Barrowford Primary School....

[claretonthecoast1882]

You could have gone all in though

Something like

"Hitler was a veggie, and I bet he started that because of something that happened at school"

It would have been close to too obvious, but with the state of this board at the moment you'd have probably convinced more than a few

There is a chapter in a book called "Defying Hitler" with goes into detail of a young Adolf and an aubergine

[duncandisorderly]

You could have gone all in though

Something like

"Hitler was a veggie, and I bet he started that because of something that happened at school"

It would have been close to too obvious, but with the state of this board at the moment you'd have probably convinced more than a few

Hitler was a sensitive man. He went to art school when he was younger, he wanted to be a painter.
Hitler was a vegetarian. He was also a non smoker.
He hired gay and handicapped officers. He was concerned about overpopulation.
If Hitler was alive today he'd listen to the Cure, the Smiths and Depeche Mode.

[Boss Hogg]

Surely the same message would be achieved by having a Veggie meal on one or two days of the week as opposed to every meal?

Unfortunately this is just someone pushing their beliefs on to everyone else with little care for the actual pupils or families. If the school is sending home the supplements that are needed as part of a Vegetarian diet then fair enough, but they aren't, they don't actually care about the health of the pupils, just that their beliefs are adopted by them.

Anyone who has been involved in the school system knows that there are families that rely on school meals to provide a balanced diet for their kids, some of these don't have the option of sending a Packed lunch due to financial constraints. Either give them the Vegetarian option or make it Veggie Mondays and Wednesdays or something similar- it's simple really.

Agree. If it’s not extreme it doesn’t draw as much attention though. Everything’s ‘Vegan’ now and not Vegetarian as it sounds more impressive. A bit of everything in moderation isn’t attention seeking enough.

[Lancasterclaret]

Hitler was a sensitive man. He went to art school when he was younger, he wanted to be a painter.
Hitler was a vegetarian. He was also a non smoker.
He hired gay and handicapped officers. He was concerned about overpopulation.
If Hitler was alive today he'd listen to the Cure, the Smiths and Depeche Mode.

Defo the Smiths with the absolute state that is Morrisey these days

[Burnleyareback2]

Very much down to individual experience. We just wanted something more traditional. But as I say, beyond the ‘headlines’, the head had well reasoned arguments for their policies and genuinely seemed to care.

Fully agree and more importantly I think you can take a judgement on the school that fits your child’s needs.

[aggi]

On this issue Lancaster we'll have to disagree. The private schools are better funded because the parents are willing to pay for their children's education. They're willing to pay because the schools are willing to implement proven teaching methods that state schools have been neglecting.

The Michaela school has blown away the idea that increased funding is behind the poor performance of state schools.

The Michaela school is a non-selective state school. It receives standard school funding. No more than any other state school.

As the Guardian states, "Michaela’s results rank among the best in the country".

Read that again. Not "best in the country compared to schools in equivalent areas"; just "among the best in the country."

This needs putting into context: It is one of the best state schools in the country even though it is in one of the most deprived areas of the country. It is slap bang in the middle of Wembley - an area riven by gangs, knife crime, family breakdown, unemployment, drugs and violence. Many of its children won't even have English as their mother tongue. And it is among the best schools in the country.

This is like Accrington Stanley being in the Champions Leagues qualification places.

It isn't because they receive more funding. It is because of the policies they have instigated.

I know a few people who teach at an inner city state school, over 50% of pupils speak English as an additional language, higher than average pupils eligible for pupil premium, etc.

I guess the teaching would be described as child centered. Their last set of results put them in the top 40 in the country.

There are lots of teaching methods, anecdotally everyone can give examples. There isn't any overwhelming evidence that one is better (possibly why you haven't provided any when people have asked). Just like there isn't any evidence that free schools are better.

[Rowls]

I know a few people who teach at an inner city state school, over 50% of pupils speak English as an additional language, higher than average pupils eligible for pupil premium, etc.

I guess the teaching would be described as child centered. Their last set of results put them in the top 40 in the country.

