Mailwatch(ed) Forum

What in the name of anything that's decent would make parents think this was an ideal place to put their children during their formative years?

Nazism?

If it's the school in the area with the well-off catchment then parents will probably overlook any nonsense like this. If the catchment is mixed, maybe some parents will think "Sounds a bit harsh, but at least the rough kids won't last 5 minutes".

Yeah, weed out the awkward kids and then relax the rules for the nice kids from nice families?

Or promise compulsory Latin.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 7:56 pm Far as I can see, she's another Oxford cunt with Strong Opinions who knows she's right about everything.

Bit in bold - if there's one thing I've caught on to it is the irony of those who think they're "right about anything" end up never learning about anything.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 11:21 pm Or promise compulsory Latin.

Yes. At one time a popular ploy to keep out working-class and BAME kids.

RandomElement wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 9:20 pm Geez, It would have been terrible for me. The best way for me to listen to the teacher, was to look out of the window and relax my eye and just listen. As for looking the teacher in the eyes; I still find it difficult to look at people in the eyes now, I'm in my mid forties. As for smiling all the time, No, just no.

ETA, how exactly is this meant to get kids ready for life, what job has that kind of rigidity, a part from perhaps the armed services.

Yeah, but it's a good way to get all the SEN kids excluded and game your average C's per pupil (or whatever the latest batshit metric happens to be).

Unfortunately the sharp elbowed parents love that sort of thing.
Until their kid's the one in need of a bit of assistance.

When I saw the headline, and remembered how she was a "hero" of the Gove/Cummings/Young free school movement.
I put 2 and 2 together and got 5.

Came here assuming Pob's mistress had been unmasked.

Spoonman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 03, 2021 11:21 pm
Bit in bold - if there's one thing I've caught on to it is the irony of those who think they're "right about anything" end up never learning about anything.

They once read a book, or a blog, or an article, and decided that it had all the answers.

I don't believe this is a carefully planned exercise to get rid of the children of non-PLU. Rather, it's a case of an intelligent and educated, but stupid, person doing what she *knows* is right, without once pausing to consider that she may be wrong. Add in a dose of petty demagogue who thinks authority=power and is using the opportuñity to (subconsciously) play out her authoritarian fantasy.

David Dunning and Justin Kruger would be faecinated by this.

As a strategy it was really used by some schools, especially in the early days of competitive league tables. Selection through the back door.

Burble and others like her have a very restricted moral compass - see what I wrote on Kohlberg.

That may be so, but I still think Hanlon's Razor applies

That's really my point.

Her biography on wikipedia is rather strange. Lots of gaps, seemingly becomes a deputy head overnight, and the main takeaway is that she knocked around with the right people at university.

I had the impression she was plucked out of obscurity for the Tory conference. But that's probably naive of me.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Sun Jul 04, 2021 12:38 pm I had the impression she was plucked out of obscurity for the Tory conference. But that's probably naive of me.

Funnily enough, that's my recollection. And that had nothing to do with her being given a Free School...

I wonder if there was some longer standing connection with Policy Exchange and co?

Cyclist wrote: ↑Sun Jul 04, 2021 9:31 am I don't believe this is a carefully planned exercise to get rid of the children of non-PLU. Rather, it's a case of an intelligent and educated, but stupid, person doing what she *knows* is right, without once pausing to consider that she may be wrong. Add in a dose of petty demagogue who thinks authority=power and is using the opportuñity to (subconsciously) play out her authoritarian fantasy.

David Dunning and Justin Kruger would be faecinated by this.

I'll disagree on "selection by exclusion".
A look at the distribution (some schools / heads doing it a lot) and targets (Mostly SEN boys) getting excluded.
The signs are there that the policy was being used cynically by people who knew exactly what they were doing.

There are all manner of strokes pulled across the board, but as Cyclist says, this might just be somebody getting high on their own supply.

Labour went hard for abolishing academies and restoring LAs last time. If they don't do that this time (which they probably won't because lots of parents will be happy with the academies their kids go to) I'd like to see a much bigger focus on stopping the strokes being pulled.