FlyTheNest

Morning all.

Morning


https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... r-disaster" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Hillsborough relatives to learn if anyone will face charges over unlawul killings.


JFT 96 YNWA

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... or-pay-cap" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... uncils-say" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... and-police" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... uncils-say" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good morfternoon.

A belated thanks to TC2 for picture of ironing on top of shed,it was spookily like the "real thing",though flat roof made it easier.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40416102" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Council homes sold off almost three times as fast as new ones are built

Figures from 72 councils show more than 12,000 properties have been sold off since 2014 but only 4,309 have been built (Guardian)

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... -are-built

Morning all.

Busy day today - into the local library early and hope to solve a couple of mysteries, and then back to a meeting at school this evening.

Dan Hannan in "posting misleading statement and then deleting when getting found out without saying he was wrong" non-shocker.

This one was about rights of EU citizens after Brexit.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nearly Legal -Giles Peaker doing sterling work in pointing out Lord Chancellor's "misunderstandings" re.legal aid eligibility for tenants.

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2017 ... ks-or.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


When capturing the middle ground works or fails

Wren-Lewis


Edited to add removal of edited to add.

Edited to replace repeat link with a fresh one!

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/l ... 37bb79bd29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

Labour is demanding to know how many schools, hospitals and other buildings have been assessed for fire safety in the wake of the Grenfell Tower blaze.

Edited to add : see HindleA above for even more editing fun and confusion!

Full NCSR report.

http://natcen.ac.uk/our-research/resear ... attitudes/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube]OSaNWYHmUvI[/youtube]

11 AM CPS decision announced.

50 years since first ATM.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... nniversary" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Families now,public at about 11.30

Morning.

My absolute lowest expectation of any Labour government would be better than this.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40418457" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are warnings of confusion over university admissions from changes to GCSE exams in England which will create two different pass grades.
A number of universities have minimum entry grades at GCSE level - such as a C grade pass at maths and English.
But GCSEs are switching to numerical grades, from 9 to 1, and there is uncertainty because both 4 and 5 are officially classed as pass grades.
Universities are now setting different "pass" grade equivalents.
University College London says a C grade pass now requires a grade 5, while Manchester University has set the benchmark at grade 4.

Complete shambles.

Imagine the uproar if this was happening under a Labour government.

And that's before we've even had the first wave of results. I suspect they're going to be all over the place. My son's school has just had a last minute change to the curriculum which will see some GCSE courses starting in year 9 instead of the usual year 10. I hope it's a prudent, carefully considered decision (and I'm certainly willing to support it, as there does seem to be some evidence it can reduce stress in students) but it does smack a little bit of outright panic, I have to say.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liv ... s-13249366#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


JFT 96

NonOxCol wrote:Morning.

My absolute lowest expectation of any Labour government would be better than this.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The absolute lowest expectation of a TORY government should be better than this. Should.

HindleA wrote:http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liv ... s-13249366#


JFT 96

Indeed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-me ... e-40419819" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ex-Ch Supt David Duckenfield faces Hillsborough manslaughter charge

Good-morning, everyone

Willow904 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40418457

There are warnings of confusion over university admissions from changes to GCSE exams in England which will create two different pass grades.
A number of universities have minimum entry grades at GCSE level - such as a C grade pass at maths and English.
But GCSEs are switching to numerical grades, from 9 to 1, and there is uncertainty because both 4 and 5 are officially classed as pass grades.
Universities are now setting different "pass" grade equivalents.
University College London says a C grade pass now requires a grade 5, while Manchester University has set the benchmark at grade 4.

Complete shambles.

Imagine the uproar if this was happening under a Labour government.

And that's before we've even had the first wave of results. I suspect they're going to be all over the place. My son's school has just had a last minute change to the curriculum which will see some GCSE courses starting in year 9 instead of the usual year 10. I hope it's a prudent, carefully considered decision (and I'm certainly willing to support it, as there does seem to be some evidence it can reduce stress in students) but it does smack a little bit of outright panic, I have to say.

