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

So assuming that you have a reasonable boss/head teacher how would it be different if the head set the targets?

I also think that there is an issue with too much examining and not enough learning. The trouble with that is that how can you determine how much a pupil has learned other than through an examination? Then you end up teaching kids how to pass exams rather than instilling knowledge. It is unfortunate, that as far as the school's prestige/budget is concerned, they need to have good grades, as far as employeers are concerned they want kids with good grades. But in reality they need pupils with good knowledge.

There was a classic example, a lad came into my school with an A* in maths at year 7. His parents were furious and demanded a meeting with the head of maths because their little johnny was then placed in the bottom set in year 8. The reason that was given, and supported by management was that while little johnny may have a good attainment in an exam he did not understand the subject.

---

Well, as DWest says, there is an issue with finding reasonable heads. There is more to it than that though. My targets are ultimately about my professional development, rather than simply hitting targets, the theory being that anything which helps improve my teaching will benefit the kids. There is a requirement that more experienced teachers are making contributions to the wider school that helps improve others as well. The head in most schools has limited direct contact with teachers and even less knowledge of their skills. A head will only have seen a handful of their staff actually teach. As such, line managers are much better placed to set targets that will be relevant to staff. Allowing staff to be involved the process rather than imposing targets on them creates a greater level of engagement and more motivation to meet the targets.

I agree entirely about teaching to pass exams. I must spend about a fifth of my GCSE teaching time purely on exam practice.

Watched The Winter Soldier last night.

Hats off again to the Marvel Studios. Top notch action/spy thriller.

And for the love of Stan The Man, Black Widow needs her own film.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DWest

Having dealt with a similar situation on the American side of the pond, the answer is "if reasonable bosses were at least as common as 2-headed unicorns, we wouldn't have a problem with them running the show."

---

But isn't a two headed unicorn a bi-corn? or does it only have a single horn still?

I have mixed feelings about it. I enjoyed it, but it lacked the courage to follow through properly on the spy thriller thing and fell back on big action set pieces a little too easily. Compare with Agents of Shield which got the balance right in y view.

On the back of the "affordability" of public transport:

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28842633[/url]

Regulated rail fares will rise by 3.5% from January next year, following the release of July's inflation figures.

Under the formula, average fares in England and Wales are due to go up by July's RPI measure of inflation, plus 1%.

RPI - the Retail Prices Index - was 2.5% last month, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

Labour accused the government of 'ripping off' passengers, but the government defended the rise.

Regulated fares have increased by more than the rate of inflation in most years since 2004.

Such fares include season tickets, "anytime" single tickets around major cities, and off-peak inter-city return tickets.

But under a "flex" rule, train companies can raise fares by 2% above the average, as long as the overall average stays at RPI plus 1%.

As a result, some fares could increase by 4.5% next year.

- - - Updated - - -

Now for some light humour:

Top 9 jokes from this years fringe:

1."I've decided to sell my Hoover... well, it was just collecting dust" - Tim Vine.
2."I've written a joke about a fat badger, but I couldn't fit it into my set" - Masai Graham.
3."Always leave them wanting more, my uncle used to say to me. Which is why he lost his job in disaster relief" - Mark Watson.
4."I was given some Sudoku toilet paper. It didn't work. You could only fill it in with number ones and number twos" - Bec Hill.
5."I wanted to do a show about feminism. But my husband wouldn't let me" - Ria Lina.
6."Money can't buy you happiness? Well, check this out, I bought myself a Happy Meal" - Paul F Taylor.
7."Scotland had oil, but it's running out thanks to all that deep frying" - Scott Capurro.
8."I've been married for 10 years, I haven't made a decision for seven" - Jason Cook.
9."This show is about perception and perspective. But it depends how you look at it" - Felicity Ward.

True, but what they did they did really, really well.

Particularly impressed with Cap's prowess in the opening scenes (trying to avoid direct spoilers!)

Definitely adding this in 3D to my growing collection :)

I don't find Tim Vine funny...
Some of the others are much better puns, but why is always a pun that wins this award?

Mystery, 3D is dead stop trying to force it.

