Despite strong support from a Tory government the Khmer Rouge were remarkably less successful.
I guess it depends on how you define the paradigm of success.
“Virtual wards”
At least we know what the 40 new hospitals will look like. No doubt careful Tory management will have them looking like this within a few weeks:
Looks like Simon Pegg has the last word on Rishi's words of wisdom yesterday
Its quite sweary, but accurate
https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1610946422010163200?s=20&t=JD7rTyga2Wtr8QD6UteLNQ
GE in the winter 2025 flu/covid NHS crisis would play very bad for the tories,
They might consider a summer 2024 GE
I thought the latest they can hold an election will be Dec 2024 with a 5 year term?
At least we can now say there’ll be an election no later than next year now.
Jan 25 is the last date. Likely to be earlier tho - no one likes an election then. Oct 24 would be my guess
I thought the latest they can hold an election will be Dec 2024 with a 5 year term?
Latest date is 24th Jan 2025
I seriously doubt they'll have solved the nhs crises by then, I could well see it being worse, the tories will want to stave a GE off as long as possible, but I'll bet they won't want it in flu season... September 24 is now my guess
Who's going to work in these 40 new hospitals?
As they are imaginary hospitals I guess imaginary staff
we don't need maths to 18. We need maths to be taught at a useful level, and sufficient investment into it, that people leave school numerate (and literate) as a minimum at a level that enables them to understand things like interest rates and true costs of loans, how to work out how many carpet tiles you need for your floor, and how to understand probability and risk in real life situations.
Some people may benefit from maths beyond 16 if they haven't acquired that understanding but that's not the same as compulsory maths, and may well need delivering in a different setting - as said previously if they go into trades they'll acquire the ability to work out how many tiles are needed for a roof by using the maths (sorry TJ, arithmetic) that supports it.
I did maths to O, A/O and A levels and as it got further up the scale the less useful it got. Square root of -1, and so on. Might be useful if you go on to a career in maybe physics, where theoretical maths enables you to solve quantum theory equations, but not at any useful life level.
And added to that, we need general life skills training rather than academic quals. I was interested to read (linked through from a Guardian piece on the Maths to 18 policy) about 'Div' at Winchester of all places. I suspect subject matter selected at Winchester might be a bit high brow but an hour a week in schools on something similar, developing the life skills of analysis, debate, etc. will equip kids far more than another two years trying to estimate the shape of a quadratic equation on graph paper.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/05/maths-schools-rishi-sunak-arts-sport
developing the life skills of analysis, debate, etc. will equip kids far more
there is NO WAY that Tories will ever support giving the proles the tools to even start to recognise and counter their corrupt, mendacious, immoral behaviour. Just not gonna happen.
An ill educated population is essential for their world view of the vast majority of us as cattle to be milked and then slaughtered to keep them in their finery.
I really think a distinction should be drawn between the people who have a legitimate objection to teaching maths skills up to the age of 18, and the people who didn’t like maths at school and are proud of their innumeracy.
Extra lessons that specifically cover the core concepts* of maths in modern society along with critical thinking skills are no bad thing, and can be taught by any competent** teacher.
* Section 1: how the modern world seeks to rip you off (Klarna, betting shops, supermarket “deals”, car finance etc etc).
Section 2: how the modern world (press, politicians etc) lie to and manipulate you. See also: Brexit.
I dislike Rishi Sunak but I think this is a good idea and if nothing else brings us in line with the rest of Europe.
** if you can’t explain to a 17-year-old how paying the minimum amount on a credit card debt is a bad idea, maybe you shouldn’t be teaching.
But Rishi is not suggesting what you have is he? He is just suggesting maths as it is (integration, differentiation, matrices) and all the other useless shit you learn in A level maths.
None of that stuff should be being taught as "maths" post O level. Its O level ( grade / gcse or what ever pre 16 exam) arithmetic
NO need to study "maths" to 18 to have basic numeracy. 16 - 18 maths is not relevant to the real world
To say - "everyone should have basic numeracy on leaving school" is fine. to say everyone should study maths to 18 is daft
I get how support for the Tories spectacularly collapsed under Liz Truss's premiership - shamelessly pandering to the wealthy during a severe cost of living crises for everyone else, and totally spooking the markets in the process.
What I don't understand is how Rishi Sunak hasn't significantly improved the situation for the Tories.
https://twitter.com/PeoplePolling?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
It's as if Liz Truss has sent the Tories into a death spiral that they can't get out of.
I suspect that if the Tories had not exposed the public to 44 days of Liz Truss's premiership they might be in a stronger position today.
Perhaps winning back disgruntled voters is a lot harder than losing them.
