It is vital to restore an honest and high standard educational system;Present levels of aspiration are deplorable and offend hte civil rights of every child in the public sector.selective schools for academic children ,technical(practiacal skills-based schools), properly equipped(old secondary moderns were not) with apprenticeships to follow,business-orientated schools.Appropriate worthwhile qualifications as valued by employers.Education policy has not been thought through for decades and is now chaotic and most foreigners receive a far better education. Parents should insist on these rights.
Why is this idea important?
It is vital to restore an honest and high standard educational system;Present levels of aspiration are deplorable and offend hte civil rights of every child in the public sector.selective schools for academic children ,technical(practiacal skills-based schools), properly equipped(old secondary moderns were not) with apprenticeships to follow,business-orientated schools.Appropriate worthwhile qualifications as valued by employers.Education policy has not been thought through for decades and is now chaotic and most foreigners receive a far better education. Parents should insist on these rights.
Re-introduce compulsory National Service for anyone aged 18 or over who isn't in further education and is unemployed. Particularly those individuals who have NEVER had a job.
Compulsory National Service could also be used as an alternative to prison in cases of petty crime or reoffence.
They could be paid a wage, say at NMW, which would be partly funded by the reduction in paying out dole money or not having to keep them in prison.
Why is this idea important?
Re-introduce compulsory National Service for anyone aged 18 or over who isn't in further education and is unemployed. Particularly those individuals who have NEVER had a job.
Compulsory National Service could also be used as an alternative to prison in cases of petty crime or reoffence.
They could be paid a wage, say at NMW, which would be partly funded by the reduction in paying out dole money or not having to keep them in prison.
Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.
It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.
During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.
One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.
Why is this idea important?
Police officers need basic English literacy and basic numeracy in order to be effective in their work.
It should be the case that he police force is an 'investors in people' organisation, that new officers do not get on the basic pay grade until they are qualified (literate and numerate), until which time, they should be obliged to take day release classes in English language reading, comprehension, and writing, alongside classes in basic mathematics. Probably someone else will add some form of training in reasoning and mediation.
During this time they would be paid a reduced wage. These are fundamental and basic skills that should equip every school leaver to be gainfully employed, but in the police they are essential skills for an officer to be fully productive no matter how well an officer can hold and use a riot shield, most officers need written English skills daily.
One could add that police officers passing basic spoken language skills in foreign languages – let the exam boards decide this – could receive a one-off bonus payment to aid in policing our many foreign visitors and immigrant communities. Such payments would be higher for unusual languages, such as Russian, less for langugages of nations who generally speak English, such as German or Swedish, and nominal (perhaps to certify the officers skill) for languages that officers already speak as their second language but which are nonetheless useful in their police work.
We made the Bank of England independent of politics so why can't we do the same with education. This mean there can be more continuity between different government's agenda. It would also stop the politicians using the essential service for political capital. I mean it's sort of silly when we have different governments messing with the previous governments policies. It's not good for our future if there education is in a constant state of flux.
Why is this idea important?
We made the Bank of England independent of politics so why can't we do the same with education. This mean there can be more continuity between different government's agenda. It would also stop the politicians using the essential service for political capital. I mean it's sort of silly when we have different governments messing with the previous governments policies. It's not good for our future if there education is in a constant state of flux.
Scrap the law which permits for schools to take parents' religion or church attendance record into account as a valid admissions criteria.
Why is this idea important?
Scrap the law which permits for schools to take parents' religion or church attendance record into account as a valid admissions criteria.
Rrepeal of the legislation requiring acts of worship in schools, and changes in legislation to give schools much more flexibility about how they conduct assemblies, with schools offering space for optional worship for those who want it.
Why is this idea important?
Rrepeal of the legislation requiring acts of worship in schools, and changes in legislation to give schools much more flexibility about how they conduct assemblies, with schools offering space for optional worship for those who want it.
Faith schools should not be funded by the taxpayer. State and privately funded institutions should be governed by the same educational standards and not able to 'opt out' when it suits them. The teaching of RE in any school should not be allowed to be used as a platform for religious proselytising by groups with very specific agendas. Treat RE as a subject like any other with the same standards and subjected to the same rigorous and regular inspections.
Why is this idea important?
