Gove is re-inventing himself more often than Madonna. His latest incarnation is a new age, nature loving, hippie.
Gove is a strange man. He has never been a conventional Tory. He was adopted and sees himself as achieving against the odds. Of course his academic achievements have some basis in his parents by adoption, he has this desire for 'exceptional' underprivliged kids to be given every opportunity. Anybody who is normal or unexeptional he despises.
The problem is reality is a warped fantasy as his desire to go back to a time that doesn't exist anymore as anybody in education will tell you. He is disloyal and sly and hated more within is own party than he is even in other parties. It is not surprising he is re-inventing himself and he is one person it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up switching to Labour. if that ever happens, I hope they tell him to p**s off!
There is a three letter word that best describes him and it begins with G and ends with T..
There’s also a four letter word for him starting with C and ending in T.
Gove is re-inventing himself more often than Madonna. His latest incarnation is a new age, nature loving, hippie.
Gove is a strange man. He has never been a conventional Tory. He was adopted and sees himself as achieving against the odds. Of course his academic achievements have some basis in his parents by adoption, he has this desire for 'exceptional' underprivliged kids to be given every opportunity. Anybody who is normal or unexeptional he despises.
The problem is reality is a warped fantasy as his desire to go back to a time that doesn't exist anymore as anybody in education will tell you. He is disloyal and sly and hated more within is own party than he is even in other parties. It is not surprising he is re-inventing himself and he is one person it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up switching to Labour. if that ever happens, I hope they tell him to p**s off!
There is a three letter word that best describes him and it begins with G and ends with T..
There’s also a four letter word for him starting with C and ending in T.
It’s not Cart
I suppose you could blame his adopted parents. Staunch Scots Labour Party members.
Mind you he is ex Labour Party himself, so that might explain things....
Gove is re-inventing himself more often than Madonna. His latest incarnation is a new age, nature loving, hippie.
Gove is a strange man. He has never been a conventional Tory. He was adopted and sees himself as achieving against the odds. Of course his academic achievements have some basis in his parents by adoption, he has this desire for 'exceptional' underprivliged kids to be given every opportunity. Anybody who is normal or unexeptional he despises.
The problem is reality is a warped fantasy as his desire to go back to a time that doesn't exist anymore as anybody in education will tell you. He is disloyal and sly and hated more within is own party than he is even in other parties. It is not surprising he is re-inventing himself and he is one person it wouldn't surprise me if he ended up switching to Labour. if that ever happens, I hope they tell him to p**s off!
There is a three letter word that best describes him and it begins with G and ends with T..
There’s also a four letter word for him starting with C and ending in T.
It’s not Cart
I was trying to be nice -not too hard - but harder than you
First Conservative Education minister to send his child to a state school. Perhaps Diane Abbott and Shami Chakrabarti, who sent their children to private schools, and Mr Corbyn sending his son to a grammar school, could be even worse than the chinless wonder?
If you understand the man, it isn't so strange. He has no issue with Grammar schools though, but free schools were his thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are and will be some very successful free schools, but there are too many and problems are going to arise in coming years. I have not liked Abbot since I learned that fact. I didn't know Chakrabarti sent hers too. Personally, I'd kick anybody who does this out of the party but it isn't up to me. I think if everybody has to send their kids to state schools they become better!
First Conservative Education minister to send his child to a state school. Perhaps Diane Abbott and Shami Chakrabarti, who sent their children to private schools, and Mr Corbyn sending his son to a grammar school, could be even worse than the chinless wonder?
If you understand the man, it isn't so strange. He has no issue with Grammar schools though, but free schools were his thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are and will be some very successful free schools, but there are too many and problems are going to arise in coming years. I have not liked Abbot since I learned that fact. I didn't know Chakrabarti sent hers too. Personally, I'd kick anybody who does this out of the party but it isn't up to me. I think if everybody has to send their kids to state schools they become better!
As much as I hate the whole idea of standing up for (the deeply unpleasant) Chakrabarti, it wasn't really her fault. As I understand it, her (very pleasant) ex-husband made the school choice and (probably) picks up the tab. Being a partner at Linklaters; he could certainly afford the Dulwich fees.
First Conservative Education minister to send his child to a state school. Perhaps Diane Abbott and Shami Chakrabarti, who sent their children to private schools, and Mr Corbyn sending his son to a grammar school, could be even worse than the chinless wonder?
Maybe they are Ut-er Hyp-c--tes?
I think Gove would send his child up a chimney if he thought it advantageous to his ambition. Odious man.
I thought I read somewhere that Corbyn split with his partner over the schooling of their child. The thing about schooling is that if the parents disagree it becomes very difficult within the family.
dont have a problem with private schools at all, i would have turned out very differently if i went to state school (i went to private school for school years 7-11), I was extremely lucky to be in a situation where i had a relative who could afford it and offered etc. Depends on individual etc. But i certainly think the labour manifesto promise of taking away charity status to private schools was creating more problems than they would solve, if they're a registered charity they have tto use the funds they get to reinvest in the teaching and facilities which can only be a good thing (especially as caveats in their planning permission for new facilities would be allowing it to be used by the public outside of school hours etc), by taking away charity status you're essentially making it for profit which is a slippery road as we all know.
