The grumpy thread

[Tadhg Tiogar]

.... She has got to have a molar out as it's split but a bit scared of her having yet more anaesthetic, it doesn't seem to be bothering her so I may wait a bit until she needs something else doing and get both done under one anaesthetic - good idea or not? 

 

Problem is that we can't see if leaving it in will lead to further damage whilst you're trying to kill two birds with one stone. By the time you get both jobs done under one anaesthetic, there might be other things that need doing as a result of leaving the split molar in. Difficult choice.

[D Spares & Tyres]

I don’t disagree particularly but I will play Devil’s advocate for a second:

Some households have children going to school that have little to no parental support. In those homes, the parents are often functionally illiterate and the child may also have language issues because of a lack of child-facing communication. These things often happen hand in hand. The homework is not necessarily for the kid, it’s sometimes to get the parents to engage with their kid’s education. And if the kid has got language problems, then all the hours in the school day might not be enough...

Mine has the best reading and general knowledge in his year group. He has the reading ability of an 8 year old and his school report said he has a vast knowledge of the world. I keep him fit, he can ride a bike for miles whereas most of his peers cannot. His vocabulary is better than kids twice his age.

 

 

I am not saying he is any brighter than he should be but school is so dumbed down and parents don't seem to interact with their children as much. I just wonder if he is the same level as a child his age would have been 60 years ago?

I teach my kids more useful things than school seem to.

[NorthernMonkey]

Problem is that we can't see if leaving it in will lead to further damage whilst you're trying to kill two birds with one stone. By the time you get both jobs done under one anaesthetic, there might be other things that need doing as a result of leaving the split molar in. Difficult choice.

With a split tooth, there’s a fair chance of her picking up an infection in there which by the time it’s made itself known through her behaviour could be pretty well advanced.

 

Probably worth getting it done sooner in my opinion although I know what you mean re the anaesthetic.

 

I was terrified when our eldest Springer had a general at 11 years and was pacing the floor at work until it was time to collect her.

[New POD]

Pets. When the Cat eventually pegs it and she's making it a long drawn out process, we are NOT HAVING anymore pets.

28 years. 4 cats, 1 dog, 4 guinea pigs, 3 gerbils, 2 rabbits, 2 fish, a hamster, and a fucking mouse.

That will be it. No vets bills, no kennel fees, no trying to find someone to pop in and feed them. No vomit on the sofa. Not shit on the lawn, no cat litter tray, no worming tablets. No teeth removed under General anaesthetic.

[mrbenn]

With a split tooth, there’s a fair chance of her picking up an infection in there which by the time it’s made itself known through her behaviour could be pretty well advanced.

 

Probably worth getting it done sooner in my opinion although I know what you mean re the anaesthetic.

 

I was terrified when our eldest Springer had a general at 11 years and was pacing the floor at work until it was time to collect her.

 

Same. Our 11 year old terrier recently had to have a general for some teeth sorting. Was beside myself about it. Apparently, as soon as he came round he was belting around the room wanting to play chase

 

Went to pick him up and he just gave me a look that said "I didn't appreciate you leaving me here to be drugged and interfered with, but I've had fun so we'll say no more of it".

[chaseracer]

Had to cut holiday short. Not car related but my son is a little shit. He can be so beautiful and innocent to people when he wants to but has now been expelled for what I've been told is violent and abusive behaviour to teachers and other staff. Meeting with the head in the morning.

 

Wow.  Just wow.

 

Do you have another son I wasn't aware of?  Because this doesn't sound like Rhys at all.

 

Hope it works out, mate.

[messerschmitt owner]

My guess was that it would have been in the same general area that I found the Mac hiding, however it seems I was mistaken. I've just got back from systematically going through every box up there marking each one as it was checked...no sign of the one I'm after.

 

This is starting to annoy me now.

maybe you’ve got my cleaner working for you. I’m sure she won’t like the criminal record she’s going to end up with.

[richardmorris]

Student today has complained about me. Apparently he didn’t like me saying that we couldn’t do what he wanted ( handling toxic liquids in an Argon atmosphere ) wouldn’t like the results if I tried , and that I mentioned the university doesn’t pay bills on time ( we’re waiting on several hundred from June last year) so I wasn’t inclined to be helpful. All true I admit. Sod it, it’s my company and if I think we can’t do something I’ll tell them.

