BS: £800 fine for low school attendance

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 12:45 PM

My daughter was school educated to the age of 15. She imploded during her GCSEs due to bullying, by pupils and teachers alike and because of the vast workload and constant testing that went on in her life.

Make up your mind! If she was home educated until 15 when did all this so called bullying take place??

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Wesley S
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 08:46 AM

"Shove your homework up your arse, because ANY teacher who has to give out homework is NOT doing their job properly!"

Bullpucky.

What you're saying is that kids shouldn't have to learn to work on their own. No book reports, no term papers? All learning should take place in the school room from 8 to 3? Kids taught like that will never be employable.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 07:23 AM

Maybe I can try the same tack, Lizzie.

NO ONE IS DOUBTING THAT YOUR CHILDREN HAVE THRIVED ON THIS METHOD OF TEACHING.

FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE SENDING THEIR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO

NO ONE IS SUGGESTING THAT SCHOOLS ARE PERFECT

TO SUGGEST THAT THOSE WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN INTO STANDARD EDUCTAION ARE DEPRIVING THEIR CHILDREN OF A CHILDHOOD, THAT THEY ARE DOING SO OUT OF SOME HERD INSTINCT AND THAT YOUR CHILDREN ARE HAVE FARED BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSES IS HUGELY INSULTING TO EVERYONE THAT HAS CHOSEN THAT ROUTE.

Does using uppercase make it any clearer? One final point -

Leave our kids alone.

YOU DO NOT SPEAK FOR ME. NO THAT DOES NOT MEAN I WANT GOVERNMENTAL CONTROL FOR MY KIDS. IT MEANS I DO NOT WANT LIZZIE CONTROL.

Understand?

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 07:00 AM

The trouble is that not all parents think like that Lizzie. A lot of parents complain if homework is not set! It's difficult trying to please everybody!

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:56 AM

STOP trying to get ALL children to be monitored!

Let go of being Proles, for just a short time in your lives, and think outside the box, go outside the herd...and stop doing what your government tells you!

Children have a right to an education. Yes.
Children also have a right to a childhood, where they are not constantly ground down by having to achieve 24/7.

Let them LIVE!!!

Shove your homework up your arse, because ANY teacher who has to give out homework is NOT doing their job properly!

Leave our kids alone.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:52 AM

"A structured, monitored home schooling environment is one thing; depriving kids of an education in some wifty-wafty, misguided notion of free learning is quite another. And it ain't going to make them more employable."



What is this *obsession* with *monitoring* every single thing in life...testing, examining, workloads, achievements!

My daughter was school educated to the age of 15. She imploded during her GCSEs due to bullying, by pupils and teachers alike and because of the vast workload and constant testing that went on in her life.

She is now 23. She has two jobs at present, and has had others in the past. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF HER EMPLOYERS HAVE WANTED TO KEEP HER ON, HAVE OFFERED HER A JOB WHENEVER SHE WANTS IT, IF THEY ARE ABLE TO PROVIDE ONE AT THAT TIME.

SHE HAS NO GCSE'S, NO A LEVELS (HER CHOICE)

She is studying for an Open University Degree.

She has paid for her own driving lessons, bought her own car.


WHICH PART OF THIS DO SO MANY OF YOU **refuse** TO UNDERSTAND????


Her employers didn't give a toss about the lack of school examinations! Why? Because in front of them stood a wonderful person, intelligent, erudite, well-spoken, confident, hard-working, trustworthy, interesting and very literate!

SHE DID NOT NEED ANY EXAMS TO GET INTO COLLEGE EITHER, HAD SHE CHOSEN TO GO, (SHE CHOSE NOT TO) BWCAUSE EXETER COLLEGE RECOGNISES THAT SO MANY HOME SCHOOLED CHILDREN ARE BLOODY MARVELLOUS AND **WANT** TO LEARN.


Thank you. And yes, I put that capitals on so that you could read it all more clearly, as perhaps some of you are struggling to read small print.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:49 AM

I have witnessed the distress caused to some children when they get their grades and those grades are not what everybody else would like them to be.