Having said that it's important to get state school teaching and more specifically, class sizes down to the sizes of private schools, which is their main appeal more than anything imo, every child enjoys learning.. just in a bigger crowd they can hide and pretend not to enjoy it.
The entire education system needs a complete overhaul. This is the single most necessary radical change in UK society imo. Look at that 'beaten at school' thread! School is war between teachers and pupils, each seeking to exert their will over the other. We may not have beatings any more, thank god, but we still have the war.
I think we need to have a serious discussion, as a nation, about what is good for children.
The problem I have with private education is that the elite that run the country are mainly privately educated. They again mostly send their children into private education and therefore again mostly don’t either understand the issues surrounding state education or very much care. There is wringing of hands and huff and bluster but on the whole state education is for the plebs. Until schools are properly funded and by that I mean enough to have class sizes that actually facilitate learning rather than hinder it and are places that all pupils have the opportunity to flourish nothing much will change.
It would appear that the more you pay to receive an education on the whole the better the outcome until the argument crosses over into state education where funding is wholly inadequate and apparently not the reason why results are poor.
If you pose the question 'why schooling' there will be a multiplicity of answers. The issue is that some of those answers are conflicting. An easy out is to say that schools should do everything, cover everything for everybody. Then there is the issue of flexibility in a changing society. Leuth is right about a root and branch overhaul of our education system, but that won't do any good until we have a better idea of why we have such a system, and if it is appropriate for everybody. Until we confront educational philosophy and make some thought through decisions it will continue to be a mess. It is also a problem that education is so obsessed with the concept of heirachy. On a regular basis Tories say that 1.9 million more children are now in 'good or outstanding' schools. Nobody has the balls to challenge that and what it means. Is a school that has 100% of its pupils neat and impeccable in the school uniform 'outstanding' because of that? The whole issue is a complex one where consensus is hard to achieve. I would suggest that teachers in fee paying schools, as a generality, wouldn't last five minutes in a state school, but teachers with experience in state schools would find working in fee paying schools a doddle. Incidentally lots of schools claim they have achieved something in exam results when it is down to families getting in private tutors. Are those schools really 'good or outstanding'?.
The problem I have with private education is that the elite that run the country are mainly privately educated. They again mostly send their children into private education and therefore again mostly don’t either understand the issues surrounding state education or very much care. There is wringing of hands and huff and bluster but on the whole state education is for the plebs. Until schools are properly funded and by that I mean enough to have class sizes that actually facilitate learning rather than hinder it and are places that all pupils have the opportunity to flourish nothing much will change.
It would appear that the more you pay to receive an education on the whole the better the outcome until the argument crosses over into state education where funding is wholly inadequate and apparently not the reason why results are poor.
Duplicitous.
I object to it on slightly different lines - firstly it may produce people who do well academically, but many of them are lacking emotional intelligence from my observations. Rees-Mogg is a prime example - he is a complete loon - how does he have a career in politics? Also, there is still an element of old school tie opportunity and this is wrong.
I think there is a secondary issue. The motivation for many parents in sending their kids to private schools is positive. They understandingly want the best for them. There are many parents who whilst they love their kids do not care too much about their academic achievements. They won't fight for the best education for their kids and so many parents who might fight and demand more from schools don't send their children to those schools so they understandably don't care! My son being a talented footballer, I witnessed a lot of this from parents of his team mates who I really liked and got on with, but put football miles before their son's education.
We put our son's education first. We discussed a plan and set objectives before and just after he was born. My wife was able to take a five year career break and part of our plan was he should be able to write his name and know the alphabet when he started nursery at under 3 years old. We did this because we knew that if you start out being one of the brightest it can quite often follow you up the ladder. And it has worked. He has done fantastically in the state system (now taking his A levels) both academically, and sportingly.
If he didn't get the school we wanted we would have fought for it. In many ways we are no different from those spending money on a school. But, if more parents that care about their kid's education, including us, were in the system, schools would be better. We had got him in the school we wanted so didn't spend any effort in making the school we didn't want better. You can achieve in the state system and I hope he comes out of it all a more rounded person. That was part of the plan.
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
I can’t think of anyone more bland than gavin Williamson. He has the charisma of an average sized pebble. I have no idea why people seem to think he’s a “rising star” in the Tory party.
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
I can’t think of anyone more bland than gavin Williamson. He has the charisma of an average sized pebble. I have no idea why people seem to think he’s a “rising star” in the Tory party.
It is all relative - The only rising star they seem to have is Ruth Davison and she is too pro-remain. So only natural they set their standards a bit low.
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
Prescott wouldn't let him tie his boots, apparently.
And let's ignore Alan Johnson.
What a ridiculously bigoted, inflammatory and plain incorrect post. Again. Does this nonsense make you feel better?
You are seriously comparing Alan Johnson to Williamson?
You could have just posted something suggesting you disagree and maybe provide some evidence to support that view.
