|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 19:59:51 GMT
I'm talking about the disparity between the best and worst STATE SCHOOLS. !!! "Exceptions " is a shocking and utterly depressing explanation. But I am not surprised. My ex wife was a head teacher in a state school and a good one. But there is world of difference between catchment areas of particular schools The ability to attract the best teachers to schools in run down areas is well known You will never get all schools performing at the highest level, indeed exceeding the average is not statistically possible
Yes but - let's assume that all schools improve by x%. That means the average goes up by x%. Yes, half the schools will still be below average, but they have all improved. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 5, 2024 20:03:43 GMT
Even at this very early stage it seems clear Ind registered or those without a party affiliation are going to decide the Presidential race in Nevada.
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 5, 2024 20:05:09 GMT
My ex wife was a head teacher in a state school and a good one. But there is world of difference between catchment areas of particular schools The ability to attract the best teachers to schools in run down areas is well known You will never get all schools performing at the highest level, indeed exceeding the average is not statistically possible
Yes but - let's assume that all schools improve by x%. That means the average goes up by x%. Yes, half the schools will still be below average, but they have all improved. Yes and that has already happened over the years, but it still won't mean all schools can perform at the highest level |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 5, 2024 20:09:07 GMT
Yes but - let's assume that all schools improve by x%. That means the average goes up by x%. Yes, half the schools will still be below average, but they have all improved. Yes and that has already happened over the years, but it still won't mean all schools can perform at the highest level Known as the "value added" metric. Or used to be when I was at school. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 20:19:43 GMT
After this length of time I can't reference the exact article that I read, but this link (from 2016) says more or less the same thing - that A-level maths standards have declined since the 1960s although they had stabilised since the 1990s. Therefore for you to assume that no-one else could have come to the same conclusion and written about it, is what is nonsense. Of course you can’t ’reference’ it! It does not exist, does it? It is just a product of warped ideas and wild imagination. The missing ‘link’ you provide is in any case irrelevant to my point, which is that you were pointing to hard evidence, i.e. that a former O level standard item was now being used at A level. Once we get to the article, we can take it apart, but we can’t do that because it exists only in your head!! Sorry about forgetting the link. Here it is. www.bbc.com/news/education-35632198What's the purpose of this vituperation? I only mentioned the article and its reference to O-levels because I remembered reading it and it was in the context of a discussion about the decline of A -level standards. The link backs that basic point up. I have provided evidence of decline in A-level standards, which is what I was trying to show. What evidence do you have that I invented the original article? None of course. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 20:27:13 GMT
Looks awfully like clustering from the pollsters to me.  If Selzer is right, there is going to be a lot of egg on their faces tomorrow. ... “I give credit to my method for my track record,” Selzer said. “I call my method ‘polling forward.’ So I want to be in a place where my data can show me what’s likely to happen with the future electorate. So I just try to get out of the way of my data saying this is what’s going to happen.” “A lot of other polls, and I’ll count Emerson among them, are including in the way that they manipulate the data after it comes in, things that have happened in the past,” she continued. “ So they’re taking into account exit polls, they’re taking into account what turnout was in past elections. I don’t make any assumptions like that. So it’s in my way of thinking, it’s a cleaner way to forecast a future electorate, which nobody knows what that’s going to be. But we do know that our electorates change in terms of how many people are showing up and what the composition is.” ... It does make one wonder whether all the adjustments made by pollsters (including our own), and tweaking their methods every time they are badly wrong, is over-complicating things. It would be a very interesting exercise for one of our pollsters to run a comparison of their current methods with the same data using Selzer's method, to see which might be more accurate. Perhaps they already do internally? |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Nov 5, 2024 20:30:30 GMT
Reporters on Guardian blog in Philadelphia say most voters spoken to see the economy as the key issue. One is a female Democratic underwriter who still voted for Trump. A bit disconcerting.
