Page 4 of 10

Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:23 pm
by Sam Slater
Cheers Wazza,

It's very powerful how these things jump out at me in posts, even after all this time.

I can see why they're taught it though, and I would purposely avoid any literature that ignored these rules (poetry aside).

Cheers for clearing it up.


Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:30 pm
by Snake Diamond
Well, how about the rate of kids leaving school as thick as a turd. A recent news article on the tv mentioned about the amount of school kids leaving school, with below average abilities in basic education skills. Reading, Writing, etc. Considering the Population growth, more children today leave school & are not able to get jobs, due to problems with their education, that 20 years ago.

Yes, I freely admit that I don't work in schools, or have never worked in schools, but if any information supplied by the Newspapers or TV is to be true, then there has to be some form of truth to the articles about lack of education in modern kids.


Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:51 pm
by Lizard
"Well, given that kids spend 85% of their childhood with their parents, not in school,"

Wazzy, did you just pull that statistic out of your huge purple nylon Y fronts, or do you know that for a fact, most kids keep clear of thier parents as far as I can see..


Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:53 pm
by Trumpton
My cousin is a teacher and the points Wazza has made are excatly the same as he (my cousin) has experienced. Poor parenting skills are incredibly low. Many children simply do not know what is right and what is wrong because they haven't been told/instructed by their parents - who themselves faced the same lack of skills. It is a skill to be a parent!

Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:56 pm
by Lizard
Thats because a whole generation of parents had no parenting skills, you look around you and see a mass of baby men, dad's who wear the same clothes as thier sons, I,m sorry but they look cunts- not fashionable.


Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:57 pm
by Snake Diamond
warren zevon rip wrote:

> Well, given that kids spend 85% of their childhood with their
> parents, not in school, you could draw conclusions from that...

> Seriously, I would say that teachers in my school are much
> better on average than the teachers I had. However, the
> expectations of what the kids will do themselves is very low -
> for instance, parents knowingly send them to school without
> basic tools of the trade. So part of every lesson involves
> making sure e.g. 15 year olds have pencils and pens! They
> cannot take text books home to revise because they have no
> school bags.

Yeah, most kids around here don't seem to carry anything, to school, or home from school.

> Many students are not used to listening at home, so they don't
> listen at school, so they don't learn as quickly as they could.

Most kids actually don't listen cause their parents don't talk. Alot of parents are too busy with their social lives to bother with what their children should or shouldn't be doing. I know this as I've listened to parents complaining that their kids are interfering with their (adults) free time.

> Time is wasted in every lesson, because some pupils want to
> "test out" their teachers by arguing every little point - not
> because they are interested in testing historical arguments to
> destruction, but to fulfill their own ego-trips.

Lots of shits like that when I was in school.

> Reading levels are actually great up to about age 8, then many
> pupils stop reading for fun at home, and stop progressing.

I agree on this, we actively encourage my daughter to keep reading, but she's always commenting on the fact her friends don't read, just play games or watch the idiot box (telly).

> If Britain wants smart students, we need to make a collective
> decision to improve parenting skills. I would personally
> welcome some sort of test before conception is allowed, as the
> highest birth rates are currently in the least educated parts
> of the population, who are least equipped financially,
> emptionally and intellectually for bringing up children. But
> that way lies madness, apparently.

I don't know about pre-conception testing of parents, but I firmly believe in Stupidity should be painful, and illegal. The previous place I was living at, there was 2 diff families (I later found out were inter-related) who had 5 & 7 kids each, & were still getting pregnant when we moved here. Their Stupidity levels (lack of education, or intelligence) would make an elephant's turd seem like a Super Smart Genius.

> Additionally, parents would have to accept that if a teacher
> chucks their kid out for being a pest in a class, the chances
> are that their kid was a pest in class.


Re: Super-Sexy-Nanny???

Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 6:58 pm
by Sam Slater
Why do you think parents have changed Wazza? I actually agree -but not about the testing before conception!- with most of what you said, but the highest birth rates have always been amongst the poorest, and least educated in society all over the globe.

My take on things is that mothers & fathers these days take less pride in the rearing of their kids. The latest, car, or mobile phone seems more important, and with both parents working, back at home it's easier to sit the kids in front of the tv, or video game while they wind down.