Don't stay in school

liney

You keep going back to financial education, but it's really not that complicated. Don't spend more money than you have - and you can't until you are 18 anyway.


What do you think parents should be responsible for? Everything suggested (apart from potty training) you have responded to with, 'Yes, but what if.'


I have children whose parents haven't got time to listen to them once a week - so I do at lunch time for which I am not paid. Haven't got the money to get them a school jumper - so I get unclaimed lost property. Haven't had time to go shopping so send in a mars bar and a bag of crisps for lunch!


Parents need to start taking responsibility for their own children! I have even had a conversation about not setting hmework (ie read to an adult) because it's the school's job to teach kids to read, innit. And no I shouldn't encourage kids to get a library card unless i'm willing to take them to the library myself (walking distance) apparently!


It is a parent's job to ensure their child receives an education, which -shock, horror- also means teaching them life skills themselves!

Flyonthewall

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I've read this sentence several times but it still makes no sense whatsoever!

Your sentence made no sense. I'm not sure how my reply could possibly confuse you.

Whenever you remember things you use your memory.

If you are remembering a skill you are using your memory.

If you have no memory of a skill you can not remember it.

So if you are remembering a skill it is based on memory. Without memory you can't remember it.

Flyonthewall

liney wrote: »

You keep going back to financial education, but it's really not that complicated. Don't spend more money than you have - and you can't until you are 18 anyway.

It's not but thousands of people get confused and make financial mistakes all the time.

Course you can. Nothing to stop you asking parents or friends for loans on things you can't afford and being unable to pay them back.

What do you think parents should be responsible for? Everything suggested (apart from potty training) you have responded to with, 'Yes, but what if.'

Many things, but that doesn't mean responsibility can't be shared or that there are those who don't have the parent(s) or responsible adult in their life.

I have children whose parents haven't got time to listen to them once a week - so I do at lunch time for which I am not paid. Haven't got the money to get them a school jumper - so I get unclaimed lost property. Haven't had time to go shopping so send in a mars bar and a bag of crisps for lunch!

Parents need to start taking responsibility for their own children! I have even had a conversation about not setting hmework (ie read to an adult) because it's the school's job to teach kids to read, innit. And no I shouldn't encourage kids to get a library card unless i'm willing to take them to the library myself (walking distance) apparently!

It is a parent's job to ensure their child receives an education, which -shock, horror- also means teaching them life skills themselves!

Agreed.

Person_one

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Your sentence made no sense. I'm not sure how my reply could possibly confuse you.

Whenever you remember things you use your memory.

If you are remembering a skill you are using your memory.

If you have no memory of a skill you can not remember it.

So if you are remembering a skill it is based on memory. Without memory you can't remember it.

So, sorry, what's your point here exactly?

Flyonthewall

Person_one wrote: »

So, sorry, what's your point here exactly?

It was an explanation to comment made about something I'd said.

If you read previous comments it would make sense why I'd said it.

pollypenny

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I did English Lit AS level, we analysed texts in class. However, for the exams it was a case of remember what we'd read and analysed (same as how it had been for school exams).

I know that's not a full A level, but even if the exam has unseen text you have to remember a lot about how to analyse texts and key words and phrases they expect you to use when analysing and quite possibly comparisons to previously seen texts (which would be memory).

So while technically it involves something else the base of it is still memory. Without remembering a lot you can't possibly pass.

Of course you have to remember a skill you've learned.

Otherwise you wouldn't have learned it. That applies to woodwork, maths, driving or anything.

Flyonthewall

pollypenny wrote: »

Of course you have to remember a skill you've learned.

Otherwise you wouldn't have learned it. That applies to woodwork, maths, driving or anything.

Exactly. That was my point, it's still basically all to do with memory.

missbiggles1

Flyonthewall wrote: »

You could argue the same about anyone who already knows a subject. The whole point of school though is to make sure the students know it and for them to get qualifications to prove they know it. So even an IT wizz should do IT classes.

I do agree with what you say about Maths though. I'd argue that B is quite high though. At my school only half the people were given a paper allowing them to possibly get a B or above. For the other half C was the highest possible and C is a perfectly acceptable grade, accepted by all colleges. It shows a good understanding of Maths.

For those who really struggle with academics or just maths even a C is really hard for them to get and it seems unfair to force them to spend years longer studying Maths to try and get a B at GCSE level that they'll quite probably never get.

Very many colleges and universities won't let you study certain subjects with only a C in GCSE Maths because they know it doesn't really reflect any great degree of competence in the subject.

This seems to be something else you don't really know about, despite your strongly expressed opinions.

missbiggles1

Flyonthewall wrote: »

Exactly. That was my point, it's still basically all to do with memory.

So is knowing what to do with toilet paper!

Voyager2002

mgdavid wrote: »

No, A levels were taught and taken at school as well. That's what the sixth form was for, back in the days before Comprehensive education ruined everything.
Ha, 'Comprehensive education', an untruth if ever there was one.

I took 'A' levels in the sixth form of my excellent comprehensive, before going on to my first-choice university. Several other members of my family can say exactly the same.

Incidentally, back in the 1990s I did some work analysing the exam results of schools in Berkshire. I found that the Grammar schools were under-performing, once you took account of the high ability of the pupils they were teaching. Sure they got good results, but children of the same ability attending neighbouring comprehensive schools were doing even better.