The Political Thread

[IndigoPrime]

Pretty sure that's what I do in my job on a daily basis, but what would I know, I've only been a secondary school teacher for fourteen years.

Having been out of school for a LONG time now, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to let me know what you think of the current state of teaching regarding social and historical background in schooling. By which I mean, looking into how our country exists, and the context behind things like European institutions, migration, social contracts and the like.

I was in secondary school in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we had NO teaching on any of this. History was all EMPIRE EMPIRE RAH RAH RAH and some bits about ancient Britain and Vikings. We had basically no teaching about how the political systems in the UK work, nor about then then EEC. Similarly, our 'personal and social education' (as it was called back then) was woeful and minimal. One period a week. (Laughably, contraception was a single lesson in two years, with a poor red-faced teacher trying to show how to use a condom in front of braying teenagers. Sex in itself was barely mentioned. Consent was never mentioned. But also, wider social contracts and important societal elements were mostly barely touched on. I'd hope this has improved immensely these days.)

As for the education system in general, it constantly baffles me how we look to e.g. Finland, go "man, their kids are all so happy, fulfilled and educated" and consistently learn precisely none of the lessons (such as them starting formal education later, concentrating on play through to about age 7, specialising later, ensuring education is more rounded, testing far less often, and so on).

[Tjm86]

Oh boy, now there is a can of worms!

To the first point regarding social and historical foundations.  This one is a real mixed bag.  The subject of Citizenship was bolted on to PSE / PSHE / Wellbeing / Whatever along the same lines as you experienced back in the day.  Only thing is, as with the rest of this, it was left up to individual schools to implement without any coherent thought or resources.  These days you have to be damn careful as a teacher about what you say regarding any of these topics.  It is also further muddied by the fact that education is a devolved issue so there are variations according to where you are in the UK.

As to the second point on international comparisons, there is a long and lamentable history of complete failure to transplant educational initiatives even within a national educational system with broadly similar structures and cultures.  Attempts to emulate methods from other nations have frequently fared far worse due to radical variations in contexts that render efforts meaningless.  unfortunately proponents of lessons from around the world have a regrettable tendency to over-simplify them, ignore contextual factors especially if they have cost implications and generally misinterpret the rationale behind them.  A good example would be Dweck's 'mindset' research that has been utterly b***ardised by schools up and down the country.

[IndigoPrime]

On the comparisons, I just find it bonkers that the UK keeps asking the same questions again and again, finding the answers, and then doing the exact opposite. Finnish kids are happier and better educated. They start formal schooling later, get tested less often, and don't specialise as early. So we could... do the same. Instead, the UK doubles down on early formalised education, more testing (including, soon, for four-year-olds!), and limiting the curriculum (not least with the EBACC debacle, which would have been OK had they not ignored Lord Judge, but, hey, he's the wrong kind of Tory, apparently).

On "saying the wrong thing", I can see how things could quickly becoming a minefield on certain topics. But are kids even taught the basics of how the UK functions? The basics of voting and politics? How the EU functions? We certainly had nothing of the sort. But we did learn about the Vikings, drew loads of pictures of Tollund Man, and – if we took GCSE history – spent ages banging on about WWII. That's not to say those things don't have importance too, but the fact I went through my entire schooling without ever knowing about the Commons, the Lords, the EEC, and so on, in hindsight seems baffling. And this surely had a major effect on things like the referendum.

Are we fairly unique in terms of widespread ignorance about not only European institutions, but also our own? (Most EU/EFTA nationals I know say they are taught all this stuff as they grow up. The understand how the EU/EFTA functions, and also how their own countries function.)

[Greg M.]

Having been out of school for a LONG time now, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to let me know what you think of the current state of teaching regarding social and historical background in schooling. By which I mean, looking into how our country exists, and the context behind things like European institutions, migration, social contracts and the like.

I'm a teacher of English (working in the Scottish education system), so I can't claim to be able to give a definitive answer re: the specific content of the Modern Studies or History curriculums. My understanding is that the former focuses on the workings of the democratic system in Scotland and the UK, social issues within the UK, and broader world issues, whereas the latter involves looking at Scottish, British and European history. From what I do know, I'm pretty sure that much of what you mention is indeed discussed – certainly up here. In terms of what's covered elsewhere in the UK – haven't a clue.

