To all the Pink 'Un Labour people here:

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="paul moy"]

All of it true, unfortunately for our kids.

[/quote]

No offence Paul, but you have repeatedly demonstrated that you possess the intellectual capacity of a walnut, I don''t think you''re well placed to comment on this topic.

[Jools 584]

[quote user="kick it off"][quote user="Jools"][quote user="kick it off"]Just on the point of education, standards are atrocious and that isnt labour''s fault.[/quote] Not Labour''s fault -- spent over a decade dumbing down education.Not Labour''s fault -- they made qualifications in cake decorating ‘equivalent’ to physics GCSE.Not Labour''s fault -- they allowed calculators in primary maths tests.Not Labour''s fault -- they broke up GCSEs into bite sized modules ensuring a constant treadmill of exams that became easier and easier.Not Labour''s fault -- they even tried to abolish proper subjects and replace them with ‘learning themes’.On Labour leaving governement in 2010 an OECD report was released on education standards -- it read that those aged 16-24 in England came 22nd of 24 for literacy and 21st for numeracy, putting England behind almost every other advanced nation in the world.But it wasn''t Labour''s fault [:|][/quote]

Remarkable how similar your post is to THIS ARTICLE .... Word for word and even make the points in the same order.... The more cynical amongst us may take the opinion you don''t have a clue what you''re talking about and are copy and pasting from one single article you googled. 

Poor effort Jools, albeit all too predictable.Ask any teachers, you know, the people who actually know what they''re talking about with regards to education, and work in schools on a day to day basis, like myself, and they''ll tell you exactly the same thing. The Tories are as useless handling education as they are with the NHS.

Rather than regurgitating nonsense, please explain why you believe calculators in primary tests are a bad thing. I''m intrigued as to your nuanced critique seeing as we live in an increasingly digital society, I personally would have thought that getting youngsters using technology as early as possible was a GOOD thing? Various studies have concluded different things about calculator usage at primary, however the most useful in my opinion would be the ones which have focussed on how the usage of calculators at Primary impacted children''s attitudes to Maths and school in general, and they all point to children being more engaged in maths and having a higher self esteem across all curriculum areas. 

Any educator will tell you the most important factor in learning is engagement of the students, so would you prefer we went back to the abacus and kids all hating maths? That seems counter-productive to me. Calculators are a tool for learning and require a knowledge and understanding of maths to use them effectively - they were only ever allowed in one test out of the two by the way, which strangely, is the same as GCSEs so some may argue that children are better prepared for later exams if they have had opportunity to use calculators in primary testing.

If you had known what you were talking about, you would understand that putting value on vocational skills such as cake decorating mean that lower level ability students have opportunity to gain some meaningful qualifications. You take cake decorating as it is an easy target, but do you put the same scorn on qualifications such as mechanics, plumbing or building? Aren''t those the exact same kind of skills that you Brexwits are advocating teaching our youth to fill the skills gap? Yes, cake decorating is a namby pamby subject, but have you seen the price of wedding cakes for example? Cake decorating is an ideal entrepreneurial endeavour for some, and I actually went to school with someone who now runs her own successful business making and decorating novelty cakes. Isn''t that the kind of spirit you want to encourage in the youth of the nation, rather than the benefits culture that you constantly criticise?

Maybe if the Tories hadn''t completely neglected education for decades, then Labour could have spent more money improving the learning outcomes, instead of having to pump money into the BSF programme to rebuild the nation''s schools. One of the first programmes to be cut after Cameron took charge I hasten to add. Shame really, as a school system with the latest technology in every classroom would probably be beneficial in building this multi-skilled utopia that you believe Britain is on the cusp of achieving. As it is, you can thank Labour for 1 in 5 children learning in state of the art of facilities. You can thank the Tories for the 4 out of 5 in old buildings with outdated technology. 

Labour didn''t get everything right with education, but they did a lot of good things. I struggle to name a single positive thing the Tories have done in education in the last 6 years. It''s funny how it''s the right wing press harping on about exams getting easier under Labour, with no evidence to substantiate that claim, then again, giving Labour credit for drastically improving exam results would be a stretch too far for the agenda driven Mail/Express etc. That suits their angle perfectly though as they can say the Tories are making it harder, rather than admitting the Tories are failing the education sector resulting in declining pass rates. You can find a working paper on the subject of Labour''s education legacy here - I''ve copied and pasted the outcomes section for you below. 

"We now turn to trends in educational outcomes. Headline measures of academic attainment improved

substantially over the Labour period. The patterns are different at primary (Key Stage 2) and secondary (Key

Stage 4).

At Key Stage 2, the ‘expected level’ of attainment is ‘Level 4’. There was a sharp improvement in the proportion

achieving Level 4 in the late 1990s. Achievement then seemed to plateau between 1999/00 and 2002/03, before

rising again slightly through to 2008, and stalling again thereafter (Table 8 and Figure 9). By 2009/10, 80 per cent

of pupils were achieving Level 4 in English and in maths, compared with 63 per cent in English and 62 per cent in

maths in 1996/7. However this was adrift of Labour’s target of 85 per cent. 

