Switzerland About To Vote On Minaret Ban

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Well, women's right to vote wasn't part of Swiss culture until 1971. But in hindsight, they did okay after agreeing on that, didn't they?

I'm sure that granting women the right to vote drastically changed Swiss architecture. Remember that women voted against minarets with a higher percentage than men.



That is a demographic idea based on that a smaller population needs to support a growing part of post-retirement population.

You're both correct. We do need a younger population to sustain us, but there is no reason for mass immigration from the Middle East or Africa to fill this need.

[Strike For The South]

You're both correct. We do need a younger population to sustain us, but there is no reason for mass immigration from the Middle East or Africa to fill this need.

There is if you don't have babies. That's where more people come from.

Europe needs this immagration to sustain there current welfare state. You need more people paying into the system. Lets not kid ourselves now.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You're both correct. We do need a younger population to sustain us, but there is no reason for mass immigration from the Middle East or Africa to fill this need.


There is if you don't have babies. That's where more people come from.

Europe needs this immagration to sustain there current welfare state. You need more people paying into the system. Lets not kid ourselves now.

No, actually immigration is hurting, not helping. Although immigrants do (just about) make a net tax contribution, they are putting a strain on social housing, hospitals, and especially schools, that we would not otherwise have. I'd rather have a few lean years, followed by stability, than perpetual decline.

Peaks and troughs are part of population, just like they are part of the economy; and we all no what happened to Gordon Brown's "No more boom and bust".

Eventually the government will need to enact a Chinese-style one-child policy, because they are artificially inflating the long-term issue in order to fix a short term issue.

[Kadagar_AV]

SFTS, source?

I could believe that to be true if a nation only accepted educated immigrants, and children.

But I have a very hard time seeing how the mass-refugees from, say, Afghanistan will help the economy.

I mean, if you are correct, then the countries in the third world would would fight to get as many immigrants as tehy can, and thats not really the case, now is it?

[Strike For The South]

No, actually immigration is hurting, not helping. Although immigrants do (just about) make a net tax contribution, they are putting a strain on social housing, hospitals, and especially schools, that we would not otherwise have. I'd rather have a few lean years, followed by stability, than perpetual decline.

Peaks and troughs are part of population, just like they are part of the economy; and we all no what happened to Gordon Brown's "No more boom and bust".

Eventually the government will need to enact a Chinese-style one-child policy, because they are artificially inflating the long-term issue in order to fix a short term issue.

This would require at the very least a partial dismantiling of the current social services you have now.

And even if it didn't those people are there now, so the point is moot.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Europe needs this immagration to sustain there current welfare state. You need more people paying into the system. Lets not kid ourselves now.

This is correct. As our population ages, we need more individuals working to pay their social services. It is an absolutely ridiculous cycle, and it needs to be broken. I for one will volunteer to have my social services cut, along with my taxes, so that we can actually maintain our economy without artificially increasing our population when we feel like it. I'm also in favour of encouraging individuals here to have more children.

[Strike For The South]

This is correct. As our population ages, we need more individuals working to pay their social services. It is an absolutely ridiculous cycle, and it needs to be broken. I for one will volunteer to have my social services cut, along with my taxes, so that we can actually maintain our economy without artificially increasing our population when we feel like it. I'm also in favour of encouraging individuals here to have more children.

Ok I can live with that, but these people are here now and some are in there 3rd generation. They are French, German, British et all.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Ok I can live with that, but these people are here now and some are in there 3rd generation. They are French, German, British et all.

The problem is that while many see themselves that way, many also do not. Yes, those people are here now, but we don't need any more. I personally want any immigrant that comes to Germany to be qualified with a university degree that is recognized in Germany, and that is in a field we need more people in. They should also speak German or be willing to learn, as well as be willing to adopt local values.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This is correct. As our population ages, we need more individuals working to pay their social services. It is an absolutely ridiculous cycle, and it needs to be broken. I for one will volunteer to have my social services cut, along with my taxes, so that we can actually maintain our economy without artificially increasing our population when we feel like it. I'm also in favour of encouraging individuals here to have more children.

This is the fallacy though, look at the amount our governments spend on extra housing, extra maternity wards, widening of roads, more teachers... etc., etc. Now, imagine all that money going into care for the elderly.

It's not a huge problem, it just requires re-structuring.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

This would require at the very least a partial dismantiling of the current social services you have now.

And even if it didn't those people are there now, so the point is moot.