There are lots of teaching methods, anecdotally everyone can give examples. There isn't any overwhelming evidence that one is better (possibly why you haven't provided any when people have asked). Just like there isn't any evidence that free schools are better.

No, there IS overwhelming evidence that what is termed traditional teaching methods impart far more knowledge and better education to children. Sadly many, many schools are still teaching along the theories prominent in incompréhensives, local authorities and dominant for many years. This includes “child centred learning”.

But what are we even talking about here?

How would you describe “child centred learning”?
Can you give a description of “discovery based learning”?

[Rowls]

This is how Wikipedia describes “child centred learning”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student ... d_learning

The actual comparison studies are difficult to find because “child centred” methods have risen to prominence. Many teaching groups, unions, local authorities are still pushing and insisting on implementing these failed teaching theories.

Many online articles will have what look like ‘fair comparisons’ giving pros and cons of eithe approach but few will admit that teacher led, traditional methods are far more effective.

The evidence is out there if you look for it though.

But it’s not the only thing that is rotten within the education system - there are many problems in our state system beyond the pushing of failed education theory: the breakdown of teacher authority, lack of knowledge based curricula, lack of cultural references, etc etc

“Child-centred learning” was the biggest elephant in the room.

[Rowls]

Here’s the blog written by headmistress of michaela school:

https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.com/about/

She says the problems faced today (even in her own school) are different to those faced 10 years ago when she began the blog.

She has recently criticised what she terms “guess what is in my head?” teaching, pointing out it lends an advantage to middle class children. This is a kind of “child-centred” approach to teaching.

She is also currently railing against the influence of smartphones - a new problem that has emerged in the past 10 years.

[Rowls]

Katherine Birbalsingh’s blog on the “guess what’s in my head?” game:

https://tomisswithloveblog.wordpress.co ... n-my-head/

Interesting reading, for sure.

[aggi]

No, there IS overwhelming evidence that what is termed traditional teaching methods impart far more knowledge and better education to children. Sadly many, many schools are still teaching along the theories prominent in incompréhensives, local authorities and dominant for many years. This includes “child centred learning”.

But what are we even talking about here?

How would you describe “child centred learning”?
Can you give a description of “discovery based learning”?

You can say it's overwhelming but it's surprising you can't provide any evidence if that is the case.

The definitions seem fairly fluid, that Wikipedia entry reads more like child led learning to me.

Obviously the other question is how are you judging these things.

You keep pointing at the Michaela school but on what basis are you assessing that? Progress, high performing pupils, low ability pupils doing better, pupil happiness? Given there has only been one set of GCSE results pre-pandemic that obviously won't be how you've judged so what is?

[Garnerssoap]

Homework is an instrument of state control.

[Devils_Advocate]

Good article on whether the free schools programme has been a success

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/poli ... williamson

[Alanstevensonsgloves]

Homework is an instrument of state control.

My 9 year old daughter agrees

[Clarets4me]

You could have gone all in though ... Something like
"Hitler was a veggie, and I bet he started that because of something that happened at school"

It would have been close to too obvious, but with the state of this board at the moment you'd have probably convinced more than a few

Nah, the point is that Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito were anti-smoking, whereas Churchill, Frankin D Roosevelt, Stalin, De Gaulle and Eisenhower were all prodigious consumers of the " evil weed " .... any smoker will tell you that some " non smokers " have fascist tendencies !

The whole unpleasantness of the 2nd World War could have been averted by a few packs of Senior Service ...

[aggi]

More modern does not equal better.

In fact, for generations now we've know that what are considered traditional teaching method are significantly superior to newer ideas like "child-centred learning".

This is borne out by test after test and result after result and yet many of these inferior teaching methods persist. Why? is the big question.

Traditional teaching methods work because the teacher has the knowledge and it is they who should instruct the children to impart this knowledge. Take something fairly easy for us to understand: Pythagorus' theorum. A child of 12 should be able to grasp the concept. Yet mankind was on the planet for hundreds of thousands of years before anybody formulated this theory. What chance would a 12 year old child have of working out the theory for themselves in a "discovery based learning environment"? Zero is the correct answer to this question. But if the teacher teaches the children the theorum they will all know it.

