Quite obviously nuts

Yes, yes, of course this is paranoia. The British left could never be that organised, could they? And yet, and yet, there does seem to be an awful lot of thrashing around in search of a justification for The Elect to be bringing up all the children in the country from the very earliest age that it’s possible to influence their beliefs.

Who knows, perhaps the nursery songs to teach them interesting words will feature Pavel Morozov? Pavlika, Pavlika, ya ya could go along nicely to that Kate Bush tune, no?

25 comments on “Quite obviously nuts

  1. Lying Marxist bullshit.

    The shite-useless state has them from 5 to 18 ( that latter number itself deceitful ploy to keep youth unemployment figures down) and still can’t teach 25% of them to read and write without moving their lips.

    If they don’t start at whatever they’ll fall behind with reading and writing? Fall behind? If you can’t teach them in 13 years you dickheads 14 isn’t going to cut the mustard.

    This kind of shit will soon be joined by the SNP’s “Commissar for every Child” capers no doubt.

  2. I read it somewhere else as parents should be talking to their kids and getting them started on reading before school, not the state.

    Not that I doubt there are people who would love to provide some early years teaching materials based on completely normal polyamorous transgender homosexual throuples and their children.

  3. BiG:“I read it somewhere else as parents should be talking to their kids and getting them started on reading before school, not the state.”

    Something seen as perfectly normal when I was growing up, and now as something only ‘posh families’ do.

  4. Julia, absolutely.

    I think the problem is the transmission of what we would see as common sense life skills is pretty haphazard, even in good families. Perhaps becasue life is too easy and the society is capable of compensating for tehm, as counterproductive as that is.

    I know there are a few that weren’t transmitted adequately to me.

  5. What Tim is hinting at is right – the SJWs and CMs have already done a good job on infesting schools, as well as unis.

    Remember that primary school somewhere in London where they had got the kids to slap up some commie posters next to the polling station: http://www.hackneygazette.co.uk/seasonal/election/tyssen-primary-school-told-off-for-pro-communist-posters-displayed-to-voters-on-election-day-1-5059951

    The march through the institutions continues unabated.

  6. Didn’t I read somewhere that the teachers were making a huge fuss about parents teaching their kiddies to read and write because they teach them the wrong methods? Parents don’t teach the state approved method and the poor teachers have to make the kiddies unlearn the bad ways then start again.

    Or was it that kids coming to school already able to read and write made the rest of the class feel bad about themselves?

    Or was it both?

  7. By the time I’d started school I’d already had three years talking to my parents, two years talking to my younger brother, and one year reading the Radio Times. I assumed that was the natural state of things.

  8. Egalitarians of every hue don’t like the family because it is the source of inequality. So all egalitarians want to ‘supplement’ the family with as much state intervention as possible. Meanwhile, the ideological assault on the family continues with gay marriage, self-identification of sex, children’s rights, polyamory, child-free cat ladies, child protection, etc.

  9. My mum taught me to read primarily so I could read my own bedtime story and she could get on with her bodice rippers.

    Didn’t bother the other kids but pissed the teachers off no end. “‘See spot run. Run spot run.’ Not much of a plot, is there, miss?” The negative reaction from the teachers cast a pall over my whole school life as it made it obvious from the outset that me learning stuff was not the objective.

  10. Perhaps this is meant to sweep up those youngsters whose parents don’t speak English- all without discrimination of course.

  11. @kevin b from personal experience with my kids they claim it’s the wrong methods, but really it’s the fact they don’t want to deal with different ability levels in the class.
    We had a complaint that our 6 year old was undermining the teachers authority, turned out she had pointed out to the class some spelling mistakes the teacher had made on the board

  12. @BiG

    Article in DM reported it as as parents should be talking to their kids and getting them started on reading before school, not the state.

    Talking to them, reading to them, teaching nursery rhymes etc which is what my parents did.

    My mother was a teacher and taught me the three Rs before school.

    Frankly it’s disgusting that UK has parents that don’t do this and some don’t even toilet train their children.