Is this really true though, your per-capita defence and healthcare spending are about double ours. If children are not being born, then they aren't placing a 18-21 year burden on our economy. People work until 65, or longer, then retire and live another 18-21 years on average, so if we have fewer children, and less strain due to overcrowding, we should be able to afford it.

[Strike For The South]

The problem is that while many see themselves that way, many also do not. Yes, those people are here now, but we don't need any more. I personally want any immigrant that comes to Germany to be qualified with a university degree that is recognized in Germany, and that is in a field we need more people in. They should also speak German or be willing to learn, as well as be willing to adopt local values.

Which is fine, but what if he's muslim and wants to buy some land to build a mosque?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Europe needs this immagration to sustain there current welfare state. You need more people paying into the system. Lets not kid ourselves now.That is a leftist myth.


what if he's muslim and wants to buy some land to build a mosque? Then he buys a plot of land and builds a mosque. :book:

According to local regulations about architecture, safety, fireproofness, zoning.



For our Swiss members:

A local council member of the UDC/SVP (party of the posters) vehemently oppossed the construction of mosques in his town. He also owned a plot of land - which he sold for a handy profit. To...an Albanian 'cultural intitute', which is currently constructing a mosque on it. :wink3:

http://www.blick.ch/news/schweiz/aargau/svp-ler-verkauft-sein-land-fuer-moscheebau-132654


(Incidentally, this is in the tiny village of Grenchen, 15 thousand inhabitants. It will be the second Albanian mosque there.
So much for 'there are only twenty mosques in the whole of Switzerland'.)




The face of Eurofascism:


For the second time in the past ten days, two weeks before the anti-minaret vote, the Petit-Saconnex mosque (Geneva), filed a complaint by the police.

On Saturday, Nov. 7th, the residents were woken up at 7AM by a call to prayer organized by the right-wing group Jeunes identitaires genevois (JIG). The call was made through a megaphone mounted on a car (JIG video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McwTLeaDajU)).

JIG chose Saturday since the Muslims organized an open day in mosques (http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2009/11/switzerland-open-mosque-day.html) across Switzerland that day.

JIG justified their action, saying they needed to inform the people. "We want to show that in case the initiative is rejected, we're de-facto accepting that in a few years such calls will echo in Switzerland," they told Swiss newspaper Le Matin.

This past Saturday night, the local mosque was pelted with stones. The windows, shutters, wooden door and granite dome of the entrance were broken, said the imam of the Islamic Cultural Center, Youssef Ibram. Ibram said that the police took away several kilos of stones in order to check for fingerprints and DNA.

This is the first time in 30 years that the mosque has been vandalized, the imam said. He linked it to both the fake muezzin call and to the minaret vote initiative.

The mosque hired a security guard to guard the mosque at night.


http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2009/11/geneva-fake-call-to-prayer-mosque.htm

http://www.jigeneve.com/galerie-photos/l

[Strike For The South]

That is a leftist myth.

Then he buys a plot of land and builds a mosque. :book:

According to local regulations about architecture, safety, fireproofness, zoning.

:

I really have nothing left to add other than I feel the Swiss people are letting a small number of racist do there xenophobic work.

Oh well.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That is a leftist myth.

It is indeedy, and it says something about American reporting that Strike thinks it is actually true, rather than him thinking we all believe it. If Strike came to Europe he would be more left wing than any European.

Weird, isn't it?

Also, Louis and I are agreeing, someone might want to take screengrabs. :beam:

[Furunculus]

This is the fallacy though, look at the amount our governments spend on extra housing, extra maternity wards, widening of roads, more teachers... etc., etc. Now, imagine all that money going into care for the elderly.

It's not a huge problem, it just requires re-structuring.

it is absolutely true.

the rate of growth, under of currenrt system, of health and pension spending is absolutely unsustainable.

the treasury put out a report this weekend saying that very thing.

this is not to say that a better system cannot be put in place, but that does not exist now and that is not what the treasury is talking about.

so, yes, we need to change things.

europe has even worse demographic problems, but nations like france have healthcare systems that are more sustainable in the long term.

we can maintain the NHS into the 2050's id we so desire............................... but we'll be living like albanians to achieve it.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

The thing is that it is true and it isn't, at exactly the same time. We do need more immigration to sustain the current system, but only because the current system is designed to be sustained by more immigration because the multiculturalists want that. If we change the immigration, we have changed how they intend the system to work even if we haven't changed much of the system. The fact that the system works as intended is a myth, and the fact that it can work without immigrants is also a myth.

