From previous thread. All quotes from Moctina.
On your last point, you are wrong. A bad, failing state school in Southampton where over 50% of students live in low income families is going to have far worse behaviour than Eton.
Having spent a lot of time in schools (including, say, my entire education up to the age of 18) that fit every part of that definition apart from being in Southampton, I can safely say that you are wrong.
On your other point, the idea that you would sacrifice good children to make others 'feel better' or in the 'name of equality' is evil- totally & utterly evil. It is exactly the same sort of person who claims this sort of argument who then goes dead-against the idea that people from private schools dominate media, government, the justice system- how can we expect more state educated students to get high positions in our society, when they are not allowed to flourish?
That is not even slightly what I said, at all. Stop lying. You seem to think that stress helps people. Surely having to work in realistic situations (surrounded by problems) is far better preparation for the future than being sheltered from all of that. This is exactly and precisely the same argument that you are applying to students in general.
But if I had a habit like that, and I couldn't control my smoking, I would quit. But this is besides the point.
That is not even slightly how biology works.
Teachers must be given space- their progress reviewed carefully in comparison to student's personal condition in terms of home life, intelligence, class size etc, etc. My point, however, still stands.
And who the fuck is going to spend that much time doing that? And who the fuck is going to pay for it? Because it sure as fuck isn't the schools: they can barely afford to keep running, let alone spend a fortune running something like that.
That is what I gathered from the post. Pushing children to be in the same classes would stem progress, thus it being against our children, thus it being evil. What other reason other than 'equality' would there be for doing this?
No, that is the bullshit that you made up. At no point did I argue against splitting students into classes within a school based on ability. The reason is exactly the one that you gave: it's valuable life experience. I'm literally taking your argument, damn near word for word, and applying it to a group of people that you are better able to empathise with. The fact that your immediate response is that it's evil should tell you how fucking awful your argument (which, I remind you, is exactly the same) was.
But exposing them to high levels of bad behaviour to make teaching 'easier' (how it will do this is bewildering) at a young age will be a bad influence, and at an older age will disrupt their exams.
Again, the idea that this is to make teaching easier is something that you have made up. Try reading my posts and responding to their content, rather than making up your own targets to argue with.
Posted: Tue May 03, 2016 3:38 am
RIP