Financial literacy should be a compulsory and stand alone part of the curriculum.
and all the other useless shit you learn in A level maths.
oi, as I'm currently typing....
normal = n * ntm;
mlb::VectorNormalize(normal);
I resent that 😉
So what are the actual practicalities of this?
Oh look... there are none. What a surprise!
So my daughter did her A levels last year. She did English Language, English literature and politics. She got great grades and has an offer from her first choice university (which she's deferred for a year) where she's going to study creative writing (as you could probably tell from her A level choices)
So what possible *ing benefit would she gain from being forced to learn how to do quadratic equations at A level? And which of these subjects would she need to drop to allow for the hours a week of totally *ing pointless maths lessons?
Its an absolutely *ing stupid idea, which looks even more ridiculous when you look at the day to day practicalities that this would involve, not least that we don't even have the maths teachers to cope with the present curriculum
He's a *ing clown who's completely detached from reality
The problem is the pure opportunity cost of having a bunch of completely disengaged humanities students sitting in five extra maths lessons a week. Which subjects are going to be elbowed out of the way for this? Nightmare to study and a nightmare to teach. 18-year-old me would have been treating it like an extra private study session for the subjects I was interested in, completely ignoring what was going on at the front, and handing back a blank exam paper at the end.
And every minute spent 'teaching' A level students is a minute you could have spent helping GCSE students.
To say – “everyone should have basic numeracy on leaving school” is fine. to say everyone should study maths to 18 is daft
Absolutely. Some people though won't get to basic numeracy or literacy by 16 for whatever reason, and if we don't continue to upskill them to that competence level then they will inevitably struggle in adult life.
And yes, there will always be the school haters, or those that claim to have no qualifications and it did them no harm, we're not talking about paper qualifications, we're talking about being functionally able to work out your household incoming and outgoings and what'll happen to your mortgage if rates go up another %, etc.
How that is achieved in a non-school setting, I don't know, but it has to be a goal. I'm tempted to say part of OtJ training, or apprenticeships, or even part of unemployment support, but also aware that as we recruit our apprentice cohort (into a STEM field admittedly) if you aren't numerate and literate you're unlikely to get onto the apprentice scheme.
we’re talking about being functionally able to work out your household incoming and outgoings and what’ll happen to your mortgage if rates go up another %, etc.
Which is very basic stuff and not related in any way to what you learn in A level. Should the curriculum be changed for GCSE to include home financing for example - yes it should, but that is a different discussion
But Rishi is not suggesting what you have is he? He is just suggesting maths as it is (integration, differentiation, matrices) and all the other useless shit you learn in A level maths.
If that’s the case then it’s a terrible policy.
Also doesn’t fix the problem of way too many people being publicly proud of being incompetent at maths because being good at it is somehow embarrassing.
Yes it is an ill thought out policy. It will not fix the apparent problem of poor numeracy as if you have poor numeracy by the time you get to 16 that is an issue with what was going on until that point. Numeracy = basic maths in my view, A level is not basic maths, at all.
theotherjonv
Full MemberAbsolutely. Some people though won’t get to basic numeracy or literacy by 16 for whatever reason, and if we don’t continue to upskill them to that competence level then they will inevitably struggle in adult life.
So what that calls for, is an "out" from the current maths teaching into a basic, practical, real-world focused maths course to be taught to people who neither can or want to do gcse and a level. But those are the students that every government for the last, oh, forever has been least interested in, and which Sunak certainly doesn't give a shit about. So he'll happily talk of pushing them into more classes that won't help them and which they'll fail at, for no benefit and massive detriment to the system as a whole. He'll do absolutely ****-all to help sub-gcse students except to use them as a tool to beat teachers and schools with.
If that’s the case then it’s a terrible policy.
No one knows. No details. No funding. No timeline. No plan. No nothing. Not a policy at all. A political fart for everyone to have a sniff and a moan about, ignoring everything Sunak isn’t doing while he sits out the winter hoping we all have short memories when the summer returns and he resurfaces to claim the credit for gas prices falling and the slowing of inflation.
It's a bullshit dead cat. Nothing will come of it. Nothing ever does.
> duplicate post deleted <
Oh, Biners rant +1
but an hour a week in schools on something similar, developing the life skills of analysis, debate, etc. will equip kids far more than another two years trying to estimate the shape of a quadratic equation on graph paper.
My boss has sat with Nick Gibb, ex education minister, current education adviser.
We were told in no uncertain terms than the current government do not want children and young people equipped with such critical thinking, we should not approach DfE around anything to do with sustainability and climate education, that senior government and leaders in DfE would resist it.
