The Failing Student

The fifteen days in news:
- Algerian hostage crisis comes to a sad end
- Gove fucks about again
- Horsemeat takes over the WORLD
- And then there's some pork in the mix.
- I get my exam entry list and it looks scary.

I apologise this is a day late etc. Down to business.

So, as my tiny round-up says, Gove is messing about with things again. This time, it's with A-levels. At the moment, students study for two years: The first year studying for AS levels (generally taking four), finishing with an exam, and then studying for A2 levels (generally taking three), leaving them with one AS level and three A-levels*. Universities often use a mix of AS level results and predictions in order to offer places. Gove's ideas would mean that students would continue to study to, in most cases, one AS level and three A-levels. However, AS levels would be a standalone qualification and not be a stepping-stone to A2. All exams for it would be taken at the end of the two years.

I'm not quite sure how that would work, but I would assume a student would have to choose which one of their options would be an AS right from the word go, so the AS could be taught at a slower pace to the full A-level. Schools would also have to run every course twice: the AS run and the A2 run, rather than just teaching one class with some students dropping out after the first year (or in the case of my sixth form's language department: stopping after the AS level). And then there'd be the over-achieving student** who'd think that because they're having to take the course for two years they might as well take the full A2 anyway.

Universities are in outrage over this. They'd have to base a student's progress on GCSEs, which are totally different to A-levels (example: French GCSE requires two five-minutes speaking pieces in which you get two weeks to prepare. A level requires a fifteen minute speaking in which you get twenty minutes to prepare). It wouldn't give a reliable view of a student, and someone who didn't do so well in GCSEs may be turned down for a university place when they end up with top marks at A-level.

Many people are saying that this is the wrong way to go about changes. I agree. I could screech all day about the faults of the Ebacc (and I already have). There are many things wrong with the system and A-levels are the ones with the least fault (at the very least, A-levels are the ones I have only a fleeting experience with). We need to start with league tables. Hence my title.

League tables started with a good idea: people can tell good schools from bad. But it's become much more than that, it's become an all-consuming focus of schools. Resources are poured into getting children into that precious A*-C bracket, noticably the few D students who have the potential for a C. That's what, twenty or thirty students? Suddenly, catch-up sessions in core subjects that used to be open for over a thousand students now become the preserve of a closed few, a closed few who often don't bother turning up. It means students like me, who spent a year as a "C" student in Maths despite having the potential of an "A", are completely ignored whilst someone who boasted about getting only six marks on a mock paper can skip out of the much-despised Core PE in order to go from a D to a C. It means a student who gets a C in their Chemistry paper and has the potential for an A must pay for their retake whilst a student who got a D gets it for free, although they don't actually want to take the paper again.

No, the education system isn't perfect. But we need to stop using the idea of the token "failing student", who are realistically very few in number, to mess things up for everybody else.

*This is mostly where my scuffle with my school comes in as I *hope* to finish sixth form with three AS levels and three A-levels. It's complicated.
**Or just the student who attempts to over-achieve *points to self*

The 18 Barrier

The first full blog fortnight of 2013 brings us:
- The potential end of HMV
- The potential end of Blockbuster
- The potential end of my sanity
- Drugs + Cycling = No.
- David Cameron gets his panties in a twist about various things
- Algerian hostage crisis
- In Britain, snow means certain death and apocalypse provisions
- January exams are taking place, watch this space for ~controversies~

Today, I'll talk about that irritating "18 or over" age barrier that dominates everything. This comes after reading the i and seeing that they were running a competition. It was a regular competition to write in an opinion article, but this time I noticed a little rule saying "no schoolchildren, please". In basic terms, this means that they only want entries from higher education, or those above 18.

Now, I can understand this to a degree. My blog is comparatively shit to what a promising journalism student in their second year of university would write, for example. They don't want to have to shift through thousands of entries from young kids who can barely string together a coherent argument (yeah, there is that whole "age =/= quality" argument but that's for another time).