I should also have pointed out there that even though those grades may not be what other people would like them to be, for that child they may be a major achievement and that should be acknowledged.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:38 AM

Well, the BBC's timing is something else, lol.

It would have helped if the 3 politicians had spoken one at a time and not altogether; I think I missed a few points!

There were two things that this programme highlighted for me:

Our teachers today were described as extraordinary and that was supported by the quality of the teachers who were there. I think we can safely say that most teachers do NOT abuse children.

I said in a previous post that I had reservations about teaching to exams. I have worked in a school where that was the case and to be quite honest I felt that too much time was spent preparing pupils for SATs - it can narrow the teaching; it does of course help in league tables. That is something that needs addressing by government.

I have to comment on this idea that if you do not get a grade 'C' or above at GCSE then you are a failure. I have a lot of experience teaching children with low ability. No matter how high the quality of teaching some children will never achieve a grade 'C' in some subjects but that does not mean that they are failures. I have witnessed the distress caused to some children when they get their grades and those grades are not what everybody else would like them to be.

I have taken the following:

Lucy Neville-Rolfe, a £1million-ayear director of the supermarket giant, told a skills conference that many have basic literacy and numeracy fail-ings as well as an "attitude problem" and "don't seem to understand the importance of a tidy appearance and time-keeping".

She went on to criticise a 'complicated' education system for distracting teachers from their main duties in the classroom, saying: "I would guess that the paperwork mountain with which teachers have to struggle is even worse than the red tape we face in business." from here:

"attitude problem" and "don't seem to understand the importance of a tidy appearance and time-keeping" is often down to parenting and of course a lot of children these days keep being reminded by their parents about their rights. It's a shame that some of those same parents are very quick to disregard the right to an education when they are taking their child on a holiday during term time.

The paperwork mountain is something that should have been addressed years ago but appears to get worse not better!

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:32 AM

I think that the supermarket demands for what they call "tidy" dress are unnecessary and oppressive, but they are nothing to do with the irresponsibility of encouraging the stupid to bunk off school because they can't be arsed.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:27 AM

Thanks Mike - I wondered when I saw the Tesco name if it was too serious. Funnily enough a couple of us were discussing Tesco a few days back and the conclusion we came to was that their staff, although generaly very good and helpful, contained what seems to be a high proportion of people who should not be let loose on the public! Maybe their HR people are the ones at fault after all!

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: MikeL2
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:26 AM

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Ruth Archer - PM
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:13 AM

Hi ruth

I agree with everything you say. I am certainly not a believer in home education but I think it can succeed in a very small number of special cases.

I agree with your excellent point about homing the needs of employers and commerce and industry into the education of our future working force.

regards

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: MikeL2
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:21 AM

hi David

My post was tongue in cheek....I know ,especially in this time before the run up to the election many things are being slung around and hyped up or damped down to suit the need.

However I would like to say that Tesco in this instance was not trying to teach people anything. They were stating that as employers the school system, as far as they are concerned is not producing enough employable people.

As for class sizes, both myself and my son and everybody round us came through the systems that applied at those times and the class sizes were certainly larger than they are today. We did well enough and we were by no means top performers.

So something has changed!!!!

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:15 AM

PS, is "centention" arguing something a hundred times? This could be a useful word on here.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:14 AM

I think you'll find some USAian used it to describe democracy, or something like that.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:03 AM

come across far too many who have gained admission to higher or further education who for practical purposes cannot read write add subtract think or use language grammatically.

I am sure that is perfectly true, Richard. But does it equate to the 'School leavers cannot read and write' quoted in the survey? It is the use of these soundbites that politicians and the media so love that causes half these arguments in the first place.

One thing that I think everyone on here is in agreement with is that class sizes are too large in a lot of cases. This is not, as you point out, the fault of poor teaching. Quite the opposite. That teachers can continue to perform so well in such difficult circumstances amazes me.

