Xkcd is one of the worst offenders on this.
Gibbet Cross.
A Willerby Story.
Podcast episode.
6 minutes with original music.
Come find us.
willerby.substack.com/p/gibbet-cro...
It’s the shrug here that gets me. “I don’t know and I don’t care.”
Don’t care that an elementary school was bombed, don’t care that he lied about it, don’t care about truth and decency.
Democracies rest on a shared dream - that public service is important, that integrity is valued.
I think it’s an argument thst can be made in STEM but I don’t think you can say “I’m an English teacher and everyone should do this” here without interrogating the differences.
Call me Karl.
Yes, I agree.
It’s the silver bullet, dammit.
My governance point is one of thinking long term. Investing in education isn’t a next-election thing, it’s a better world for your grandchildren thing.
I recognize that’s a personal bias as well as a good line, and that it might be a privilege of now being ok for me, but I think we need some of this
And, honestly, there are so many holes in this that I can see why it doesn’t fly, and it comes down to a moral issue rather than a governance one. If you are good at something then that privilege comes with the responsibility to help those who aren’t - and we should say, model and enable that.
This is diverting from your point, so let’s return to it.
If we accept that some people are better at some things than others and we set our goal on the greatest public good leaving nobody behind (and there’s a whole other essay to be written there) then we need the best people doing the most good.
It makes me cross when people argue against high salaries in general (against individuals who don’t warrant it is different) in the public sector (and not the private: I’m fine with an argument for socialism) - paying people is a way to attract the best field and we want the best of the best.
Yes - not easy, but I’m not kidding. In my world the most competent people go into public service and, within that, teachers, judges and politicians are the top bracket.
In James’ ideal world the whole school is Miramar, we treat teachers like fighter pilots and those who aren’t cut out for it find other employment.
I think that our recruitment targets are too timid - we should be training 50% more than we need and support those who don’t make it.
I think this is absolutely the key - and one where I’ve seen setting work brilliantly, expert teachers creating a positive experience for kids who are finding learning hard. “No setting” seems a bit ideological rather than pragmatic for those who need the help.
2/2.. and the article falls into the familiar pattern of saying the problem is kids not "achieving their potential" rather than looking at the experiences of those who do find learning harder.
Like the poor in the Bible, they will always be with us whatever we do.
It’s also written from the position of an English teacher without any acknowledgement of the greater challenge of mixed ability teaching in subjects that have a tower structure rather than a broader heap.
That’s not your point, I’ll respond to that where you make it now I have that off my chest.
I really think that society as a collective thinks people with learning disability and those who love them should lower expectations and accept they will have a worse life than others.
They are the most marginalised group in society by far.
Amazing Opportunity!
Harris Westminster is looking for a new Principal - taking charge of a school which is objectively the best one in the imaginable universe (I am also personally fond of it but don’t let that cloud my view).
Message me if you want a chat
www.harriscareers.org.uk/200/search-o...
#UKEd #EdSky #Schools #SixthForm #Headship #Principal
Amazing Opportunity!
Harris Westminster is looking for a new Principal - taking charge of a school which is objectively the best one in the imaginable universe (I am also personally fond of it but don’t let that cloud my view).
Message me if you want a chat
www.harriscareers.org.uk/200/search-o...
You would have been lucky to be in the same postcode (I imagine, I’ve never seen you play)
That is a great try - and nobody was ever going to cream him (although as a defensive coach I’d agree with you that there were people who should have brought him down)
Sathnam says I should read this so it is muscling past two other half-read books.
Ah, the eternal story of the unrequited love of a man for a rock.
But options are difficult for schools to deliver and for students to select from. I’m not really convinced that they add much value (nor do I really think that it’s the time spent in maths (or art) classes that is limiting teenagers’ study habits - there’s a lot of time outside school)
Unit 1: Pickpocketing, distraction tactics and the use of tools for breaking and entry
Unit 2: Violence, including appropriate weapon choices and gang organization
Unit 3: Smuggling, fencing and narcotics.
Fraud and tax evasion are A-level topics. Exploiting the poor to amass capital is university.
There are lots of good arguments to make about curriculum (and a big part of me thinks the interesting things are those you learn that aren’t on the syllabus).
I just object to the idea that if you don’t need it you don’t need to study it (especially when applied to maths and not art)
Yes - there are some compromises here. We teach them the things that we imperfectly reason to be some version of “best” and we give them some choices and not others and some of this is resource management and some of it is ideological.
It’s because geometry is actually a good place to develop abstract reasoning because whilst the ideas are artificial you can at least draw them.
There’s also an argument that this is our heritage, that the origins of school mathematics are in geometric reasoning and that’s worth defending:
And no music, poetry or sports for those who want to be mathematicians?
Surely not! We don’t want to cut children off from lines of learning based on their intentions aged 14.
