As we all know, Nanny believes that everyone in Britain should be given a fair chance in life...er so long as they comply with her views on how they live their lives, and so long as they fit her ethnic/social ideal.Nanny is proud to remind us daily that we live in a utopia, which could only be possible under her benign rule.
The trouble is, life doesn't always work out in the way that Nanny would like it. Sometimes the facts do not always fit Nanny's propaganda.
Have no fear, when reality does not match expectations, Nanny has a simple fix.
What's that then Ken?
Nanny fiddles the figures!
Today we see such a case in point. Nanny has fiddled the education figures, to favour those who come from what she would describes "deprived" backgrounds.
Nanny has done a wee bit of "jiggery pokery" (can I say "jiggery pokery"?) on the school tables.
Now Nanny has "engineered" the figures to show the new paradigm, the worst schools in the country for GCSE results are now near the top of the new list, whilst some of the best grammars are near the bottom.
It's Orwellian reality revision at its very best!
Needless to say, this "jiggery pokery" (are you sure that I can say this?) does the pupils no good. Teachers will of course use poverty and other social issues as an excuse for under-achievement.
The "jiggery pokery" comes in the form of the "contextual value added" table (CVA), who thinks these BOLLOX phrases up?, which has been introduced alongside standard tables this year.
The CVA judges schools less harshly if they have large numbers of pupils who claim free school meals, due to family poverty, or live in deprived postcodes.
What the fark is a deprived postcode?
Other factors are also taken into account, eg ethnicity of pupils and sex.
Before we get some racial bigot saying something unpleasant, let me point out that the CVA tables are skewed in favour of white males; Nanny deems white maels to be thick and the most deprived.
Nanny has even imposed a maximum limit on the number of GCSEs that schools can count towards their results. No more than eight GCSEs per pupil are allowed.
Nanny's Schools Minister, Jim Knight, said:
"I don't think we should draw too many conclusions from these figures.
If I were to be fair to grammar schools,
it could be quite difficult for them to show improvement
because they are already doing so well thanks to their selection."
Which translated means, the figures are bollocks and grammar schools are the best.
The CVA system does the pupils no favours, no matter how much you try to explain away under achievement and make them feel good about themselves, these kids will one day become adults and enter world that is unforgiving and does not accept excuses.
Life is hard!
In truth Nanny is abusing these children, by shielding them from life's hard realities.
As regards which schools are better, state, private or grammar...well I think Ruth Kelly (Nanny's favourite little minister) has demonstrated the stark reality there...hasn't she?
Labour
Do as we say
Not as we do!
Ken,
ReplyDeleteYou said: "...these kids will one day become adults and enter world that is unforgiving and does not accept excuses."
Wish it were so. Many will end up working in the ballooning public sector where they will continue to be shielded from everyday reality and responsibility, dreaming up ever more eloquent excuses for failure.
"Now Nanny has "engineered" the figures...."
ReplyDeleteThis used to be known as 'perverting the course of justice'; at least it was telling a pack of lies!
In a few years this nonsense will be coming home to roost.
ReplyDeleteDoctors will be killing patients because they (The Doctors) can't read.
Bridges will fall down because there are no competent engineers.
Just wait for it.
Sorry but just you're plain wrong.
ReplyDeleteA school shouldn't be too highly lauded for providing a great education if its intake consisted of well-adjusted, well-educated, high achievers. The pupils would get top grades if the teachers locked 'em up for two years with the textbooks to read.
Consider the opposite. A comprehensive in an impoverished area. Half the pupils don't speak English as a first language. Yet, due to dedicated teaching, achievement is considerable at this hypothetical school: but the stats still look poor as the background of the pupils is not shown in the bald stats.
Grades are not adjusted in these figures. They are just there to allow parents to compare a school's 'input' with the 'output'. Thus, in my opinion, THESE are the only educational stats worth anything, not the league tables.