The major bone of centention seems to be what you call 'the creation of hiding places and excuses for the feckless by the wifty-wafty. ' Very eloquent. Is that the legal term? :-D

Cheers

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:39 AM

Ruth is (as usual) right, but trust me DeG I have during my last about 10 years lecturing come across far too many who have gained admission to higher or further education who for practical purposes cannot read write add subtract think or use language grammatically.

In most cases this is not because of poor teaching but of excessive class sizes and pressures not to compel children to work - the creation of hiding places and excuses for the feckless by the wifty-wafty.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:25 AM

Thanks Richard - Always happy to be corrected by someone who knows what they are talking about:-) I shall file that information away mentaly, forget it, dig it out in 2 years time and misquote it...

:D (eG)

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:20 AM

Sorry Mike but headlines like 'School leavers cannot read and write' are both misleading and unhelpful in situations like this. I think I would realy like to see the facts behind that statement before commenting on it. The statement about grade c in maths and english etc. can be interpreted in so many ways I am not even sure what it signifies and finaly I would be a little reluctant to trust any survey commisioned by Tesco! Once more - don't ask a shopkeeper if you want to know about education:-)

I was aware of the OFSTED report, which Lizzie does not believe in any case. One thing that most reporters failed to mention ws that the incidence of schools in the 'lowest class' increased because many of the schools in the highest class were excluded during this inspection. Even with the skewed figures, one school in ten being in the 'lowest class' hardly amounts to the majority of schools or teachers being bad. If they bring the higher achieving schools back into the survey next time you will see a big performance increase.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:13 AM

MikeL2: no one is suggesting that schools are perfect; far from it, in fact. But what people find baffling is how yanking kids out of formal education and letting them run feral, to pick up whatever haphazard morsels of learning they might discover through searching the net (cause we all know how reliable so much of the information on the Internet is) constitutes a reasonable way of increasing the literacy, numeracy and other basic skills of young people. A structured, monitored home schooling environment is one thing; depriving kids of an education in some wifty-wafty, misguided notion of free learning is quite another. And it ain't going to make them more employable. This Luddite idea that kids never needed literacy or numeracy to be thatchers or builders or whatever is all very well, but we live in the 21st century. My mechanic yesterday checked what was wrong with my car, then went straight to his suppliers' handbook to find the parts, then on-line to order them through the firm's automated ordering system. My friends who are sheep farmers have a computer programe rhat allows them to monitor what goes on, predicts their yeilds and does financial projections, and let's them do their own accounts. They also have to fill in loads of government applications for grant schemes and the like. The horny-handed sons of the soil have come a long way. And the skills they need have changed.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:11 AM

Of course, I fully expect that we will soon be treated to a display of expertise about defamation law from the resident heart surgery specialist/dog trainer/relationship counsellor/style guru/disability discrimination adviser/musicologist/etc.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:11 AM

Like Dave said - go to an expert. Thanks for that Richard.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:05 AM

This is not solicitor-client legal advice, merely general discussion. No duty of care to any person arises. I am not acting for any client in this post.

Actually DeG that is not correct. Truth is a defence rather than untruth being part of the cause of action. If material is defamatory it is up to a person seeking to establish "justification" as a defence to prove the truth.

Here is a website http://www.website-law.co.uk/resources/website-libel.html that is superficial but mostly not wrong, although fails to recognise the recent trend to treat ephemeral internet writings as slander rather than libel.

It does not deal fully with the question of who is liable for hosted material.

It is incomplete in its treatment of Reynolds privilege but that will not affect us in this case.

It fails to deal with "mere vulgar abuse".

It does not deal with the fact that a person responding to defamation of him has slightly more latitude in what he can say.

It also fails to deal with the fact that English libel law although in my view based on correct principles in most cases is regarded in teh USA with such hostility (in my view as a result of an incorrect approach to what the US constitutional position was intended to mean about "laws restricting freedom of speech") that there is a risk that the USA may enact legislation preventing the enforcement in the USA of UK defamation judgments.


"Most teachers are [insert epithet]" is not actionable because there is no identifiable plaintiff, unless there is other material that identifies a person about whom it is said. Also, it would be a form of trade libel to which other rules apply in that the words disparage a person (if spoken about a person) in his profession trade or calling.