 

He Asked why it was hard, so I asked if he was able to weigh 1mg or sample ( grain of caster sugar size for example) into a 1mm wide capsule wearing two layers of rubber gloves in a secured cabinet, and using a glass capillary no wider than a human hair.

My impossible price is +50%, he’s moved up to our miracle rate which is what I feel like charging.

 

Honestly the only two complaints we’ve had in the last ten years have been related to me mentioning poor payment of bills. We are currently owed £89,500. And the only people to have paid a September bill so far is a Nigerian university. Weird new customer that is!

 

AND, may as well get the rants in, we’ve had twelve phone calls today from some Indian gimp outfit claiming to be variously from talk talk or Bt or Microsoft about our internet connection. I blame BT for all this as these people are spoofing uk land line numbers. Surely they can stop this happening?

[loserone]

I had to provide advice today to someone who had taken one of those calls, and ended their day a five figure sum lighter.

 

Fark.

[somewhatfoolish]

Was the advice "don't be such a rocket that you give some random yahoo who's phoned you up remote access to your PeeCee"? Some people are not safe with anything more sophisticated than an etch-a-sketch.

[Christine]

My first wife's just told me her mate has just paid £40 to SORN 2 cars.....     

 

(etch a sketch will be her nickname now)

[GrumpiusMaximus]

Mine has the best reading and general knowledge in his year group. He has the reading ability of an 8 year old and his school report said he has a vast knowledge of the world. I keep him fit, he can ride a bike for miles whereas most of his peers cannot. His vocabulary is better than kids twice his age.

 

 

I am not saying he is any brighter than he should be but school is so dumbed down and parents don't seem to interact with their children as much. I just wonder if he is the same level as a child his age would have been 60 years ago?

I teach my kids more useful things than school seem to.

 

 

I will take issue with the assertion that kids today are less intelligent than kids 60 years ago.  There is a vast, vast difference in attainment and literacy rates in favour of modern education.  Before the National Curriculum was introduced, teachers were allowed to teach whatever they felt like in Primary and Secondary schools.  As a result of this, I've spoken to a lot of adults that are lacking basic skills in maths or literacy simply because they were never taught them and there was no regulatory need to.

 

Schools are far, far from perfect and I must admit that I tend to see the higher end of the education sector - but I have worked in schools in deprived areas.  The same demographic issues exist now as 60 years ago but most of the 'grinding' poverty (e.g. unable to buy food and thus starvation and malnutrition) has been vastly reduced.  We are a more affluent and better paid society on average.

 

That does not obfuscate the fact that there are definitely issues now within education.  Communication is increasingly abstracted by electronic devices, kids have deeply inappropriate material easily within their reach and school budgets are highly stretched.  Parents generally spend less time with their kids and communicate with them less.  

 

I wouldn't say the curriculum is 'dumbed down' as much as it is now more appropriate.  There are a number of things that I disagree with in Primary education (e.g. systematic synthetic phonics) and the focus on STEM in secondary is causing a number of issues for other subjects that bring huge benefits to a child's wellbeing (e.g. music).  Academy schools are a major, major mistake for a vast range of reasons - but compared to where we were 60 years ago, we've come a long way.

 

Just so you know where I'm coming from here, back in 2012 I trained as a Primary School Teacher.  I dropped out due to personal reasons with about a month left so never qualified but I have worked in other roles in secondary schools since then.

[richardmorris]

I had to provide advice today to someone who had taken one of those calls, and ended their day a five figure sum lighter.

Fark.

That’s awful- we just let them talk to the radio for a while. It’s obvious they’re a scam really, mainly because no one else calls these days.

[richardmorris]

I will take issue with the assertion that kids today are less intelligent than kids 60 years ago.  There is a vast, vast difference in attainment and literacy rates in favour of modern education.  Before the National Curriculum was introduced, teachers were allowed to teach whatever they felt like in Primary and Secondary schools.  As a result of this, I've spoken to a lot of adults that are lacking basic skills in maths or literacy simply because they were never taught them and there was no regulatory need to.