Faith schools should not be funded by the taxpayer. State and privately funded institutions should be governed by the same educational standards and not able to 'opt out' when it suits them. The teaching of RE in any school should not be allowed to be used as a platform for religious proselytising by groups with very specific agendas. Treat RE as a subject like any other with the same standards and subjected to the same rigorous and regular inspections.
Merge the current exam boards Edexcel, AQA and OCR. Or alternatively give the contract to just one of them.
When a school is selecting which exam board to enter it pupils on to, it rationally selects the exam board with the reputation for asking the easiest (and most consistent) questions.
You cannot blame schools and teachers for acting in this manner, especially in a time when league tables hold such sway in the minds of parents, governors and media.
Exam boards currently have an equally rational desire to provide as many exam papers to as many schools as possible. You therefore have this 'race to the bottom' in terms of difficulty in exam papers.
The only solution is to have 1 exam board, independent of central government, which will write the papers for all GCSE and A level students in the country.
Why is this idea important?
Merge the current exam boards Edexcel, AQA and OCR. Or alternatively give the contract to just one of them.
When a school is selecting which exam board to enter it pupils on to, it rationally selects the exam board with the reputation for asking the easiest (and most consistent) questions.
You cannot blame schools and teachers for acting in this manner, especially in a time when league tables hold such sway in the minds of parents, governors and media.
Exam boards currently have an equally rational desire to provide as many exam papers to as many schools as possible. You therefore have this 'race to the bottom' in terms of difficulty in exam papers.
The only solution is to have 1 exam board, independent of central government, which will write the papers for all GCSE and A level students in the country.
I think daily collective worship in non-faith schools leaves young people without access to their right to freedom of believe as its usually christian worship (what about the other religions). I am an atheist and believe this is indrocination of my children. Also how come they know nothing of evolution yet when its scientific fact,
Why is this idea important?
I think daily collective worship in non-faith schools leaves young people without access to their right to freedom of believe as its usually christian worship (what about the other religions). I am an atheist and believe this is indrocination of my children. Also how come they know nothing of evolution yet when its scientific fact,
The National Curriculum has been disastrous for primary education and should go.
Ofsted has driven more teachers insane than even the worst pupils from hell. It should be shrunk to the size needed to turn the screws on the worst state schools (worst defined by examination results, more later), and leave the rest of the schools to take care of themselves.
Desperately needed is an independent body that will establish stable educational standards, from 10-year-olds to A-levels.
Why is this idea important?
The National Curriculum has been disastrous for primary education and should go.
Ofsted has driven more teachers insane than even the worst pupils from hell. It should be shrunk to the size needed to turn the screws on the worst state schools (worst defined by examination results, more later), and leave the rest of the schools to take care of themselves.
Desperately needed is an independent body that will establish stable educational standards, from 10-year-olds to A-levels.
This body is similar to the teaching sector General Teaching Council which was recently scrapped, I am unsure why this one has not been scrapped.
My subscription and all my collegues is paid for by the tax payer, I see no benefit to being a member of the IFL. Similar to the GTC the IFL does little to improve teaching but generates unnecessary bureaucracy and wastes teachers' and tax payers hard-earned cash.
Therefore I propose that the Government save the money and use it to surport more worthy causes.
Why is this idea important?
This body is similar to the teaching sector General Teaching Council which was recently scrapped, I am unsure why this one has not been scrapped.
My subscription and all my collegues is paid for by the tax payer, I see no benefit to being a member of the IFL. Similar to the GTC the IFL does little to improve teaching but generates unnecessary bureaucracy and wastes teachers' and tax payers hard-earned cash.
Therefore I propose that the Government save the money and use it to surport more worthy causes.
