Brew
-
Content Count
6,608 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
85
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Brew
-
-
1 hour ago, philmayfield said:
Someone dressed as an elf wanted to help me pack my bags at the checkout on Saturday. I told them to go away in the sort of language they would understand in Netherfield.
I'd be ashamed to admit to that...
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, DJ360 said:
the bottom box is just an optional outboard power supply which improves the sound slightly.
I'm curious, care to explain how this works?
-
A major problem is the outdated 1970's organisation structure. The NHS is the third or fourth largest employer in the world (depending how you count it), and employs over 4% of the UK working population.
Total number of employees is 1.7 million of which less than a third (483,000), have any medial qualifications. this includes doctors. nurses, midwives and health visitors. What the other one million plus are doing for their money is anyone's guess.
I'm no accountant but it seems unsustainable to me...
-
1
-
-
True enough but none quite so 'in your face' or as blatant.
To paraphrase Mone "I didn't lie to hide the the fact we're making £60 million and hiding it in a trust, it was to to protect my family" of course it was, silly me for thinking anything else... Her husband is a different kettle of fish altogether and in no way offered any sort of apology. A demonstration of the unacceptable face capitalism made flesh.
-
5
-
1
-
-
Horrible situation to be in Lets, you have my sympathies. It makes me cross to think our broken two tier system could probably have you sorted by tomorrow afternoon...
-
1
-
-
Watched Mone wriggling on the Kuenssberg show. Her and her husband admitting to telling lies yet still, in my mind, carefully obfuscating and trying to deny that they are benefiting financially. Not quite sure how gullible they think we are, I haven't seen anything like it since the days of Hamiliton
-
3
-
-
good to see you back Oz
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, MargieH said:
Playing devils advocate here…
what’s wrong with parking at a tram terminus instead of driving into the centre - free if you have your bus pass.
Using the tram to go into Nottingham, unless a commute, means shopping and shopping means bags and packages being toted around until you get back to the car. At this time of year that can mean trudging through town in the cold and rain to stand and wait for a tram that may or may not have a seat.
Car parking charges in town, despite what some tightwads of this parish say
, are not that bad. I'll happily pay a fiver or so just for the convenience.
-
A short time ago I posted that far from promotion Blair should be prosecuted, It seems around a million souls are of the same mind and petitioned for his knighthood to be rescinded.
HMG have cried foul and will not let it proceed - for shame sir, for shame...
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, DJ360 said:
I'll go back to the student example one last time. If a student sits, say TEN GCSE's and passes NINE but fails ONE.
I did say I don't want to play worrabout ,but suppose your car at MOT (15 item to test each item made up of multiple parts), is in excellent condition in all areas except one brake doesn't work, There are only two one word ratings and apply to the whole car. Pass or fail, how else should we rate them?
One word is just that, one word. Consider the other ratings outstanding, good, requires improvement and inadequate. Results that cannot be confused or misinterpreted.
Let's turn it on its head. To achieve the highest rating they must achieve it in MOST areas, not ALL but will be rated 'outstanding' i,e one word and applied to the whole school. Should we now say, "yeah-but- no-but you can't call the whole school as outstanding?
There's another single word that applies, judgement. The whole system is based on judgements made against a clear and unambiguous criteria by qualified professionals. The school, and remember the inadequate rating was well out of date, failed in one arear made up of four parts. It must have been pretty bad to have an inadequate rating rather than a 'need improvement' - only 120 schools managed an 'inadequate' out of more than 2500 - less than 5%
-
12 hours ago, DJ360 said:
Liz Kendall firing into open goals for Labour. Starmer take note.
Liz Kendall is almost as clever at avoiding answering a question as Michael Howard. I knew a little about her but she has crashed dived in my opinion she came across to me as thoroughly untrustworthy. She came not to extoll the virtues of Labour policy but to simply throw rocks at the government. She had an agenda and was damned if answering questions was going to get in her way.
Jenrick said little that was not blowing his own trumpet, he's manoeuvring for reasons yet to become clear. Gove was Gove though he appeared to be on slightly more solid ground, not his his usual evasive self.
The moderate you quote was somewhat disingenuous in quoting 3% without saying how big a number 3% represents. Though the topic was immigration the focus was the boats and Rwanda, something he avoided.
As an interviewer Kuenssberg made a better fist of it than Bruce, keeping better control of the interviewees etc. although she has a lot more time to play with and fewer numbers. Perhaps Question Time could use bit of a reformat.
-
1
-
-
I really do think too much is being made of this, a fail is a fail and the margin of failure is largely irrelevant.
The tragedy associated with this report, even it's though out of date and has long been corrected is giving the word way more import that it deserves.
As people look for a reason, a way to explain what happed they will seize on anything to assuage their grief or attribute blame.
The are many instances and examples we can quote but it would descend into a yeahbutworrabout contest.
