School Class Snobbery

Naikon

I remember to this day how poor performance on the school entrance exam banished my ass to one of the worst/weakest classes in the entire school. A minority of the people from that class are now in jail or dead. The teaching standards were diabolical. Teachers missing for weeks at a time close to exams. Crazy looking back.

Why do some state schools still get away with this? Is it that hard to treat people equally even in the face of varying ability(or maybe perhaps, a bad exam day?). It still angers me to this day how little can be done to remove ****ty underperforming teachers from school. Class division should not exist at the secondary school level. Do you agree?

Nonsense like this should be consigned to the history books. It's 2011 ffs. I believe it's a Pretty sick mentality to presume weaker students are less likely to succeed, thus leading to a reduction in teaching standards for that given class. tl;dr - Do you feel seriously let down by your school in terms of standards?

</rant of the day>

Biggins

Naikon wrote: »

...Do you feel seriously let down by your school in terms of standards?

Speaking personally, the school system was good - just some of the teachers at the time (Christian Brothers) were right bastard thugs in gowns.
I have a lot more respect for the teachers of today and what they are up against.

Naikon

Biggins wrote: »

Speaking personally, the school system was good - just some of the teachers at the time (Christian Brothers) were right bastard thugs in gowns.

Yeah, it's easy for me to complain, but I know the carry on back then really was something else. I have heard stories of these fcukers using belts, canes, and hurleys to hit people. How they got away with these antics, I don't know.

ImpossibleDuck

Naikon wrote: »

I remember to this day how poor performance on the school entrance exam banished my ass to one of the worst/weakest classes in the entire school. A minority of the people from that class are now in jail or dead. The teaching standards were diabolical. Teachers missing for weeks at a time close to exams. Crazy looking back.

Why do some state schools still get away with this? Is it that hard to treat people equally even in the face of varying ability(or maybe perhaps, a bad exam day?). It still angers me to this day how little can be done to remove ****ty underperforming teachers from school. Class division should not exist at the secondary school level. Do you agree?

Nonsense like this should be consigned to the history books. It's 2011 ffs. I believe it's a Pretty sick mentality to presume weaker students are less likely to succeed, thus leading to a reduction in teaching standards for that given class. tl;dr - Do you feel seriously let down by your school in terms of standards?

</rant of the day>

Although I absolutely agree with you, it can have the opposite effect. I was a bad wee f*cker up until 2nd Year (in 5th now) when I was put in one of the top classes and since then, my behaviour and results improved dramatically. It can have a very positive effect but I always feel sorry for the ones stuck in the low classes, especially if they are intelligent.

Wasted potential; welcome to the Irish schooling system.

Kevin Duffy

I agree there are some poor teachers and elements of the sytem need fundamental reform, but from getting a fairly in-depth insight into teaching over a few years, I think far more of the problems come from poor parenting and people seeing schools at all levels as state-provided babysitting services.

Logical Fallacy

Naikon wrote: »

Do you feel seriously let down by your school in terms of standards?

In all honesty, not really. The school i was in did the same, the stronger teachers would take the better students and the classes were broken into A,B,C,D etc, A were considering the better students and it got worse as you went along.

Being honest i was in the A classes for all my subjects simply because i have a good memory and learning by rote was particularly difficult for me thankfully. It was just a case of read the stuff and feed it back to the teachers.

There were some issues in 6th year when I wanted to drop Honours Irish and French. I didn't need the points and did see why i should bust my ass on two subjects like that when i could focus more on the things i found easier and achieve a better mark. The school made it quite hard to do this...even though it was really none of their concern.

I have to say, i can't remember anyone in my school being really stupid or lacking intelligence. I think at the time i might have thought they were, or i think they wanted to imply they were as when you are young there is that ideal that being too clever is not cool and doing too well in school is certainly not cool.

amen

Class division should not exist at the secondary school leve

of course it should. Why someone who say is very good at Maths/Science and who want to do medicine be stuck with someone who is poor at Maths. Do you intend for the teacher to teach Lower and Higher (and maybe even Foundation level) in the one class?

Sometimes you just need to grade classed based on ability. I would agree though that for classed such as Religion, Civics there is no need.

