I think his point was misconception in this instance is a matter of perspective.

Its actually really really easy to defend 2008 onwards, because bailing out the financial system costs money. Which is why no main stream narratives attack Labour for their spending 2008-2010.

They are attacked for their spending in 2007, because if they had not spent so much in 2007 they would have been better positioned for the catastrophe of 2008.

Looking at the graph we can see that is a fairly empty attack as debt as gdp (different to deficit as gdp btw) was not at some historically abhorrent level.

Also you need to stop assuming people support one or other party by default. I dont support any and have voted for all 3 major parties in my life time for varying reasons.

Some people just want politics to be discussed rationally and transparently.

As I have said sure you can attack Labour for how they run the economy, but removing narratives and looking at records transparently and empirically you see that the Tories track record is hardly stella.

Real political insight only comes from detached analysis of the political system as a whole, not from trying to cheer on one party against the other.

You'd attribute that to rastamouse? Personally I think he's just clicking buttons.

However I find the idea that kids without good English hold back English speaking kids in primary school a very poor reason to vote for a racist organisation.

Yep.

Maybe i should be putting this is in BBV but i feel it's better suited here...



wanted to put more on but the bookies capped my bet (!?) and i lost interest. When the pundits say 'no one saw this happening!' i feel a little warm glow.

Being factually and definitively wrong about something is probably the best possible reason to vote for a racist organisation. When you think about it.

Who are you to say what qualifies as a misconception? What metrics do you have to quantify that children being unable to speak English in a classroom and thus holding back the process of learning for the native children isn't an important issue?

Aye, she's clearly a witch.

I'm a language teacher, yes a fake teacher, but I teach English nevertheless, and so although I don't have a PGCE, I know enough to see how there could be great learning opportunities for a class in having non native English speakers, even if they struggle with language, in fact especially if they struggle with the L1 of the class. She clearly does not have the very basic imagination that teachers should have in their arsenal in order to capitalise on these opportunities.

Rather, this teacher's prejudices lead her to see it as a burden. Someone with such prejudices should not be teaching children.

Her decision to vote UKIP on these grounds could hardly be dressed up as any kind of critical analysis of the situation. It's a decision founded on bigotry - nothing more, nothing less.

I think I agree with this ordinarily on the basis than when those factual errors are pointed out the person should change their allegiances but I'm not sure the factual errors will be readily admitted by someone who believes their perspective privileged by virtue of working in the field.

I do think this raises an interesting point with regard to the discussion though because I don't think the rationality O.A.F.K.1.1 and Elrazor seem to advocate for ever really extends to a rational interrogation of values only facts. If your political allegiances are bound by values then a consideration of the facts is unlikely to alter your position.

Do tell...

I'm pretty sure we could find some law against bigotry. Maybe someone else could confirm or deny that....

Bigotry under any circumstances is at the very least a misconception.

Pointing out that a reasonable percentage of a class of children are incapable of being communicated with, and thus cannot participate in a lesson, and thus is almost certainly a disruptive influence, isn't bigotry.

Like, it literally cannot be attributed as such with any stretch of the definition.

Agree with this as do other teachers I've had similar conversations with.

Again, I invite you to tell us all how failing to be able to communicate with a reasonably large proportion of the class is a benefit to the teaching and learning that can be done in the lesson.

As for these 'other teachers', I don't believe for one second that they're proper teachers.

By that, I'm talking about serious schoolteachers charged with educating kids to pass exams geared towards them going to college/being academically successful/gaining qualifications/gaining jobs and independence. Proper teachers who have to answer to OFSTED, the headteachers, the parents etc.

You might have talked to some special needs teachers or maybe someone who taught English as a foreign language whilst travelling around Guatemala one summer, but I don't believe for a second that you've met a proper teacher, charged with proper responsibility, who's told you anything of the sort.

I simply can't believe you without proof of what you're saying I'm afraid.

David Sklansky started an interesting thread about jelly beans a while ago and I sometimes wonder if we're mistaken to think the full spectrum of opinion and methods isn't one of democracies strengths.

I see it differently. I see it as the teacher's prejudices being a disruptive influence.

You seem quite dismissive of anyone you don't categorise as a 'proper teacher'. It looks, to me, like you are not qualified to make the distinction. I could be wrong though, difficult to judge in this context.

As for the bigotry, her decision to vote ukip is based on bigotry. She thinks the solution to her problem of 'spending too much time' on the ones who are not native english speakers is to exclude them.

Sounds pretty bigoted to me. Let's not spend any time with our slower learners. Instead let's just get rid of them.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH SEIG HEIL!!!!

Well I'm a teacher with 7 years experience teaching all age groups. I'm saying it.

Anyway, the discussion here is not of pedagogy, it's of politics, and her solution to the issue was to vote for a party that advocates exclusion of non natives through strict immigration laws. That's not the solution of a learned and wise teacher, not even one who's been 'charged with proper responsibility'.

Nothing of this is about whether or not a teacher has the resources to deal with a problem of this nature. That's a completely separate debate.

The correct response to a shortage of teacher resources is more teacher resources, not getting rid of the kids imo

Not overly familiar with schools these days but hard to believe they aren't being squeezed as much as hospitals, councils etc etc.The frustration felt by those trying to do a good job but being unable to due to a lack of resources is always going to spill in all directions. We can blame the ones who go extreme if we want to but it's only by improving the resourcing of services that we do any good.

What prejudice is there here? The teacher hasn't pre-judged anyone. She just can't communicate with the kids, which is of course, a contingent factor for her to be able to teach them.

Yes. I've taught English as a foreign language to a bunch of French kids as a TEFL teacher. There is absolutely no way that such a task is remotely close to being responsible for teaching kids in a paid-for (by state or private) school whereby the teacher is responsible for kids being able to learn in order to become qualified and ultimately, independent adults, ideally with success and happiness, all whilst satisfying regulators/parents/superiors etc.

You have absolutely no metrics with which to judge how 'qualified' I am to make any sort of judgement relative to yourself, other than your own opinion.

That isn't bigotry, its a reasonable opinion to have based upon evidence and experience.

We're not talking about slower learners. We're talking about kids that the teacher cannot communicate with, who as such, can't possibly learn or be taught.

Describe your teaching experience please. Were you a teacher in a proper school, the kind of which I've described?

I say it is. I say its the solution of someone with their head screwed on enough to realise that as with many things, idealistic solutions often meet reality head-first in a fairly ugly collision. This independent-thinking young lady clearly has the wherewithal to realise that the issue is allocation of resources, logistics and prioritisation.

We have different opinions Diego.

You can say that you feel differently, but you can't say that I'm wrong.

Can't say I disagree, but the problem the left in Britain faces is people like Diego who are so ideologically committed to multiculturalism and open-door immigration just willfully bury their head in the sand and insist that there is in fact, no problem there at all.

I mean he's literally been saying that having a significant proportion of children in a classroom who can't communicate with the teacher isn't just not a problem, but is in fact, a good thing! And that even someone with first hand experience of this proving to be an issue is simply a bigot

How come you know she is an 'independent thinking young lady'?

This is the kind of **** that leads me to think you are unqualified to make the distinction.

And how the **** do you know I am 'ideologically committed' to multiculturalism?

The only problem with multiculturalism is that people like you exist to **** it all up.

I'm ideologically committed to multiculturalism and what you would call open-door immigration as well. I'm also committed to public services.

So many problems are caused by poor public services that picking on immigrants/refugees is ridiculous especially as they contribute so much towards public services.

I still accept the fact that if we run things badly it helps extremist causes. It's an additional reason to run things well.

lolwat