Best snob post of 2009, now with added wriggle

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Have a chat to your father, Hugenot.

[????]

To move off topic (as it's not the Drawing Room) I think this thread is a fine example of why the Lounge is a far better place for debate than the Drawing Room...Content, participation, frequency etc

[bigbadwolf]

Hear hear Quids. What what.

[Keef]

Agree Quids!

Also agree with Brendan that BBW's post was a LOLer.

And also agree with BBW, that we can all be snobs at times. I know I can, and I love it.

I seem to be in an agreeing mood today.

[????]

JetSetWilly Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> so are you therefore proposing a school for the

> children born of "middle income professional

> families" in the ED area, because you don,t

> believe that throwing all children of all

> abilities in together works in all areas. you want

> a school that is right for ED, the people who live

> in ED and aimed at their childrens abilities.

>

> what in effect you are proposing is selective

> education for the choosen ones and the rest can in

> effect get stuffed. you make a very broad

> assumption that a) all families in ED fall into

> the middle income professional bracket, b)that the

> children of these families will be of a suitable

> educational standard to go to this proposed

> school.

>

> so for the bright children from the families in ED

> who don,t quite meet the level of the middle

> income professional bracket, where do they go, or

> are they suitable to attend by association.

> what about the children of the middle income

> families who don,t quite come up to standard, what

> happens to them, as according to your beliefs

> throwing children of all abilities in together

> dosent work in all areas, or are you of the belief

> that it will work in ED.

>

> while we all want the best for our children, what

> you are proposing is selfish, middle class

> elitism, that will in effect educate the children

> born of families, lucky enough to have parents

> earning enough to fall into your middle income

> bracket, and the rest can again get stuffed. your

> idea is flawed, ill thought through, and you need

> to go back to the drawing board and brush up on

> your homework.

No. He's suggesting that schools for this area shouldn't just be Academies - which have poorer records and I suspect negligble mixtures of different classes as, hey surprise, middle class 'socialists' on the whole don't follow their 'heatrfelt convictions'- to the detriment of their kids educaton.. And maybe we can then get some schools that benefit EVERYONE who lives in our area....where does MM ever say these schools would be fpr middleclass kids only?

It may be an unpalatable truth but 'middleclass' schools do tend to do a fair bit better than those in more deprived areas for a whole host of reasons including 'pushyness', apirations, home environment, discipline ...which is nothing to do with inherent differences in intelligence. Go and ask motivated, singleparent working class mum's with bright kids if they'd like a bit more than the 'acadamies' available locally

I'd put away your sociology text book and go and look at some Ofsted reports...

[Moos]

It may be that this thread is causing confusion by conflating 2 themes. Schools for wealthier/poorer children vs schools for bright or focused children / less bright or disruptive children. I think what Mick Mac is saying is that deprived areas are more likely to have a higher proportion of disruptive children, ergo the focus of the school will be on inclusion, behaviour and getting something out of the system, whereas he'd like to see a state school that focuses on developing children and getting good results. Trouble is, who gets to decide who goes to the 'academy' and who goes to the 'grammar'?

(Mick, I apologise for speaking for you - if I'm wrong please correct me)

Seems to me that if the OP is correct and that the demographics are changing so that there are more kids around with fewer social problems and pushier parents, then the schools will benefit automatically.

[Mick Mac]

That's fine Moos. I agree with most of that.

I'm not sure the last line necessarily follows, although I am hoping that will be the case, at primary school level at least.

As for secondary school, as there appears to be a baby boom in ED over the last 5-10 years and the primary schools are this year becoming overloaded, we are likely to need a new secondary school or face sending our children outside of ED to schools which currently serve other postcodes.

The government will say but we have just given you two academies, so the chances of another school will be slim.

[Mark]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To move off topic (as it's not the Drawing Room) I

> think this thread is a fine example of why the

> Lounge is a far better place for debate than the

> Drawing Room...Content, participation, frequency

> etc

Why make it a that place vs this place issue? It's not one or the other, you have the option of both, surely that's better as it means the place as a whole is more non-exclusive.

[Keef]

or face sending our children outside of ED to schools which currently serve other postcodes.

Nothing wrong with that, I went to school in SE14 I think. Builds character! ;-)

[Keef]

Why make it a that place vs this place issue? It's not one or the other, you have the option of both, surely that's better as it means the place as a whole is more non-exclusive.

I disagree. I now find it hard to find good threads in The Lounge, yet find The Drawing Room too stuffy.

I was very pro the drawing room idea, but to be honest, I liked it better before. Just my opinion.

[Mark]

Damn, and I thought you were being agreeable today ;-). I know what you're saying but the general opinion from feedback was that the Lounge has became a playground and there were no "good" discussion threads going on any more.

[giggirl]

Mark Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> opinion from feedback was that the Lounge has

> became a playground and there were no "good"

> discussion threads going on any more.