Following on from your analogy there is no need for grading in anything, we should have races, shouldn't pay those who do a good job more etc.

ImpossibleDuck

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

There were some issues in 6th year when I wanted to drop Honours Irish and French. I didn't need the points and did see why i should bust my ass on two subjects like that when i could focus more on the things i found easier and achieve a better mark. The school made it quite hard to do this...even though it was really none of their concern.

What is up with this??? It should be your own choice. I'm being made to do Honours French at the minute even though my college course only needs about 350 points which is modest to say the least and I am overachieving in all my other subjects but I dislike French and would rather see an A or B ordinary on my CV that a D or an E in French (For a subject that won't even be counted in my 6 subjects anyway!)

Naikon

amen wrote: »

of course it should. Why someone who say is very good at Maths/Science and who want to do medicine be stuck with someone who is poor at Maths. Do you intend for the teacher to teach Lower and Higher (and maybe even Foundation level) in the one class?

Sometimes you just need to grade classed based on ability. I would agree though that for classed such as Religion, Civics there is no need.

Following on from your analogy there is no need for grading in anything, we should have races, shouldn't pay those who do a good job more etc.

Maybe not at Leaving cert level, but pidgin holing people at a very young age is totally out of order. Putting people down at that age is bordering on abuse imo. I was told I would never get into college despite being in second year. I proved these peope wrong. It's no wonder I am distrusting of authority in general, when you have situations like the above still happening today. I wasn't even a trouble maker! This crap still happens today, I know this because the very same comments are being thrown around to students, yet the VEC does not give a rats ass.

Have you considered people percieved to be "weak" may not have developed their skills yet? Why do we have Mature Student places? For the craic?

stovelid

Naikon wrote: »

I remember to this day how poor performance on the school entrance exam

It's known as being thick.

Logical Fallacy

Naikon wrote: »

Maybe not at Leaving cert level, but pidgin holing people at a very young age is totally out of order. Late Bloomers are at a disadvantage here. Putting people down at that age is bordering on abuse imo. I was told I would never get into college despite being in second year. I proved these peope wrong.

It's no wonder I am distrusting of authority in general, when you have situations like the above still happening today. I wasn't even a real trouble maker!

It always struck me as a little weird in my school that the better teachers were not the ones teaching the students that might have an issue with a certain subject.

SEPT 23 1989

The B class had all the fun:cool:

OutlawPete

I did very well at school, mostly A's, B's and C's. but I would not like to have had me as a pupil. I caused complete chaos. Booby trapping teachers, throwing fun-snaps at the black board, listen to my walkman (whole class was doing that at one stage almost). We had this system of breaking apart headphones and sliding one of the foam earpieces down the sleeve and so it just looked as if you wearing leaning on your palm. However, what you would be doing was listening to W.A.S.P F**K Like A Beast. Eating during class became an obsession too. Unwrapping a Chewit or a Bazooka took a remarkable level of dexterity and skill, of which I was excelled in :cool:

hardCopy

OP, it sounds like the problem in your school was with crap teachers rather than with streaming.

IMO streaming is good, bad teachers are bad and should be sacked.

dlofnep

Agreed.

I went from all honours in the junior cert, to being shoved into the LCA because of an incident. I was unjustly expelled, and when they decided to let me back in - they said all the places left were in the Leaving Cert Applied.

I was dumbfounded by the level of teaching. I was learning maths that I had learned in primary school. I remember going from honours Irish, to learning basic words like cow, and pig. I felt completely disillusioned with the school and lost all interest in it - spending the majority of my days on the duck, getting stoned because I just couldn't be arsed anymore with it.

I didn't correct it until I hit 23, and applied to college as a mature student where I got a degree. I remember a few people in my class at the time were pretty intelligent, and I couldn't understand how they got to be in the LCA.

Naikon

hardCopy wrote: »

OP, it sounds like the problem in your school was with crap teachers rather than with streaming.

IMO streaming is good, bad teachers are bad and should be sacked.

One of the teachers I had was sacked. I won't go into it, but suffice to say, it was not a simple case of misconduct.

mikemac

Naikon wrote: »

Class division should not exist at the secondary school level.