I wanted to adopt/foster four years ago. I applied but then moved house, and so they stopped the applicagtion and I had to apply all again in the new home a year later, which in fact takes another year. then i disliked the hertfordshire adoption policy against obese people and left them and went to another and had to start all over again for another year. such a waste of public money as if the first social worker interviewed me for a national agency (whereever i lived and offering a home to children from any borough) then I would have not only offered a home immediately but when i moved my foster children might have moved too or in fact i began doing it immediately. the notion each borough does its own thing leads to the criminal repetition and waste of moeny of agency and borough social workeres going through paperwork then wasting time – in fact years – that a child could have been settled in a family. it is in insane the boroughs have control anyway as the original social worker who interviews you could leave the borough and the staff there have to pass on the notes, so there is no reason if soc services were out of the control of boroughs that you would nto have the better fostgering and adoption to children nationally. The obscenity of haringey council offering a manager a large pay rise for not getting a "bad " case in the headlines – as with baby P woudl be curbed as this is also a misuse of our council tax by councillors trying to reward staff for covering up before elections etc. If it was national then no one would get a payrise for a shameless failing like that…instead the money would go to the foster parents – the thousnad more who shoudl be recruited from lone parents (a bit of a no no inherently in the reactionary interview technique of the forms etc) AND WIDEN THE FIELD . stop the endless repetition and waste of moeny that each foster parent goes through when they move borough – again ….
Why is this idea important?
I wanted to adopt/foster four years ago. I applied but then moved house, and so they stopped the applicagtion and I had to apply all again in the new home a year later, which in fact takes another year. then i disliked the hertfordshire adoption policy against obese people and left them and went to another and had to start all over again for another year. such a waste of public money as if the first social worker interviewed me for a national agency (whereever i lived and offering a home to children from any borough) then I would have not only offered a home immediately but when i moved my foster children might have moved too or in fact i began doing it immediately. the notion each borough does its own thing leads to the criminal repetition and waste of moeny of agency and borough social workeres going through paperwork then wasting time – in fact years – that a child could have been settled in a family. it is in insane the boroughs have control anyway as the original social worker who interviews you could leave the borough and the staff there have to pass on the notes, so there is no reason if soc services were out of the control of boroughs that you would nto have the better fostgering and adoption to children nationally. The obscenity of haringey council offering a manager a large pay rise for not getting a "bad " case in the headlines – as with baby P woudl be curbed as this is also a misuse of our council tax by councillors trying to reward staff for covering up before elections etc. If it was national then no one would get a payrise for a shameless failing like that…instead the money would go to the foster parents – the thousnad more who shoudl be recruited from lone parents (a bit of a no no inherently in the reactionary interview technique of the forms etc) AND WIDEN THE FIELD . stop the endless repetition and waste of moeny that each foster parent goes through when they move borough – again ….
For the majority of people under 25 their history lessons at school seem to have consisted mainly about learning about the second world war and about the evils of Nazi-ism.
Stop teaching our children that history is nazi-ism and that our national identity comes from winning world war 2.
While this may not seem like a civil liberties issue at first, it's laying the foundations for an errosion of our civil liberties. If our children are only ever taught about their identity in terms of what they're not – ie "What does being British mean to you?" "It means fighting the nazis and winning world war 2", it means they will never have a full sense of what it means to be British in a positive way. All the positive aspects of our history – our part in the industrial revolution, our lack of religious wars, our expertise in trade and discovery, our openness to new ideas from the places we travelled to – all of this disappears into the simple fact that we were on the winning side in a war. And if we as a country have no sense of our national identity, no sense of who are are, then it is so much easier for a government to tell us who we are – who they want us to be.
In addition, education about World War 2 is framed in terms of Good (Us) and Evil (Them), and Hitler and his regime are demonise to such an extent that children believe that there is no subtlety to evil – that evil is easy to recognise and easy to avoid. If no-one accepts that there was a seductive and rational side to Hitler's policies, then how can we ever learn the lessons of history? The next evil dictator may be just around the corner – he (or she) may be telling us that we need to increase police power for our own protection, that we need to lock terrorist suspects up for our own protection, that we need to shoot innocent people for our own protection, that we need to disenfranchise poorer elements of the population for our own protection – and because they keep giving us money we're happy to go along with it, because our history lessons have shown us that evil is obvious and evil never as any good to it.
I'm not saying that any of this has already happened, but I'm saying that if we never teach children the history of our country beyond WW2 and never teach them a pride in that history, then we are opening ourselves up to this kind of manipulation.
Why is this idea important?
For the majority of people under 25 their history lessons at school seem to have consisted mainly about learning about the second world war and about the evils of Nazi-ism.
Stop teaching our children that history is nazi-ism and that our national identity comes from winning world war 2.