|
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 5, 2024 20:33:27 GMT
... “I give credit to my method for my track record,” Selzer said. “I call my method ‘polling forward.’ So I want to be in a place where my data can show me what’s likely to happen with the future electorate. So I just try to get out of the way of my data saying this is what’s going to happen.” “A lot of other polls, and I’ll count Emerson among them, are including in the way that they manipulate the data after it comes in, things that have happened in the past,” she continued. “ So they’re taking into account exit polls, they’re taking into account what turnout was in past elections. I don’t make any assumptions like that. So it’s in my way of thinking, it’s a cleaner way to forecast a future electorate, which nobody knows what that’s going to be. But we do know that our electorates change in terms of how many people are showing up and what the composition is.” ... It does make one wonder whether all the adjustments made by pollsters (including our own), and tweaking their methods every time they are badly wrong, is over-complicating things. It would be a very interesting exercise for one of our pollsters to run a comparison of their current methods with the same data using Selzer's method, to see which might be more accurate. Perhaps they already do internally? It may be a case of horses for courses. Ann Selzer's polling organisation's method works (or has to date) in Iowa. It's performance isn't quite as good nationwide. |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 5, 2024 20:42:07 GMT
Reporters on Guardian blog in Philadelphia say most voters spoken to see the economy as the key issue. One is a female Democratic underwriter who still voted for Trump. A bit disconcerting. I agree, early vibes suggest that PA may turn red. I'm not quite sure of the maths but if it does, I think the Dems will need to hold Georgia. |
|
|
|
Post by jib on Nov 5, 2024 20:44:39 GMT
Reporters on Guardian blog in Philadelphia say most voters spoken to see the economy as the key issue. One is a female Democratic underwriter who still voted for Trump. A bit disconcerting. I agree, early vibes suggest that PA may turn red. I'm not quite sure of the maths but if it does, I think the Dems will need to hold Georgia. Georgia almost certainly Red. Oh shit! Buckle up |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 20:48:41 GMT
I have no idea what Trump would actually do as president. He cannot run again. He isnt really a republican, so wont care much what happens at the next election. More than almost any president he is free to ignore anything he said campaigning and do what he wants.
|
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 5, 2024 20:49:40 GMT
I agree, early vibes suggest that PA may turn red. I'm not quite sure of the maths but if it does, I think the Dems will need to hold Georgia. Georgia almost certainly Red. Oh shit! Buckle up The problem we have is that Election Day turnout reports are solely by ED party affiliation. They do not generally include how anyone actually voted today, early voters or postal voters. So we are still very much in the dark |
|
|
|
Post by nickpoole on Nov 5, 2024 20:56:29 GMT
"ITV just had an interview with a big black guy, whose job is a security guard. He said he voted by post so as to avoid potential trouble if he voted in person. He might not be the only one who thinks its wiser all round to move to early voting." Why not just say big guy, skin colour can be relevant in elections but not necessary for the above remark. In the context of being afraid to vote in person, being black is relevant surely? |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 5, 2024 21:03:25 GMT
Danny You may not have noticed it, but your university science education would have been underpinned by the ideas of Karl Popper (Conjectures and refutations), Thomas Kuhn (Structure of scientific revolutions), Paul Feyerabend (Against method) and many others. ‘Critical reasoning’ is not a subject in its own right. It is an intellectual process. And it most certainly is not the preserve of universities. Its rudimentary form includes reading, writing and number. History and science have in common the fact that they rely on ideas and testing them with evidence and reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by turk on Nov 5, 2024 21:08:44 GMT
Just been to vote not many people at the school . Chatting to one of the officials not been many people in it’s almost 1400hrs here ,polling closes at 20:00 hrs. I think most have already voted by post
Montana is likely to vote Trump but its low population only gives it 4 electoral votes, a bit like the much talked about Iowa which only has 6. I think the highest is California which has 54. The states to watch are.
Arizona. 11 votes
Georgia 16 votes
Michigan 15 votes
Nevada 6 votes
Wisconsin 10 votes
North Carolina 16 votes
Pennsylvania 19 votes.
These are the Us swing states for this election based on polling in the last election of course there can be surprises in other states . Most of the media are in the to close say mode.
|
|
|
|
Post by mark61 on Nov 5, 2024 21:12:46 GMT
As I understand it if Harris holds Georgia she can lose Nevada, Arizona and Pennsylvania and still win, hold Penn and it is very difficult for Trump in any combination. I remember it looked difficult early last time before being a fairly comfortable Dem. win. Here's hoping!