-
Didn't phrase that well. did they present a cogent argument of their own or simply agree with you?
-
But seems have failed in their estimation to present a viable case???
-
Like i said, tarring the whole school with the same brush, but I think you're over thinking it and attaching too much to it..
-
1 hour ago, benjamin1945 said:
whos wife had to drop out..so i did him a favour and stood in for her
Really!!
-
53 minutes ago, DJ360 said:
I disagree. Of course, if you'll excuse the pun, 'inadequate' is a perfectly adequate descriptor, but I'm beginning to despair that you will ever grasp my point!
I take you mean the word is so onerous and overarching the effect is judgemental and a damnation. It's one dimensional without any sort of nuance or room for interpretation, definitive. There is no wiggle room whereby it can be explained away and there is a finality about it. It tars all with the same brush
Correct me if I've misunderstood.
This aspect Spielman covers from Q128 on. Basically she says no matter what word you use it will quickly acquire the same disagreeable and distasteful connotations as inadequate, with much the same effect.
In my view should they choose a more descriptive, multi-word statement it immediately becomes open to argument and differing interpretations. With one word there is no interpretation, no argument as to its meaning. It does exactly what it says on the tin.
-
1 hour ago, DJ360 said:
That is an extreme expression of your customary pragmatism. It is both obvious and widely accepted that OFSTED reports are taken very seriously by schools, staff, governors and of course parents.
I did not say reports were not taken seriously.
The report, like any exam result judged by an outside source is dispassionate, not emotive. Be as gentle as you like but where criticism is due then criticise you must.
Concentrating on one word is misleading and takes us away from the reports purpose.
Synonyms for inadequate include incompetent, poor and deficient among others. Which would think is a better word to use without downgrading the seriousness implied by the word.
There are as i pointed out two degrees of failure. The school was judged 'good' in most areas. In 'leadership and management' it was not judged 'needs improvement' it was an outright fail, a fault they considered so serious it warranted the lowest grade. Also the inadequate report is over a year out of date the school is now rated good, grade 2
2 hours ago, DJ360 said:Not sure the word 'blame' is appropriate here.. I'd use 'cause', but in any case you are drawing a false equivalence, unless you are considering skilled tradesmen who commit suicide as a direct result of having their quality of work publicly judged and impuned.
I'm simply drawing a comparison the whereby statistics have seen fit to include occupation, the inference being that the work they do may be a contributing factor. Working in education seems not to drive as many to end their lives despite the number that go through the humiliation of a poor report
Spielman is in my view held her own in cross examination, I find little to criticise. Anna Firth just wants to show how good she is a corporate-speak.
Much is made of semantics. The word 'judgement' with the chair offering 'academic circles' criticisms, which is in itself a judgment. They could easily go round and round on that one word alone
I wrote the second paragraph before i read your link, it would seem Spielman and I sing from the same hymn sheet. The criticism you raise of 'one word' judgement is raised and discussed fromQ128
-
17 minutes ago, DJ360 said:
I'm struggling to think of any other profession where people who are judged to have even partially failed, as far as I can see without even any right of appeal, are placed under such pressure that they kill themselves. I can think of many, many people who have failed in far worse ways, but who weren't so personally invested that they felt compelled to take their own lives. I include many politicians in that number
There are at least two ways to appeal Ofsted decisions and I can't see where an Ofsted bad report puts pressure on anyone except to follow the recommendations, it is what it is.
To speculate further is to try and analyse the type of personality of those involved, their personal circumstances or mental state. I will not comment on things of that nature when I'm not qualified to do so.
32 minutes ago, DJ360 said:I can only repeat that something is clearly wrong with a system which causes so much fear, and even death.
In most other circumstances, an appraisal would build on positives, not the reverse
From what I have read every other element of the inspection was positive.
What would we think if the result of ignoring the situation or downrating the assessment as per Brent council ended in harm?
We have to remember there are four grades, they could have given. Grade 1 and 2 the highest then down to grade 3 (requires improvement). To be graded as a 4 (inadequate), something must have been very wrong and well below the expected standard. This was not an individuals judgement, it had to be a team agreement and I doubt that decision was taken lightly.
Blame for suicides is difficult to establish. Skilled trades are at the highest risk with plasters, painters and decorators having twice the national average, agricultural workers are next...
57 minutes ago, DJ360 said:For what it's worth, I was appraised regularly. Usually, the 'appraiser' would find something to criticise.
As were many of us myself included. Usually it was a tick box exercise much like a school report which aways ended with recommended 'areas to concentrate on', and were universally ignored by both assessed and assessors
1 hour ago, DJ360 said:In any sane world, the body charged with inspecting schools, would be DIRECTLY responsible to the Minister for Education, not vaguely reporting to Parliament.
