Pours on petrol, lights match, and steps back ....

Waiting_For_Godot · Post by **Waiting_For_Godot** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 9:04 am

The problem with positive discrimination is that we do not know the backgrounds of the children who do well at low achieving comps. The first student ever to go to Cambridge from my school was my best friend. She was a bright girl, not as naturally bright as me

, but her families focus (they are Asian) was education from the moment she rose until the moment she went to bed. She was never allowed out and I could only visit if there was an academic or musical slant to the visit. I am sure there are plenty of families like this. Positive discrimination is a tick box exercise which does not really help the bright children who were failed a long time ago in their early schooling.

Fix the schools, not the universities. On an up note, Oxbridge will no longer hold the status it once had as it's standards fall.

pist · Post by **pist** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 10:09 am

mike1880 wrote: Post subject: Re: Pours on petrol, lights match, and steps back ....

Fix the schools, not the universities.

Hear Hear! - and dare I say it - I think the "fix" needs to start even earlier with the provision of proper quality nursery provision, so that all little ones get a chance to learn the social skills neccesary to get on in school and aquire all the little building blocks needed for more structured learning later on. (no I don't mean the "nappy curriculum"

I mean the good old-fashioned stuff: the interaction with peers, expectaion of good behavior, sitting still, having aspirations (not just about being on X-factor), play dough, painting, stories, playing outside, etc etc etc - things too many children are deprived off today)

But alas, doubt there will be room for this in the budget cuts.......

magwich2 · Post by **magwich2** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:13 am

What you call "nursery education" used to be called "parenting"! Other than that, totally agree with you. I fear that the disadvantage for many children starts the night they are conceived though. Don't know if anyone has watched that somewhat gruesome TV programme "One born every minute" but even allowing for the self-selected group who would allow themselves to be filmed, OMG what a collection!!! It would be interesting to follow the unfortunate babies as they grow up but probably deeply depressing and predictable.
I'm not being horrible here, its just soooo bad that one doesn't see much hope of any improvement in social mobility anytime soon if this lot carry on popping them out.

pist · Post by **pist** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:29 pm

magwich2 wrote:What you call "nursery education" used to be called "parenting"!

Yes - exactly! Completely agree

But as you say, sadly not everyone gets that - so if.... one could help these kids through nurseries and better schools, maybe more would be better educated (not just academically), better "socialised" and have more aspirations - and so may be in a better position to offer their own children a better life one could hope........

gertie · Post by **gertie** » Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:42 pm

Don't know if anyone has watched that somewhat gruesome TV programme "One born every minute" but even allowing for the self-selected group who would allow themselves to be filmed, OMG what a collection!!!

Not sure what you are referring to here magwich2??... I have seen a some of these programmes and yes it features all sorts of people....but none that I think would necessarily make awful parents....have I missed something??

magwich2 · Post by **magwich2** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:09 am

I think you have!

scarlett · Post by **scarlett** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:20 am

I'm not sure why you would want to be filmed in that state...maybe afterwards in a nice nightie and a ribbon in your hair....but I agree with Gertie, I'm afraid, I can't think of any of the parents who I would deem as inadequate.Some of the girls were very young and also playing up to the camera a bit ...but I'm sure would do the best for their child. The only family that I did cringe at and thought rather immature was actually the older mother who had her dh and her 18 year old son with her and who were both having a good look at the wrong end !

magwich2 · Post by **magwich2** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:29 am

Well, most of the mothers aren't too good but its the fathers who are truly dire.
I saw a great poster the other day (actually it was at the vets!) - "PREVENT TEENAGE PREGNANCY - NEUTER EARLY"

scarlett · Post by **scarlett** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:43 am

Thinking about it though, Magwich2, there have always been uncaring mothers and errant fathers since the beginning of time.It's nothing new, is it ? So, can things really be changed anyway ?( apart from neutering at an early age

)

gertie · Post by **gertie** » Thu Feb 17, 2011 12:47 pm

The point I am trying to make magwich2 is that all kinds of people can make good parents and all kinds bad. Just because certain people aren't your cup of tea or have a different lifestyle it doesn't necessarily mean they are less likely to love, care for or support their children than anyone else.... I don't see how you can make such a sweeping assumption.

With reference to the programme, yes I have seen some "interesting" couples, but remember also they are in an emotional/intense situation where it is well known that people can behave quite out of character.