When we had lots of state grammar schools educating their pupils with these traditional methods the proportion and total of working class children attending good universities soared.

When we had comprehensive schools teaching with ideas based around wrong-headed modern ideas like "child-centred learning" the number of working class children attending good universities fell dramatically, as a proportion and as a total.

Many new Free Schools have reverted to teaching by proven, traditional methods (they are open to new ideas but use techniques that are proven in schools, not pure "theory") and guess what? They have started sending working class children from the poorest areas to the best universities once again.

I strongly recommend this book:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tiger-Teachers ... 191290621X

Here's a Guardian article on the school in question:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... of%2022%25.

The article refers to the school as "controversial". I think the adjective they were looking for is 'exceptional': (from the article) "Compared with other non-selective state schools, Michaela’s results rank among the best in the country. More than half (54%) of all grades were level 7 or above (equivalent to the old-style A and A*), which was more than twice the national average of 22%. Nearly one in five (18%) of all grades were 9s, compared with 4.5% nationally, and in maths, one in four results were level 9."

Here's a video from their Youtube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmlUc4zTKyg

I truly believe all (state) schools in the country should be run along the same principles and with the same methods. If I ever make millions of pounds I will build and fund a state school in Burnley that looks to replicate everything this school is achieving for working class, inner-city kids in London.

Just caught an interview with this head regarding the inequalities in STEM qualifications. Got to say I wasn't convinced by the gist of her comments:

“Physics isn’t something that girls tend to fancy. They don’t want to do it. They don’t like it… There’s a lot of hard maths in there that they don’t want to do.”

[Lancasterclaret]

It was very telling that she didn't have anything like facts to back up such a ridiculous statement

She's the education tsar isn't she?

Something tells me that she got that job because she's known as "Britains strictest head teacher" rather than anything else

[Rowls]

It was very telling that she didn't have anything like facts to back up such a ridiculous statement

She's the education tsar isn't she?

Something tells me that she got that job because she's known as "Britains strictest head teacher" rather than anything else

What a load of tosh. She got the job because of the amazing results she's achieved with her school.

[Rowls]

Just caught an interview with this head regarding the inequalities in STEM qualifications. Got to say I wasn't convinced by the gist of her comments:

“Physics isn’t something that girls tend to fancy. They don’t want to do it. They don’t like it… There’s a lot of hard maths in there that they don’t want to do.”

Well she's been a teacher for many, many years. She's established an ultra-high performing school from scratch and achieved success almost beyond measure.

Maybe she knows what she's talking about even if you weren't convinced by the gist of it?

The results of her school suggest that for all these brickbats aimed at her, she knows what she's doing.

[Rowls]

|Just caught the end of Politics Live on BBC2 where Katherine Birbalsingh had to spend 15-20 minutes explaining how she'd been taken out of context.

Might be worth watching and might be worth asking why she (and this is a recurring issue for her specifically) is so often taken out of context in this manner?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/ ... itics-live

[taio]

Distasteful judging a local professional from afar

[Lancasterclaret]

Distasteful judging a local professional from afar

Happy to acknowledge that I know the square root of f**k all about her and what we said (only going of what was reported this morning) so more than happy to retract

[Rowls]

Happy to acknowledge that I know the square root of f**k all about her and what we said (only going of what was reported this morning) so more than happy to retract

That's genuinely an honorable thing to post Lancs.

I do have to wonder why Ms Birbalsingh attracts such viciousness though? (edit. not from yourself BTW, that's aimed at "the media" et al)

I'm suspect of anything reportedly attributed to her or written about her and find that anything that comes directly from her is usually thoughtful and intelligent. As she admitted on Politics Live today, she isn't perfect and admits her language was "clumsy" but that's exactly what spoken language is.

This silly game the press (and public) play of trying to trip up figures in the public spotlight is nasty and it is counter-productive. We'll only succeed in driving talented and exceptional people out of public service.

