Teaching News

Quote:

---

Pupils 'unable to use full stops'

A third of children leave primary school in England unable to use full stops and capital letters properly, examiners have suggested.
They are unable to demarcate sentences with basic punctuation marks, analysis by exams watchdog the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority reveals.

Some 67% of the 600,000 11-year-olds who took Key Stage 2 writing tests in 2006 met the standard expected of them.

Just under half reached level 4 in national English tests as a whole.

The scale of the problem is revealed in an analysis of national assessment task results from 2006 by the examinations watchdog, the QCA.

Commas

It looked through 100 pupils' scripts from each level for examples of where required standards were missed.

They found that those failing to reach the required level 4 in writing were unable to "demarcate most sentences correctly with capital letters and full stops".

Many pupils were also unable to write basic sub-ordinate clauses "using commas correctly to support sentence divisions".

They also failed to include basic informative detail using adjectives, the QCA analysis revealed.

Assessment of reading test results also showed almost one in 10 were unable to subject texts to basic analysis.

Many could not skim and scan text to locate evidence, while one in five were unable to recognise the gist of a paragraph.

It also warned that too many youngsters were unable to use basic connective words or master the use of adjectives and adverbs.

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6263075.stm

That's interesting, and worrying.
In addition to problems with punctuation, I've noticed that the kids I tutor don't know what to do with articles and/or prepositions. I frequently hear "Let's go disco." or "Give me keys."

Here's an interesting article. What interrests me is not so much the general thrust of the article but the cost of educaton. It costs over $12,500 per student per year. This has been a long pet peeve of mine. What makes for such an exuberant cost? A typical class is around 30 students. $12,000 times 30 equals $360,000. A class is eesentially one teacher. Now a teacher makes at most $80,000 and when you figure overhead (medical benefits, paid vacation, management, building and maitenence, supplies) that is typically 50% of the base salary, so it costs the employer $80,000 plus $40,000 to support a classroom. That's $120,000. Where does the rest of the money go? Every election year politicians keep saying that we need more money to educate our children. BUT WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO? Two thirds of it doesn't go directly to a classroom.

Quote:

---

Towns tame taxes by keeping children out
By Bob Ivry
BLOOMBERG NEWS
January 20, 2007

Lee Farber, left, talks with town councilman Irwin Nalitt, outside Farber's home at Clearbrook, an 55 and-over age-restricted housing community in Monroe Township, New Jersey. (BLOOMBERG NEWS)
New Jersey towns have figured out a way to sidestep the highest property taxes in the U.S.
Keep children out.
Educating a child in New Jersey costs an average of $12,567 a year, the most in the nation and more than double the property tax parents typically pay. So local governments have hit upon a way to expand the tax base without the expense of higher enrollment: age-restricted housing.
New Jersey developers have responded by building an estimated one-fifth of the country's adults-only housing, making the state the leader in a national trend spurred by baby boomers seeking new homes after their children move out.
In New Jersey, where schools can command two-thirds of a municipal budget and state officials have failed to provide tax relief, building communities that don't allow children has as much to do with reducing taxes as it does with serving older home buyers.
"It's frustration on the part of some communities," said New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, a Democrat. "The real problem is we have too much reliance on property taxes in how we finance public education."
Nationwide, 2.8 million households were part of age-restricted communities in 2005, up 29 percent from 2001. The number in New Jersey grew 37 percent in the same period. More than half the housing units started in the state in the past two years have excluded children, according to data compiled by the New Jersey Builders Association.
In one New Jersey town, Monroe Township, population 28,000, half the housing units are limited to senior citizens.
As many as 95,000 such units will be built in the U.S. in 2007, according to an estimate by the National Association of Home Builders. New Jersey developers will build about 20,000 of them.
Exclusionary zoning is legal in the U.S. A 1998 exemption to the federal Fair Housing Act allows age restrictions if homes in a development are intended solely for residents age 62 and older, or if 80 percent of the units are occupied by one person who is at least 55.
New Jersey towns support their school systems mostly with property tax revenue, pushing the average tab to $5,153 in 2004, the highest in the U.S. New Jersey residents are older than in most states -- 12.5 percent are 65 and older, compared with the 12.1 percent average in the U.S.
Some home builders see age-restriction housing as protection against the wider housing slump. The National Association of Homebuilders estimates that profit from age-restricted housing was $1.2 billion in 2006.