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Nov 5, 2024 21:13:29 GMT
... “I give credit to my method for my track record,” Selzer said. “I call my method ‘polling forward.’ So I want to be in a place where my data can show me what’s likely to happen with the future electorate. So I just try to get out of the way of my data saying this is what’s going to happen.” “A lot of other polls, and I’ll count Emerson among them, are including in the way that they manipulate the data after it comes in, things that have happened in the past,” she continued. “ So they’re taking into account exit polls, they’re taking into account what turnout was in past elections. I don’t make any assumptions like that. So it’s in my way of thinking, it’s a cleaner way to forecast a future electorate, which nobody knows what that’s going to be. But we do know that our electorates change in terms of how many people are showing up and what the composition is.” ... It does make one wonder whether all the adjustments made by pollsters (including our own), and tweaking their methods every time they are badly wrong, is over-complicating things. It would be a very interesting exercise for one of our pollsters to run a comparison of their current methods with the same data using Selzer's method, to see which might be more accurate. Perhaps they already do internally? Agreed. There is a definite possibility that by correcting for perceived errors in the last election all they do is set themselves up for new, different ones in the next. I'm all for adjustments to get a balanced representative sample of the population, but I am dubious about some of the other things that go on - such as adjusting for turnout based on past behaviour - when each election is different. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 5, 2024 21:17:05 GMT
mercianVituperative because you made a simple, dramatic claim - that A level curriculum had been reduced to using O level material in its assessment. You present it as a hard fact, but when contested you cannot say where it came from. So vituperation because this is really wrong and makes me very cross. The article you do now reference is NOT the original but a flimflammy representation of unsubstantiated, opinionated material. Grrrr!
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 21:18:56 GMT
"ITV just had an interview with a big black guy, whose job is a security guard. He said he voted by post so as to avoid potential trouble if he voted in person. He might not be the only one who thinks its wiser all round to move to early voting." Why not just say big guy, skin colour can be relevant in elections but not necessary for the above remark. Nothing happens in the US for which your skin colour is not relevant. Now I think, which state this was in might also have been important because reaction would vary. However, in terms of physicality there is a clear difference in muscularity on average of people from different racial types. I seem to recall form talk around the series 'game of thrones' that there is actually a genetic variation in ireland which gives rise to very large men, and one or more were hired for the series. But in general, thats not what you think of for a big white man. I have no doubt the TV reporter showed the interview precisely because it was a big black man worried about voting in person. It didnt seem like he was scared, just didnt want to take an unnecessary risk.
I am a bit bothered why people would want to suppress skin colour discussion? You will not resolve issues by pretending they dont exist.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Nov 5, 2024 21:24:10 GMT
Reporters on Guardian blog in Philadelphia say most voters spoken to see the economy as the key issue. One is a female Democratic underwriter who still voted for Trump. A bit disconcerting. I've looked that up - the G reporter cites the views of exactly two people, one of whom voted Republican and the other Democrat. A rather small sample size for a poll, although oddly enough with the same result as all the other ones in Pennsylvania! |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Nov 5, 2024 21:41:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 23:17:35 GMT
mercian Vituperative because you made a simple, dramatic claim - that A level curriculum had been reduced to using O level material in its assessment. You present it as a hard fact, but when contested you cannot say where it came from. So vituperation because this is really wrong and makes me very cross. The article you do now reference is NOT the original but a flimflammy representation of unsubstantiated, opinionated material. Grrrr! You do get worked up about nothing. Although I remember the article, I accept that you don't believe me. I was simply using it to back up another poster who said that A-level standards are declining. The link I gave to an article making that same point was not "flimflammy representation of unsubstantiated, opinionated material.". It was from the BBC (or is that not one of your approved sources any more?) Here are some quotes: "Students who achieve a B in A-level maths today would only have secured an E in the 1960s, suggests research. However standards have been stable since the 1990s, with no evidence of any further fall since then, says the Loughborough University paper. The researchers compared the level of mathematical knowledge needed to tackle today's maths A-level papers with those from the 1960s and 1990s. The government said its reforms would help tackle grade inflation in England. The authors say their work, published in the British Educational Research Journal, external amounts to one of the most comprehensive studies into A-level standards."