Then the entire class goes at the rate of the weakest members

Naikon

amen wrote: »

Following on from your analogy there is no need for grading in anything, we should have races, shouldn't pay those who do a good job more etc.

What is a "good job"? Making more money for your superiors? I never said there should be no grading, it's just that this class snobbery should be removed. You did not address the fact that in general, poor teaching standards exist in the lower classes, whereas higher teaching standards exist in the higher classes. Should that not be the other way around?

Naikon

dlofnep wrote: »

Agreed.

I went from all honours in the junior cert, to being shoved into the LCA because of an incident. I was unjustly expelled, and when they decided to let me back in - they said all the places left were in the Leaving Cert Applied.

I was dumbfounded by the level of teaching. I was learning maths that I had learned in primary school. I remember going from honours Irish, to learning basic words like cow, and pig. I felt completely disillusioned with the school and lost all interest in it - spending the majority of my days on the duck, getting stoned because I just couldn't be arsed anymore with it.

I didn't correct it until I hit 23, and applied to college as a mature student where I got a degree. I remember a few people in my class at the time were pretty intelligent, and I couldn't understand how they got to be in the LCA.

This is a Canonical example of the sham that is the public school system. At least in Ireland. Seriously though, Well done mate.

Naikon

mikemac wrote: »

Then the entire class goes at the rate of the weakest members

This is an assumption. Not a fact. Yes, there should be classes to divide people at Foundation, Ordinary, and Higher level based on their subject choice along with their respective ability. That is not the issue here. I could not get into the decent honours classes simply because I was from 'class x', even though my JC results could have been taken on merit. How is that not discrimination? Parents have no choice when it comes to matter like this. Input is good, no matter what the source.

dlofnep

Naikon wrote: »

This is a Canonical example of the sham that is the public school system. At least in Ireland. Seriously though, Well done mate.

Cheers man. I can tell you the class really hurt my self-confidence, and self-worth.

Naikon

dlofnep wrote: »

Cheers man. I can tell you the class really hurt my self-confidence, and self-worth.

Well, you are a living proof that they were wrong:)

People WILL put you down on little more than a whim at times. The important thing to remember, is that you aren't the sum of their warped opinion. Once you have the ability to pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and move on, you are golden. If you can recognize you have a problem/issue that you can solve, that is half the battle. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Not to sound cliche, but I am convinced you aren't doing anthing worth doing unless you **** up along the way. Know how to improve your prospects on your own terms. If you have a problem, fix it. Worry about stuff you can change. Caring about what others think really think about you is an exercise in absolute futility:cool:

The safest path in life tends to lead to mediocrity...

starviewadams

I was/am shít at maths so was chucked into the foundation class in 5th year,the class had 4 people in it including myself so it would've been fairly easier for the teacher to teach us dullards and improve us even a bit,but he was 2 years away from retirement and wasn't arsed so he put movies and comedy videos on for us instead,I still know Brendan Grace's 'Bottler' routine off by heart to this day.

My English teacher basicaly did the same thing aswell,I was pretty fed up with school so left after a few months of 5th year to go on the sites,these two lazy fúckers definitely helped make my decision a bit easier.

Victor Meldrew

This is rife in all schools,

My experiences relate to private schools, and in some cases the basket case teachers got the top streams. In Honours physics 70% of the class was getting grinds...


When I dropped from the 2nd (hons) maths stream to the 5th (pass) stream, which was for the not that bright, but good kids who would work.

I got an A1 in pass maths because the teacher let me move faster than the class once I stayed quiet. That Maths teacher got me an A in Science in my Inter-cert and was probably the best teacher I ever had.

Other private, high end schools have discriminated against pupils because individual teachers perceive that child X is not up to honours.

So it's common to both systems and is utterly dependent on the Pupil-teacher relationship

7sr2z3fely84g5

My own old school,any messers in the top classes where moved down to the bottom groups,sometimes the teachers used to tell some of members of bottom group they where better off dropping out and not bother doing the leaving cert :eek:

bleg

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I have to say, i can't remember anyone in my school being really stupid or lacking intelligence. I think at the time i might have thought they were, or i think they wanted to imply they were as when you are young there is that ideal that being too clever is not cool and doing too well in school is certainly not cool.