Yes that's spot on. The Lounge is a playground and even, as if by magic, a good thread appears, it's a safe bet that the children will run amok all over it by bedtime.

It?s just that the Sitting Room is a bit grown up in a scary way.

[bigbadwolf]

In the lounge they've got encyclodpedia Britannica and a bouncy castle.

In the drawing room they've got a huge chandalier with cobwebs and torn snooker table. There's also a revolver just in case Tony starts talking in his sleep.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> BTW ask Diane Abbot, Tony Blair and other 'Labour'

> architects of the Academies where they sent their

> kids to school.......

Wish I had thought of that.

Good point Quidsy and thank you for confirming what I have thought for many a long day---that my posts are, indeed, invisible...::o

[Mick Mac]

I did see your post Tony - don't worry, I noticed you said it too.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Gotta love this thread.

Takes me back to the halcyon era of '72ish...

"Ban Grammar Schools" for blah/blah...

"Working-Class Kids will then miss the chance to elevate themselves"

"No, they won't!"

"Yes, they will!"

Answer 35 or so years later..we listened to the "Right-On" Brigade of the time(probably the ancestors of todays "crop") and YES endless of thousands of bright, able kids from working-class stock DID get dragged down in the mire where the finest achievement of "some" classrs in "some" State Secondary Schools was to ensure no-one got hurt during the disruption of the lesson.

As for actually learning anything during the lesson, forget it!

[Mick Mac]

Tony - the "right on brigade" is alive and well in ED it seems.

[Ladymuck]

bigbadwolf Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Snob

>

> -noun

>

> 1: A person who imitates, cultivates or slavishly

> admires social superiors and is condescending or

> overbearing to others.

>

> 2: A person who believes himself or herself an

> expert or connoisseur in a given field and is

> condescending toward or disdainful of those who

> hold other opinions or have different tastes

> regarding this field.

>

>

>

> I think (and I emphasis I) that going by the

> defenition of Snob then we're all guilty in some

> respect to being snobs in one way or another.

>

>

> Just don't forget your own prejudices no matter

> how trivial they may towards this arguement before

> you go about unfairly branding someone as a snob

> because they have a different opinion to yours.

BBW, I ABSOLUTELY agree with you! (problem is, it's SO easy to behave this way - I've done it many a time...and on this forum too...poor Honaloochie...)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tony - the "right on brigade" is alive and well in

> ED it seems.

Too Right Bruv!

I'm joining them for one, I've had enough of this namby-pamby, softly-softly attitude!

Edited to say...hang on a minute, I might have got that last bit wrong...

In fact, you just try to stop me joining their ranks!

[dulwichmum]

Darling Mr Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

"What does a school with higher aspirations do that one with lower aspirations doesn't?"

*Puts on glasses and looks serious*

A school with lower aspirations does not know how to advise/prime/prepare a student that may have an interest in law, architecture, dentistry, medicine or particular educational establishments such as Oxbridge.

A school with higher aspirations will encourage students who show aptitude or interest in a certain subject area to acquire particular voluntary, work or placement experience, early on, to support applications to university later. It may have a network of past alumni willing to provide this experience for its students.

A school with higher aspirations will virtually write the required supporting statement on a student's UCAS form, and prepare the student with mock interviews.

Schools with lower aspirations do not sit a child down and ask them to consider their path, instead allowing them to persue mismatched subjects that will not assist them when it comes to applying for a particular course of study at University - rather, it may encourage students to study subjects that are easier and are likely to deliver higher grades to help the school on their place on a league table.

The education provided by schools with higher aspirations, considers the needs/aspirations/aptitudes of the student. There are most certainly schools all over this country that have lower aspirations (glares).

*Flops on desk and whispers*

"is it too early to open the gin?"

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Cor Bloimey, thats good stuff from DM...

"Sighs" wish I had gone to a good School and could write like that..."tails off wistfully"....

[lard]

One wot makes them spell fings correctly too. But hey. let's not pursue this. :-)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

lard Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> One wot makes them spell fings correctly too. But

> hey. let's not PURSUE this. :-)

I see you PERUSED that thread lard....

[bigbadwolf]

"Schools with lower aspirations do not sit a child down and ask them to consider their path, instead allowing them to persue mismatched subjects that will not assist them when it comes to applying for a particular course of study at University - rather, it may encourage students to study subjects that are easier and are likely to deliver higher grades to help the school on their place on a league table.

The education provided by schools with higher aspirations, considers the needs/aspirations/aptitudes of the student. There are most certainly schools all over this country that have lower aspirations."

In other words the schools with lower aspirations are out to impress the inspectors and OFSTED and the schools with higher aspirations are out to impress the parents of future admissions.

[Mick Mac]

I wish I had written that DM.

The school I went to did all those things - My Father was in charge of career developement and he set up Alumni visiting days, coached pupils on career aspirations, performed best career fit analyses, advised on UCCA form completion, choice of university etc.

But no one school can be all things to all people.