Instead you go straight into your usual nuclear frothing at the mouth, angry Tory Gammon man from Tonbridge routine. It is getting tiresome.
I suppose taking into account the hundreds of rediculously bigoted, inflammatory and incorrect posts you have made and continue to make at every opportunity about Tony Blair and the Labour Party I shouldn't be surprised you are trying to defend a completely incompetent Tory Defence minister.
Gavin Williamson must surely have the lowest IQ of anyone who has ever attained a cabinet position. And yet, apparently, he has serious ambitions of becoming the leader of the Tory Party!
Prescott wouldn't let him tie his boots, apparently.
And let's ignore Alan Johnson.
What a ridiculously bigoted, inflammatory and plain incorrect post. Again. Does this nonsense make you feel better?
You are seriously comparing Alan Johnson to Williamson?
You could have just posted something suggesting you disagree and maybe provide some evidence to support that view.
Instead you go straight into your usual nuclear frothing at the mouth, angry Tory Gammon man from Tonbridge routine. It is getting tiresome.
I suppose taking into account the hundreds of rediculously bigoted, inflammatory and incorrect posts you have made and continue to make at every opportunity about Tony Blair and the Labour Party I shouldn't be surprised you are trying to defend a completely incompetent Tory Defence minister.
Way to go to prove a point. Brilliant! Genuine LOL.
Comments
Perhaps Diane Abbott and Shami Chakrabarti, who sent their children to private schools, and Mr Corbyn sending his son to a grammar school, could be even worse than the chinless wonder?
Maybe they are Ut-er Hyp-c--tes?
Glad you agree.
The thing about schooling is that if the parents disagree it becomes very difficult within the family.
Vaz was very vocal against 'selective' grammar schools.......
Having said that it's important to get state school teaching and more specifically, class sizes down to the sizes of private schools, which is their main appeal more than anything imo, every child enjoys learning.. just in a bigger crowd they can hide and pretend not to enjoy it.
I think we need to have a serious discussion, as a nation, about what is good for children.
It would appear that the more you pay to receive an education on the whole the better the outcome until the argument crosses over into state education where funding is wholly inadequate and apparently not the reason why results are poor.
Duplicitous.
Leuth is right about a root and branch overhaul of our education system, but that won't do any good until we have a better idea of why we have such a system, and if it is appropriate for everybody. Until we confront educational philosophy and make some thought through decisions it will continue to be a mess.
It is also a problem that education is so obsessed with the concept of heirachy. On a regular basis Tories say that 1.9 million more children are now in 'good or outstanding' schools. Nobody has the balls to challenge that and what it means. Is a school that has 100% of its pupils neat and impeccable in the school uniform 'outstanding' because of that?
The whole issue is a complex one where consensus is hard to achieve. I would suggest that teachers in fee paying schools, as a generality, wouldn't last five minutes in a state school, but teachers with experience in state schools would find working in fee paying schools a doddle.
Incidentally lots of schools claim they have achieved something in exam results when it is down to families getting in private tutors. Are those schools really 'good or outstanding'?.
I think there is a secondary issue. The motivation for many parents in sending their kids to private schools is positive. They understandingly want the best for them. There are many parents who whilst they love their kids do not care too much about their academic achievements. They won't fight for the best education for their kids and so many parents who might fight and demand more from schools don't send their children to those schools so they understandably don't care! My son being a talented footballer, I witnessed a lot of this from parents of his team mates who I really liked and got on with, but put football miles before their son's education.
We put our son's education first. We discussed a plan and set objectives before and just after he was born. My wife was able to take a five year career break and part of our plan was he should be able to write his name and know the alphabet when he started nursery at under 3 years old. We did this because we knew that if you start out being one of the brightest it can quite often follow you up the ladder. And it has worked. He has done fantastically in the state system (now taking his A levels) both academically, and sportingly.
If he didn't get the school we wanted we would have fought for it. In many ways we are no different from those spending money on a school. But, if more parents that care about their kid's education, including us, were in the system, schools would be better. We had got him in the school we wanted so didn't spend any effort in making the school we didn't want better. You can achieve in the state system and I hope he comes out of it all a more rounded person. That was part of the plan.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2018/may/29/richard-madeley-gavin-williamson-dodges-question-on-russia-video
And let's ignore Alan Johnson.
What a ridiculously bigoted, inflammatory and plain incorrect post.
Again.
Does this nonsense make you feel better?
You are seriously comparing Alan Johnson to Williamson?
You could have just posted something suggesting you disagree and maybe provide some evidence to support that view.
Instead you go straight into your usual nuclear frothing at the mouth, angry Tory Gammon man from Tonbridge routine. It is getting tiresome.
I suppose taking into account the hundreds of rediculously bigoted, inflammatory and incorrect posts you have made and continue to make at every opportunity about Tony Blair and the Labour Party I shouldn't be surprised you are trying to defend a completely incompetent Tory Defence minister.
Brilliant!
Genuine LOL.
Vote Tory to support Britain... Hoorah!
Cutting short Gavin Williamson was the most popular thing I’ve ever done
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/30/richard-madeley-gavin-williamson-good-morning-britain