The limitation period for defamation is one year, but in England that period runs afresh from each "publication". That is correct in my view but it is an unpopular rule with the media and intense lobbying has meant that it is likely to be changed some time so that limitation runs from first publication.

There is no form of what is commonly called "legal aid" for any form of defamation proceedings.

The conditional fee lawyers generally only take on big cases and they are unlikely to be interested in this microcosm unless they see it as a chance to get famous by breaking new ground on moderator liability, site operator liability, ISP liability, host liability, or the strained UK/US relationship over defamation law.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: MikeL2
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:56 AM

hi

I don't wish to take sides in what appears to have become a very personal topic but two articles in today's press do appear to be very pertinent to the didsussion.

1. Tesco, Britain leading private employer states that school leavers today " can't read, can't write and have attitude problems."
They go on to say " that in six out of ten schools fewer than half of the pupils gained Grade C in English and Maths".

2. OFSTED have classed one in ten schools to be in the lowest class compared with one in 25 in their previous last inspection. They also said " only 9% are considered outstanding compared with 19% in the same review period".

Perhaps Lizzie does have a point ???

cheers

MikeL2

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:52 AM

Just another bit of advice. I am sure it will be ignored or attacked but I will try anyway.

To be libellous, or slanderous in the case of spoken word, the statement needs to be both defamatory and false. Just defamatory will not do so you really need to prove the falsehood of the claim in any defamation case. Things, for instance, like 'The majority of teachers are bad' is both defamatory and untrue. Of course in this case as it is not against one specific person libel would not be found but I think it describes the situation. The addition of 'in my opinion' may help but I am not at all sure it removes all culpability.

All academic anyway. As we all know, we cannot remove our own posts. I would suggest a note to the moderation team with specific instances of libel would be the best way to get such posts removed. Of course it may be better to leave them there if you are considering legal action.

Again, just trying to help and I am sure that Richard would be better placed to give legal advice. He is another of those experts I keep going on about.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 07:29 PM

"I am not defending him, I am pointing out that what you wrote is libellous and that under the laws of this country, not only you but by publishing it Mudcat is equally guilty."


Then I look forward to *you* removing ALL your libellous posts about me.

Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 07:08 PM

Working in schools very regularly, I have seen no evidence of kids being stressed out by too many exams. None. Most seem not particularly bothered about them, to be honest.

The thing I have observed, through working in a whole range of secondary schools, is that some schools are better than others. On the whole, this isn't necessarily down to catchment, or how well resourced the school is, or how much the kids are being tested. It is down, in my opinion, to how well structured the school environment is. The more slack the school, the more unstable the learning environment and the more stressed the kids generally seem. Any parent will understand this: kids feel secure when they are given consistent boundaries. A lack of structure and boundaries makes kids feel more stressed.

Structured environments can mean all kinds of things. It is not simply about kids sitting quietly and rigidly in rows at desks. The best schools provide clear guidelines for different kinds of teaching and learning, and provide the resources that allow these to be utilised. But what it does mean is that kids know and understand the rules, the rules are enforced, and the environment is managed and supportive. The schools where kids are expected to turn up on time, where uniform policy is strong, where there are very specific means of dealing with unacceptable behaviour, where policies about racist and bullying behaviour are clearly set out and enforced...these are the environments where kids seem the happiest, the most productive. There is a positive buzz from the minute you walk in the door.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 06:58 PM

One cannot improve standards of education by removing children from education and encouraging them to learn less, or to ignore the subjects they do not like.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 06:46 PM

7/10 teachers believe standards in the classrooms have gone down

Ermmm... Are these the good teachers who are in a minority or the bad teachers that, according to you, are in the majority. You have already said that you belive that the majority of teachers are bad so why the big deal about 7/10 of them saying standards have gone down. I would guess, if they are bad teachers and they don't know what they are doing, then them saying things are getting worse must be a good thing?

Funny how 'facts' can be changed at will to suit the circumstances isn't it. But even if you now say the teachers DO know what they are talking about a 'drop' in standards is very subjective anyway. No indication what they are measuring against for instance. Not that that mens too much to some people.