Teach the technicalities of what is happening, yes. Teaching to have a response or motivation or equip to take action - absolutely no way.
We're now delivery partner for the (underfunded and much delayed) DfE sustainability and climate strategy, national education nature park. It's £5m over 5 years, it's led by a *few* people in DfE, disowned by DfE curriculum team (biggest team in DfE) and is now 4 months behind on the contract actually being signed.
The only reason they have done it is a) a tiny team in DfE trying to do something right, and b) Nadhim Zahawi went off-piste with an announcement at COP in Glasgow to get that days headlines. I was sat with him and the DfE team an hour after he announced it - with most of them going 'wtf do we do' - hence why my organisation was invited to help.
Don't believe that any of our current government either understand how good education is undertaken or that they have any shred of 'education is good for all' motivation - thier motivation is self serving in the extreme.
We were told in no uncertain terms than the current government do not want children and young people equipped with such critical thinking
Heaven forbid the plebs get told how to work out that the Tories are screwing them over.
WILL PEOPLE PLEASE STOP SAYING MATHS WHEN THEY MEAN ARITHMETIC!!!!!
*bangs head on wall*
🙂
No. Arithmetic is not going to be taught between 16-18 as a student learns all the arithmetic they require by the time they are 14 so what do you think they will be doing when they are 16-18?
as a student *learns* all the arithmetic they require by the time they are 14
*should learn* - and yet reports suggest "on average, one in four adults in England has low literacy or numeracy. These are skills as crucial as understanding the dosage instructions on an aspirin packet". And apparently it's declining, not improving.
https://learningandwork.org.uk/news-and-policy/literacy-numeracy-england-map/
As has been said before, I agree there's no benefit to forcing numerate kids to do another two years doing "non-useful" maths like calculus or quadratic equations; those that it is useful for such as those planning on going into eg. STEM subjects in further education will do it by choice.
But if kids aren't getting to functional effectiveness in numeracy or literacy by 14 or 16 then I think it's important that it continues until they do. Respecting that some will really struggle either with a school environment, and some will just struggle full stop. How that is done; I'm not an educationalist but we can't simply say 'school's not for everyone' and give up, 3/4 is a terrible level of competency for a first world nation.
No. Arithmetic is not going to be taught between 16-18 as a student learns all the arithmetic they require by the time they are 14 so what do you think they will be doing when they are 16-18?
Everyone who has posted on this thread is talking about arithmetic not higher maths!
But if kids aren’t getting to functional effectiveness in numeracy or literacy by 14 or 16 then I think it’s important that it continues until they do.
Well, there's a potentially useful policy. But it isn't the political fart that Sunak let off, is it. Throw in some money and a plan to actually train and recruit more maths teachers (including specialists to oversee primary school maths teaching perhaps, rather relying too much on trying to fix things post GCSE) and we could be getting somewhere.
But it isn’t the political fart that Sunak let off, is it.
God no. It's just a dead cat attempt and like everything else this third (or is it now fourth?) choice gov does, even they are increasingly shit
Throw in some money and a plan to actually train and recruit more maths teachers (including specialists to oversee primary school maths teaching perhaps, rather relying too much on trying to fix things post GCSE) and we could be getting somewhere.
☝️
If they do go ahead with the policy they should make it maths skills needed for life. How credit works, Aprs, mortgages, insurance, Stamp duty, tax and pensions.
How credit works, Aprs, mortgages, insurance, Stamp duty, tax and pensions.
Which should be in place well before further education level, as the maths complexity required is actually fairly low and perfectly understandable at pre GCSE level.
Sunak’s announcement is nothing more than a distraction that won’t actually happen, but allows right wing commentators to blather on about it for a while instead of focussing on some really existential Tory nastiness currently going on. See also; the Harry and Meghan non story.
Sunak is just pushing out clouds of ink and waiting for the Bring Back Boris sect to gain enough momentum to do him in. To be honest, the whole party is doing that too - none of them think they've got a snowball's chance in hell of winning an election so they're going to spend two years lining the pockets of the mates who are going to be giving them jobs afterwards.
Of course he uses a private GP. And even he didn’t, has the means to go straight to private specialists anyway.
Interestingly he is moving on talking to the healthcare strikers. the latest is that he WILL discuss this years pay claim.
Dunno why the change of heart. He was getting some flack from backbenchers over being inflexible
I guess it can only be a good thing
Interestingly he is moving on talking to the healthcare strikers.
Don’t be fooled. He’s only talking about the upcoming pay review/year… not the current one that is being contested in these strikes. All hangs on what “this year” means… he’s so damn shifty.
