And of course it’s all NULAB’s fault! But you can always rely on the Mail help raise intellectual standards in this country with it’s diet of celeb trivia and general vacuous nonsense
Maybe if the Mail journalists had a better education they’d be able to come up with some estimate for the number of people starting work without the 3Rs. Maybe it’s two people, maybe it’s ten million? Who knows? Best blame Labour anyhow.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives’ solution (according to today’s Guardian) is emergency legislation for MORE ACADEMIES. That’s sure to work.
The issue I have that even “a lesson in incometance” is a serious step up from what it was.
That’s why the Mail is so lightweight. They really don’t put anything in context.
School levels, exam levels, uni levels, are really on a different planet now to what they were in 1996.
The real issue is that Mail readers object to paying for it. They can afford good schooling. Or live in a nice catchment area. Why should they pay to fund “hoodies” education.
The tories first few moves will probably be cutting funding to every state school. And getting rid of Offsted – the people who are doing the work to improve things,
You know. As I said, t’will be a glorious education utopia witht he tories in charge……….
Haven’t read the article, but I bet there’s at least one comment suggesting that “ZaNuLiebour want to keep the population stupid so we don’t object to their Stalinist goals”.
If Sarandon didn’t have her famous sweater cows, then she wouldn’t be on the cover. Need I ask if the article is a prime contender for the (matronly) “Tits!” thread?…
‘Countless start work without 3Rs’. How many is that then?
How do they define ‘without 3rs’?
A recent article stated that nearly a third of children started secondary school illiterate. Which really meant that a third of children didn’t get the ‘expected level’ at 11 years, i.e. level 4. Most of them did get level 3, though which is far from being illiterate. Given that these levels are, or were when they were first used, an average, the fact that a third are ‘below average’ should not come as a shock. At least, not to anyone who understands the concept of average.
Oh, well, statistics, eh?
What I love is that they’re complaining that “£5 billion wasted on Adult Literacy Classes”, but should it be “Countless PEOPLE start work without THE 3Rs”? Maybe they should invest in some of those lessons…
And of course it’s all NULAB’s fault! But you can always rely on the Mail help raise intellectual standards in this country with it’s diet of celeb trivia and general vacuous nonsense
Maybe if the Mail journalists had a better education they’d be able to come up with some estimate for the number of people starting work without the 3Rs. Maybe it’s two people, maybe it’s ten million? Who knows? Best blame Labour anyhow.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives’ solution (according to today’s Guardian) is emergency legislation for MORE ACADEMIES. That’s sure to work.
Kudos to the Mail for putting vile socialist Susan Sarandon on the cover, though.
The issue I have that even “a lesson in incometance” is a serious step up from what it was.
That’s why the Mail is so lightweight. They really don’t put anything in context.
School levels, exam levels, uni levels, are really on a different planet now to what they were in 1996.
The real issue is that Mail readers object to paying for it. They can afford good schooling. Or live in a nice catchment area. Why should they pay to fund “hoodies” education.
The tories first few moves will probably be cutting funding to every state school. And getting rid of Offsted – the people who are doing the work to improve things,
You know. As I said, t’will be a glorious education utopia witht he tories in charge……….
Haven’t read the article, but I bet there’s at least one comment suggesting that “ZaNuLiebour want to keep the population stupid so we don’t object to their Stalinist goals”.
If Sarandon didn’t have her famous sweater cows, then she wouldn’t be on the cover. Need I ask if the article is a prime contender for the (matronly) “Tits!” thread?…
‘Countless start work without 3Rs’. How many is that then?
How do they define ‘without 3rs’?
A recent article stated that nearly a third of children started secondary school illiterate. Which really meant that a third of children didn’t get the ‘expected level’ at 11 years, i.e. level 4. Most of them did get level 3, though which is far from being illiterate. Given that these levels are, or were when they were first used, an average, the fact that a third are ‘below average’ should not come as a shock. At least, not to anyone who understands the concept of average.
Oh, well, statistics, eh?
I like the irony that the DM are bitchin’ that kids leave school without “The 3 Rs”, but then admit that they can’t count them.
What I love is that they’re complaining that “£5 billion wasted on Adult Literacy Classes”, but should it be “Countless PEOPLE start work without THE 3Rs”? Maybe they should invest in some of those lessons…
Not that the DM judge women on their age or aesthetics…..
‘countless start work without 3Rs’
Is that sentence grammatically correct?
So Fergie has been killed?
“Prison kisses”
Snigger, snigger …
Ladies kissing … and in prison …
[Not that such a family friendly paper would go down that road, at all]
Nice to see the DM are introducing a GILF feature.
they think illiteracy is too high, but they think paying for remedial classes is a waste… typical mail, wanting something for nothing.