I remember 90% of the people in my school being absolutely stupid and really didn't give a ****.

Pherekydes

stovelid wrote: »

It's known as being thick.

You can have a bad day, can't you?

Weaker, slower or disruptive students should be separated from the others. They will hold up progress.

Wetai

Good thing they stopped the entrance exam where I went a couple of years before I started (I think it was stopped 1/2 years before I started, anyways) so I didn't get bundled straight into different classes based on it, because of that.

partyatmygaff

I'm glad I go to a school that doesn't have streamed classes. I did well in my entrance exam (98th Percentile IIRC) but we were all organised in classes based on our base class groups and not on our abilities. In second year we were placed in HL and OL classes and that's as far as it went in terms of class organisation. I never found any reason to complain and neither did anyone else.

Cuddlesworth

Somebody has to clean the toilets in future, those polish chaps are not going to stick around forever. Keep the dunce classes I say.

Naikon

amen wrote: »

of course it should. Why someone who say is very good at Maths/Science and who want to do medicine be stuck with someone who is poor at Maths. Do you intend for the teacher to teach Lower and Higher (and maybe even Foundation level) in the one class?

Sometimes you just need to grade classed based on ability. I would agree though that for classed such as Religion, Civics there is no need.

Following on from your analogy there is no need for grading in anything, we should have races, shouldn't pay those who do a good job more etc.

You miss the point entirely. There are Higher level messer classes in my old school. The problem is streaming, not the Higher/Ordinary distinction. I don't think it's right that more resources are pumped into
the upper class, whereas the peasants get very little. I never heard of teachers missing for weeks on end in the "better" classes. I honestly believe the lemon teachers were assigned to the messer classes as
a last resort, because they aren't much use apart from babysitting duties. The constant smell of grass was off putting to say the least.

Monty Burnz

Naikon wrote: »

I was told I would never get into college despite being in second year.

Sure there's a place in college for everyone who wants to go nowadays. You can't blame your teacher for not knowing that back then!

Marty McFly

amen wrote: »

of course it should. Why someone who say is very good at Maths/Science and who want to do medicine be stuck with someone who is poor at Maths. Do you intend for the teacher to teach Lower and Higher (and maybe even Foundation level) in the one class?

Sometimes you just need to grade classed based on ability. I would agree though that for classed such as Religion, Civics there is no need.

Following on from your analogy there is no need for grading in anything, we should have races, shouldn't pay those who do a good job more etc.

Yeh but I dont think the op meant honours, to pass to foundation level.

I think he meant like in my school you had six form classes 1 to 6. One was people who done the worst in the entrance exam and 6 was the highest luckily for me I ended up in 3 very average student.

Now this did not mean you couldnt do honours, pass or foundation it did mean you only mixed with certain classes or elements, like a person from 6 would never end up sharing a class with some from 1.

So basically if you did bad in the entrance exam you were screwed really if you did good you were given all the benefits.

i.e class one which did has it fiar share of dim wits in fairness was also full of the most trouble makers so for the few in that class with brains, or who were painfully shy or especially easy prey to peer pressure school beacme a living hell for them.

Monty Burnz

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

i.e class one which did has it fiar share of dim wits in fairness was also full of the most trouble makers so for the few in that class with brains, or who were painfully shy or especially easy prey to peer pressure school beacme a living hell for them.

Would it not make sense to deal with the real problem there, which would be getting rid of or somehow dealing with the trouble makers? Instead of holding back the better students, and scattering trouble makers into all the classes...

Marty McFly

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Would it not make sense to deal with the real problem there, which would be getting rid of or somehow dealing with the trouble makers? Instead of holding back the better students, and scattering trouble makers into all the classes...

Maybe but what solution would you reccomment to deal with the trouble makers? You cant just kick them out and make them someone elses problem.

Plus you say holding back the better students, but arent we all meant to be given the same opportunitys in our society regardless of social class or aptitude for school, like just because someones not got as high an i.q doesnt mean theyve not got a talent for English or Maths etc.