I think I have just fallen down a rabbit hole.

`I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. `Of course you don't -- till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

`But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice objected.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

Not that I am attacking anyone by quoting stories at them...

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:52 PM

The judge says he was not a paedophile.

You are correct he was held on remand - that means he had not been proved guilty of anything. You said he was sentenced to prison - he wasn't.

That is what the newspaper reports of the day say. You told people to read them.

I did.

I am not defending him, I am pointing out that what you wrote is libellous and that under the laws of this country, not only you but by publishing it Mudcat is equally guilty.

That's all.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:48 PM

Ooh...a secondary school headmaster is busy telling us how stressed out the children are with all the examinations! And the teacher sitting next to him is agreeing! WOW!

He's saying how respect for teachers has definitely gone down and that 7/10 teachers believe standards in the classrooms have gone down, because kids are REALLY WEARY of being constantly tested, which New Labour has insisted upon doing.

He's saying how teachers have been drilled into getting children to pass tests, to get results...

Well, well.......well...

I have to go listen to a little more of this progamme...

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Emma B
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:46 PM

Lizzie please PLEASE read your local paper again it says

"Voyeur teacher awaits sentence"

NOT Paedophile - voyeur - the man was sentanced to a 3 year suervision order after being found gulty on 'five charges of voyeurism'

You talk (at great length) about 'personal responsibilty' have you no sense of any responsibilty at all by asserting again this man is a peadophile on an internet site when we know that illiterate vigilantes are quite capable of attacking even the home of a female hospital pediatrician?

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:38 PM

Ooh, just listening right now...We're 17th in Reading and 24th in Maths...in some poll or other..We're behind Estonia!

Wow!

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:36 PM

"To call someone a paedophile when they are no such thing is libel.

To say they were sentenced to prison when they were not is libel."



Noun 1. paedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children

The guy likes to look at little girls in underwear. What does that make him in your eyes...He went from looking at photos, to taking his own....to putting them on the internet...

Noun 1. paedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children


So, you're defending this man?   

I mean...come ON, I know you STALK me on the internet..but now, are you defending a man who is sexually attracted to children, as in a PAEDOPHILE?


He was sent to prison, on remand and whilst there he was put on Suicide Watch.


And now, I have to watch Jeremy Paxman talking about the school system

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Emma B
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:27 PM

'Luckily, Emma, neither you, nor the folks you know, were assigned to my children'

At last something I can actually agree with :)

I thank you :)

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:25 PM

"Would your daughter, who is now in her 20s, be surprised at the language her exemplary mother uses online?"

Nope, because she knows about the pack mentality on here.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:22 PM

"And to be honest I still haven't worked out what your daughter was doing at school when she was being home-educated. "

Then look up your notes on my family. You'll find the entire story there.

Our EWO was not a cold, calculationg person, who sat there ticking off tick boxes. He's the most inspirational man I have ever known, as a former teacher and as an Education Welfare Officer. He knew there was nothing he could give us apart from his support, so he gave us that in bucketloads.

You will find, if you read Education Otherwise, that many people have a tough time with cold, calculating, suspicious EWOs. Not all though, because some are lucky and meet magical people who support and inspire as much as possible.

"For this reason it is extremely critical that, while supporting parents wherever possible, the relationship always remains on strictly 'professional' terms - certainly not the one described in a previous post."

Luckily, Emma, neither you, nor the folks you know, were assigned to my children. I was blessed with someone who cared about them, deeply. He cared about all the young people in his care. He cared about the parents too, because he knew how hard it was to go against a system that has brainwashed so many, for so long.

And Jeremy Paxman is about to host 'Newsnight' shortly, where he'll be discussing the state of our Education System....and what can be done to improve it..

I do not know you, jeddy...and after your recent posts, I have absolutely no plans to know you.   With regard to the 'confirm' and 'conform' comment, being 'non-conformist' has nothing to do with not being responsible for your actions or behaviour.