I think that makes sense, doublethink was never my strong suit.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

it is absolutely true.

the rate of growth, under of currenrt system, of health and pension spending is absolutely unsustainable.

the treasury put out a report this weekend saying that very thing.

this is not to say that a better system cannot be put in place, but that does not exist now and that is not what the treasury is talking about.

so, yes, we need to change things.

europe has even worse demographic problems, but nations like france have healthcare systems that are more sustainable in the long term.

we can maintain the NHS into the 2050's id we so desire............................... but we'll be living like albanians to achieve it.

The NHS is inefficient, and still costs half what the Americans spend as a proportion of GDP, so we should be able to slim it down to an affordable level, and still have decent universal healthcare. Key to this would be dealing with the top-heavy management (right now the hospitals are run by what were the Bursars and Bean-Counters, but are now "managers" and paid 10 times the amount for half the work.)

Another issue is welfare, more than one television a household is a luxury (or should be) so we know there's something wrong because many on benefits have one per person, and they aren't small families!

Ye Gods, we need an old-fashioned Tory Government like a soldier bleeding out needs a field dressing, and then we need to go into surgery.

[Beskar]

Ye Gods, we need an old-fashioned Tory Government like a soldier bleeding out needs a field dressing, and then we need to go into surgery.

I am sure rubbing salt in the wound won't be the best method.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I am sure rubbing salt in the wound won't be the best method.

Actually, that might kill the infection.

The current mainstream Left in Britain ascribes to equality of outcome, not equality of opertunity. This is why people on benefits are as well off or better than those working.

[Furunculus]

I am sure rubbing salt in the wound won't be the best method.

oh, how wrong you are.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I really have nothing left to add other than I feel the Swiss people are letting a small number of racist do there xenophobic work.

Oh well.

A broken clock is right twice a day...and in a yes/no vote it's right half the time? Probably not, but racists being happy about something isn't enough to condemn it. I thought you were against affirmative action, or maybe that was someone else.

[Beskar]

oh, how wrong you are.

Try it next time you cut yourself, then you will understand.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Try it next time you cut yourself, then you will understand.

When I cut myself I use surgical spirit, which feels quite similar, it's a pleasant kind of burning pain.

[Beskar]

When I cut myself I use surgical spirit, which feels quite similar, it's a pleasant kind of burning pain.

I know what you mean, sort of the ol' aftershave on the cut when you shaved sort of thing.

It is far worse feeling and it isn't a pleasant one.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I know what you mean, sort of the ol' aftershave on the cut when you shaved sort of thing.

It is far worse feeling and it isn't a pleasant one.

No, I don't think you do, because when I use surgical spirit it's because I've taken all my skin off.

Anyway, it's still good for you; even if it hurts. So I feel the metaphor falls a bit flat; all it really says is that a remedy is long overdue.

We can't support 70 million people on this land, not without everyone's standard of living taking a dive.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The used to use salt to sterilize wounds. It's also painful. So there could be two different meanings of the phrase.

I don't believe it does any medicinal good though.

The "you don't fight fire with fire" from earlier in the thread was a better example of a misused phrase :book:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The used to use salt to sterilize wounds. It's also painful. So there could be two different meanings of the phrase.

I don't believe it does any medicinal good though.

Salt is very alkaline, it does steralise, just like sulfer, viniger, turperntine etc.

[Strike For The South]

A broken clock is right twice a day...and in a yes/no vote it's right half the time? Probably not, but racists being happy about something isn't enough to condemn it. I thought you were against affirmative action, or maybe that was someone else.

I am for the same reason I am against this.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I am for the same reason I am against this.

But all the racists are against affirmative action. If there were a referendum to overturn it, it would probably be driven by racists.

[Beskar]

But all the racists are against affirmative action. If there were a referendum to overturn it, it would probably be driven by racists.

The funniest comment in reference to Affirmative Action was:
"The reason we support Affirmative Action now, is because in 20 years time, we will be the ones needing to us it."

However, affirmative action can only be a short-term thing, if needed. To have it set in stone or long-term is immoral.

Edit:

As for my Salt comments, the phrase is in reference to the extreme painful experience of rubbing salt into the wound causing the person to recoil/etc. What a Tory government would do, is cut support for the NHS underneath it, and cause it to collaspe and get into a far worse situation then it currently is. Tories just advocate cutting everything and everywhere, even not taking in account the conquences of the actions.

[Fragony]

I am for the same reason I am against this.

