Teacher training days

milliebear00001

woody01 wrote: »

Acting like one of your under -educated children. (who's fault might that be)

Clearly, the fault of whoever taught you apostrophe use. (Surprising how this was never picked up on during your extended academic studies - shameful teachers!)

mintymoneysaver

milliebear00001 wrote: »

Clearly, the fault of whoever taught you apostrophe use. (Surprising how this was never picked up on during your extended academic studies - shameful teachers!)

I was just thinking the same thing myself. Fancy having a good degree and not knowing that it's 'whose' rather than who's !

RedBern

just had to wade in here - married to a teacher - wouldn't do the job if you paid me.

Teachers are responsible for all the evils in the world. Teachers are responsible for teenage pregnancies, for knife crime increasing, for children not being able to eat with a knife and fork - you name it, it's the teachers wot are responsible. :rolleyes:

They have long holidays because.... well because the children they are supposed to teach are not in school..... Perhaps they could go into school during the 'long holidays' and do painting and decorating (oops, a lot already do). Children need breaks from learning, and believe me, teachers need breaks from children. Six weeks for a half-term is just about enough for any teacher to get through.

There was an advertising campaign ages ago which said something like.... "if you've got a good job, thank a teacher" and I think a few of the posters on here should reflect on their education and stop 'teacher bashing' (even if they've not been taught proper use of the apostrophe!)

Here endeth the lesson!!

pollypenny

woody01 wrote: »

Acting like one of your under -educated children. (who's fault might that be)

I wish I'd seen that before the others! irony! Irony! :rotfl::rotfl:

woody01

As long as i earn 3 or 4 x as much as the sub standard teachers that post here i am happy.

mintymoneysaver

And as long as I know I've done a good job, and achieved something I'm happy...funnily enough most teachers don't do it for the money!!

poet123

woody01 wrote: »

As long as i earn 3 or 4 x as much as the sub standard teachers that post here i am happy.

So now that your academic standards have been called into question, and despite your original (erroneous) protestations that your degree was more academic than one a teacher may possess, you resort to bringing money into the equation.

I actually question your maths ability too, teachers can earn around £30/35,000 after reasonable service and with alllowances. Yet you claim to earn 3 or 4 times as much, I would seriously doubt that, but unlike your easily countered academic claims, we can only take your word for it.

Perhaps you would like to do the calculation again?

woody01

poet123 wrote: »

So now that your academic standards have been called into question, and despite your original (erroneous) protestations that your degree was more academic than one a teacher may possess, you resort to bringing money into the equation.

I actually question your maths ability too, teachers can earn around £30/35,000 after reasonable service and with alllowances. Yet you claim to earn 3 or 4 times as much, I would seriously doubt that, but unlike your easily countered academic claims, we can only take your word for it.

Perhaps you would like to do the calculation again?

I earn an excellent salary and i do not need to prove it to you. (though if i had to it would be easy enough). If you are happy scraping by on peanuts then i am pleased for you.

30-35K is what i would expect for teacher.
I do not know which decade you are from, but 30-35K for a supposedly 'educated' position is pretty poor.

Oh...and by the way, your chuckles earlier at the post regarding my use of an apostrophe............at least try and get it right.
I did use the symbol incorrectly but it was a HYPHON....not an apostrophe.

(all of a sudden 30K looks too high)

poet123

My comment was not regarding the amount teachers are paid, but regarding your contention that you are paid 3/4 times as much. Can you honestly say that is correct? if so what field are you in? and how old are you?

Sorry to contradict you but ' is an apostrophe as used by you in the word who's and that - is a hyphen (not hyphon). In fact it was the incorrect spelling/usage of who's in the context you used it that was the problem. It should have been written whose. See my link for a more in depth explanation.

Oh, and it is not called a symbol, it is a punctuation mark.

The words hole, digging, and deeper, spring to mind!!!

milliebear00001

Woody has had a limited education and feels he needs to make up for that by 'swaggering' about his pay. It's sad, but not uncommon. Unfortunately, he needs to learn that when picking an argument, you should choose a topic you know more about than your opponent (what job can a person do that pays so much, and does not require them to be able to string a coherent sentence together?!) Failing in one argument and so changing tack to boast about income, to people seldom motivated by money, is just bizarre. Why on earth would you think we would care more about your pay, than your lack of literacy?