---

I didn't paste the entire article. You can read it here: http://www.washtimes.com/business/20...4741-5143r.htm

Where the rest goes: Lawyers and beauracracy. Also do not forget that is an average. Mentally disabled students cost as much as $50k per pupil, only because their parents refuse to believe they are different and demand they go to the same schools as everyone else. It ends up being glorified baby sitting that could be done for much cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Admin

Where the rest goes: Lawyers and beauracracy. Also do not forget that is an average. Mentally disabled students cost as much as $50k per pupil, only because their parents refuse to believe they are different and demand they go to the same schools as everyone else. It ends up being glorified baby sitting that could be done for much cheaper.

---

Oh that is interesting about disabled students. There were a few when I went to school, but only a handful. I can't imagine they drive the average that much. It is beuaracracy as far as I can see. I was hoping some teachers on the forum would shed some light for me.

That is pretty high. In Oregon I think it is only 1/3 of that. This is one reason why some people do not like homeschooling. If their kids aren't in school, the "school system" doesn't get the money. I can't believe there is age restricted housing. I thought that was illegal! Also, many families of Special Needs students (a term I prefer to "Mentally ill students") want their child integrated with normally functioning students. I don't think they want them to only be around other Special Needs students. Plus, it is good for normally functioning students to learn how to be in a community with other people who are not exactly like them. Because Special Needs students qualify for specialists, their needs are sometimes met better at school if the family feels like they are inadequate "teachers". In my opinion, school as a whole can be seem as "glorified babysitting".

No doubt capital costs for buildings and interest repayments could account for some monies. Then there's heating costs, maintenance of property etc. I wont say much here as this seems to be about American domestic politics. Education is expensive but ignorance is much more expensive. All poor countries have very low levels of education.

I came across this in my morning reading and I thought you teachers might be interested.

There was a time when extra effort had to be made to help girls in school, and rightly so. But I think the pendulum (just check college grad rates between guys and gals in the US) has shifted the other way. I think some extra attention needs to be given to boys now.

Quote:

---

Boys can make the grade, if they're not bored
May 21, 2007
BY PEGGY WALSH-SARNECKI

There's a big difference in Pamela Dean's English 9 class at Salem High School when Grammar Bowl begins.

The boys clamber over desks and race for the chairs, sitting with shoulders hunched forward, buzzers clutched in hand. On a recent day, the boys beat the girls to the buzzer for 42 out of 45 questions.

That level of engagement doesn't usually happen in English classes, where girls typically far outperform boys on testing. But turn it into a sport, and suddenly the boys get it.

Plymouth Canton Community Schools is one of the few districts in the metro area making a dramatic effort to change how boys are taught in response to research showing they learn differently than girls.

"You can teach boys anything as long as you don't do it in a boring way," said Sharon Strean, assistant principal for curriculum and instruction at the district.

The district is encouraging more competition in the classroom and finding ways to make lessons more hands-on, all rooted in studies that suggest physiological differences in the brains of boys and girls are the main reason an acheivement gap between genders exists in some subjects.


[SNIP]

---

You can read the rest of the article here.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article.../705210325/1001

It does seem the pendulum has swung the other way. For so long education bodies have tried to make things easier for girls that they've neglected the boys.

In NSW Australia, they changed the high school syllabus. If you compare a physics paper now to 10 years ago, the current one has more descriptive type questions than calculation ones. Generally speaking, everyone knows that guys are stronger in maths/science and girls in the arts. The move was clearly to make things easier for girls.

Quote:

---

Google is to ban adverts for essay writing services - following claims that plagiarism is threatening the integrity of university degrees.

There have been complaints from universities about students being sold customised essays on the internet.

The advert ban from the Google search engine has been "warmly welcomed" by university authorities.

But it has angered essay writing firms which say this will unfairly punish legitimate businesses.

From next month, Google will no longer take adverts from companies which sell essays and dissertations - and the internet company has written to advertisers to tell them about the policy.