My problem is with everything else (on the internet mostly) - you must be "18 or over" for everything.

And I mean everything. Some sites I can understand why they would have such an age barrier - PayPal, for example. Others I understand less so. I bought The Pirates! In An Adventure With Scientists (watch it), which came with a "UV Copy". The "UV Copy" was basically a digital copy of the film that I could keep on my computer so I wouldn't be tempted to do anything illegal. To do this, I needed to sign in. To sign in, I need to be over 18. Why? I didn't have to be over 18 to buy the film, I certainly didn't have to be over 18 to watch the film. So why do I need to be over 18 to access a copy of a film I have just bought. Presumably, their reasoning would be along the lines of "to stop me accessing inappropriate content", but surely if I'd bought an 18 film then it's the store I bought it from that would be at fault, not the company who gave me the download for it.

Another argument I suppose they could give would be "child protection". However, sites like Goodreads manage to allow under-18's perfectly fine - so why is it such a problem everywhere else? On gaiaonline.com, they ban swearing, which brings me to another point. Under 18's can't sign up to certain things because of the "language and content" but I can guarantee you that in their home life they would have heard much worse. Especially by the time they are 16.

Why is it that, until recently, a 16 year-old can leave school but not get a YouTube account in the UK? Why is it that a 16 year-old must pay tax on all their earnings but can't download a film they paid for online? Sites believe they're protecting children, when actually they're just forcing them to lie about their age over and over. If they really want to help, I would suggest following Goodreads' example and setting under-18 accounts to private. That is true safeguarding, not the "must be 18 or over" clause that it's so easy to hide behind. The internet is being used by all ages and people, not just the over-18's.

A Letter to a Train Ticket

The fortnight in a list:
- We didn't get a white Christmas
- We got a wet Christmas
- And a wet Christmas Eve
- And a wet Boxing Day
- And a wet New Year's Eve
- And a wet New Year's Day
- Do you sense a theme here.
- A horrific car crash kills two kids on the motorway
- 2013 happens.

I would do the year in news but A) I can't remember and B) Charlie Brooker does it so much better in Charlie Brooker's 2012 Wipe (Brits - look it up on iPlayer. Rest of the World - go find a streaming link or something)

Before I start my post properly, I'd just like to say that I discovered "Google Stats". Now, because I still use Internet Explorer (and also because Blogger is the most user-unfriendly site ever) I don't venture to the Blogger site often, and I email my posts through to noiwouldnotlikesometea. However about a week ago, I decided to log in just to check that everything was hunky-dory. This was when I found the "Google Stats" thingy. It tells me how many page views I get, when and where. I discovered with this that I get a lot (and I mean a lot) of views from Russia. How exactly did this happen? Most of my babbling is either barely making sense or vaguely political, and I can't help but wonder why exactly it is so appealing. Please, put me out of my misery. Even this week, I have 8 page views from Russia, and only one from the UK (and that was most likely me in the last few minutes). If you happen to live in Russia, tell me why you read my blog.

Onto the second little bit before I start my post properly, this is just a little bit of background. I came back from Wales the other day, on the train (first class!). On one of the three trains I would take that day, I happened to slouch in my chair and notice, underneath the table and in the chair opposite was a train ticket. I'm a bit weird and like to collect train tickets, so I picked it up. Then, being the wax-lyrical person I am, I started to think of the person who bought the ticket. It wasn't a ticket per se, just a receipt announcing somebody had bought tickets. This fortnight, I've decided to write a letter to this unknown person.

Dear Ticketholder,

I notice you do not pay much attention to your accounts, otherwise you would've taken this ticket receipt. Maybe it was just an accident, and you're now sat at home worrying. I highly doubt this, your ticket cost £2.