I hate starting GCSE in year 9 with a passion. I have only ever seen it done as a way of drilling exam technique and questions for three years to impact results and tables - not for any educational value beyond that. By the end of three years the kids are completely sick of the same thing over and over again. History is a particular offfender, as many Heads of Department can now adapt the curriculum, so nearly a 1000 years of history is rushed through in Year 7 and 8, and then they spend from Year 9 onwards studying the nazis. They do the nazis for GCSE, and then the poor suckers get more of the Nazis at AS and A level. Its a nonsense, but a symptom of the league tables fetish.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liv ... s-13250526" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/ ... decisions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

CPS

Hillsborough Charging Decisions

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... rs-charged" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temulkar wrote:

Willow904 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40418457

There are warnings of confusion over university admissions from changes to GCSE exams in England which will create two different pass grades.
A number of universities have minimum entry grades at GCSE level - such as a C grade pass at maths and English.
But GCSEs are switching to numerical grades, from 9 to 1, and there is uncertainty because both 4 and 5 are officially classed as pass grades.
Universities are now setting different "pass" grade equivalents.
University College London says a C grade pass now requires a grade 5, while Manchester University has set the benchmark at grade 4.

Complete shambles.

Imagine the uproar if this was happening under a Labour government.

And that's before we've even had the first wave of results. I suspect they're going to be all over the place. My son's school has just had a last minute change to the curriculum which will see some GCSE courses starting in year 9 instead of the usual year 10. I hope it's a prudent, carefully considered decision (and I'm certainly willing to support it, as there does seem to be some evidence it can reduce stress in students) but it does smack a little bit of outright panic, I have to say.

I hate starting GCSE in year 9 with a passion. I have only ever seen it done as a way of drilling exam technique and questions for three years to impact results and tables - not for any educational value beyond that. By the end of three years the kids are completely sick of the same thing over and over again. History is a particular offfender, as many Heads of Department can now adapt the curriculum, so nearly a 1000 years of history is rushed through in Year 7 and 8, and then they spend from Year 9 onwards studying the nazis. They do the nazis for GCSE, and then the poor suckers get more of the Nazis at AS and A level. Its a nonsense, but a symptom of the league tables fetish.

It works OK in Science, and is the norm in all the schools round here. Perhaps the curriculum is more of a spiral than history, allowing revisiting of topics but with more advanced concepts (same in Maths).
PS Afternoon folks.

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... rs-charged

Its only taken 28 years - will those affected by the Grenfell horror have to wait that long?

55DegreesNorth wrote:

Temulkar wrote:
I hate starting GCSE in year 9 with a passion. I have only ever seen it done as a way of drilling exam technique and questions for three years to impact results and tables - not for any educational value beyond that. By the end of three years the kids are completely sick of the same thing over and over again. History is a particular offfender, as many Heads of Department can now adapt the curriculum, so nearly a 1000 years of history is rushed through in Year 7 and 8, and then they spend from Year 9 onwards studying the nazis. They do the nazis for GCSE, and then the poor suckers get more of the Nazis at AS and A level. Its a nonsense, but a symptom of the league tables fetish.

It works OK in Science, and is the norm in all the schools round here. Perhaps the curriculum is more of a spiral than history, allowing revisiting of topics but with more advanced concepts (same in Maths).
PS Afternoon folks.

I think my son's school does normally start building towards GCSE in science and maths in year 9, in a non formal way. Certainly you need to be in the right group in year 9 if you want to go on to study triple science. The last minute change, which I suspect to be a panic move, is in English with an announcement that the GCSE literature texts will be studied from the beginning of year 9 in a formal manner. Which does sound pretty dull, but then they have to learn whole sections by rote and regurgitate them in the exam now, so dullness seems to be built in by design. I really do pity this year's GCSE cohort. Although the first year of GCSEs that I took in 1988 was equally chaotic, at least the courses were interesting and the reasons for the change from 'O' levels made sense and seemed positive. This shambles seems both punitive and pointless. I'm grateful that these exams at least won't be new and untried when my children take them, but it's still a shame they've had to experience education under the Tories. Their primary school experience has been absolutely excellent, but it's starting to feel like everything's heading downhill from here on in.

Better trade deals with those countries as a UK democracy than Tory dictatorship rule of the UK.