You are overreacting Strike, it's perfectly possible to wrap everything that is wrong in the world around this but it would be a concious attempt to do so and little more than that, and it isn't doing anybody any good. What we have here is xenophobia, I think we can all agree on that, it is pretty obvious. Xenophobia is a dangerous thing, don't ever invite it, and some did, this is only a natural reaction to a changing world, what did your grandma tell you about not waking sleeping dogs, this is oh so very bloody Europe.

[Furunculus]

As for my Salt comments, the phrase is in reference to the extreme painful experience of rubbing salt into the wound causing the person to recoil/etc. What a Tory government would do, is cut support for the NHS underneath it, and cause it to collaspe and get into a far worse situation then it currently is. Tories just advocate cutting everything and everywhere, even not taking in account the conquences of the actions.

lol, the logical rhetorical response to that is that labour are happy to spend anywhere and everywhere, without regard to the effect it is designed to achieve, or the damage it does to the economy which provides that tax money which they so love to spend.

[Beskar]

lol, the logical rhetorical response to that is that labour are happy to spend anywhere and everywhere, without regard to the effect it is designed to achieve, or the damage it does to the economy which provides that tax money which they so love to spend.

I am sure all those conservative MP's with their moats and 2nd homes for their ducks would be better in that department.

[al Roumi]

lol, the logical rhetorical response to that is that labour are happy to spend anywhere and everywhere, without regard to the effect it is designed to achieve, or the damage it does to the economy which provides that tax money which they so love to spend.

I would argue that if labour have been profligate in their spending, it's because the economy provided them with the means to do so. Now that the economy has tanked and so much cash has been borrowed for the bailouts, the next budget -by whichever party in government, will entail serious cuts.

Edit: And on reflection I find your above statement amusing given the links in your signature, calling for -oh, more MOD spending...

[Furunculus]

I am sure all those conservative MP's with their moats and 2nd homes for their ducks would be better in that department.
i don't believe labour have much room to wriggle free of the expenses scandal, do you? in which case; how does your comment advance the debate?


I would argue that if labour have been profligate in their spending, it's because the economy provided them with the means to do so. Now that the economy has tanked and so much cash has been borrowed for the bailouts, the next budget -by whichever party in government, will entail serious cuts.

Edit: And on reflection I find your above statement amusing given the links in your signature, calling for -oh, more MOD spending...
sure, except for the point where government spending occupied 37% of GDP in 1997, whereas it consumed 43% in 2008, and and even greater proportion given the fiscal stimulus plan, a fact which is quite simply immoral.

the first duty of the nation state is the provision of internal and external security, a duty that i would argue is not taken seriously by labour given that it has fallen as a spending priority from 3.5% of GDP in 1990 to 2.1% of GDP today. they very fact that it occupies such a tiny fraction of government spending means that any increase is not the cause for any vast swelling in government spending. i would decrease government spending as a proportion of GDP, and raise Defence as a proportion of government spending, and recognise no contradiction between the two.

[drone]

https://img195.imageshack.us/img195/6364/steepleminaret.jpg

Cleary this is an abomanation and this Swiss people should be angry.

Egads. The smaller pic in the article hides a lot, I thought all that gold was timber. Nevermind...

[Strike For The South]

But all the racists are against affirmative action. If there were a referendum to overturn it, it would probably be driven by racists.

Considering AA denys the rights of other citizens by its very exsistence, that's quite a stretch.

I'm against anything that presumes to know whats best because of wider cultrual implications.


You are overreacting Strike, it's perfectly possible to wrap everything that is wrong in the world around this but it would be a concious attempt to do so and little more than that, and it isn't doing anybody any good. What we have here is xenophobia, I think we can all agree on that, it is pretty obvious. Xenophobia is a dangerous thing, don't ever invite it, and some did, this is only a natural reaction to a changing world, what did your grandma tell you about not waking sleeping dogs, this is oh so very bloody Europe.

Don't invite it but hey it's here so lets us it?

[Brenus]

“This is oh so very bloody Europe.”: The last battle of Swiss in Europe is in 1515, Marignan… :book:
If you ignore the Swiss Guard of Louis the XVI in the Tuilleries…:laugh4:

So not so bloody Swiss is it?:beam:

[Fragony]

Don't invite it but hey it's here so lets us it?

Maybe we just see things differently, and are more on our guard, you know it wasn't that long ago half of my family died in W2, my grantmother lost 3 of her sisters, not that I know them but that is pretty common here. Everybody knows someone who was raped by w2, everybody does, the USA ain't Europe.

Edit, I am fine with the germans, my grandmother hated them up to their bones, no idea why I as never told. And I have to grandma's, the other one was pretty positive about the germans, helped her on her farm and all that.