[M.I.K.]

I was in secondary school in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and we had NO teaching on any of this. History was all EMPIRE EMPIRE RAH RAH RAH and some bits about ancient Britain and Vikings. We had basically no teaching about how the political systems in the UK work, nor about then then EEC.

That's interesting. I was at high school in Scotland during the same period and modern studies lessons taught us about stuff like the first past the post system, proportional representation, antidisestablishmentarianism and mutually assured destruction. It was when the Berlin Wall was coming down so there was some mention of the impact that might have, plus a smattering about the EU and EEC (but I don't remember exactly what that entailed).

[The Legendary Shark]

JBC - the Trivium is, very basically, teaching people how to learn based on the way that the mind works. The three cores are Grammar (learning the specific words and meanings of any given subject and how they fit together), Logic (understanding how a subject's contents fit together and relate, and resolving any inconsistencies, misunderstandings or contradictions), and Rhetoric (learning how to present or apply what has been learned in a clear and coherent manner). In modern computer parlance it's Input, Processing, Output. That's the basics. It's how the later Greeks taught their citizens (but not their slaves).

The Quadrivium (which combines with the Trivium to compose the original Seven Liberal Arts) is composed of Arithmetic (the basic meanings and operations of numbers), Geometry (numbers in space), Music (numbers in time), and Astronomy (numbers in space and time).

I wish I'd learned this at school!

TJM - no probs, Man - I probably should have been clearer in my original post, proving that my own eddykayshun was, and continues to be, woefully inadequate!

[JayzusB.Christ]

Fair enough.

I'm a teacher of English to adults, and have been for a long time.  For me there are only four rules that I follow: Know your shit, keep it practical, keep them interested, and give them confidence.

As for teaching kids, I haven't a clue.  I hate doing it and as such don't do it.

[Tjm86]

On the comparisons, I just find it bonkers that the UK keeps asking the same questions again and again, finding the answers, and then doing the exact opposite. Finnish kids are happier and better educated. They start formal schooling later, get tested less often, and don't specialise as early.

British education seems to have wholeheartedly embraced the idea of repeating the same mistakes in the hopes of a different outcome over the last, well Century or so if I'm completely honest., but particularly since the second world war.  Since the 1988 Education Reform Act this has gone into overdrive as both parties seem to have tried to outbid each other in an attempt to crush the soul out of education.  So much of what is expected is not only not based in any evidence but actually frequently negated by available evidence.  The problem is though that because educational research is so heavily contested, often poorly constructed and definitely 'ideologically suspect' in the eyes of decision makers it tends to be twisted to meet any point you want.

But are kids even taught the basics of how the UK functions? The basics of voting and politics? How the EU functions? We certainly had nothing of the sort. But we did learn about the Vikings, drew loads of pictures of Tollund Man, and – if we took GCSE history – spent ages banging on about WWII.

The history curriculum, in its compulsory phase up to the end of key stage 3 at year 9 (as is now, 3rd form in old money, 14 in age ...) is focused more on historiography than content.  It is more about gaining a sense of historical enquiry and core ideas from history.  The GCSE curriculum still has a heavy focus on Nazi Germany but also American history on most syllabi.  Modern English history is (IIRC) largely reserved for A level study, tends to focus mainly on political issues and is about as exciting as watching a cricket match.

Teaching about voting and political structures is supposedly reserved for Citizenship and has the distinction of being the biggest dogs breakfast in UK education (which in itself is a significant achievement).  In terms of discussions / lessons about political institutions and structures, this will depend very much on who your child has as a teacher and how informed they are.

[JayzusB.Christ]

You got the Empire; we got the Vatican.  I distinctly remember being very suspicious of our history book when I was about 14 - it stressed how the Spanish Inquisition's methods were probably exaggerated by biased historians, and that it didn't use torture more than anyone else.  Fortunately Pat Mills had already given me a more accurate picture of its true nastiness in Nemesis.

The prog did a lot, in hindsight, to rescue me from the toxic influence of Catholicism in the education system.  I have no idea how much time is devoted to god-bothering in Irish schools these days, but I would imagine it's a whole lot less than it was in my time. 