Willow904 wrote:I think my son's school does normally start building towards GCSE in science and maths in year 9, in a non formal way. Certainly you need to be in the right group in year 9 if you want to go on to study triple science. The last minute change, which I suspect to be a panic move, is in English with an announcement that the GCSE literature texts will be studied from the beginning of year 9 in a formal manner. Which does sound pretty dull, but then they have to learn whole sections by rote and regurgitate them in the exam now, so dullness seems to be built in by design. I really do pity this year's GCSE cohort. Although the first year of GCSEs that I took in 1988 was equally chaotic, at least the courses were interesting and the reasons for the change from 'O' levels made sense and seemed positive. This shambles seems both punitive and pointless. I'm grateful that these exams at least won't be new and untried when my children take them, but it's still a shame they've had to experience education under the Tories. Their primary school experience has been absolutely excellent, but it's starting to feel like everything's heading downhill from here on in.

One thing we've been told is that this year 'average' Y11 student will sit about 16 hours of exams which will assess about 50% of their courses, and this years 'average' Y9 student in two years will have to sit about 33 hours of exams will which will assess about 85% of their courses.

citizenJA wrote:Better trade deals with those countries as a UK democracy than Tory dictatorship rule of the UK.

I'm referring to the Guardian's Politics live blog linked below. It gets worse. Desperate stuff from Tories.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oliver Letwin: government must look at tax rises for sake of public services
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... rvices-nhs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oliver Letwin says this
We've reached the end times

citizenJA wrote:

citizenJA wrote:Better trade deals with those countries as a UK democracy than Tory dictatorship rule of the UK.

I'm referring to the Guardian's Politics live blog linked below. It gets worse. Desperate stuff from Tories.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/bl ... itics-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just read the latest regarding Venezuela's political struggles. I don't like Tories having brought up Venezuela into the conversation during PMQs today.
Makes me uneasy. Cognitive dissonance and that. Tories have lost their majority, they've been thrown off their course and don't have the mandate Theresa May asked for in the GE.

adam wrote:

Willow904 wrote:I think my son's school does normally start building towards GCSE in science and maths in year 9, in a non formal way. Certainly you need to be in the right group in year 9 if you want to go on to study triple science. The last minute change, which I suspect to be a panic move, is in English with an announcement that the GCSE literature texts will be studied from the beginning of year 9 in a formal manner. Which does sound pretty dull, but then they have to learn whole sections by rote and regurgitate them in the exam now, so dullness seems to be built in by design. I really do pity this year's GCSE cohort. Although the first year of GCSEs that I took in 1988 was equally chaotic, at least the courses were interesting and the reasons for the change from 'O' levels made sense and seemed positive. This shambles seems both punitive and pointless. I'm grateful that these exams at least won't be new and untried when my children take them, but it's still a shame they've had to experience education under the Tories. Their primary school experience has been absolutely excellent, but it's starting to feel like everything's heading downhill from here on in.

One thing we've been told is that this year 'average' Y11 student will sit about 16 hours of exams which will assess about 50% of their courses, and this years 'average' Y9 student in two years will have to sit about 33 hours of exams will which will assess about 85% of their courses.

Yes, I did discover that the new maths and English exams this year are all exam based. No more coursework. So no longer really GCSEs. Back to memory tests like the old "O" levels. I only became aware of this because I was googling for information about the new exams. I don't know how widely this significant change has been trailed. Has anyone noticed much discussion of this in the media? I may have just missed it.

Jo Stevens at PMQs today

Willow904 wrote:

adam wrote:

Willow904 wrote:I think my son's school does normally start building towards GCSE in science and maths in year 9, in a non formal way. Certainly you need to be in the right group in year 9 if you want to go on to study triple science. The last minute change, which I suspect to be a panic move, is in English with an announcement that the GCSE literature texts will be studied from the beginning of year 9 in a formal manner. Which does sound pretty dull, but then they have to learn whole sections by rote and regurgitate them in the exam now, so dullness seems to be built in by design. I really do pity this year's GCSE cohort. Although the first year of GCSEs that I took in 1988 was equally chaotic, at least the courses were interesting and the reasons for the change from 'O' levels made sense and seemed positive. This shambles seems both punitive and pointless. I'm grateful that these exams at least won't be new and untried when my children take them, but it's still a shame they've had to experience education under the Tories. Their primary school experience has been absolutely excellent, but it's starting to feel like everything's heading downhill from here on in.