Not entirely sure I agree, By being non-ministerial they are able to maintain a degree of impartiality, free from influence by unqualified politicos who have an axe to grind or a budget to cut. Neither of the two Ministers or the Secretary of State for education are qualified in any area of education.
-
!2 days ICU? Close call then OZ, glad you made it...
-
4 hours ago, siddha said:
Good Safeguarding arrangements are necessary.
Of that there is no argument, however in the two terrible cases you quote neither schools nor Ofsted had any involvement.
I don't doubt you have experience and in depth knowledge of the way the system works, but can't imagine how you can be so certain in this particular instance unless directly involved. The focus in your post is safeguarding, the school failed on four elements in that area. how did they not do their job?
Victoria before her death, the police, the social services department of four local authorities, the National Health Service, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, and local churches all had contact with her and noted signs of abuse. However, in what the judge in the trial following Victoria's death described as "blinding incompetence", all failed to properly investigate the case and little action was taken.
Baby P was similarly failed by those who had contact.
In both cases there was no criticism of failure by the school system and over the intervening 20 yrs there has been significant changes.
The point I'm making is widening the topic to include extreme historical examples such a these invites unrelated comment and draws attention away from the current discussion, I can't see how they are relevant. Child protection is something entirely different.
-
1
-
-
It seems Ofsted can do nothing right.
2 hours ago, DJ360 said:OFSTED inspectors of schools need to be Graduates with Qualified Teacher Status
It would follow therefore they are best qualified to judge.
13 hours ago, siddha said:A good and robust professional development process (appraisal) could sort most of that out but again you need good and firm leadership and governance
Isn't that what Ofsted does? and define 'robust' and 'firm leadership'. Schools heads regular carry out appraisals internally, who would you suggest does the impartial external?
2 hours ago, DJ360 said:OFSTED has always been problematic in generating an aggressive culture.
Is it aggressive or robust, firm leadership?
" Whatever the omission it was poorly handled by the inspection team."
How do we know this? Unless we are privy the the internal proceedings of Ofsted we only have conjecture and supposition,
2 hours ago, DJ360 said:I'm sorry but I don't think we can conclude anything of the sort about Ruth Perry. It was a judgement made by an inspector and I don't think we have enough evidence to go on.
Totally agree. I won't comment on Mrs Perry other than to say it's an absolute tragedy.
But it was not just an inspector. there's at least three in a team, each qualified in different areas.
2 hours ago, DJ360 said:Both of the above points bring me straight back to my original point..that it is not only unhelpful, but it is monumentally stupid, to allow ONE element of the inspection criteria, however important, to totally condemn a school.
On this the coroner came up with two hypothetical cases to illustrate the point:
"Hypothetical school A is inadequate in all areas and there are serious concerns about safeguarding, which will take a long time to fix. Hypothetical school B is good in all areas, but has safeguarding concerns which are likely to be fixed quickly." Both fail inspection ,and far from a single item there were at least four areas of concern,
OK, but where do we draw the line? There has to be a standard, and far from a single item there were at least four areas of concern,
A driving test allows 15 minor faults, 16 and you fail. It can be said therefore that you failed the driving test on a minor fault. A failure is a failure whether its a massive fault causing an accident or simply bumping the kerb. There has to be a line as with O level, A level. MOT and every other sort of test.
There are 2500 schools in Ofsteds mandate, of those only 130 failed to gain at least a 'good' rating. Hardly the draconian result that the press are alluding to. Ofsted are taking some flak with the media frantically searching to find tales of woe from the profession, the more onerous the better.
There is no criticism from those schools rated good or outstanding indeed they are very quick to boast about it, but that's not newsworthy and we rarely see mention of it. A school fails and its headlines...
No organisation is perfect, but in short Ofsted are staffed by well qualified professionals, well funded and accountable to parliament. any changes to the system will simply be Ofsted by another name.
-
2
-
-
Welcome RPC. topics here never die, they may go dormant once in a while, but as soon as someone makes a post it usually triggers more memories from other members, so go for it, reminisce away...
-
Only ever eaten venison once at the Kirkstone Pass Inn... I was ill for three days
What are you listening to now ??
in Nick Palmer's Nottstalgia General Music Chat.
Posted
I'm fairly sure you know I'm not going to be impressed.
Reading that is quite frankly pretentious nonsense, sales upspeak for the gullible. The writer claims a small but significant improvement in sound quality without saying how they achieve it. They even admit the 'brick' is perfectly serviceable and the LPSU is, in so many words, simply a £500 prestige accessory. Little is said about what it brings to the party, it's there almost as an after thought, a marketing placebo.
I expected it would be some technical wizardry of filters and smoothing caps to deliver a pure signal free of distortion. It's not It's a linear supply and as such is not as efficient as the swich mode 'brick. They also cost less to manufacture than a switch mode.
Quite how it affects the sound is beyond me but hey, each to their own, if you're happy so am I...