mr2mk1g

I understand that - effectively a finished product argument and it is important in the higher end of the educational spectrum as there is generally only one subject dealt with. But lower down the educational system that argument brakes down - for example in the UK on leaving high school you have 9 or more qualifications in separate subjects; (English being at least one those subjects). If the student is given a poorer grade in one of the other subjects based on their inability to spell, the examining board is misleading prospective employers and higher educational institutions about how well that individual understands that subject. A biology paper examines understanding of biological concepts, not how well an individual spells. It is the English paper which examines the individual's understanding and use of the English language. That is where the reduction in marks should come at this level, not across the board. Look at it another way. In order to get into higher educational institutes in this country one must obtain a certain number of points (with each institute and subject setting the points total required). These points are linked to the grades obtained in each subject so in my day an "A" got you 10 points (I think things have now changed however so the system works as a proportion of 100). If an individual is marked down in English for poor spelling they may drop a grade and loose points so they might not be able to get into the educational institute of their choice. However it is only one subject they are marked down in so the likelihood of this happening is slight – in line with the impact on the individual's ability as a student one might say. If however they are marked down in all of their subjects due to poor spelling, they may drop grade in a number of subjects and therefore loose a great many points all due to one inadequacy alone and thus miss out on the education they were looking for. This seems to me like an exceptionally disproportionate mechanism for marking down one element of the individual's schooling. Simply because the student is lacking in one area of their schooling they are marked down not once, but 9, 10 or 11 times. Seems harsh to me. [edit] and there's a big difference between teaching writing across the entire curriculum and examining writing across the entire curriculum.

On a side note; I've always objected to the concept of spelling errors being taken into account in the exam grade for most subjects. A students ability to spell or otherwise is not a factor in how much physics they know or how well they understand Krebs cycle. It should therefore have no bearing on the grade they receive for papers on history, physics, mathematics, or any multitude of other subjects. It should of course have an impact on their grade in spelling or overall English skills as this is the indicator to which we look if we wish to see how good the individual at communicating. Poor spelling is an element of an inability to communicate effectively and it is therefore right that their grade in this area suffers. Poor spelling however does not indicate a poor physicist and it would be unfair to mark them down because of it. A "B-grade" student who would, but for their spelling, have been an "A-grade" student has been let down by the system, as their exam marks lie to prospective employers as to how well they understand the subject in which they were examined. [/rant over]

If you recall correctly, the UN said the "West" had been stingy in its initial response. US papers reported that as the "US" being stingy. Can't really account for crappy reporting though can we. To be fair, the West was pretty stingy in its initial response. Thankfully we all increased our pledges dramatically once the scale of the disaster became more apparent... thanks in part to comments like that above.

Just curious... but how does an elephant masturbate?

Probably are much better ways of doing things. It's just the full story doesn't seem quite so dumb as the papers make out with their snippets of info.

Sorry Feuergnom, Christel's offering Champaign and sex. I'll take her offer over yours. Besides I'm a lesbian... at least I always wanted to be a lesbian... no one's going to tell me I can't be one because that would be oppressing me!

You just want to screw him.

The sex God works in mysterious ways.

Only if you are a bad little sex addict will the sex Gods smite down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger inflicting upon thine lives the S.T.I. and the unplanned pregnancy. Godly and worshipful sex addicts lavish upon their Gods offerings of latex and rubber and thus ensure their Gods love shines down upon their bouncing arse.

Before first student lift of the day - legal requirement here. And before a demo drop. Quite a common skill over here.

It is isn't it. Wonder why we're not all doing it. Hell Europe pays it's farmers millions each year to "set aside" fields and do nothing with them just so we don't grow too much. Only conclusion I can come up with is that the powerful oil industry doesn't want us to so they put pressure on the govt not to make it so. Govt.s don't want it to happen either really because it would upset the current norms that put them in power. Neither of those conclusions are particularly palatable to me... but I can't come up with any better ideas... although there isn't exactly much of a call for it from the public at large just yet... maybe if people en mass actually start wanting biodiesel there would be money in it and it would happen. Money makes the world go round after all.

Yes digital is digital. You either get data or you don't. Therefore the degradation isn't manifested in poorer quality footage but footage where whole blocks of the shot are missed and you instead get a shot of whatever it was you last recorded.

I don't know if there is a link to it. As I said this is simply from a radio interview yesterday with the Head. But hey, who needs to let reality cloud an otherwise great story which will sell papers?

They had the Headmaster on the radio yesterday and he explained the full situation that the papers didn't let get in the way of a good story. Apparently this rule applies only to a special class set up to deal with highly unruly children. There are around half a dozen to a dozen kids in the class. They swear constantly and have already been excluded from all their other classes on account of their behavior. The Headmaster concluded that they weren't going to get the kids to move from swearing dozens of times per lesson to none all in one go so set a goal. That goal is initially 5 profanities per lesson before they're excluded and will be lowered as the class makes progress. If they were simply excluded from class on their first swear word not only would they not spend long in class but quite quickly the class would be completely empty – these are problem kids remember. Score is kept on the board and each swear word is reprimanded but will only lead to exclusion if it is the 5th offence. The kids are not ever permitted to swear at anyone. That will result in instant exclusion according to the Head yesterday.

Is anyone interested in hearing the full story or would you all prefer to simply rely on the Daily Mail version?

I dunno... naming a reserve the "Decelerator" is pretty cool... definitely a better name for a reserve than its predecessor the "Predator".

well I don't have any... I was trying to solicit others to post some. All my stupid disgusting but funny pictures come from Billy - not exactly inspired posting for his b-day thread.

Exceedingly.

Juanesky, this is possibly one of the funniest posts I have ever read on DZ.com. Seriously. Skydekker - if you're referring to what I think you're referring to; "google" has recently become commonly used as a verb. ie "to google" - to search for; especially with the use of an internet search engine; especially with the use of www.google.com If not... well I don't get it.

No "happy B-day BV" thread could be complete without stupid and sometimes disgusting, but always funny picture attachments!

On a side note... jeezus - I thought "disease" stopped taking out 5 times as many troops as combat did after Ms. Nightingale got herself a lamp...

I just to jump an XE... not so happy about telling people I used to jump something between genders.

I used "they" in the colloquial singular gender-neutral pronoun as opposed to the plural. Sadly (or happily depending on how you look at it) English has no neutral singular pronoun only "he" for masculine and "she" for feminine. In fact I believe our language is unique in this respect. If we want to use a gender neutral pronoun we must resort to "they". Whilst technically a third person plural term it is commonly employed in the gender neutral singular. As for if the student could cope with a conversation on reserve drills (eg) you're probably right to err on the side of caution.

Are they a dumbass? I would feel quite comfortable discussing why I have the cutaway proc I do have with some students on the understanding that they do theirs they way they've been trained. Others I wouldn't trust not to emulate me based on a simple conversation alone because they thought my cutaway drill was the "cool" way "experienced" jumpers did it.

Personally I'd say once he has his A it's up to him who he listens to. From then on just be very humble and remember who you are - ie don't give advice if you're not absolutely sure of and if you're not sure, say so while providing an alternate source for the advice he's after.