While this may not seem like a civil liberties issue at first, it's laying the foundations for an errosion of our civil liberties. If our children are only ever taught about their identity in terms of what they're not – ie "What does being British mean to you?" "It means fighting the nazis and winning world war 2", it means they will never have a full sense of what it means to be British in a positive way. All the positive aspects of our history – our part in the industrial revolution, our lack of religious wars, our expertise in trade and discovery, our openness to new ideas from the places we travelled to – all of this disappears into the simple fact that we were on the winning side in a war. And if we as a country have no sense of our national identity, no sense of who are are, then it is so much easier for a government to tell us who we are – who they want us to be.
In addition, education about World War 2 is framed in terms of Good (Us) and Evil (Them), and Hitler and his regime are demonise to such an extent that children believe that there is no subtlety to evil – that evil is easy to recognise and easy to avoid. If no-one accepts that there was a seductive and rational side to Hitler's policies, then how can we ever learn the lessons of history? The next evil dictator may be just around the corner – he (or she) may be telling us that we need to increase police power for our own protection, that we need to lock terrorist suspects up for our own protection, that we need to shoot innocent people for our own protection, that we need to disenfranchise poorer elements of the population for our own protection – and because they keep giving us money we're happy to go along with it, because our history lessons have shown us that evil is obvious and evil never as any good to it.
I'm not saying that any of this has already happened, but I'm saying that if we never teach children the history of our country beyond WW2 and never teach them a pride in that history, then we are opening ourselves up to this kind of manipulation.
If data has to be collected about the achievment of children in schools then include the achievement of all children, not just the A* to C grades. It should be A* to G, Entry Level, Apprenticeships, BTechs etc.
Celebrate the achievement of all our children. Value everyone in our society and there skills. Success at all levels should be part of the data collected about school achievement. If your exam results are not considered important unless they are Grade A* to C will you bother trying? No. This is how children who get Grades D to G at GCSE feel. However, they often have other skills, which are not part of the data collection system. Our world needs builders, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, chefs, hairdressers, etc. in the same way as it needs academics. Raise the self esteem of children and they will achieve, constantly de value their achievements and they will not.
Why is this idea important?
If data has to be collected about the achievment of children in schools then include the achievement of all children, not just the A* to C grades. It should be A* to G, Entry Level, Apprenticeships, BTechs etc.
Celebrate the achievement of all our children. Value everyone in our society and there skills. Success at all levels should be part of the data collected about school achievement. If your exam results are not considered important unless they are Grade A* to C will you bother trying? No. This is how children who get Grades D to G at GCSE feel. However, they often have other skills, which are not part of the data collection system. Our world needs builders, plumbers, carpenters, electricians, chefs, hairdressers, etc. in the same way as it needs academics. Raise the self esteem of children and they will achieve, constantly de value their achievements and they will not.
Maintained status should be removed from all faith schools. It is offensive to a great many taxpayers that they should be subsidising the religious and cultural separation of our children in school. Have politicians not learnt anything from Northern Ireland et al?
Why is this idea important?
Maintained status should be removed from all faith schools. It is offensive to a great many taxpayers that they should be subsidising the religious and cultural separation of our children in school. Have politicians not learnt anything from Northern Ireland et al?
If you are a (close family member of a) EU national, you pay the reduced 'home' fee at Universities in England. There are residency requirements that you have not lived outside the European Economic Area or Switzerland in the three years before your course starts but there are no residency requirements for the UK.
If you are the child of a Swiss national, you also pay the reduced 'home' fee but you have to fulfil the above prior residency requirement AS WELL AS being resident in the United Kingdom on the first academic day of the first academic year of your course. For all courses beginning between August and December, this is universally defined as September 1.
The situation is thus that if an EU national and a child of a Swiss national both start a course in mid-October, the child of a Swiss national has to take up residence in the UK already on or before September 1, wheras the EU national can just arrive on the day his course actually starts.
The exactly same provision applies in terms of eligibility for student loans.
Such discrimination is unnecessary and unfair – EU and Swiss students should be treated similarly, otherwise the spirit of the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons between the EU and Switzerland is violated.
Source: http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/student/info_sheets/tuition_fees_ewni.php and http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091555_en_18 (clauses 9 versus 11)
Why is this idea important?