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6680457.stm

:thumbs_up

Quote:

---

Google bans essay writing adverts

---

Hey that is good news, but I bet the kids will find another way to get essays.

Quote:

---

Eight out of ten children with learning disabilities are scared to leave their homes for fear of being bullied, a report has found.

The bullies are invariably other children, picking on young people with Down’s Syndrome, cerebral palsy and other disabilities because they are easy targets.

The survey, conducted by Mencap, was based on interviews with hundreds of children who have learning disabilities and is designed to explore what life is like for them in modern Britain.

Instead of finding tolerance and understanding, the survey found that the children are routinely bullied everywhere they go, including at school, in the park, on the bus, in the street and at out-of-school clubs.
.....
......

---

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1945751.ece


hey, those articles you guys have posted sound really interesting, will have to read them some time.

As a parent and a tax paying homeowner, I am always conflicted when it comes time to vote on my school budget. Like most parents, I want my son to get the best education possible and I know that costs money. When I recently became a teacher myself, I became even more conflicted! There are several threads above and I will comment on them seperately.
I know, that even though I am now an "empty-nester", I hope to have grandchildren some day and I would want them too to get a quality education. My neighbors, who still have children in school, also deserve the same treatment. All of our futures depend on our schools providing a steady stream of competent, responsible leaders and problem solvers. Personally, I think it's selfish to turn my back on public education, once my own children have graduated. Older Americans, while saving a district money on education, can cost tax payers plenty in other ways. Consider who pays for the health care and housing needs of seniors who have not been able to save enough for retirement? How much cheaper would working family's health insurance be if not for the huge costs spent on seniors?
As for the question, why does education cost so much--if one would take some time to read the yearly budget (I don't) they would know there is much more involved than teacher salaries. Most of us have heard of "mandated" programs that raise local costs but fail to be funded. No child left Behind, a federally mandate program, with an emphasis on teacher accountability, and standardized tests, has added greatly to the cost of education. Tests cost money, not only to buy, but to practice for, administer and to grade.
Special ed. costs are very high too, but the alternative: uneducated misfits who have little or no social or vocational skills, are misunderstood by their peers, and who must be supported for a lifetime by social services or worse; turn to crime, is much more costly in the long run. This doesn't even take into the account the angst of their parents, and that could be anyone of us. The majority of these kids can and do learn and many are downright brilliant.
When I student taught, I had one class with two supporting staffers. One followed a student around all day to sign for her and the other followed a student all day because he could become very disruptive and too much for the teacher, who has 25 or so other students, to control.
Remember, the money districts spend is ultimately granted by our fellow tax payers: teachers don't raise our taxes, we and our legislators do that. Is money wasted or misappropriated at times? For sure, but look at the examples set by our society; profiteers in Iraq and in New Orleans being just two of the most recent and egregious.

as it stands today, even modest school budget increases will have no bearing on the quality of education, at least in public education. it just doesn't pay enough. plus, unions, tenure, content/curriculum standards, patronage, guarantee that the vast majority of teachers - at least in the US - will remain mediocre at best.

i recall a conversation i had once with a girl in a bar when i was working in public ed. she mentioned how education is such a "nobel profession." it inspired me to ask her why she didn't teach. in my mind, she appeared to be very articulate, educated, and creative.

"I'm an attorney, I make real money," she answered. ahhh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

as it stands today, even modest school budget increases will have no bearing on the quality of education, at least in public education. it just doesn't pay enough. plus, unions, tenure, content/curriculum standards, patronage, guarantee that the vast majority of teachers - at least in the US - will remain mediocre at best.

i recall a conversation i had once with a girl in a bar when i was working in public ed. she mentioned how education is such a "nobel profession." it inspired me to ask her why she didn't teach. in my mind, she appeared to be very articulate, educated, and creative.

"I'm an attorney, I make real money," she answered. ahhh.

---

Jon, read post #3 above in this thread. Where does all that money go?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Jon, read post #3 above in this thread. Where does all that money go?

