The Sisters of Mercy Forum
Motz wrote:Surely that's an Eldritch series?Obviousman wrote:Next month I'll have a lovely exam covering all kind of definitions which you don't use anyway, like Taylor series, matrixes, whatever, and some terrible statistics too...
) I translated it litteraly 
... Depends on the world you live inBurn wrote:Maths rocks
Now that would be an encouragementpaint it black wrote:yeah, i like maths
.... Thus she stops about 55 times every lesson (and a lesson takes two hours), and I try to keep myself busy through counting how many stops she manages to do 
I'm all in favour of high academic standards for those who are that way inclined. I think the dumbing-down you talk of is due to a continued lack of any genuine alternative for the rest. High schools in this country are judged primarily on the number of pupils achieveing 5 or more grade Cs at GCSE level. Luke's school offers an IT GNVQ which is very popular: the kids like it beacause it's primarily course-work based; the school likes it because a pass is equivalent to 4 GCSEs. But it's not what I would call a genuine vocational qualification. It's not going to help them get a job in mainstream IT. Familiarity with the most common PC-based applications is a basic life skill though in this day and age and, therefore, I would argue far more essential than the sort of things they're trying to cram into him on his maths course.Chairman Bux wrote:Replacing science, mathematics and other such purely "academic" courses with practical and domestic classes will be the ruination of the nation.
Not to be a pedant, but teaching them the most common apps will only hinder them and funnel more money into the pockets of those blokes in Redmond. As with all subjects, it's better to teach transferable skills than pigeon-holing everything, which is perhaps why generic subjects such as Maths have more support than supposedly more useful qualifications.Francis wrote:Luke's school offers an IT GNVQ which is very popular: the kids like it beacause it's primarily course-work based; the school likes it because a pass is equivalent to 4 GCSEs. But it's not what I would call a genuine vocational qualification. It's not going to help them get a job in mainstream IT. Familiarity with the most common PC-based applications is a basic life skill though in this day and age and, therefore, I would argue far more essential than the sort of things they're trying to cram into him on his maths course.
). However, what you risk by introducing such a system is that there is a stigma attached to either one of the paths. Either a student could be seen as "thick" for opting to take purely vocational courses (maybe a mix and match of vocational/academic courses would be a good idea) or some of the less psychologically strong, yet intelligent students, may be put off the academic courses by peer pressure.You sound very coherent to me. And while you may be at the end of the system in question, you're soon to be at the start of the one which is in a position to change it i.e. the right to vote.Motz wrote:Anyway, I'm just babbling now. I'm at the end of the system so it's not exactly going to do me much good by ranting about it.
I know what you mean. My son Adrian's teacher wanted him to do grade 2 one more year. Me and Sara refused. Now he's very good in grade 3. Doing just fine.Francis wrote:Twice now Luke's maths teacher has rung to tell me he's only managed a D on his test paper when his target grade's a C. Yeah well, if you'd set his sights a bit higher he might have managed a C or even a B. What earthly use is Pythagorus' theory ever gonna be to him anyway? Why don't we teach them something more useful like raising children/ eating healthily/ fixing leaking taps/ choosing the right mortgage.
It makes me seethe.
i think more the ideal you aspire to? the reality for all subjects, is, and i think has to be, more propositional and at best (for the brightest) practical learning, but never in my experience, experientialSchools are for educating (i.e. Giving students something they can use), not giving parrot-like familiarity with a small field of reference (English literature is the worst offender in this case).
that might be seen as the new BTec: the old ONC for technicians, C&G for practical bod's, rolled into one meaningfulYes, I agree with a mixture of academic/ vocational courses. I wouldn't want to see a return to the old grammar school/ secondary modern system where we were segregated based on an exam taken at 11 years of age with no opportunity to develop later.
qualification.Yes, but the point I'm obviously failing to make is that post 16 is too late. Look at all the disillusioned 15 year olds hanging around a street corner near you. I'm not advocating sticking 10 year olds up chimneys, but I think we 're trying to give too many of our teenagers more of an 'education' than is good for them.paint it black wrote:you know one thing Francis, i've never met a poor (in wealth) plumber. true, there is still a great deal to be said for the post school apprenticeship route IMHO
I thought I would never need any of that c**p, until I joined the Merchant Navy and they went even further, (talk about hell), so be careful sometimes even the worst subjects are needed, oh I failed art and now I'm a graphic designer, just goes to showFrancis wrote: What earthly use is Pythagorus' theory ever gonna be to him anyway?