If you are a (close family member of a) EU national, you pay the reduced 'home' fee at Universities in England. There are residency requirements that you have not lived outside the European Economic Area or Switzerland in the three years before your course starts but there are no residency requirements for the UK.
If you are the child of a Swiss national, you also pay the reduced 'home' fee but you have to fulfil the above prior residency requirement AS WELL AS being resident in the United Kingdom on the first academic day of the first academic year of your course. For all courses beginning between August and December, this is universally defined as September 1.
The situation is thus that if an EU national and a child of a Swiss national both start a course in mid-October, the child of a Swiss national has to take up residence in the UK already on or before September 1, wheras the EU national can just arrive on the day his course actually starts.
The exactly same provision applies in terms of eligibility for student loans.
Such discrimination is unnecessary and unfair – EU and Swiss students should be treated similarly, otherwise the spirit of the Agreement on the Free Movement of Persons between the EU and Switzerland is violated.
Source: http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/student/info_sheets/tuition_fees_ewni.php and http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/uksi_20091555_en_18 (clauses 9 versus 11)
In order to encourage graduates to enters career in teaching, I believe we need a scheme that allows them to enter this career mimimal cost. Teach first obviously helps, but I believe that excellent graduates should be allowed to train on the job (i.e. Without a year’s full time training before they start) in any state school. Obviously the qualifications needed to enter the scheme would not only be academic but would require an intensive interview process/day to identify academic, dedicated and talented teachers.
Why is this idea important?
In order to encourage graduates to enters career in teaching, I believe we need a scheme that allows them to enter this career mimimal cost. Teach first obviously helps, but I believe that excellent graduates should be allowed to train on the job (i.e. Without a year’s full time training before they start) in any state school. Obviously the qualifications needed to enter the scheme would not only be academic but would require an intensive interview process/day to identify academic, dedicated and talented teachers.
Financial Services should be a compulsory subject until the age of 16 in every school in the UK.
The subject should cover:
UK Regulatory structure and your rights as a consumer
Distribution channels (bancassurers, IFAs, Direct sales etc) and the advice process including the key sales documents.
Concept of risk
Types of financial products, Savings, Investments, Bonds, pensions, Mortgages
Basic Tax planning
State benefits
Projections, charges, fees and costs.
Why is this idea important?
Financial Services should be a compulsory subject until the age of 16 in every school in the UK.
The subject should cover:
UK Regulatory structure and your rights as a consumer
Distribution channels (bancassurers, IFAs, Direct sales etc) and the advice process including the key sales documents.
Concept of risk
Types of financial products, Savings, Investments, Bonds, pensions, Mortgages
Basic Tax planning
State benefits
Projections, charges, fees and costs.
I think the Government has been misleading on the fact that ASBO's do not work, using Breach figures as the reason to abolish them. I have personally found ASBO's to be a wonderful Invention and i undertand that Conservertaves do not want to be associated with things that the Labour brought in, so change the name reform them but do not remove them. in the aspect of child ASBO's more responsability should be on the parents and they should have some sort of punihment for letting this carry on.
ASBO's take too long to get, can be time consuming and make the many victims wait too long for Peace. But they do offer respite to the people who have to put up with the poor behaviour for a small few.
Why is this idea important?
I think the Government has been misleading on the fact that ASBO's do not work, using Breach figures as the reason to abolish them. I have personally found ASBO's to be a wonderful Invention and i undertand that Conservertaves do not want to be associated with things that the Labour brought in, so change the name reform them but do not remove them. in the aspect of child ASBO's more responsability should be on the parents and they should have some sort of punihment for letting this carry on.
ASBO's take too long to get, can be time consuming and make the many victims wait too long for Peace. But they do offer respite to the people who have to put up with the poor behaviour for a small few.
Back in my day at school, there were no AS Levels and retakes. Exams were done at the end of two years. As a result there was not so many going to university, less graduates and more graduates were able to fill jobs.Some universities object to going back to the old system because they like to see many applicants and the competition in order to pick and choose from a wide variety of backgrounds, e.g the moans from University of Cambridge.