As a human being and student I think were all entitled to the same benefits not one class with better teachers and other fecked in with some student teacher still learning the way. Poverty breeds poverty children from lower classes or lower i.q need extra help to make it in this world and not be the next inmate in mountjoy and its when there children it counts most. The intelligent children or ones with good up bringing will generally make it on there own or with parents help.

Cian92

Naikon wrote: »

You miss the point entirely. There are Higher level messer classes in my old school. The problem is streaming, not the Higher/Ordinary distinction. I don't think it's right that more resources are pumped into
the upper class, whereas the peasants get very little. I never heard of teachers missing for weeks on end in the "better" classes. I honestly believe the lemon teachers were assigned to the messer classes as
a last resort, because they aren't much use apart from babysitting duties. The constant smell of grass was off putting to say the least.

Streaming has to take place, the weaker students will hold back the stronger students.

I'd also think that in many cases it is better to give the stronger students the better teachers. They will be the students most likely to go further and utilise their education.

Shivers26

My friend is a secondary school teacher and some of her subjects would have mixed ability students in them but she ends up having to split the class and put the weaker kids together and the better perfoming kids together. She ends up spending all of her time explaining things over and over to the weaker kids while the better kids are nearly left to their own devices so its not really fair on them either.

I do agree though that there should be some come back if teachers are crap. I was giving grinds to a young lad this year (not Feeky) and he was petrified to ask me questions and he would be nearly rigid with fear if he made a mistake. He told me his teacher in school refused to let them ask questions and would basically ridicule the kids if they got something wrong. How the feck can a teacher get away with that? Apparently parents complained but nothing was done.

ChloeElla

I've just completed my Leaving Cert., and I have to say I think my school was excellent. We had an entrance exam, but weren't placed into classes based on this, there was a mix of all abilities in base classes. For first year, unless someone requested to be in a Foundation / Ordinary Level class, we were in Higher Level. In second year, there were different level classes but we remained in the same base classes, so everyone had a fair chance. If there was one student struggling, a teacher usually offered to help them outside of class so everyone else didn't miss out on teaching time. In fifth & sixth year, there was more of a division in classes, I think. The base classes were still mixed ability, but for subjects like maths, there was one Higher class, one Foundation class, and a few Ordinary Level classes, which were considered to be sorted by ability, because one class contained most of the Higher Level drop-outs, or people who did well in their JC, etc. I think this is fair, because no-one is at a much different rate to the rest of their class. Though if someone wanted to be moved to a different level, this was allowed. One girl did Ordinary Level Irish for her JC, then was in my Higher Level Irish class for the LC. Also, all Maths students who achieved an A in Ordinary Level Maths in the JC were given the opportunity to do Higher Level for the LC. I know a lot of schools aren't as accommodating, but sometimes having classes based on ability works best!

Naikon

Cian92 wrote: »

Streaming has to take place, the weaker students will hold back the stronger students.

I'd also think that in many cases it is better to give the stronger students the better teachers. They will be the students most likely to go further and utilise their education.

Of course, getting people to college is the sole purpose of education. I almost forgot. Fcuk the people who drop out, they aren't worth ****:rolleyes:

spurious

Victor Meldrew wrote: »

This is rife in all schools,

No it is not.
Many? Perhaps, but not all.

spurious

Cian92 wrote: »

Streaming has to take place, the weaker students will hold back the stronger students.

That's not necessarily true either.

Oh - it's AH...ok, I'm off.

Tauriel

They have to divide the students into classes based on their abilities.

When I was in school I was put into top honours english. I know that I probably held the class back as I was useless at it and didn't have an interest in poetry or shakespear.

On the other hand I wish they got rid of half the thick idiots that were in my accounting and business classes.

Monty Burnz

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

Maybe but what solution would you reccomment to deal with the trouble makers? You cant just kick them out and make them someone elses problem.

Why not? I don't have any great solution, but perhaps there could be special schools for troublemakers? Does anyone ever remember a serious, hardcore trouble maker that suddenly reformed and became a great student? Nor do I. If you put them in a different school, you could actually tailor the studies towards things that would interest and/or be useful to them.