[IndigoPrime]

both parties seem to have tried to outbid each other in an attempt to crush the soul out of education

What gets me most (bar the incessant testing, which has resulted in children as young as five suffering from depression – when the medical world often doesn't recognise it as a problem in people that young) is when I hear about schools closing their entire arts departments. So children there – at secondary level – are basically robbed of painting, drawing, drama, music, and so on. This obsession with academia and chasing international league tables baffles me, not least because we aren't preparing kids anymore for the things we are actually good in.

This is even the case in English. I'm a writer. I have been since 2002, and full-time for over well over a decade
now. I have no idea about half of the arcane chunks of grammar kids are now being told are essential. And yet the Tories seem to think this is more important than storytelling, presentation, and ideas. (Of course, you need to balance the two. We've just gone WAY too far in one direction.)

So much of what is expected is not only not based in any evidence but actually frequently negated by available evidence.  The problem is though that because educational research is so heavily contested, often poorly constructed and definitely 'ideologically suspect' in the eyes of decision makers it tends to be twisted to meet any point you want.

Well, quite. But, again, the Finnish thing shines through. Their kids are happier. Let's face it: this isn't down to sunlight, nice summers, etc.

Teaching about voting and political structures is supposedly reserved for Citizenship and has the distinction of being the biggest dogs breakfast in UK education (which in itself is a significant achievement).  In terms of discussions / lessons about political institutions and structures, this will depend very much on who your child has as a teacher and how informed they are.

So that's actually a specific lesson at secondary now? We had nothing like that. (As I said, we got PSE, which IIRC was one period a week for two years.) Depressing that these fundamentals are down to the knowledge of a teacher – a lottery. Still, I'm sure it's probably not that important to learn about the fundamental principles of your democracy. What could go wrong, eh?

*looks at news about Brexit*

Oh. Oh fuck.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

I'm no teacher, but I regularly hear STEM professors/academics bemoaning the awful standard of teaching at secondary level maths. I would generally agree with them until recently when I heard a podcast with Simon Singh. He had been travelling around the UK doing maths outreach/promotion stuff in schools and concluded that maths is taught exceptionally well. His argument was basically in every maths classroom, around half the pupils aren't really engaged. This breaks down into about 40% that have no aptitude for the subject at all, and think it's useless. The other 10% having an almost instinctive grasp of the subject, and are completely bored that the teacher is going over how to multiply fractions for the umpteenth time this year, even though they got it the first time they heard it 5 years ago. However, that 40% mostly get passing grades. The 10% go into STEM and complain about maths teaching standards because they found school so boring.

The big problem with maths teaching is if you know enough to teach GCSE maths, you're qualified to earn a lot more than a teachers salary offers.

[Tjm86]

the Finnish thing shines through. Their kids are happier. Let's face it: this isn't down to sunlight, nice summers, etc.

No it isn't.  The problem is that there is a lot more to the situation in Finland that the government in the UK would never countenance.  Top of the list is their attitude to teachers full stop.  There is also the issue of the wider context which means that there is a far greater degree of trust in teachers.  What is interesting is to note the strategies and practices that politicians do seem willing to embrace.  Approaches like those used in China or Singapore, based on drill and rote, are encouraged.  Approaches like those used in Finland, based on a reform of the way in which teaching is viewed and rewarded, in which schools are structure, are admired but ignored.

I heard a podcast with Simon Singh. He had been travelling around the UK doing maths outreach/promotion stuff in schools and concluded that maths is taught exceptionally well. His argument was basically in every maths classroom, around half the pupils aren't really engaged. This breaks down into about 40% that have no aptitude for the subject at all, and think it's useless.

This is probably one of the biggest challenges that Maths teachers face.  On the one hand, as an essential and compulsory subject, everyone has to do it regardless of competence.  This is compounded by a grading system that means that some pupils are not able to achieve the hallowed 'C' / '4' (depending on where OFQUAL left the goal-posts under the new regime) grade that they believe all employers demand.  So the benefit of being in a high demand subject is offset by the fact that an awful lot of class time is spent fighting against these factors.  Then you add in the old "well, I was useless at Maths in school so I'm not too worried that my child can't do it ..." mindset that manifests itself pretty uniformly at parents' evenings.