It is the same with employers when the student graduates. They like to see hundreds of applications so that they can pick and choose. Unfortunately, this leaves so many graduates unable to find suitable jobs after graduating, many of whom have good degrees and work experience. They end up unemployed or in jobs that they could have been done without going to university and incurring a huge amount of debt to pay off. The government has to write off their outstanding loans after 25 years. There will be ahuge amount having to be paid off.The government cannot change their minds about writing off student debts because many of them had a signed agreement with the student loans company.
Why is this idea important?
Back in my day at school, there were no AS Levels and retakes. Exams were done at the end of two years. As a result there was not so many going to university, less graduates and more graduates were able to fill jobs.Some universities object to going back to the old system because they like to see many applicants and the competition in order to pick and choose from a wide variety of backgrounds, e.g the moans from University of Cambridge.
It is the same with employers when the student graduates. They like to see hundreds of applications so that they can pick and choose. Unfortunately, this leaves so many graduates unable to find suitable jobs after graduating, many of whom have good degrees and work experience. They end up unemployed or in jobs that they could have been done without going to university and incurring a huge amount of debt to pay off. The government has to write off their outstanding loans after 25 years. There will be ahuge amount having to be paid off.The government cannot change their minds about writing off student debts because many of them had a signed agreement with the student loans company.
Give employers and employees the Right to meaningful exam grades at GCSE and A level.
What does an A level "A" grade actually mean?
Has anyone seen a definition? No other grade system in public or private life is to poorly defined.
This does not do pupils and young adults any favours, as hard work and top grades are ignored and ridiculed.
It does not do employers any favours as they simply do not know how to discriminate between candidates, and probably reject potential excellent employees at the shortlist/sift stage without ever reading their achievements let alone meeting them.
Introduce a legally enforcable definition of the top 2 grades and the pass/fail boundary (others will follow naturally). For any subject with more that 1000 candidates an A grade could be defined as the top X%, a B the next Y% and fail less than Z% or less than U partly correct questions. (With over 1000 candidates there should be a "normal" and representative spread of abilities that is consistent from year to year, unless a particular subject is targetted by head teachers as being easy for thick pupils.)
To be honest, employers are less interested in absolute measures of ability, and more interested in comparing between candidates for selected key subjects – and that is not possible if a single grage covers a 40 point range.
Alternatively there needs to be some clear objective qualative definition that inspires confidence that an A grade in one subject represents the same level of intellegence, hard work, practice and learning as an A grade in a wildly different subject. Yes I realise that contradicts the above paragraph, but … this is very difficult to do without testing actual exam questions on statistically valid large number of benchmarked candidates – and that would of course mean revealing exam questions in advance.
Why is this idea important?
Give employers and employees the Right to meaningful exam grades at GCSE and A level.
What does an A level "A" grade actually mean?
Has anyone seen a definition? No other grade system in public or private life is to poorly defined.
This does not do pupils and young adults any favours, as hard work and top grades are ignored and ridiculed.
It does not do employers any favours as they simply do not know how to discriminate between candidates, and probably reject potential excellent employees at the shortlist/sift stage without ever reading their achievements let alone meeting them.
Introduce a legally enforcable definition of the top 2 grades and the pass/fail boundary (others will follow naturally). For any subject with more that 1000 candidates an A grade could be defined as the top X%, a B the next Y% and fail less than Z% or less than U partly correct questions. (With over 1000 candidates there should be a "normal" and representative spread of abilities that is consistent from year to year, unless a particular subject is targetted by head teachers as being easy for thick pupils.)
To be honest, employers are less interested in absolute measures of ability, and more interested in comparing between candidates for selected key subjects – and that is not possible if a single grage covers a 40 point range.
Alternatively there needs to be some clear objective qualative definition that inspires confidence that an A grade in one subject represents the same level of intellegence, hard work, practice and learning as an A grade in a wildly different subject. Yes I realise that contradicts the above paragraph, but … this is very difficult to do without testing actual exam questions on statistically valid large number of benchmarked candidates – and that would of course mean revealing exam questions in advance.
NQT (Newly Qualified teachers) must complete an induction year of three school terms in order to gain their QTS and can teach in mainstream schools. The problem is that many NQTs have found it difficult to obtain a post which will help them complete their induction year because of lack of posts. Cuts in education and teaching jobs will make the situation worse. Many have turned to supply teaching, but cannot complete their induction within the specified time limit as it is difficult to obtain three consecutive term time posts.