---

that's a good question virgil. this was one of my grievances with the public system when i worked in it. Admin touches on a huge problem that i encountered first hand, the inflated cost of funding special education programs that are full of students who clearly can't handle it. armed with their whacky classification schemes, students are deemed "classified" or "504" and placed in mainstream classes under a doctrine of "inclusion" where they are assigned a permanent "teacher." this teacher is paid the same salary as a specialized subject teacher which they don't deserve because, as admin pointed out, all they do is baby sit, shadowing students from class to class. they are also required to assist and organize the student's homework, and in many cases i observed special ed teachers doing the homework for them while the student goofed off during his/her special ed period. additionally these wanna-be teachers have the luxury of NO lesson planning and little to no grading of tests/papers/homework. :alien:

many of the special ed teachers i worked with would have been special ed students themselves had the special ed program existed when they were going in school.


students classified as "504" basically meant that as a subject teacher i could NOT grade them under the same standard as a mainstream student. i also had to give them "extra time" and never once did i experience where the extra time amounted to an improvement in the student's grade or work product. a 'C' grade for a special ed student was the equivalent of an F grade for a mainstream kid. the sad fact is i never once met a special ed student with the skills to be in a regular class. when i approached the special ed team about it -- usually headed by a school psychiatrist -- to inform them that their student couldn't hack the work, they referred me to the classification file.

enough's enough, if parents want their children who are classified to go to a regular school, then they should have to earn being there or face attending an alternative school. they lower the quality of learning for students who meet the standard. the system needs to stop dumbing down.

a teacher needs to step up with the nerve and write a book that puts the special ed program on notice. Special ed students are not the same.

Thanks Jon. I do believe that teachers are under paid, but I bristle every time I hear politicians saying that more money needs to go to education. I got to believe the system can be more efficient. You may disagree with me, but I do believe that private competition (in the same way that colleges have both private and public) would do the system wonders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Thanks Jon. I do believe that teachers are under paid, but I bristle every time I hear politicians saying that more money needs to go to education. I got to believe the system can be more efficient. You may disagree with me, but I do believe that private competition (in the same way that colleges have both private and public) would do the system wonders.

---

not at all, i agree with you 100%. :thumbs_up that's a system in which teachers will be properly compensated based on merit, not union membership.

Here's an interesting article. What interrests me is not so much the general thrust of the article but the cost of educaton. It costs over $12,500 per student per year. This has been a long pet peeve of mine. What makes for such an exuberant cost? A typical class is around 30 students. $12,000 times 30 equals $360,000. A class is esentially one teacher. Now a teacher makes at most $80,000 and when you figure overhead (medical benefits, paid vacation, management, building and maitenence, supplies) that is typically 50% of the base salary, so it costs the employer $80,000 plus $40,000 to support a classroom. That's $120,000. Where does the rest of the money go? Every election year politicians keep saying that we need more money to educate our children. BUT WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO? Two thirds of it doesn't go directly to a classroom.


Interesting article, Virgil. I will note that there are some discrepancies... or rather some expenses that you have left out. The average class sizes vary greatly. Currently there is a movement toward smaller class sizes in the early elementary years, studies having found strong correlation between class size and student learning in the early years. Many schools stipulate a 15 or 20 to 1 ratio in 1st through 3rd grade. Of course, there are also situations (not uncommon) when teachers have 45, 50, or more students. But you cannot count the salaries of the classroom or homeroom teacher only. There are the subject area specialists (art, music, P.E., library, etc...). In high school you have all the various electives (foreign languages, wood shop, the arts, etc...) You also have the extracurricular activities (clubs, sports, band, etc...) Add to this the administrative costs (principals, secretaries, etc...) and operational maintenance and supplies (custodial, construction, electricians, plumbers, utilities, the costs of books, paper, xerox machines, instruments for band, equipment for sports, art supplies, etc...)

If we figure all of this in we must figure the salary and benefits of a teacher ($80,000) plus 1/5th of this to cover the subject area specialists (who the children go to while the teacher is on his or her planning periods) That adds a further $16,000. To this we must also add administrative costs. If we figure there is usually somewhere around 1 principal ($100,000) two custodians ($180,000) 2 cleaners ($60,000), four food service personnel ($60,000) and two secretaries ($60,000) for every 400 children this comes to approximately another $1200 per student. Add to this transportation costs, after school detentions, extracurricular activities, books, supplies, etc... and we start getting far closer to understanding the costs of maintaining and operating a school.