Where can you go for £2? I was sat in the first class section, so you must have been too. Where can you go, first class, for £2? You bought with a Visa card, and few under-16's wander around with a card as the only source of money, so I can only assume you're an adult. You must've only gone one or two stops. Was it a journey to work? I wouldn't suppose it would be, otherwise you would probably by a season ticket. Just a day out shopping, perhaps? Or did you go to visit a friend?

What's funny is the fact you bought this ticket on the 30th December at 19;41. I traveled up to Wales on the 30th, and I would have been travelling at the same time as you. This is what always astounds me about the world. How we can all go about our own lives without any direct contact with one another. There are many things that we have in common: We both took a train at that time, we both held a ticket for the train, we both travelled on First Great Western service. And yet we possibly have many things that are different, if only we knew each other.

I think of all the places you could be going, and then I realise all I wish is that you got there in the end.

Waiting for Doomsday

It's the fortnightly round-up!
- A woman goes missing with her son because apparently the possibility of a few lost IQ points is worse than the possibility of him dying in the next few months.
- Shitstorm at the BBC enters it's next month
- Shitstorm at the Met Police
- Britain floods.
- Typhoon in Philippines
- Guns and primary schools do not mix
- The world almost ends
- I drown in christmas quizzes
- I win money for no real reason

This post has to be about the end of the world. Anything else would just look weird.

It's always curious, the end of the world. Just think, an entire planet just disappearing.
It's much like the notion of death. Just... ending in such a way.

I heard quite a few theories about what would happen. Zombie apocalypse sounds like good fun in theory, but I don't you'll be saying that when night falls and you're curled up in an abandoned house, freezing cold and hungry, hiding from your dear beloved Nan. Also, it's bloody difficult to get a good swing on a blunt weapon to ward the zombies off.
Epic flooding of lands? Yes, you'd probably look awesome stood on a raft with your face to the wind, but your socks would be wet. All the time. You would be cold from the fact your clothes are wet. All the time. Your hair would be full of salt. All the time.
Insane inferno? Efficient. We'd all die from smoke inhalation very quickly.
Yellowstone? Too slow.
Asteriod? Again, fairly efficient. Especially since a scientist would wise on very quickly, the media would find out and people who begin to pack up their things and try and get out of their town as soon as possible. Not sure why, we'd all be dead anyway.
Time repeats and we just relive the 21st over and over? Well, surely someone would con on at last and we'd just start recounting time again. Which as I understand it, is roughly how the Mayans worked.

Of course, the end of the world could have already happened, and we could have died on the stroke of midnight. The afterlife may just be us assuming a continuation of our life, and everything supposedly continues as normal.

I'll leave that for you to ponder.
See you in a fortnight.

Kew Gardens

Fortnight at a glance:
- The Autumn Statement was announced and basically everybody's fucked
- Something really unimportant happens re the Royal Family
- The Leveson Inquiry result was announced and Cameron has decided to ignore... all of it
- Looks like the entire BBC should have been renamed "House of Peodophiles" in the 70's according to the tabloids
- No-one communicates in my potential sixth form and so I have to endure weeks of stress.


Today, I traveled to Kew Gardens as part of my Art BTEC. My sub-topic was Buildings and Structures, and so I visited the Treetop Walkway, the Pagoda, the Palm House, the Princess of Wales Conservatory and the Alpine House. We didn't have much time, so I saw (but didn't enter) the Temperate House.



See you in a fortnight.

Alpine House





Treetop Walkway

Temperate House

The Pagoda

Palm House



Princess of Wales Conservatory



Rules of the Television

Fortnightly round-up:
- Gaza and Israel have serious shit to sort out
- Newsnight have a complete balls-up
- Lord McAlpine plans to sue the world
- George Entwistle loses it and still gets away with £450,000
- Abu Qatada sticks two fingers up at Britain, yet again

This time, I shall talk about rules of the television. Things that shall happen, no question.
Trust me on this.