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

Plus you say holding back the better students, but arent we all meant to be given the same opportunitys in our society regardless of social class or aptitude for school, like just because someones not got as high an i.q doesnt mean theyve not got a talent for English or Maths etc.

Um...I think it does. If you have a talent for language or mathematics, by definition you won't have a low IQ (although IQ is a fairly discredited measure of intelligence). And we do all have the same opportunities - you don't get no education just because you are below average. You don't get to study at the highest level though, because it would be a waste of time for you and others. You study at a level you can cope with. According to your argument, I should be on the phone giving out to Man Utd because they didn't take me on as an apprentice pro footballer (just because I'm only an average player - so unfair!).

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

As a human being and student I think were all entitled to the same benefits not one class with better teachers and other fecked in with some student teacher still learning the way. Poverty breeds poverty children from lower classes or lower i.q need extra help to make it in this world and not be the next inmate in mountjoy and its when there children it counts most. The intelligent children or ones with good up bringing will generally make it on there own or with parents help.

Teachers teaching the lower classes are not necessarily worse teachers - in fact, they may be better. They certainly need a different approach, trying to teach students, some of whom may be - let's be honest here - quite stupid. You can't make a stupid student clever with better teachers - that is cloud cuckoo land stuff. I don't know if the state has a duty to raise the children of parents who can't be arsed to do it right themselves.

Monty Burnz

spurious wrote: »

That's not necessarily true either.

Not necessarily, but in the real world, it usually is.

7sr2z3fely84g5

Some students where branded weaker because in some cases the teachers where frankly useless or impatience.

almostnever

I'm all for streaming based on ability. From a young age. All I ever felt in school was boredom and frustration-can't remember learning much, it just felt like such a waste of my time because it did not challenge or stimulate me in the slightest. Primary school especially, doing the same thing practically every single day. Whereas now, at college, I can move at the pace I feel will benefit me most, I have access to a wealth of information and I'm actively encouraged to read up on things which interest me, even if they're not strictly related to the lecture material, and if I have any questions or queries or want to discuss a topic with an expert, I can meet with an academic and do so. A stark contrast to school, where asking questions was strongly discouraged, especially in my science classes because anything I wanted to know was "beyond the scope of the course" and we moved at a snail's pace all the bloody time. :rolleyes:

randylonghorn

Naikon wrote: »

Of course, getting people to college is the sole purpose of education. I almost forgot. Fcuk the people who drop out, they aren't worth ****:rolleyes:

Yeah, I know you're being sarcastic (and you're absolutely right to be) but unfortunately the pressure more and more in recent years is coming from the points race and getting into college. An awful lot of this pressure is coming from the parents and the students themselves, and while some teachers are happy to go along, many are uncomfortable with it and resist it. It's a bit like resisting the incoming tide though. I know schools which have had to cancel extra-curricular activities, and indeed in-class activities which they would see as core to education (as opposed to maximising points), because parents kicked up so much about the "waste of time".

Looking at some of the comments above, I am reassured once again that I went to a "good" school. I don't mean a snobby school, or one that thought points were the be all and end all, I mean a genuinely good school.

Yes, we were broken into groups in first year, you can't teach everyone together, but the streaming was based more on peoples subject choices than anything else (same after Junior Cert). And the groups were very permeable ... someone might be in the Honours class for say languages and English, and doing pass maths, or doing pass English and Irish hons maths and sciences. Insofar as it was possible, they tried to be as flexible as they could.

Nor was it all certain teachers teach hons, certain teachers teach pass; normally, they swapped each year, e.g., Teacher A would take the hons maths group this year and Teacher B the pass class, and next year they would do it the other way round.

And in fairness, while they weren't all absolutely brilliant teachers, none of them were terrible either. They tended to range from average to very good, with one or two outstanding. Only one or two of them that I can think of might I characterise as a bit lazy, and even at that, it mostly boiled down to the odd doss class once in a blue moon.