 

Schools are far, far from perfect and I must admit that I tend to see the higher end of the education sector - but I have worked in schools in deprived areas.  The same demographic issues exist now as 60 years ago but most of the 'grinding' poverty (e.g. unable to buy food and thus starvation and malnutrition) has been vastly reduced.  We are a more affluent and better paid society on average

 

 

That does not obfuscate the fact that there are definitely issues now within education.  Communication is increasingly abstracted by electronic devices, kids have deeply inappropriate material easily within their reach and school budgets are highly stretched.  Parents do generally less time with their kids and communicate with them less.  

 

I wouldn't say the curriculum is 'dumbed down' as much as it is now more appropriate.  There are a number of things that I disagree with in Primary education (e.g. systematic synthetic phonics) and the focus on STEM in secondary is causing a number of issues for other subjects that bring huge benefits to a child's wellbeing (e.g. music).  Academy schools are a major, major mistake for a vast range of reasons - but compared to where we were 60 years ago, we've come a long way.

 

Just so you know where I'm coming from here, back in 2012 I trained as a Primary School Teacher.  I dropped out due to personal reasons with about a month left so never qualified but I have worked in other roles in secondary schools since then.

 

I agree about synthetic phonics. My neices are being tawt/tort (sic) this way and their spelling is weird. My sister and I had flash cards which my mum diligently kept but hasn't been allowed to use for her grandchildren. They read a lot, but it has taken a long time for them to realise that what they read is connected to how they spell.

[GrumpiusMaximus]

The issue with systematic synthetic phonics is all to do with a misinterpretation of a study on an industrial scale.

 

The Rose Report (2005 - I think?) was a massive piece of work looking at childhood development of language and what schools could do to improve education in this area.  It made a number of recommendations - but fundamentally it looked at two aspects of language development:

 

i) Decoding.  The ability to take syllables and break them down phonetically so that words can be said.

ii) Comprehension.  The ability to take those words and understand what they mean.

 

Of course, systematic synthetic phonics only looks at decoding.  There is very little comprehension going on.  What's more, the English language is chocked full of phonetic irregularities that make absolutely no sense from a phonics perspective.  Unfortunately, systematic synthetic phonics has (or at least had, when I was training back in 2012) the upper hand and most schools had it heavily emphasised on their curriculum.  Kids could say very complicated 'words' (often these words were nonsense words - which I have no inherent issue with in this framework) but they failed to understand what a number of fairly ordinary words meant.  

 

Most schools, in my experience, had bought a systematic synthetic phonics package from an education firm and were essentially implementing it verbatim because that was the easiest and cheapest way of being compliant with the government guidelines with regards to reading.  Unfortunately, this means that at a younger age, kids generally have no idea what a lot of what they're reading actually means.

 

I can read and pronounce Latin (Latin was compulsory for the first two years of my secondary school, which given that I started in 1999 must make me one of the few that was the case for!) and my decoding of German isn't too terrible either.  I have absolutely no idea what's being said most of the time.  The same is true with most phonics-based approaches and it should be balanced with reading comprehension.

 

Multiple governments did their usual thing of looking at a study, misinterpreting it profoundly and then inflicting their view on a group of people that actually do know how to do their jobs properly in the first place...

[D Spares & Tyres]

I will take issue with the assertion that kids today are less intelligent than kids 60 years ago.  

I didn't say that they were any less intelligent, just that their intelligence is less used. There is no need in the current climate to be any more than reasonably intelligent and reasonably nice so why test their intelligence too much.

 

Most older kids could tell you far more about ancient Egyptians than they could tell you about managing money or healthy eating for example. Pointless

[Tadhg Tiogar]

Mine has the best reading and general knowledge in his year group. He has the reading ability of an 8 year old and his school report said he has a vast knowledge of the world. I keep him fit, he can ride a bike for miles whereas most of his peers cannot. His vocabulary is better than kids twice his age.

I am not saying he is any brighter than he should be but school is so dumbed down and parents don't seem to interact with their children as much. I just wonder if he is the same level as a child his age would have been 60 years ago?

I teach my kids more useful things than school seem to.

Sounds like he'd be better off in a private school, although these days there's no Government Assisted Places Scheme to help with the school fees.

[artdjones]

The issue with systematic synthetic phonics is all to do with a misinterpretation of a study on an industrial scale.