Melissa. Excellent point. I hereby take absolute and full responsibility for using the f word, because I am so incensed at some of the people in here and their behaviour. They however, do not MAKE me do it, I choose to do it myself, because to use any other words than the ones I do would be doing some of them a gross injustice.

Oh..and jeddy, I am nobody's 'victim' but some people's prey. There is a huge difference.   

Personally, internet stalkers give me the creeps..and with regards to the 'rape' thread, I'm extraordinarily surprised that it doesn't give you the creeps as well, because in my opinion, men who become so obsessed with women are more than a little worrying. Women who also become obsessed with other women are equally as worrying, as are those who take the side of the internet stalker...

But heyho, you alls pays yer monies and takes yers choice..

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:11 PM

Good grief- it appears that I'm going to "attack' a certain person again. But I just don't want to let this go:

"It is that system, and you lot in here, who made me swear as I do, when I write. I do not swear in front of my children..they do not swear at all. I will, however, use some great anglosaxon words when confronted with complete plonkers, be they politicians, teachers, or messageboard users...I particularly will swear when confronted with perverted stalkers who follow me round the internet giving me 'secret signs' on here..."

Would your daughter, who is now in her 20s, be surprised at the language her exemplary mother uses online? Why not advise her to dip into Mudcat so that she can see how mistreated her mother is?

More to the point, no one makes you swear, OK? That mindset is the same one that many ne'erdo-wells- and I don't want to enumerate them - use to excuse their own behavior.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Emma B
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:45 PM

I have also known several Education Welfare Officers, personally and through my job.

Their role is a professional one and they are required to carry out a number of statutory functions on behalf of the Local Education Authority (LEA)

They are required, like all such professionals, to work within a legal framework
This could include giving consideration to applying for Education Supervision Orders under section 36 of the Children Act which empowers local authorities to apply to the courts for an order in respect of any child of compulsory school age who is not being properly educated suited to their age, ability aptitude and any special educational needs

For this reason it is extremely critical that, while supporting parents wherever possible, the relationship always remains on strictly 'professional' terms - certainly not the one described in a previous post.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:34 PM

"In most classrooms, it is commonspeak, if you are a young person..."

No, it isn't.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Melissa
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

LC: "It is that system, and you lot in here, who made me swear as I do, when I write."

Does that mean you aren't Responsible for the choices you make while posting?

If you're swearing because others 'made you', does that mean you swear in order to Comply with their wishes?

Maybe the big water between us means I just don't understand..

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:08 PM

And to be honest I still haven't worked out what your daughter was doing at school when she was being home-educated.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Folkiedave
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:07 PM

To call someone a paedophile when they are no such thing is libel.

To say they were sentenced to prison when they were not is libel.

No matter what you say.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: jeddy
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:02 PM

thanks richard for finding this gem!!!!

"Confirm in a child's mind that they never have to Conform!"


rape thread anyone???
thats the reason i am, not exactly angry, but amazed at some of your attitudes.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:02 PM

I wonder where Dan Brown get's his inspiration from?

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: jeddy
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:59 PM

thanks for the chuckle lizzie.

i am not telling you to change how you talk, merely trying to help you feel less like a victim of stalking. only i think you love it.

good idea to skip your posts, i used to until i realised how dangerous some of your posts can be.

ok, reality check time.
so it is ok to meet a boyfriend online, to be totally in love and have a soul connection, but not to care about people you have never met as friends online?????

DOUBLE STANDARDS or what?

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:55 PM

"....Somebody in their education system keeps an eye on what the parents are doing..."

Oh yes, because we mustn't EVER think that parents are capable of looking after their children, let alone teaching them, must we?...


"Obviously that doesn't happen here Does anyone from the local education authority check up as to how you are progressing as a home tutor?"

I have stated, SO many times, Ralph that I have an Education Welfare Officer....a former teacher of long standing, who has 'checked up on me' and my children ever since they came out of school. He comes once a year. If he was worried, he'd come far more often. He has NEVER been more than once a year, because we have always been given the highest grade the Corporate Education Bastards will give you, which is a mere 'Satisfactory', no matter how well you are doing.

