Child A: “If he wasent doing enthing els heel help his uncel Herry at the funfair during the day. And had stoody at nigh on other thing he did was invent new rides. Becoues he invented a lot of new rides he won a prize. He didn’t live with his mum he lived with his wife.”Child A got a higher mark than Child B. Seriously. Apparently it all came down to him having better "composition and effect" I kid you not!
Child B: “Quickly, it became apparent that Pip was a fantastic rider: a complete natural. But it was his love of horses that led to a tragic accident. An accident that would change his life forever. At the age of 7, he was training for a local competition when his horse, Mandy, swerved sideways unexpectedly, throwing Pip on to the ground, paralysed.”
The headmaster makes the point in the article that this is an extreme examples, and thankfully has requested for them to be re-marked. The question I have is who the hell marked them and are they going to be fired?
Now then, let's have a closer look, shall we?
Child A pens a tale about a funfair, one of those 'loveable' rogues, a member of the lower classes, probably sucking benefits whenever possible.
Child B pens a tale about someone on horseback, probably frmo a succesful, earning background.
Snobbery in marking, anyone?
Based on comments elsewhere about the difficulties, the answers appear to be:
1. A jobbing contractor who was found at the bottom of the barrel whence all others had fled;
2. It was a job-and-finish contract, so he never had any incentive to do it right, and has already "moved on" (or is it back to the bottom of his barrel again)
Child B should have written "f*** off" to get himself a couple of extra marks.
Another question: do sats matter and does anyone care about them?
So here we have it, proof that our education system expects mediocrity, ignores failure and abhors excellence.
child B seems to have an amazing command of english for an 11 year old.
still, marking the child down is only fair after all we mustn't be seen to reward merit and by doing so make child A feel disadvantaged .
I think child A is the new 22 year old speech writer from Liverpool for Dave.
It's going to be a lorra, lorra of fun ok lar?
Seriously is anyone surprised after what the cunts have done to our education system over the last decade?
Dizy u r horable u r a bit ov a miggle class conspiratory, 1 ov my dads is Labur an he finks u r 2 posh,
"The question I have is who the hell marked them and are they going to be fired? "
And if not, why not?
Because our government signed a 5 year contract (this is year #1), probably without any get out clause on sub standard delivery, and therefore (taxpayers) would probably be royally shafted if that agreement were broken.
For my extra marks I wish they'd all just f**k off.
so should these sorts of activities be outsourced and put up for contracts and tenders from global corporations?
Anyone see blinkyballs on the news?
He inhabits a different universe!!
Someone take a knife to him pleeeease!!!!!
"The headmaster makes the point in the article that this is an extreme examples"
Plural when the singular will do? Are you tying to get top marks Dizzy?
Anon 19:22 I don't think anyone has problems with these services being outsourced, provided safeguards are built in to the contract for poor performance and/or non-delivery of said services. A five year contract without recourse is just ludicrous and an insult to the intelligence of the taxpayer.
This government, however, seems to have no business acumen whatsoever and will sign up to just about anything provided it's cheap.
Buy cheap, pay twice.
One would assume that child A and child B had different markers. If not, then someone should be named and shamed.
Apparently they're employing A-level students to do the marking.
So clearly A-level standards have gone down the plughole too.
head of ets in uk interviewed on the news said some papers were a week delayed and some 10 days late, that 'high quality' marks had gone out to the vast majority and now the thing was to get the marking as accurate as possible.
He continued that this was the first year of the contract and inevitably things go wrong.
the overall tone of his 'apology' was staggeringly blase.
of course business is always so much better at doing everything.
imagine what a terrible fiasco it would have been if teachers or public servants had been allowed to do it.
Post a Comment