Sticky_Fingers

I was in a streamed system from about 5th class onwards. The teacher broke the class into 4 groups and you were ranked 1 to 30 in accordance on how well you did on a spelling and math test each Friday. I couldn't spell to save my life so I was thrown in with the paste eaters and messers down at table 4. While it didn't help my confidence much I must say that the teacher did concentrate on the weaker groups more and tried to really help those who struggled, best teacher I ever had.

Marty McFly

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Why not? I don't have any great solution, but perhaps there could be special schools for troublemakers? Does anyone ever remember a serious, hardcore trouble maker that suddenly reformed and became a great student? Nor do I. If you put them in a different school, you could actually tailor the studies towards things that would interest and/or be useful to them.

So you want to put troublemakers all in the one school that would be a disastrous idea, theyd all just feed oof each other and make each other worse, itd be like a whos who of whos going to end up in mountjoy. Also actually yes I do, I know a few to be honest i.e a friend of mine who constantly got in trouble and eventually got kicked out of school in 5th year for smoking cannabis is now living in America at 27 and studying for his PHD the man is genius but if you had asked any of the teachers from my school theyd tell you he was waste of space.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Um...I think it does. If you have a talent for language or mathematics, by definition you won't have a low IQ (although IQ is a fairly discredited measure of intelligence). And we do all have the same opportunities - you don't get no education just because you are below average. You don't get to study at the highest level though, because it would be a waste of time for you and others. You study at a level you can cope with. According to your argument, I should be on the phone giving out to Man Utd because they didn't take me on as an apprentice pro footballer (just because I'm only an average player - so unfair!).

So you just contradicted yourself there really some student can be realy poos at one subect but be great at another, just look at autism for years they were judged to be stupid and they cant interact socially with people and can appear to be stupid but some of them are the most gifted people youll ever meet at cetain things. Yes you do study at a level you can cop with but your missing my point yes your level maybe pass, honours even foundation but being lumped in with one class before youve even had a chance to discover what your real level is doesnt give you the same opportunitys.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Teachers teaching the lower classes are not necessarily worse teachers - in fact, they may be better. They certainly need a different approach, trying to teach students, some of whom may be - let's be honest here - quite stupid. You can't make a stupid student clever with better teachers - that is cloud cuckoo land stuff. I don't know if the state has a duty to raise the children of parents who can't be arsed to do it right themselves.

Im sorry but going by my own experiences the teachers teaching lower classes are a lower standard of teacher, they got the studnet teachers, the teachers who never showed, the new untested teacher in the school etc, the better classes got the teachers whod been there years and proven themselves to be good teachers. True you cant make a stupid student clever with better teachers, but you can give them a better education and better prepare them for life after school when they leave fact. Well I do think the state does have a responsibility to help raise children whose parent dont give two damns because if the state doesnt there the ones who will become a burden on the state when they become older, which would you rather the state to educate these children better so when they reach the age they get a job etc or state not care throw them in dumb classes with teacher who dont care and later on we pay taxes while they sit on the dole there whole livesor we pay to keep them in jail?

Monty Burnz

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

I couldn't spell to save my life so I was thrown in with the paste eaters and messers down at table 4.

..and the mystery of where you got your name from is solved.

Marty McFly

almostnever wrote: »

I'm all for streaming based on ability. From a young age. All I ever felt in school was boredom and frustration-can't remember learning much, it just felt like such a waste of my time because it did not challenge or stimulate me in the slightest. Primary school especially, doing the same thing practically every single day. Whereas now, at college, I can move at the pace I feel will benefit me most, I have access to a wealth of information and I'm actively encouraged to read up on things which interest me, even if they're not strictly related to the lecture material, and if I have any questions or queries or want to discuss a topic with an expert, I can meet with an academic and do so. A stark contrast to school, where asking questions was strongly discouraged, especially in my science classes because anything I wanted to know was "beyond the scope of the course" and we moved at a snail's pace all the bloody time. :rolleyes:

You kind of ust proved my point that less intelligent students need more help.See you were bored didnt get the attention you wanted or deserved but at the end of the day arent you still in college getting the education you craved and arent you going to make a good life for yourself? Were as some the students who were slacking behind you might just be in college now with the extra help from the teachers, you wouldve made it regardless and fair play to you for it.