One thing we've been told is that this year 'average' Y11 student will sit about 16 hours of exams which will assess about 50% of their courses, and this years 'average' Y9 student in two years will have to sit about 33 hours of exams will which will assess about 85% of their courses.

Yes, I did discover that the new maths and English exams this year are all exam based. No more coursework. So no longer really GCSEs. Back to memory tests like the old "O" levels. I only became aware of this because I was googling for information about the new exams. I don't know how widely this significant change has been trailed. Has anyone noticed much discussion of this in the media? I may have just missed it.

This is also true of new A Levels - a few have fought tooth and nail to retain some kind of coursework - maybe 20% of total assessment - but most have lost it all - and even Level 3 Vocational subjects - BTECs and so on - now have around 50% compulsory exam units.

[youtube]kHg6QjhvsCM[/youtube]

History is different to science/maths. Advanced skills and concepts can be taught using any period without revisiting them. Indeed, there is no real need other than political for kids to study any specific period or nation's history to learn the skills and concepts, any one will do so to speak. That's what makes the Hitler dominance so counterproductive. Similar in English Lit, the same texts, and extracts for three years just doing a different level of analysis. It's soul destroying to teach, if you have a passion for your subject, and evaporates kids enthusiasm. It's just turning them into exam robots.

Grayling being a total shit on wato. Local government decide over sprinklers, not central government.

StephenDolan wrote:Grayling being a total shit

That is his default state.

Temulkar wrote:History is different to science/maths. Advanced skills and concepts can be taught using any period without revisiting them. Indeed, there is no real need other than political for kids to study any specific period or nation's history to learn the skills and concepts, any one will do so to speak. That's what makes the Hitler dominance so counterproductive. Similar in English Lit, the same texts, and extracts for three years just doing a different level of analysis. It's soul destroying to teach, if you have a passion for your subject, and evaporates kids enthusiasm. It's just turning them into exam robots.

It does feel like a backwards step. The very first History GCSE had a source material element for the very first time, where the point was that students were to be taught how to handle source material which would only be first seen in the exam. Given that I went on to study history at degree level and one of my papers in the final exam was a source material paper in a very similar vein, looking back, that first history GCSE was a very good preparation for studying at a higher level. Do we know how much input the government has had from universities when devising their new GCSEs and "A" levels? Certainly studying the same periods over and over for 3 years doesn't sound like the sort of thing that would have been beneficial to me when studying history at a higher level, but what do I know compared to the superior Mr Gove.

Leftie BBC...



Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak

Wrexham MP Ian Lucas trolls May with Q on police cuts - she visited his constituency trying to swipe the seat during the campaign
12:26 PM · Jun 28, 2017

Guardian Politics Blog

The Conservative MP Johnny Mercer says he wants to lift the public sector pay cap.
But he says he won’t be voting with Labour tonight.

Johnny Mercer MP
✔
@JohnnyMercerUK
I will persistently be a loud voice to remove public sector pay cap for frontline workers. But will not vote with this political game today.
8:56 AM - 28 Jun 2017
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Game?

citizenJA wrote:

Guardian Politics Blog

The Conservative MP Johnny Mercer says he wants to lift the public sector pay cap.
But he says he won’t be voting with Labour tonight.

Johnny Mercer MP
✔
@JohnnyMercerUK
I will persistently be a loud voice to remove public sector pay cap for frontline workers. But will not vote with this political game today.
8:56 AM - 28 Jun 2017
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Game?

Ephemerid formerly of these parts was lucid on this JA!

So there’s to be a vote tonight on a Labour amendment to end the cap on public sector pay.

The badges that Labour MPs were wearing in the House today are RCN “Scrap the cap” badges.

Tory Johnny Mercer says he won’t vote for the amendment, even though he supports the end of the cap, because Labour are playing games and are trying to vote down the contents of the Queen’s Speech.

Correct, moron – that’s what Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition is actually FOR.

[youtube]d_aeQ5zHwyE[/youtube]

Then Tory MP Jonny Mercer doesn't want or care to lift the cap on public sector pay
His vote and party politics are proof enough of that