|
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Nov 6, 2024 6:26:57 GMT
If you pour extra resources into a child's education they will on average do better But of course there will always be exceptions and that includes schools there is also selection to consider - public schools have entrance exams and how well you do determines which schools you can apply for. State schools can have selection indirectly via catchment area. There are other factors: my school used to be in the top 10 nationally, but slid quite some way down the rankings after it decided to pursue international qualifications that they felt were better for the pupils, but which gave them far fewer points in the ranking system. (the school used to deliberately take the exams from the hardest exam board, as that could help with uni applications). The biggest influence on state school performance is intake. Those whose parents are largely educated, middle class reasonably affluent will perform better than those whose parents are unqualified, multigenerationally unemployed and relatively impoverished will perform less well. Private schools tend to have a more homogeneous intake from the former, which when combined with the additional resources available plus the extra extracurricular activities parents pay for explains a lot of the performance disparities. That's not to say that poorer intake schools can't achieve great results but the level of resources and support needed is much greater than is generally available. The London Challenge in the 2000s led and funded by the Blair government proved this with spectacular improvements in performance. But it cost a lot of money and expertise. But in general inequalities built into everyday lives and society are replicated in the academic performance of svhools and pupils and in their future finances and quality of life. The answer lies much earlier and much wider than superficial fiddling about with schools and exams. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 6, 2024 7:03:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 6, 2024 8:11:35 GMT
"Britain’s hospitality industry is in “survival mode” after a £3 billion increase in tax and wage costs imposed in last week’s budget, ministers have been warned.
At a meeting with leaders of the retail, leisure and food and drink sectors, Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, was told that the tax bill for employing a part-time worker had increased by 73 per cent as a result of lowering the threshold for national insurance contributions.
Rami Baitiéh, chief executive of Morrisons, the supermarket, told Reynolds that the budget had exacerbated “an avalanche of costs” that businesses would face next year. Nick Mackenzie, chief executive of Greene King, the brewer and pub owner, said the NI rise would cause “a £20 million shock” to the company.
Reynolds was told that tax rises would increase business costs by more than £1 billion and the rise in the minimum wage would cost the sector a further £1.9 billion.
One of those at the meeting said that Reynolds did not appear to have “fully appreciated” the impact that reducing the national insurance threshold from £9,100 to £5,000 would have on sectors that a large proportion of part-time workers. “It didn’t seem like anyone had done a proper impact assessment,” the source said."
Times
!
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 6, 2024 8:12:32 GMT
"Farmers are plotting a nationwide strike this month to disrupt the food supply system in protest against a proposed 20 per cent inheritance tax on farms."
Times
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 6, 2024 9:10:03 GMT
Latest on Badenoch’s new Shadow Cabinet
She's appointed Mims Davies, the MP for East Grinstead and Uckfield in Sussex,200 miles from Cardiff, as its Welsh affairs spokesman
Okay they haven't got any MPs in Wales now, but surely they could find some one a little closer
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 6, 2024 9:14:00 GMT
"Farmers are plotting a nationwide strike this month to disrupt the food supply system in protest against a proposed 20 per cent inheritance tax on farms." Times I'm sure we'll see the Times and Telegraph taking their usual approach and robustly criticise them for holding the country to ransom...won't we? Or is that righteous indignation reserved for the less wealthy trying to get enough money to live on? |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 6, 2024 9:29:17 GMT
mercian If I concede on the flimflammy thing, will you agree that making a factual claim without being able to substantiate it is bad practice?
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on Nov 6, 2024 11:23:27 GMT
"Latest on Badenoch’s new Shadow Cabinet
She's appointed Mims Davies, the MP for East Grinstead and Uckfield in Sussex,200 miles from Cardiff, as its Welsh affairs spokesman"
Be fair Davies has at least visited Wales she was in Swansea during university term times 30 years ago!
|
|
If Selzer is right, there is going to be a lot of egg on their faces tomorrow.