Because puns work best as a one liner. Whereas observational jokes might take 3 minutes to set up with a number of minor tittles inbetween before the crux of the joke breaks. Also physical humour does not work well in written text

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychosplodge

I don't find Tim Vine funny...
Some of the others are much better puns, but why is always a pun that wins this award?

Mystery, 3D is dead stop trying to force it.

---

3D isn't dead - I like 3D at home. So nyeah.

And I otherwise agree - Tim Vine isn't funny. His jokes are I'll grant you, but his delivery is terrible. Give me proper comedy rather than 'rapid fire one liners'. Anyone can say something funny. But to actually be funny is much, much harder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wolfshade

Because puns work best as a one liner. Whereas observational jokes might take 3 minutes to set up with a number of minor tittles inbetween before the crux of the joke breaks. Also physical humour does not work well in written text

---

He said as much himself on BBC breakfast this morning. To roughly quote him 'it's for best joke, not best paragraph'.

I just watched that video! Yes it appears to be an award for the best 1 liner.

Pffrt.

Yay! My oils should be arrive any minute now, and that means tonight will be spent experimenting with finding the right level of scent. Yo' bedda believe it beh-beh!

it rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again

Well indeed.

Though this is for those sort-of pomander things I'm making to sell at LARP.

If I can pulls this off, I'll be rich!

Ferguson news:

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/police-protesters-collide-again-ferguson-071214374.html[/url]

This quote really stood out: "Capt. Ron Johnson of the Missouri Highway Patrol, who is in charge of security in Ferguson, said bottles and Molotov cocktails were thrown from the crowd and that some officers had come under heavy gunfire. At least two people were shot and 31 were arrested, he said. He did not have condition updates on those who were shot. Johnson said four officers were injured by rocks or bottles."

Is it just me or does a statement saying that officers came under heavy gunfire but their only injuries were from rocks sound like a blatant lie?

IDK because if you remember the rioting in manchester(iirc?) someone took shots at police but missed, but they were clearly shown on cctv doing so. I don't think the US has the same sort of cctv coverage as the UK though?

Yup. People in Ferguson are tweeting all the time and the only gunfire has been from the police and at least one 'molotov cocktail' was a tear gas cannister that caught fire and was thrown AWAY from children, not towards police. One journalist has been threatened with being shot at least, some others have been attacked in other ways. Some black journalists were not allowed into the media zone while white journalists were and a white journalist was recorded saying the police needed to shoot some people to stop the riots.

Oh and some protesters broke into a McDonalds toget milk for people affected by tear gas so watch out for that being spun as looting at some point.

That's insane.As if a journalist won't report that.

Yup, he tweeted it. It was also police who broke the peace (again), three hours before curfew (which is a disgusting way to enforce order anyway) they charged down the street firing tear gas and rubber bullets when there wasn't even rioting, just people and families out and about.

Learnt something new and horrifying, rubber bullets are actually rubber coated metal bullets.

That probably depends. I'm sure I've seen one like the army used in NI before and it was more like a hockey puck in large "bullet" form.

Well the ones in Ferguson are rubber coated metal at least.

That seems dangerous. or even more dangerous...

Some people have been tweeting their injuries from them and they are horrific.

According to the wiki you're supposed to fire them at the ground so they inflict pain to the legs when they bounce.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psychosplodge

IDK because if you remember the rioting in manchester(iirc?) someone took shots at police but missed, but they were clearly shown on cctv doing so. I don't think the US has the same sort of cctv coverage as the UK though?

---

Cameras are still rare here and any revealed footage would be completely one sided anyhow if they were government controlled. Maybe it's because I learned how to use a rifle at a young age but completely missing all those cops with 'heavy gunfire' seems ridiculous to me. (Not that I want to see anyone shot on either side.) Plus I don't want to contemplate the severity of the police oppression if an officer is shot.

Every time I see these type of exchanges it firms up my belief that there is a strong undercurrent of anarchy and barbarism behind our thin veneer of civilization.

Yes, :[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_bullet[/url]

[url]http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rubber-bullets-in-missouri-clash-highlight-militarization-of-america-s-police/[/url]

If this "non-lethal" approach does not deter protesters one worries how long before non-lethal force is replaced by live rounds