[aggi]

Well she's been a teacher for many, many years. She's established an ultra-high performing school from scratch and achieved success almost beyond measure.

Maybe she knows what she's talking about even if you weren't convinced by the gist of it?

The results of her school suggest that for all these brickbats aimed at her, she knows what she's doing.

I didn't realise that she'd achieved other stuff as well as the Michaela school. I can't really find anything about her successful schools other than the very recent Michaela one though, any more info?

Obviously everyone can have their own opinions, I've watched the extra clip and she still doesn't convince me on this area. (She keeps talking about context but I can't find the original and she doesn't link to it on her twitter for some reason). Her suggestion that her school has fixed it, but still a low proportion of those doing physics are girls, don't really tally for me, particularly with the comment about "hard maths".

She's clearly done some impressive things (although there are plenty of similar stories out there without the same level of coverage) but if you are also fulfilling roles such as Chair of the Social Mobility Commission then you really need to think somewhat more about your words at times.

[Rowls]

I didn't realise that she'd achieved other stuff as well as the Michaela school. I can't really find anything about her successful schools other than the very recent Michaela one though, any more info?

Obviously everyone can have their own opinions, I've watched the extra clip and she still doesn't convince me on this area. (She keeps talking about context but I can't find the original and she doesn't link to it on her twitter for some reason). Her suggestion that her school has fixed it, but still a low proportion of those doing physics are girls, don't really tally for me, particularly with the comment about "hard maths".

She's clearly done some impressive things (although there are plenty of similar stories out there without the same level of coverage) but if you are also fulfilling roles such as Chair of the Social Mobility Commission then you really need to think somewhat more about your words at times.

Why should she have to link a clip of her talking on twitter to prove she has said what she has said? I believe she was invited by a panel to speak to one of those select committees. Why would she film it and be in possession of the (hours of?) footage to link to her twitter? Why on earth should she have to do any of this? And all simply to try and prevent people misconstruing her?

She hasn't suggested her school has "fixed" anything - you're misrepresenting her entirely in claiming this. Though you're in good company in this respect.

We'll have to disagree on the wisdom on continually misrepresenting public figures. If you think holding any kind of public office gives the press carte blanche to misrepresent you on every turn and that it's therefore her "fault" for being continually misrepresented and having her words presented out of context then I politely but very firmly disagree. People need to have their words reported in good faith.

If any media establishment disagrees with Katherine Birbalsingh they'd be better off explaining their differences and putting forward their own opinions rather than continually misrepresenting her and placing everything she says out of context.

[dsr]

What is it that is the issue here?

I can't work out whether the objection is because:
(1) girls are not reluctant to do physics and Ms Birbalsingh is wrong; or
(2) girls are reluctant to do physics but that shouldn't be talked about; or
(3) girls are reluctant to do physics but it's for a different reason.

If the objectors would make it clear what they are objecting to it might be helpful.

[Lancasterclaret]

What is it that is the issue here?

I can't work out whether the objection is because:
(1) girls are not reluctant to do physics and Ms Birbalsingh is wrong; or
(2) girls are reluctant to do physics but that shouldn't be talked about; or
(3) girls are reluctant to do physics but it's for a different reason.

If the objectors would make it clear what they are objecting to it might be helpful.

Here's the clip dsr

https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1 ... 6227183616

[dsr]

Here's the clip dsr

https://twitter.com/chrischirp/status/1 ... 6227183616

But that doesn't answer my question. I know what Mr Birbalsingh said, but I don't know why anyone is objecting to her saying it. Is it because they think she is wrong, or is it because they think the subject shouldn't be talked about?

[Lancasterclaret]

But that doesn't answer my question. I know what Mr Birbalsingh said, but I don't know why anyone is objecting to her saying it. Is it because they think she is wrong, or is it because they think the subject shouldn't be talked about?

I think its fairly obvious, and that is why there is such a furore

Put it one way, you aren't thick, so pretending you don't know why that clip has caused a fuss isn't a good look for you

[Rowls]

Nobody appears to be objecting to the low numbers of boys or young men taking up careers as midwives, do they? Maybe they are but I'm not aware of it?