The only thing is, attempts to make Maths Exams more useful and functional actually over complicate it to an insane extent.  Pupils are expected to be able to read train timetables at a time when more and more train companies are moving over to using apps.  Pupils are expected to be able to calculate household bills when these are fully automated.  The lag between the sorts of assessment questions pupils are given and the sorts of skills that they need is insane.  The end result are exams that are overly complex and confusing, limiting further still pupil outcomes.

This is before we get into the debate about who decides which child is capable of dealing with the sorts of Maths tested by current exams.

[Frank]

Stochastic Terrorism  l  JONATHON KEATS  l  01.21.1906:00 AM

n. The use of mass public communication to incite or inspire acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random.

One or more unstable people responds to the incitement by becoming a lone wolf and committing a violent act.   While their action may have been statistically predictable, the specific person and the specific act are not predictable.

The stochastic terrorist may be acting either negligently or deliberately, or may be in complete denial of their impact, just like a drunk driver who runs over a pedestrian without even realizing it. 

There is no conspiracy here: merely the twisted acts of individuals who are promoting extremism, who get access to mass media in which to do it, and the rest follows naturally.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2011/1/10/934890/-[/i]

The El Paso Shooting and the Gamification of Terror  l  August 4, 2019 By Robert Evans

As we've seen with two other mass shootings this year, the killer announced the start of his rampage on 8chan's /pol board. The poster also attached a four-page manifesto to the post, along with a document in his original post that included his name.

The El Paso shooter's manifesto and 8chan post show his radicalization and turn towards white suprematism, the Christchurch shooter's manifesto, and the video of his massacre, likely acting as major influences in his eventual attack ...

https://www.bellingcat.com/news/americas/2019/08/04/the-el-paso-shooting-and-the-gamification-of-terror/

Lengthy but prescient (2017) and rigorous piece on the myth of the lone wolf attacker and the de-centralised model of terrorism. Influencers, man:


If the label of lone wolf is plainly incorrect, there are other, more subtle cases where it is still highly misleading.

Another category of attackers, for instance, are those who strike alone, without guidance from formal terrorist organisations, but who have had face-to-face contact with loose networks of people who share extremist beliefs.

The Exeter restaurant bomber, dismissed as an unstable loner, was actually in contact with a circle of local militant sympathisers before his attack. The killers of Lee Rigby had been on the periphery of extremist movements in the UK for years, appearing at rallies of groups such as the now proscribed al-Muhajiroun, run by Anjem Choudary, a preacher convicted of terrorist offences in 2016 who is reported to have "inspired" up to 100 British militants.

A third category is made up of attackers who strike alone, after having had close contact online, rather than face-to-face, with extremist groups or individuals.

A wave of attackers in France last year were, at first, wrongly seen as lone wolves "inspired" rather than commissioned by Isis. It soon emerged that the individuals involved, such as the two teenagers who killed a priest in front of his congregation in Normandy, had been recruited online by a senior Isis militant.

In three recent incidents in Germany, all initially dubbed "lone-wolf attacks", Isis militants actually used messaging apps to direct recruits in the minutes before they attacked. "Pray that I become a martyr," one attacker who assaulted passengers on a train with an axe and knife told his interlocutor. "I am now waiting for the train." Then: "I am starting now."

Very often, what appear to be the clearest lone-wolf cases are revealed to be more complex. Even the strange case of the man who killed 86 people with a truck in Nice in July 2016 – with his background of alcohol abuse, casual sex and lack of apparent interest in religion or radical ideologies – may not be a true lone wolf. Eight of his friends and associates have been arrested and police are investigating his potential links to a broader network.

What research does show is that we may be more likely to find lone wolves among far-right extremists than among their jihadi counterparts. Though even in those cases, the term still conceals more than it reveals.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/mar/30/myth-lone-wolf-terrorist

[JayzusB.Christ]

So Trump is blaming the latest mass racially-motivated shootings on video games, mental health problems, immigration (!) and negative news about himself.

Everything except the shit-ton of guns in America.

[Tjm86]

... Everything except the shit-ton of guns in America.

Turns out there is a need for high power assault rifles amongst the general population after all: 

Feral Hogs!

Now see I would have gone with claymores and other anti-personnel mines myself.

Or better yet, dust off and nuke them from orbit.