Students who learned in school that n(sq)-n=90 but go viral on the internet complaining the exam was unfair because it expected them to know why it worked.
Students who learned in school that n(sq)-n=90 but go viral on the internet complaining the exam was unfair because it expected them to know why it worked.
I think it's safe to say we're all with you on that one mate.
I'm not sure exactly why but I've been mulling this over recently (probably because my son was one of the ones that didn't get it). I've decided, I don't blame the kids on this one at all. I blame the education system. I'm not saying that they shouldn't understand how the formula works or shouldn't be able to apply it differently. I am saying that the education system puts far too much stress on testing and examinations. Lessons become focussed on how to pass exams rather than really understanding the nuts and bolts of a subject and figuring out how to apply it. As a result, looking at past papers becomes a key teaching strategy. What this means is the students become highly competent at passing formulaic questions that arise term after term, at the same time remaining incompetent at understanding why things are done and how they could apply their basic knowledge to do things differently.
In a simplistic world I'd like to be able to say that it was Nicky Morgan's fault, or popular whipping boy Michael Gove's or maybe even that it was a result of a complete Balls-up. But the truth is it's not down to individuals, it's down to a whole culture and it's been going on at least since the introduction of the GCE in 1951 and probably much longer. In fact, I suspect it was worse before when there was so much emphasis on learning by rote and the three Rs. The more I think about it, the more I think that Sir Ken Robinson's view of education is spot on: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity?language=en Don't blame the kids, blame the system.
Sorry, I know that's all a bit heavy for a, usually, light-hearted thread but I needed to get that off my chest. Thanks doctor, the cheque's in the post.
People that take other fans online usernames to make Twitter accounts, and then continously make personal attacks against other fans and club employees. Doesn't take much working out who it is either.
Actually it doesn't annoy me, I just think it's proper creepy.
People that take other fans online usernames to make Twitter accounts, and then continously make personal attacks against other fans and club employees. Doesn't take much working out who it is either.
Actually it doesn't annoy me, I just think it's proper creepy.
ooh - this sounds like something that needs expanding !!!!
People that take other fans online usernames to make Twitter accounts, and then continously make personal attacks against other fans and club employees. Doesn't take much working out who it is either.
Actually it doesn't annoy me, I just think it's proper creepy.
ooh - this sounds like something that needs expanding !!!!
"I'm doing well" makes sense grammatically but "I'm well" doesn't. You wouldn't say "I'm happily".
Have you ever heard of the expression "fit and well"? I guess not. Otherwise you wouldn't have posted that.
"Well" in that context is about health, ie no sicknesses, not mood. The question is usually a general one about mood not specific about health
Is a mood not a state of wellbeing?
To say 'I'm well' is a perfectly acceptable response to the question 'How are you?'.
Wellbeing, not health, which in general usage means physical health.
If you think "I'm healthy" is a perfectly normal response to an everyday "how are you?", then yeah, I'd agree "I'm well" makes sense in that context. I think that's a rare context for the question. Cambridge dictionary definition and Merriam Webster use this definition for 'well' as an adjective.
Absolutely, if you're visiting someone in hospital you are probably asking about their physical health.
For me, the fuss made around "I'm good", and particularly BK's post about behaviour reminds me of hypercorrection and the Jack Lynch quote on that link
I agree 100% with what Jack Lynch is quoted as saying. I is often used when me is correct. And a misplaced sense of poshness is one possible reason why. But its hardly relevant to this point, is it? I just find the incorrect response "I'm good" rather more annoying, hence my post.
If the response "I'm good" does not relate to your behaviour (if you don't mean "well-behaved", then good at what, exactly?) then what question do you think you are answering when the greeting was "how are you?"
"I'm healthy" would be a fair response to the question. Or, as I used to say before I was ill, "satisfactory". [That is a word that has become misunderstood due to its use in appraisal systems - in other words appraisees come to think of it as less than satisfactory when the scale is excellent, good, satisfactory, poor, or there's the door!]
Funnily enough I don't find "I'm ok" an annoying reply! We are agreed then and can move on. Good afternoon and a pleasure doing business with you.
I agree 100% with what Jack Lynch is quoted as saying. I is often used when me is correct. And a misplaced sense of poshness is one possible reason why. But its hardly relevant to this point, is it? I just find the incorrect response "I'm good" rather more annoying, hence my post.
If the response "I'm good" does not relate to your behaviour (if you don't mean "well-behaved", then good at what, exactly?) then what question do you think you are answering when the greeting was "how are you?"
"I'm healthy" would be a fair response to the question. Or, as I used to say before I was ill, "satisfactory". [That is a word that has become misunderstood due to its use in appraisal systems - in other words appraisees come to think of it as less than satisfactory when the scale is excellent, good, satisfactory, poor, or there's the door!]
Funnily enough I don't find "I'm ok" an annoying reply! We are agreed then and can move on. Good afternoon and a pleasure doing business with you.
There are lots of definitions of good without referring to behaviour or skill/talent (being 'good at' something). The explanation I was going for was that it meant being in a good mood, rather than being sad or angry or whatever, none of which are directly connected to health.