Or the lack of female representation in the refuse collection industry?

It's puzzling why some people fail to grasp the reality of the world as it is and are willing to try and score cheap political points in the way Christina Pagel so clearly is. Pagel, who's politics are there for all to see on her twitter page, is claiming that Birbalsingh is "totally fine" (Pagel's phrase BTW, not Birbalsingh's) with only 16% of girls choosing physics and yet today Birbalsingh when asks this question explicitly said she wants to see more girls taking up physics but stands by each girls individual decision not to.

The honourable thing for Pagel to do would be to retract the tweet and apologize, especially given the high profile she commands.

There's a lot of fudging whereby people grudgingly admit that, yes, Birbalsingh might be right but -so goes the argument- she should talk like a robot or one of those guarded politicians so as to never say anything that might be misconstrued. I say this is bunkum. People like Pagel simply need to stop miscontruing public servants like Birbalsingh and be honest and open about their politicking rather launch these sly political campaigns to misrepresent her and take her words out of context.

[Rowls]

The problem appears to be that Birbalsingh gave an honest answer.

To anyone who wants to get up on their high horse about this, which of the girls in Birbalsingh's 6th form who chose not to take physics should be forced to study the subject against their will?

[dsr]

I think its fairly obvious, and that is why there is such a furore

Put it one way, you aren't thick, so pretending you don't know why that clip has caused a fuss isn't a good look for you

I suspect it has caused a furore because some people believe that certain opinions must not be spoken. Do you think I'm right?

But I don't want to see the worst in people if I can help it. if the people objecting to these views have any fairer or more reasonable excuses for their objections, they should have the chance to give them.

[Rowls]

I suspect it has caused a furore because some people believe that certain opinions must not be spoken.

But if the people objecting to these views have any fairer or more reasonable excuses for their objections, they should have the chance to give them.

It's not just certain opinions, dsr. It's certain truths.

[aggi]

Why should she have to link a clip of her talking on twitter to prove she has said what she has said? I believe she was invited by a panel to speak to one of those select committees. Why would she film it and be in possession of the (hours of?) footage to link to her twitter? Why on earth should she have to do any of this? And all simply to try and prevent people misconstruing her?

She hasn't suggested her school has "fixed" anything - you're misrepresenting her entirely in claiming this. Though you're in good company in this respect.

We'll have to disagree on the wisdom on continually misrepresenting public figures. If you think holding any kind of public office gives the press carte blanche to misrepresent you on every turn and that it's therefore her "fault" for being continually misrepresented and having her words presented out of context then I politely but very firmly disagree. People need to have their words reported in good faith.

If any media establishment disagrees with Katherine Birbalsingh they'd be better off explaining their differences and putting forward their own opinions rather than continually misrepresenting her and placing everything she says out of context.

I don't think anyone has said that she has to do it. There are links to half a dozen clips saying she was taken out of context so I'm just a bit surprised she didn't link to the context as well. I assume it was filmed given that a clip has been widely distributed. Where did you watch the full thing?

Her defence certainly appeared to be that the imbalances weren't an issue at her school.

From watching the clip and subsequent defence on politics live I'm not so convinced that she was that misrepresented. Whether in the context of her school or the wider environment the suggestion that it's a natural thing that girls don't want to do hard maths isn't a great one.

[aggi]

I suspect it has caused a furore because some people believe that certain opinions must not be spoken. Do you think I'm right?

But I don't want to see the worst in people if I can help it. if the people objecting to these views have any fairer or more reasonable excuses for their objections, they should have the chance to give them.

Opinions can be spoken, it's the complaining when they are robustly challenged that is often the issue.

[Lancasterclaret]

I suspect it has caused a furore because some people believe that certain opinions must not be spoken. Do you think I'm right?

But I don't want to see the worst in people if I can help it. if the people objecting to these views have any fairer or more reasonable excuses for their objections, they should have the chance to give them.

No, I don't think you are right

But me and you only agree on Burnley related stuff so its not a biggy