 

The Rose Report (2005 - I think?) was a massive piece of work looking at childhood development of language and what schools could do to improve education in this area. It made a number of recommendations - but fundamentally it looked at two aspects of language development:

 

i) Decoding. The ability to take syllables and break them down phonetically so that words can be said.

ii) Comprehension. The ability to take those words and understand what they mean.

 

Of course, systematic synthetic phonics only looks at decoding. There is very little comprehension going on. What's more, the English language is chocked full of phonetic irregularities that make absolutely no sense from a phonics perspective. Unfortunately, systematic synthetic phonics has (or at least had, when I was training back in 2012) the upper hand and most schools had it heavily emphasised on their curriculum. Kids could say very complicated 'words' (often these words were nonsense words - which I have no inherent issue with in this framework) but they failed to understand what a number of fairly ordinary words meant.

 

Most schools, in my experience, had bought a systematic synthetic phonics package from an education firm and were essentially implementing it verbatim because that was the easiest and cheapest way of being compliant with the government guidelines with regards to reading. Unfortunately, this means that at a younger age, kids generally have no idea what a lot of what they're reading actually means.

 

I can read and pronounce Latin (Latin was compulsory for the first two years of my secondary school, which given that I started in 1999 must make me one of the few that was the case for!) and my decoding of German isn't too terrible either. I have absolutely no idea what's being said most of the time. The same is true with most phonics-based approaches and it should be balanced with reading comprehension.

 

Multiple governments did their usual thing of looking at a study, misinterpreting it profoundly and then inflicting their view on a group of people that actually do know how to do their jobs properly in the first place...

The reason you don't understand German through phonics is that you can't speak German.By the time an English speaking child is taught reading in the UK using phonics they already have a large vocabulary of English words and are capable of carrying on a conversation.So when they learn to read using phonics they will be able to understand what they read.I attended a primary school in a working class area with large class sizes and my classmates all seemed to learn to read using phonics without too much difficulty.I myself was taught to read by my bus conductor father and my mother,who finished school at 12,at the age of 3 - using phonics.

[Christine]

Bring back the cane, that'll learn 'em 

[Ghosty]

Wow.  Just wow.

 

Do you have another son I wasn't aware of?  Because this doesn't sound like Rhys at all.

 

Hope it works out, mate.

 

 

As a kid I had similar issues, it turned out the staff were deliberately being lax, letting me be bullied, and even the staff were bullying me. If I'd have known what I do now then, a) multiple people would have lost their jobs and possibly careers, and I'd have been able to sue for discrimination.

[Tadhg Tiogar]

.....I can read and pronounce Latin (Latin was compulsory for the first two years of my secondary school, which given that I started in 1999 must make me one of the few that was the case for!) ...

Not really. When I was booted into private education in 1981, Latin was compulsory from age 11 onwards up to 15. I remember it being fun, and it taught me how grammar works, the origins of language and why we (still) have the words that we do.

[bub2006]

Wow. Just wow.

 

Do you have another son I wasn't aware of? Because this doesn't sound like Rhys at all.

 

Hope it works out, mate.

Seriously mate he can come across so innocent to people but he is a big trouble causer.

[Noel Tidybeard]

Get up early after they have had a session and wake the fucked up. Use Any excuse. Make fake parcels and tell him theyve been delivered to you. Knock on his door, tell him you are mowing your front lawn, would he like you to do his. Put your music on at full blast at 7 am and go and sit in the garden.

Drill with hammer action into the shared walls.

Always complain. But not when it's happening. Stop him on his way to work, thus forcing him to talk to you when he's late already.

Get a solicitor to get an injunction.

 

i think they need an argos catalogue or some shefag

[forddeliveryboy]

Not really. When I was booted into private education in 1981, Latin was compulsory from age 11 onwards up to 15. I remember it being fun, and it taught me how grammar works, the origins of language and why we (still) have the words that we do.

 

And loads of our words have nothing to do with Latin at all. It's all a result of Bill the Conk successfully invading us 952 years ago. The Harrying of the North was spectacularly brutal, in an attempt to rid England of any rebuttal of this invasion by the pseudo-French.

 

As I've spouted here before, the Scots moan of their 300 years of subjugation by Westminster whereas The North of England (which was pivotal in the Industrial Revolution and gave the British Isles such a lead in the world) has been under the thumb of a Norman system for 1000 years.