On the other hand... as Jon has suggested there is a hell of a lot of money wasted on special ed services... largely due to the federal government's inane (asinine) requirement that each child be taught in the "least restrictive environment". As a result the most in-demand position in the public schools today... and the fastest growing... is the special ed departments. Some of these Special Ed teachers truly earn their pay... teaching 12 or 15 children at 5 different grade levels and 15 different cognitive levels... but far too often we have Special Ed. teachers who have 8 or 4... or even just 2 students... and these students are mainstreamed into the regular classrooms with the regular classroom teacher who must deal with them... maintain discipline... but cannot grade them. Now and then the Special Ed. Instructional Aid will be there to help... but most of the time he or she is off making xerox copies for the Special Ed. teacher or making phone calls. Every now and then the Special Ed. teacher may pull 3 or 4 of his/her students aside for individualized instruction... but far too often these students are left to the classroom teachers... and to the subject area specialists who get no assistance in dealing with their behavior or their needs. Add to this the fact that in any given classroom you might find 2 or 3 or 5 other students who should/could be classified as "special ed." (being just as low academically or as disruptive as the behavioral disabled) and you will understand why a lot of teachers aren't overly fond of the whole "Special Ed." Department crap... and suspect it is just one vast waste of money.

not at all, i agree with you 100%. that's a system in which teachers will be properly compensated based on merit, not union membership.

Again... the problem is how do you measure a teacher's "effectiveness". The week before we broke for winter break a well-off suburban school took us on as a partner... with the students raising money to buy coats and sweaters for our kids. Several principals, a superintendent, and a number of teachers came to our school. The one principal came from the most poverty-ridden school in his district. 24% of his students met the federal poverty guidelines required for them to be provided a free breakfast. He was shocked to discover that 100% or our students qualify. His school district has easily met AYP (average yearly progress under NCLB)... but my building has failed to do so for the last 3 years. I have no doubt, however, that if we were to switch places with the teachers from that school, half of them would quit before the year was out (many the first time a 6-foot 8th grader got in their face, threw a chair across the room or called them an "M...F...er"). Few would find it at all possible to teach anything... let alone meet the required yearly progress.

How do you measure the ability or effectiveness of a teacher when the teachers in some districts have students with educated, well-off parents who support the schools and education... who work with their children at home... who provide them with computers and books and learning experiences such as trips to the zoo or the orchestra or the museums... who set examples by reading at home themselves... by talking about how important education is... while other schools have students whose parents live in poverty... who walk to school everyday past hookers, gangs, drug dealers, and crack heads... whose only guaranteed meals are those provided by the schools... whose only experience of structure and continuity is provided by the schools... who enter their given grade 3 or 4 grade levels behind in ability and lacking any outside learning experiences outside that provided on the streets or in the R and X-rated films their parents let them watch?

A-level candidates will soon be able to choose some of the books they want to study for their English course. Teachers must approve the texts, which the OCR exam board says will have to be "of sufficient substance".

Any three works of poetry or prose can be used for its "texts in time" module, a 3,000-word coursework essay that is worth 20% of the final A-level marks.

Another module, literature post-1900, also allows three free choices though one must be from after 1990.

OCR's director of qualifications, Clara Kenyon, said the changes - which come into effect in September - should help to enthuse youngsters about the subject.

"The public has a real enthusiasm for literature, as shown by the popularity of initiatives such as Richard and Judy's Book Club which have been hugely successful," she said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7230754.stm

It is time to revamp some of the curriculum for the boys. College enrollment is increasingly female dominated. Most of the lads are being taught by all females through 5th or 6th grades. Fiction is the genre of choice for most females. Males much prefer non-fiction. Columbia university in NYC seems to be ahead of the curve in their reading and writing workshop approach.

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

---

Oh my God. What has this world come to? This just infuriates my conservative heart. :flare: Unreal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.

His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.

Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate “some simple sequencing of ideas” and “some words in appropriate order”. The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/lif...cle4237491.ece

---

That is truly disturbing:flare: Why would you reward someone in the school system for being intentionally disrespectful? That is more or less what I see this as. A child can write any amount of unacceptable language, and they'll get credit for proper usage and spelling???? What exactly is the education system thinking?

Primary school children as young as five are to be given an early insight into the work of William Shakespeare.

A government initiative will see schools in England being sent a support package including DVDs of adaptations of his plays in its original language.

Guidance in the form of a booklet called Shakespeare For All Ages and Stages will be sent to all schools.

Schools minister Jim Knight said the Bard's work should be enjoyed as much as possible from a young age.

The booklet includes tips on bringing the writing of Shakespeare alive for children from the age of five to 16.

And pupils in some secondary schools will get the chance of seeing a live Shakespeare performance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7490360.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Primary school children as young as five are to be given an early insight into the work of William Shakespeare.

A government initiative will see schools in England being sent a support package including DVDs of adaptations of his plays in its original language.

Guidance in the form of a booklet called Shakespeare For All Ages and Stages will be sent to all schools.

Schools minister Jim Knight said the Bard's work should be enjoyed as much as possible from a young age.

The booklet includes tips on bringing the writing of Shakespeare alive for children from the age of five to 16.

And pupils in some secondary schools will get the chance of seeing a live Shakespeare performance.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7490360.stm

---

HA! I was going to post this in the news thread, you beat me to it scher :nod:
In principle I dont think its a bad idea my sister did Macbeth at school when she was 7 and for weeks was lugging around the Oxford ( or was it kingfisher) stories from Shakespeare because she LOVED it that much. The rest of us got rather sick f hearing about it though. :rolleyes: :lol:

But it sort of goes hand in hand with idea of teaching primary school kids philosophy and thinking skills doesnt it?

Poor reading and writing skills among graduates are a concern for half of the UK's top employers, a survey suggests.

The Association of Graduate Recruiters found 56% of the 200 firms surveyed had concerns about a lack of "hard skills" like literacy and leadership.

The survey found employers were also less likely to trust degree grades as "gold standards" for recruitment.

It also found starting salaries were not keeping up with inflation but that there were more graduate vacancies.

This annual survey reflects the type of labour market facing graduates - and this year shows a mixed picture of continued growth tinged with a growing uncertainty over earnings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7494172.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Oh my God. What has this world come to? This just infuriates my conservative heart. :flare: Unreal.

---

You don't need to be conservative to be infuriated. :p I find this totally unbelievable too. I had already read something similar a while ago and some people thought it was false when I told them! (which is understandable!) That is just crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Poor reading and writing skills among graduates are a concern for half of the UK's top employers, a survey suggests.

The Association of Graduate Recruiters found 56% of the 200 firms surveyed had concerns about a lack of "hard skills" like literacy and leadership.

The survey found employers were also less likely to trust degree grades as "gold standards" for recruitment.

It also found starting salaries were not keeping up with inflation but that there were more graduate vacancies.

This annual survey reflects the type of labour market facing graduates - and this year shows a mixed picture of continued growth tinged with a growing uncertainty over earnings.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7494172.stm

---

Which links nicly into my current RL rant which is information literacy and how it si a basic skill in todays world that people are shockingly lacking in!
:nod:

A Norfolk headteacher has said there have been no exclusions from his school since he started rewarding pupils with chocolate for good behaviour.

Dr Andrew Sheppard began the scheme in 2005, since when exclusion days at Redcastle Furze Primary in Thetford have dropped from 65 a year to zero.

Critics said he was contributing to childhood obesity and dental problems.

But Dr Sheppard said: "It has improved behaviour, they are polite and... they have a sense of responsibility."

In September 2005, Dr Sheppard pledged to give all 240 pupils a bar of chocolate if they made it to the half time break without any exclusions.

The scheme proved so successful it was extended term by term. Since then discos, picnics and Easter eggs have been handed out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/7513320.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

A Norfolk headteacher has said there have been no exclusions from his school since he started rewarding pupils with chocolate for good behaviour.

Dr Andrew Sheppard began the scheme in 2005, since when exclusion days at Redcastle Furze Primary in Thetford have dropped from 65 a year to zero.