According to new rules introduced on 7th May 1999, they must complete this induction year within three terms or if they do supply teaching in posts which last less than a term, this would be a maximum of four terms. If they fail to meet this requirement they will not be able to teach in mainstream schools, although they will not lose their QTS. Short term supply placements of less than a year do not count towards the induction year. Once they start on a short term supply teaching, the clock starts ticking and then the pressure is on to find other long term supply teaching posts within four terms.
It seems a waste of time having a QTS and not be able to teach in a mainstream school, because they have not fulfilled the requirements of a statutory induction period will not be eligible to work in a mainstream school. There is major lack of long term teaching posts for NQTs. There are many qualified teachers out there who have not been able to teach in a school as they have been unable to complete their induction.
Why is this idea important?
NQT (Newly Qualified teachers) must complete an induction year of three school terms in order to gain their QTS and can teach in mainstream schools. The problem is that many NQTs have found it difficult to obtain a post which will help them complete their induction year because of lack of posts. Cuts in education and teaching jobs will make the situation worse. Many have turned to supply teaching, but cannot complete their induction within the specified time limit as it is difficult to obtain three consecutive term time posts.
According to new rules introduced on 7th May 1999, they must complete this induction year within three terms or if they do supply teaching in posts which last less than a term, this would be a maximum of four terms. If they fail to meet this requirement they will not be able to teach in mainstream schools, although they will not lose their QTS. Short term supply placements of less than a year do not count towards the induction year. Once they start on a short term supply teaching, the clock starts ticking and then the pressure is on to find other long term supply teaching posts within four terms.
It seems a waste of time having a QTS and not be able to teach in a mainstream school, because they have not fulfilled the requirements of a statutory induction period will not be eligible to work in a mainstream school. There is major lack of long term teaching posts for NQTs. There are many qualified teachers out there who have not been able to teach in a school as they have been unable to complete their induction.
Your previous contributors have pointed out some very good reasons for restoring the grammar schools. In addition, the 2005(?) Charities Act should be repealed or amended so that it no longer "penalises" the (apparent) privilaged status of the public schools.
Why is this idea important?
Your previous contributors have pointed out some very good reasons for restoring the grammar schools. In addition, the 2005(?) Charities Act should be repealed or amended so that it no longer "penalises" the (apparent) privilaged status of the public schools.
With statistics as high as 1 in 20 fathers not being the biological father of their child and the implimentation of a DNA database I think it's time we began DNA testing all fathers. This will help prevent storys such as
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-10845112
The law would help protect mothers, fathers and children and in most cases cement the bond between father and child and in 5% of cases allow the parner to choose or not to choose to undertake the task of raising a child that is not biologicly his own.
Why is this idea important?
With statistics as high as 1 in 20 fathers not being the biological father of their child and the implimentation of a DNA database I think it's time we began DNA testing all fathers. This will help prevent storys such as
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-10845112
The law would help protect mothers, fathers and children and in most cases cement the bond between father and child and in 5% of cases allow the parner to choose or not to choose to undertake the task of raising a child that is not biologicly his own.
Dear Sirs
Could I may put an idea forward please that the children at school should pay tuition fee as little as £5 for start every month and an invoice will be issued to them.
Let’s say if there are about 500 kids in school that mean the amount of £2500 will be a big help for the school to full fill their needs, like repairs.
Thast £30000 a year and can do alot!
And its not a big amount for any parents to pay for their children at least they will be spending less money on their drinks and society will be a lot better place.
I don’t want to say too much I have many ideas but I leave this idea in you good hands.
Best wishes’
Mchoudhry
Why is this idea important?
Dear Sirs
Could I may put an idea forward please that the children at school should pay tuition fee as little as £5 for start every month and an invoice will be issued to them.
Let’s say if there are about 500 kids in school that mean the amount of £2500 will be a big help for the school to full fill their needs, like repairs.
Thast £30000 a year and can do alot!
And its not a big amount for any parents to pay for their children at least they will be spending less money on their drinks and society will be a lot better place.
I don’t want to say too much I have many ideas but I leave this idea in you good hands.
Best wishes’
Mchoudhry