If you think "I'm healthy" is a normal response to "How are you?" then I guess we have different interpretations of the question
I agree 100% with what Jack Lynch is quoted as saying. I is often used when me is correct. And a misplaced sense of poshness is one possible reason why. But its hardly relevant to this point, is it? I just find the incorrect response "I'm good" rather more annoying, hence my post.
If the response "I'm good" does not relate to your behaviour (if you don't mean "well-behaved", then good at what, exactly?) then what question do you think you are answering when the greeting was "how are you?"
"I'm healthy" would be a fair response to the question. Or, as I used to say before I was ill, "satisfactory". [That is a word that has become misunderstood due to its use in appraisal systems - in other words appraisees come to think of it as less than satisfactory when the scale is excellent, good, satisfactory, poor, or there's the door!]
Funnily enough I don't find "I'm ok" an annoying reply! We are agreed then and can move on. Good afternoon and a pleasure doing business with you.
There are lots of definitions of good without referring to behaviour or skill/talent (being 'good at' something). The explanation I was going for was that it meant being in a good mood, rather than being sad or angry or whatever, none of which are directly connected to health.
If you think "I'm healthy" is a normal response to "How are you?" then I guess we have different interpretations of the question
We have. I doubt whether "I'm good" is a legitimate shortening of "I'm in a good mood" but perhaps I'm jut too old.
Nothing to fall out over. It will continue to annoy me. Personally I prefer "I'm fine" (or just "Fine.") but the meaning is the same as I'm healthy, at least to me! Sorry I couldn't persuade you.
The thing is, if I hear someone saying 'Fine' to that question, it sort of sounds as if they're killing any subsequent, possible conversation dead. It can sound a bit curt. 'How are you?' 'Fine.' It almost sounds like code for, 'For God's sake. Go away, mate, and leave me alone. I'm not your friend. Never have been, never will be.'
I always reply, 'Good as gold, mate. Good as gold.' I don't how grammatical that is, mind. I suppose gold is good, when you really stop to look at it.
It's a minefield, NLA. Sometimes I shorten it to 'Good as.' But no one ever asks 'Good as what?' Because if they did, why, then I could exclaim, 'GOLD!' and laugh manically while walking away, backwards, and shouting, 'You may consider this conversation terminated with extreme prejudice, my friend,' and then doing the Moonwalk.
No whoosh mate honest too or to what's the difference surely it is just the same
Thought I'd try to join in the good debate but failed
Hawksmoor I am officially confused as fuck I am sitting here watching a presentation about God knows what as I ain't paid attention and now I have no idea if I used oo or single o right and if gold has feelings and needs a charity to protect its rights, or if I can ever actually just feel good
Comments
In a simplistic world I'd like to be able to say that it was Nicky Morgan's fault, or popular whipping boy Michael Gove's or maybe even that it was a result of a complete Balls-up. But the truth is it's not down to individuals, it's down to a whole culture and it's been going on at least since the introduction of the GCE in 1951 and probably much longer. In fact, I suspect it was worse before when there was so much emphasis on learning by rote and the three Rs. The more I think about it, the more I think that Sir Ken Robinson's view of education is spot on: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity?language=en Don't blame the kids, blame the system.
Sorry, I know that's all a bit heavy for a, usually, light-hearted thread but I needed to get that off my chest. Thanks doctor, the cheque's in the post.
Actually it doesn't annoy me, I just think it's proper creepy.
To say 'I'm well' is a perfectly acceptable response to the question 'How are you?'.
To say 'I'm well' is a perfectly acceptable response to the question 'How are you?'.
Vapers.
If you think "I'm healthy" is a perfectly normal response to an everyday "how are you?", then yeah, I'd agree "I'm well" makes sense in that context. I think that's a rare context for the question. Cambridge dictionary definition and Merriam Webster use this definition for 'well' as an adjective.
Absolutely, if you're visiting someone in hospital you are probably asking about their physical health.
For me, the fuss made around "I'm good", and particularly BK's post about behaviour reminds me of hypercorrection and the Jack Lynch quote on that link
I usually say "I'm OK" to avoid this.
If the response "I'm good" does not relate to your behaviour (if you don't mean "well-behaved", then good at what, exactly?) then what question do you think you are answering when the greeting was "how are you?"
"I'm healthy" would be a fair response to the question. Or, as I used to say before I was ill, "satisfactory". [That is a word that has become misunderstood due to its use in appraisal systems - in other words appraisees come to think of it as less than satisfactory when the scale is excellent, good, satisfactory, poor, or there's the door!]
Funnily enough I don't find "I'm ok" an annoying reply! We are agreed then and can move on. Good afternoon and a pleasure doing business with you.
If you think "I'm healthy" is a normal response to "How are you?" then I guess we have different interpretations of the question
Nothing to fall out over. It will continue to annoy me. Personally I prefer "I'm fine" (or just "Fine.") but the meaning is the same as I'm healthy, at least to me! Sorry I couldn't persuade you.
I always reply, 'Good as gold, mate. Good as gold.' I don't how grammatical that is, mind. I suppose gold is good, when you really stop to look at it.
Thought I'd try to join in the good debate but failed
Hawksmoor I am officially confused as fuck I am sitting here watching a presentation about God knows what as I ain't paid attention and now I have no idea if I used oo or single o right and if gold has feelings and needs a charity to protect its rights, or if I can ever actually just feel good