  13. “Didn’t I read somewhere that the teachers were making a huge fuss about parents teaching their kiddies to read and write because they teach them the wrong methods? Parents don’t teach the state approved method and the poor teachers have to make the kiddies unlearn the bad ways then start again.”

    Methods aren’t ‘wrong’ unless they give the wrong answer. But it can be confusing to the less able kids to be taught multiple methods. First they’re told you do it like this. Then they’re told to do it like that. They get mixed up.

    Take a question like 17×35. The ‘traditional’ method starts with you setting out a long-multiplication problem. 5×7 = 35, 5×1=5, 3×7=21, 3×1 = 3, 85 + 510 = 595.

    Or alternatively, you start by saying 17 is nearly 20, so call it 20 – 3. 20×35 = 700. Subtract 2×35 to get 630. Subtract another 35. 595.

    One is completely defined and methodical. Do this, then this, then this in precise sequence with no variations. The other is more ‘tool-based’ and ‘problem-solving’ and ‘exploratory’. You look for approximate answers, and routes to the solution by easy steps you already know. They not only involve different steps, but depend on entirely different mindsets.

    Somebody taught the methodical method gets lost when asked to use the exploratory one. “What do I do now? What do you mean ‘it depends’?” Somebody taught the exploratory method will keep trying to deviate and go off on tangents when told to use the systematic method.

    The smarter kids can handle both, and even understand why they give the same answer. But when you’ve got kids who hate maths, don’t understand it, and just want a single simple set of instructions to follow by rote, it’s a pain having to say “Forget what mummy told you, do it this way”, or worse, trying to simultaneously teach multiple methods to the whole class at once.

  14. NiV

    +1. At my time,you were formally taught the methodical approach, but delveloped your own ideas from there.

    btw. we clearly all think different routes! I automatically went for simplifying using 7, becomes 5 x (7×17) > 5×120-5.

  15. john 77, PF,

    Indeed! I picked that method because it only involves doubling 35. But there are lots of routes.

    One of the difficulties with the methodical method is that it requires memorising the entire multiplication table before you’ve really got a complete system. (Doing 7×17 = 119 in one step implies a lot of memorised knowledge.) But for those of us who *have* extensive memorised tables, there’s a lot more routes to pick from, so there’s always likely to be something shorter.

    16×35 means doubling 35 four times – 70, 140, 280, 560. Add another 35.

  16. A literate population is obstructive to an indoctrinated one. Don’t need no book learning to chant the red flag.

  17. “A literate population is obstructive to an indoctrinated one.”

    That’s a dangerous assumption to make. It’s often the intellectuals who are the most easily indoctrinated.

    The illiterate know they can be fooled, and so are suspicious. The clever think they can’t be, and can always find some clever reason to believe what they want to believe.

  18. A good teacher is one who realises a child hasn’t understood the approved method and then uses whatever method works.

    Mrs BiND was a specialist reading teacher but gave up when she got fed up with all and sundry telling her how to do a job.

  19. One of the issues, of course, is that people think that this is some new phenomenon, whereas it has been happening for decades. My mum and my much older siblings read to me and I had the Beano every week.

    Back inthe 70s, I can still remember my primary school teacher’s volcanic reaction when she discovered that I had spent the whole year reading adventure novels, rather than the crap approved reading books about pirates (no walking planks or disembowelling) . I read the first three in a couple of minutes and concluded that they were a waste of time. My reading age was 5 or 6 years older than my real age when tested, hence my teacher’s horror when she learned how few approved books I had read.

    The teachers at my South London comp ( same as Sadiq Khan’s) were mostly extreme Marxists, for whom Gramsci was some sort of dangerous centrist.

  20. Re: Books

    No idea about reading age, but I read C S Lewis’ Narnia 7 books in P4

    Secretly read my father’s stash of porn novels “postman…” etc when ~12. I also had a Sun Page 3 Calender on wall in bedroom – bought with Saturday job money.

    By 14 I only read adult books eg Bagley, Maclean, Wheatley

    Parents were very strict (law, responsibilities, manners etc) and very liberal (do/try what you want if “strict” not breached).

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.