This man is also a grandparent now and he is worried sick about his grandchildren. The stress that his own children are putting on their children to achieve, achieve, ACHIEVE, is driving he and his wife to the brink of deep worry. They have extra tuition, they moved schools to go to the one with the best grades, they demand high results...and their children are so little..around 6 and 8. It depresses both of these wonderful people.

They asked us round to tea, I've told you this before...and I sat talking to his wife for ages. She was paralysed in a terrible car accident 20 years back. She was a maths teacher. People have tried to get her back into some form of educating again, but she wants nothing to do with it, because she highly disapproves of the rigourous and constant testing, the workload so many children have and the fact that now, so many children are not judged on WHO they are, but ONLY on their exam results.

Her husband made my kids feel wonderful about themselves..praise, praise and more praise. He brought his National Geographic magazine collection round for them to have, masses of magazines. He brings music, classical and jazz, he shares his photographs, as he's a wonderful photographer..and he tells them stories that inspire...

He's distraught about what is happening inside The System..utterly distraught.

He teaches the children who are expelled. He gives them his very soul to try to inspire....and he does the same with my children..did, as my daughter is now in her 20s. We were so very, very fortunate. Many home educators have EWOs who are like a lot of the people in here, Little Hitlers who demand they do things their way...which of course, they have no right to do.

I do not have to let any EWO see my children. I always have done. They used to bake cakes for him, which he'd gobble up happily, whilst he told us about his life, spoke to my children..all the while cleverly finding out information on their education...

No, Ralph, my abilities as a teacher for my children were NEVER brought into question. I was praised, as much as my children were..


"...Unlikely. Which is not a good thing."

See above, and yes...I accept public apologies.


"I just hope that none of the people supervising you as a home tutor are reading this.. You might not have any children left to teach. Apart from your antagonistic attitude, your language would not be permitted in any classroom I know of."

In most classrooms, it is commonspeak, if you are a young person...because they, like me, are fed up to their back teeth with the fucking Edukashon System. It is that system, and you lot in here, who made me swear as I do, when I write. I do not swear in front of my children..they do not swear at all. I will, however, use some great anglosaxon words when confronted with complete plonkers, be they politicians, teachers, or messageboard users...I particularly will swear when confronted with perverted stalkers who follow me round the internet giving me 'secret signs' on here...because they truly are utter scumbags, in my opinion, of course.

And my EWO would more than likely join me in the use of language because he is as angry as me about what is going on...and why so many people are sticking their heads into Ostrichland, whilst dashing out to make sure Little Johnny is the best in his class, so they can tell all the other Ostriches...not seeing that Little Johnny may well be falling apart, because he doesn't want extra tuition, he simply wants to be.........a child.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:53 PM

Well I am not permitted to talk to Lizzie, nor about Lizzie but I trust I can quote Lizzie: -

"Confirm in a child's mind that they never have to Conform!"

Well in that case - no comment.

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:34 PM

I was not being sarcastic, Lizzie. Just trying to help! How come it is OK for you to do that but not me? Even an old computer can be made to speed up with the right care and attention. Look at the start-up, the registry, disk fragmentation. All that sort of stuff would be covered in a computer course. What is wrong with suggesting it?

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:29 PM

Frankly I wouldn't leave the parenting to 'some' parents let alone the teaching!

Subject: RE: BS: £800 fine for low school attendance
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:19 PM

Actually Lizzie. I have changed not one jot. Joes information about the education system in the states was very welcome and enlightening, honestly stated in a calm and considered way. I agreed with him that the US way of home tutoring could teach our government a thing or two.
Your problem being?
At least in the US, there are checks and balances when it comes to home tutoring. Somebody in their education system keeps an eye on what the parents are doing.
Obviously that doesn't happen here. Does anyone from the local education authority check up as to how you are progressing as a home tutor?
Unlikely. Which is not a good thing.
I just hope that none of the people supervising you as a home tutor are reading this.. You might not have any children left to teach. Apart from your antagonistic attitude, your language would not be permitted in any classroom I know of.