---

Hey no wonder you give out kit kats Scher. :) :)

Quote:

---

Critics said he was contributing to childhood obesity and dental problems.

---

I really hate critics. How much is he giving out? Come on. This guy found a solution which has helped keep students attentive and on good behavior.

Quote:

---

But Dr Sheppard said: "It has improved behaviour, they are polite and... they have a sense of responsibility."

In September 2005, Dr Sheppard pledged to give all 240 pupils a bar of chocolate if they made it to the half time break without any exclusions.

The scheme proved so successful it was extended term by term. Since then discos, picnics and Easter eggs have been handed out.

---

Three cheers for Dr. Sheppard. :thumbs_up :thumbs_up :thumbs_up

Almost one in five teenage pupils surveyed for a police study said they had carried a weapon in the past year.

The survey of 1,426 14 and 15-year-olds by Portsmouth University researchers suggested only 5% took these to school.

Some 60% of those who carried a weapon said they did so for self-defence, while 30% said they had done so during activities with the Scouts or cadets.

Only 20 of the youngsters surveyed admitted carrying a weapon for the purposes of an attack.

The study was carried out among pupils in Southampton last November and was commissioned by Hampshire Police after the fatal stabbing of two young people in the city.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7519136.stm


Well, this brings the "excitement" back into teaching!

That's pretty scary. I wonder what weapons means? I know that in this area most boy over the age of 8 or 10 will have a pocket knife and probably a good portion of the girls. Do you think that would count as a weapon? The part that is most frightening is the 20% that carried to attack. That’s horrible.

Recently there has been a sudden increase in knife crimes in the UK. I used to think that these would be somewhat like kitchen knives but then I watched a CCTV video in the news and they are talking about knives that I, with my very limited knowledge of weapons, would describe as "swords"!

Swords?!? I would have thought something like switchblades. how do they get those in their backpacks? Do you remember the highlander? are all of the kids wearing trench coats?

One in five UK adults struggles with reading and writing. In an age of e-mail, texts and form-filling, how is it possible to hide illiteracy? Linda Worden, who's learned to read and write as part of a Channel 4 series, explains how she managed to keep it a secret for 40 years...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7532834.stm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

One in five UK adults struggles with reading and writing. In an age of e-mail, texts and form-filling, how is it possible to hide illiteracy? Linda Worden, who's learned to read and write as part of a Channel 4 series, explains how she managed to keep it a secret for 40 years...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7532834.stm

---

I hear similar in the US. It's really hard to believe but I guess it's true. Obviously teachers pass these students along. That is a shame. They are not doing them a favor at all.

It is rarely teachers who are passing them along, actually, Virgil. The education system is becoming as such that students do not fail anymore (at least not before they reach college level). Nowadays, teachers are expected to teach mixed ability classes and, hence, required to provide material suitable at each individual student's level. So, if a student is not doing so well, s/he gets simpler material compared to those who are really doing at the level they are expected to. I have to admit that the opposite is also true; ie, if a student is doing well above their class level, then s/he gets material suitable for their level, even if it means that they are working couple of years ahead of their age.

Having said that, it is one of those sad but true cases. I have had many students who could barely read or write (some do not even know their alphabet). Some are dyslexic or suffering from another form of learning difficulty which was not picked on while they were younger (some might lose their ability due to a stroke etc and might have to start all over again, unfortunately). Yet, there are many simply did not learn and could never get any help.

Still, it is great that for those who would like to give themselves another chance, there are opportunities. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Schokokeks

That's interesting, and worrying.
In addition to problems with punctuation, I've noticed that the kids I tutor don't know what to do with articles and/or prepositions. I frequently hear "Let's go disco." or "Give me keys."

---

Even I have these problems by virtue of being a nonnative writer in English. I am still not adequately equipped with the idea of using or applying appropriate prepositions or articles in their right places and that is why I need someone to edit my writings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blazeofglory

Even I have these problems by virtue of being a nonnative writer in English. I am still not adequately equipped with the idea of using or applying appropriate prepositions or articles in their right places and that is why I need someone to edit my writings.

---

Your english seems pretty good Blaze. Most of the time you seem like a native speaker.