The Clitheroe Prime Minister

[Big Tone]

You're right or course RH. But these days the current ethos in schools, so I am reliably informed, is that so long as the meaning is understood it doesn't matter. I got Conny's post okay, so why turn it into a big deal anyone?

Where I am offended is on TV and in some papers where there are such glaring errors as not starting a sentence with a capital or names and countries like England or Susan. (Was tempted to say england or susan but it's painful for me to look at)

 

[EFLImpudence]

names and countries like England or Susan.

Before RH chastises you; did you and your friend, England, enjoy your holiday in Susan?

 

[Big Tone]

I think I'm safe on that, although I will admit I wish my engrish wuz betta. I, er, was struggling the other day with a C word. (No, not that one!)

I thought I was being clever when I said it's Company when it's a business, as opposed to company when you are in good company for example. Still not sure and I meant to look it up or ask

Probably shouldn't have revealed that here. He looks for weaknesses and pounces on you later...

I blame the plethora and overload of seeing and reading things which are put so bad, (there's one), we start taking them for granted or even think maybe that's the correct way these days

 

[Micilin]

The apostrophe?

It's got its uses .

What a useful phrase! I'll remember that. Thanks.

Enjoy
For those old enough to remember him

Cheers for that!

 

[Big Tone]

That guy. Micilin, has got more talent and humour in his little finger than most people I am ever likely to meet.

Cheers dude; glad you like it I nearly wet my mankini watching it again... Really miss him; truly a one-off...

 

[JBR]

The apostrophe?

It's got its uses .

What a useful phrase! I'll remember that. Thanks.

Enjoy
For those old enough to remember him

Yes, I remember him and especially the 'punctuation' sequence. A very funny man.

 

[JBR]

But these days the current ethos in schools, so I am reliably informed, is that so long as the meaning is understood it doesn't matter.

You're right. It appears that, these days, so long as children can 'express themselves' everything else takes second place.

And they wonder why our education system cannot compete with those of countries like Singapore, where the 'old fashioned' methods (like those used when I was at school) still prevail.

In mediaeval Britain very few people, mostly monks, could read and write. Perhaps that's what the establishment is aiming for. An effective means of keeping the hoi polloi under the thumb.

 

[Micilin]

The consistently best education system, as measured by international tests, is Finland.

Not your old fashioned approach, but child centred, with an emphasis on problem solving and social skills.No Sat- like testing and start school at 7 years old AFAIK.

A big difference is that teachers are on apart with doctors and lawyers in terms qualifications, pay , and status.

Worth a google if you are interested on how education for learning works rather than educating for exams .

 

[RogueHanger]

I got Conny's post okay, so why turn it into a big deal anyone?

Fair comment, BT, except I think you're very biased in your criticism
a) my initial comment, three weeks ago, about conny's post was lighthearted, note the smilies,
b) cajar's recent post, two days ago, was a misplaced critique of my lighthearted comment, and
c) my recent post was merely a response to cajar's unfair and inaccurate critique.

So, all-in-all, I think it's reasonable to say that cajar was the first to make an issue out of a lighthearted situation. I surely have a right of reply, especially to an unfair critical comment. Your post was prejudiced against me and misplaced.
It's what I've come to expect from you.

Is that a fair assessment?

 

[RogueHanger]

The consistently best education system, as measured by international tests, is Finland.

Not your old fashioned approach, but child centred, with an emphasis on problem solving and social skills.No Sat- like testing and start school at 7 years old AFAIK.

A big difference is that teachers are on apart with doctors and lawyers in terms qualifications, pay , and status.

Worth a google if you are interested on how education for learning works rather than educating for exams .

Sorry, micilin, not being pedantic.
Did you mean "teachers are on a par with doctors, etc". Only as it's written it could be considered to mean the opposite.

No criticism intended, just in case you hadn't noticed it.

 

[Micilin]

The consistently best education system, as measured by international tests, is Finland.

Not your old fashioned approach, but child centred, with an emphasis on problem solving and social skills.No Sat- like testing and start school at 7 years old AFAIK.

A big difference is that teachers are on apart with doctors and lawyers in terms qualifications, pay , and status.

Worth a google if you are interested on how education for learning works rather than educating for exams .

Sorry, micilin, not being pedantic.
Did you mean "teachers are on a par with doctors, etc". Only as it's written it could be considered to mean the opposite.

No criticism intended, just in case you hadn't noticed it.

Of course, had not spotted that! 'On a par' it should be.

I'll obviously blame the iPad for auto correcting it rather than my fat fingers.

Cheers

 

[Big Tone]

I got Conny's post okay, so why turn it into a big deal anyone?

Fair comment, BT, except I think you're very biased in your criticism
a) my initial comment, three weeks ago, about conny's post was lighthearted, note the smilies,
b) cajar's recent post, two days ago, was a misplaced critique of my lighthearted comment, and
c) my recent post was merely a response to cajar's unfair and inaccurate critique.

So, all-in-all, I think it's reasonable to say that cajar was the first to make an issue out of a lighthearted situation. I surely have a right of reply, especially to an unfair critical comment. Your post was prejudiced against me and misplaced.
It's what I've come to expect from you.

Is that a fair assessment?

No! But it's what I've come to expect from you. I did not criticize you, quite the opposite if you look back. Do I have the right to reply here too?

I was only saying that these days the emphasis is on the meaning which I don’t approve of, (like yourself), and that was all.

You are always spoiling for a fight..

 

[RogueHanger]

I got Conny's post okay, so why turn it into a big deal anyone?

Fair comment, BT, except I think you're very biased in your criticism
a) my initial comment, three weeks ago, about conny's post was lighthearted, note the smilies,
b) cajar's recent post, two days ago, was a misplaced critique of my lighthearted comment, and
c) my recent post was merely a response to cajar's unfair and inaccurate critique.

So, all-in-all, I think it's reasonable to say that cajar was the first to make an issue out of a lighthearted situation. I surely have a right of reply, especially to an unfair critical comment. Your post was prejudiced against me and misplaced.
It's what I've come to expect from you.

Is that a fair assessment?

No! But it's what I've come to expect from you. I did not criticize you, quite the opposite if you look back. Do I have the right to reply here too?

I was only saying that these days the emphasis is on the meaning which I don’t approve of, (like yourself), and that was all.

You are always spoiling for a fight..

OK, BT, I'll accept your explanation.
But I will point out your full paragraph:

You're right or course RH. But these days the current ethos in schools, so I am reliably informed, is that so long as the meaning is understood it doesn't matter. I got Conny's post okay, so why turn it into a big deal anyone?

It rather looked to me that your comment about the big deal was very much part of the same comment aimed at me. Maybe I'm expecting criticism, especially from you.

Usually, it would be politic to seperate the comment from the rest of the paragraph to avoid any confusion.

Now if I've offended you by sniping unfairly at you, I apologise.
But, I trust you will realise that it's not the first time that you've made a comment that looks, at first glance, to be a biased comment, which you've later had to explain.

 

[Big Tone]

I said "anyone" which I hoped would clarify. I will pay more attention in future to be more unambiguous