 

I'm hugely in favour of schools teaching such fascinating and disciplinary languages as Latin (why not more Ancient Greek, it's way more of an interesting culture and language) which have a bearing of the words we use now, but why not Ancient Scandinavian languages also?

[New POD]

I agree about synthetic phonics. My neices are being tawt/tort (sic) this way and their spelling is weird. My sister and I had flash cards which my mum diligently kept but hasn't been allowed to use for her grandchildren. They read a lot, but it has taken a long time for them to realise that what they read is connected to how they spell.

When my wife worked in "School of Scalls" in netherton Bootle she would tell the kids to put on their best Telephone voice and try to sound like the queen was phoning them.

Also used to tell them to put their BBC world service voice on, but obviously they had no idea what she was going on about.

 

She once recorded the shipping forecast and had them try to mimic the accent.

 

Fucking Scallies she should have told them to talk like the Magistrate that was sending their mum's boyfriend down for getting caught stealing Christmas from Matalan.

[SierraMikeHotel]

I used to teach English as a foreign language to adults and my instinct was that phonics was bunk - or at least unsuitable for English.

 

If you understand how Italian pronunciation works you can read pretty much anything aloud, even if you don't understand what you're saying. English spelling, however, has more exceptions than rules.

 

This isn't a new issue. My mum was taught to use the rules of Latin grammar on her English, leading her to tut at every episode of Star Trek. This is silly: it's fine to boldly split an infinitive in English, just as it's fine to pick up the ball in rugby (unless you're trying to play it using the rules of football).

 

When teaching, the question is always about outcomes. Why are we doing this? What's the point of teaching kids to read words out if they don't know what they're saying?

[Tadhg Tiogar]

.... What's the point of teaching kids to read words out if they don't know what they're saying?

 

The same question might be asked of politicians making statements.....

[GrumpiusMaximus]

I used to teach English as a foreign language to adults and my instinct was that phonics was bunk - or at least unsuitable for English.

 

If you understand how Italian pronunciation works you can read pretty much anything aloud, even if you don't understand what you're saying. English spelling, however, has more exceptions than rules.

 

This isn't a new issue. My mum was taught to use the rules of Latin grammar on her English, leading her to tut at every episode of Star Trek. This is silly: it's fine to boldly split an infinitive in English, just as it's fine to pick up the ball in rugby (unless you're trying to play it using the rules of football).

 

When teaching, the question is always about outcomes. Why are we doing this? What's the point of teaching kids to read words out if they don't know what they're saying?

 

 

I quite agree.

 

I'm not a psychologist but there are many studies out there that show that the simple act of communicating with and to children improves their knowledge of English.  The most critical time period for this is before formal education even starts.  Reading and writing are things that can be taught effectively any number of ways and this focus on one method that I also feel is inherently unsuitable for the English language is a major mistake.  It does work - but there are so many other methods that also work.

 

To be honest, I'm not the best judge of this because I could read and write before I ever stepped into a classroom.  I'd be interested in knowing what experience others have had...

[artdjones]

I used to teach English as a foreign language to adults and my instinct was that phonics was bunk - or at least unsuitable for English.

 

If you understand how Italian pronunciation works you can read pretty much anything aloud, even if you don't understand what you're saying. English spelling, however, has more exceptions than rules.

 

This isn't a new issue. My mum was taught to use the rules of Latin grammar on her English, leading her to tut at every episode of Star Trek. This is silly: it's fine to boldly split an infinitive in English, just as it's fine to pick up the ball in rugby (unless you're trying to play it using the rules of football).

 

When teaching, the question is always about outcomes. Why are we doing this? What's the point of teaching kids to read words out if they don't know what they're saying?

Why would you teach anyone to read out words in their native tongue that they don't know? Surely children are taught to read using simple books containing words they already know.Once they have some level of literacy then more advanced texts are gradually introduced,and also the use of a dictionary with pronunciations can be taught.

[Tadhg Tiogar]

Why would you teach anyone to read out words in their native tongue that they don't know? Surely children are taught to read using simple books containing words they already know.Once they have some level of literacy then more advanced texts are gradually introduced,and also the use of a dictionary with pronunciations can be taught.

 

Out of interest and maybe a touch OT, what is the current Irish approach to this, and does it differ from how it was done when you were in school?