At Key Stage 4 (GCSE) the standard measure is the achievement of ‘five good GCSEs’, meaning five GCSEs or

equivalent qualifications at grades A*-C. From 2005/06, the proportion achieving five good GCSEs including

English and Maths was also monitored (also shown in Table 8 and Figure 10).8

On the standard measure, GCSE results increased steadily at a rate of between one and two percentage points

each year until 2003/4. After 2003/4 they began to improve more sharply, and then with a step change upwards

after 2007. On this measure, Labour met its target. By 2010, 76 per cent were achieving 5 A*-C, compared with

45 per cent in 1997. The proportion of pupils achieving five GCSEs including English and Maths also increased,

and more so after 2007, but less rapidly than the proportion achieving the qualifications in any combination of

subjects." 

[/quote]I subscribe to the Spectator and I did indeed copy & paste some of said article because I agree with it owing to its factually accurate content.Because I was educated long before that fateful 13 years of Labour, I could''ve course put it in my own words [H] Apologies for being lazy and getting my calculator out because the football was on [:|]I have four relations who were teachers - three of them deputy heads.

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="Jools"]I subscribe to the Spectator and I did indeed copy & paste some of said article because I agree with it owing to its factually accurate content.Because I was educated long before that fateful 13 years of Labour, I could''ve course put it in my own words [H] Apologies for being lazy and getting my calculator out because the football was on [:|]I have four relations who were teachers - three of them deputy heads.[/quote]

The fact you subscribe to the Spectator, a rag that published stories about Caribbean people "multiplying like flies" and claiming that "blacks have a lower IQ" says alot Jools. As a flag-waving, "non-racist" Brexiteer, I wouldn''t have believed you endorsed that kind of thing, let alone subscribed to it. 

A pseudo-intellectual version of the Daily Express, that publishes articles describing Greece''s "Golden Dawn" party as "Neo-Nazis" then inexplicably publishes another article praising them, advocating them to take over Greece and saying they''re not neo-nazis, just "patriotic" (sounds familiar). A gutter rag of the lowest order, publishing articles celebrating infamous racists like Enoch Powell, starting with the line "It seems almost obscene to be sitting in bucolic Gstaad rubbing it in ... but boy, oh boy was Enoch - God rest his soul - ever right!".

If you have relations in education, then not only should you be familiar with the successes of Labour in education policy (as well as their failures), but you should be familiar with the concept of plagiarism and citing your sources, instead of trying to pass off a copy and paste job as your own opinion.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="kick it off"][quote user="paul moy"]

All of it true, unfortunately for our kids.

[/quote]

No offence Paul, but you have repeatedly demonstrated that you possess the intellectual capacity of a walnut, I don''t think you''re well placed to comment on this topic.

[/quote]

As usual, when you don''t like the truth you insult.   That shows much about your intellectual capacity methinks. 

I''m not getting into detail over schools as it''s not worth it arguing with your type but Jool''s article is spot on in my experience.    

[Herman 9,700]

I think you should go into details Paul. KIO kindly put his views up so the only decent thing is for you to expand on yours.

[kick it off 1,948]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="kick it off"][quote user="paul moy"]

All of it true, unfortunately for our kids.

[/quote]

No offence Paul, but you have repeatedly demonstrated that you possess the intellectual capacity of a walnut, I don''t think you''re well placed to comment on this topic.

[/quote]

As usual, when you don''t like the truth you insult.   That shows much about your intellectual capacity methinks. 

I''m not getting into detail over schools as it''s not worth it arguing with your type but Jool''s article is spot on in my experience.    

[/quote]

Funny that Paul, because you boasted in the EU thread about "knowing the details" yet you refused my invitation to expand on that and give us some details, and you refused to answer direct questions about the details which you claimed to know. Yet here we are again, with Paul refusing to go into the details.

Vague Daily Express regurgitation seems to be about your level Paul, and you don''t even regurgitate that tripe very well as you don''t seem to know any of the details about anything.

If you won''t go into the details Paul, at least qualify your knowledge. How long have you worked in the education sector...? Tick tock....

You may not like my perspective, but it''s an interesting tactic to try and denegrate my intellect. For the record, I wasn''t trying to insult you Paul, I was just making an (accurate) observation on your contribution to debate (which is essentially Go to Daily Express Website >> Find some anti-muslim propaganda or story based on very little fact >> Copy and paste to pinkun with quote like "1-0 to the Brexiteers"). I stand by my observation.

[Badger 2,405]

I am no particular fan of Labour''s right-wing education policies during its time in power but the "facts" as reported in the Spectator article are wrong. The Telegraph article, hardly a pro-labour newspaper, illustrates this. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/leaguetables/10488555/OECD-education-report-subject-results-in-full.html2013 26th out of 65 for maths (up two from 2010) and 23rd (also up two from 2010) out of 65 for reading. As I think we all agree, as illustrated during the referendum campaign, politicians have no regards for the truth in the things that they say and write. It is disappointing that teachers efforts should be denigrated by politicians to gain a few extra votes (I''m biased - my wife is a teacher!)

[MooreMarriot 305]

The Spectator article was written by Liz Truss , probably the most clueless MP ever to be given a job in government .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YxhIq6t6Fk