-- Before the Credits rule (Or the "first-60-seconds" rule)
With the exception of pilots, any new character introduced either before the credits or in the first 60 seconds of a tv show will be murdered.
Sometimes they're already dead, proving that writers know that we're not stupid.

-- Anybody Can Handle a Firearm rule
Unless convenient to the plot, anybody (from small children to near-death elderly) can shoot any kind of gun at anyone and not miss. Ever.

-- No Inter-gender Friendships rule
If a male and female appear with one another on screen, they will fall in love. And sleep together. And then have a big argument. And then it's awkward until they die.

-- Death is Never Permanent rule
Found in sci-fi and fantasy shows, anyone who dies too easily (or are in the named cast) will never stay dead. A thousand and one things, varying from vaguely sane to seriously out there will bring them back to life. See: Supernatural

-- Cast are Never in Danger rule
Mostly relating to LOST, in which "48" people survive, although for some reason only about twelve seem to be around. This does mean, of course, when the health of the survivors is threatened, no-one interesting will die. Until 36 of the uninteresting characters die, then we're in trouble.

-- Home Alone rule
If a person is alone in the house, a strange noise will happen at night. The person will go investigate it. They will probably end up dead.

-- Let's Split Up! rule
A noise sounds late at night in a forest/haunted house/large establishment. An initially large group decide to split up. The least interesting of the group will die. They will generally be a woman. (more common in films)

The Strange Thing about History

Dear lord, I am tired.
So, as a result I've googled one of my favourite things to eat and I'm pasting a recipe for it (link below).

See you in a fortnight, when maybe I will bring you what was actually meant to go below this title.


Swedish Meatballs with Ligonberry/Cranberry Sauce
Lingonberry or Cranberry Sauce

500 g lingonberries or 500 g cranberries
1 lemons, juice and zest of, finely grated
150 g caster sugar

Swedish Meatballs

50 g butter
1 onions, peeled and very finely diced
2 teaspoons allspice
100 g fresh brown breadcrumbs
150 ml milk
1/2 kg fresh minced beef
1/2 kg fresh ground pork
1 eggs, beaten
salt
pepper
2 tablespoons sunflower oil
2 tablespoons flour
400 ml beef stock
200 g sour cream or 200 g creme fraiche
4 tablespoons finely chopped fresh dill
Directions
To make the sauce, put the lingonberries or cranberries into a heavy bottomed saucepan with about 100 to 120 mls of water, the lemon juice and zest & bring to the boil.

Then turn the heat down to a gentle simmer and cook for 10 to 15 minutes. As soon as the berries have started to burst - add the caster sugar and cook until the sugar has completely dissolved.

Take off the heat and allow to cool. Check for sweetness, if it is too sour, add more sugar to taste and cook until dissolved. To make the meatballs, first melt a little of the butter in a frying pan and add the finely chopped onion - sauté until soft & then add the allspice.

Soak the breadcrumbs in the milk - until the milk has been absorbed, about 30 to 45 minutes. Mix the fried onion in with the soaked bread and then add the meat and beaten egg, season and mix well.

Dampen your hands and form the mixture into balls about the size of large walnuts.

Heat half of the remaining butter with half of the oil and fry the meatballs in batches - until they are golden brown in colour and hold their shape.

Allow to meatballs to cool slightly.

Heat up the remaining butter and oil in the pan and add the flour - cooking over a low heat until the flour is golden and sandy in appearance (like a roux base).

Take the pan off the heat and gradually add the beef stock, stirring and blending well after each addition. Put the pan back on the heat and bring to the boil - then add the sour cream (creme fraiche). Turn the heat down and add the meatballs - cover and cook over a low heat for about 15 to 20 minutes, until the sauce has thickened.

Check and adjust the seasoning before adding the chopped dill to the meatball and sauce mixture.

Serve with the Lingonberry or Cranberry sauce, and mashed potatoes or broad ribbon noodles

http://www.food.com/recipe/swedish-meatballs-with-lingonberry-or-cranberry-sauce-235024