[Beskar]

Maybe we just see things differently, and are more on our guard, you know it wasn't that long ago half of my family died in W2, my grantmother lost 3 of her sisters, not that I know them but that is pretty common here. Everybody knows someone who was raped by w2, everybody does, the USA ain't Europe.

Fragony is actually saying a lot of good things, including mentioning the problems of xenophobia. I find myself agreeing that he is talking sense and the right thing.

Also, Brenus, that comment was pretty stupid and ignorant and completely ignores the fact that both World Wars were fought in Europe.

[Strike For The South]

Maybe we just see things differently, and are more on our guard, you know it wasn't that long ago half of my family died in W2, my grantmother lost 3 of her sisters, not that I know them but that is pretty common here. Everybody knows someone who was raped by w2, everybody does, the USA ain't Europe.

Edit, I am fine with the germans, my grandmother hated them up to their bones, no idea why I as never told. And I have to grandma's, the other one was pretty positive about the germans, helped her on her farm and all that.

When did this becomce a dick measuring contest?

What do Minarets have to do with Hitler?

[CrossLOPER]

Maybe we just see things differently, and are more on our guard, you know it wasn't that long ago half of my family died in W2, my grantmother lost 3 of her sisters, not that I know them but that is pretty common here. Everybody knows someone who was raped by w2, everybody does, the USA ain't Europe.

Edit, I am fine with the germans, my grandmother hated them up to their bones, no idea why I as never told. And I have to grandma's, the other one was pretty positive about the germans, helped her on her farm and all that.
That's a staggering parallel you are trying to draw.

[Brenus]

"Also, Brenus, that comment was pretty stupid and ignorant and completely ignores the fact that both World Wars were fought in Europe.". Yeap, but not by Swiss. So whose comment was stupid and ignorant?:beam:
And not only if you look at some maps, as Midway or perhaps Pearl Harbour wasn't US territory?

[Beskar]

"Also, Brenus, that comment was pretty stupid and ignorant and completely ignores the fact that both World Wars were fought in Europe.". Yeap, but not by Swiss. So whose comment was stupid and ignorant?:beam:

Erm, there were Swiss casualties and Swizterland did play a part in both wars. So you are incorrect.

[Quid]

This is going to be good!

Quid

[Husar]

Switzerland in WW2 behaved like a rabid Texan, shooting everybody who dared cross their property.

How that relates to the topic I'm not sure though.

[Subotan]

The current mainstream Left in Britain ascribes to equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity.
*Lols quietly to himself*
Regardless, I believe in equality of opportunity over outcome, and I'm on the mainstream left.

This is why people on benefits are as well off or better than those working.
And you would know that...how?

When did this becomce a dick measuring contest?
My minaret is bigger than your dick.

[Brenus]

"Erm, there were Swiss casualties and Swizterland did play a part in both wars. So you are incorrect."
:beam: Yeah, there are even Swiss "As. But it doesn't mean that Swiss was involved in the war as a belligerant...
Brazil as well, and Portugal, and Spain, and Argentina, well all played a part in WW2...
Sorry, you didn't make your case, nor in theater of operations or in countries in war.

So the fact that the Swiss voted against minarets has nothing to do with bloody Europe.:beam:

Just admit it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

*Lols quietly to himself*
Regardless, I believe in equality of opportunity over outcome, and I'm on the mainstream left.

And you would know that...how?

Labour has a policy of people going to university as a percentage of the population, grade inflation and exam degredation are practiced to increase the number of people with high grades.... You want more?

How about infinite rewrites on essays, until you get an acceptable grade?

[Subotan]

Labour has a policy of people going to university as a percentage of the population

It wants 50%, and even that hasn't been achieved.


Labour has a policy of people going to university as a percentage of the population, grade inflation and exam degredation are practiced to increase the number of people with high grades.... You want more?

How about infinite rewrites on essays, until you get an acceptable grade?

Grade inflation occurs at the boundaries between grades, not the easiness of exams. This is due to a policy instituted by, er, the Conservative government. And isn't it such a shame that people are allowed to practice essays rather than fail at something which they haven't been taught to do.

The next person who says "Exams are getting easier" without having done or taught one for twenty years is going to get a punch in the gob. I'm guessing you did neither.

Besides, that has nothing to do with what I originally said. That affects stupid rich kids as much as stupid poor kids. Stupid rich kids are much more likely to get a better standard of living though.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Grade inflation occurs at the boundaries between grades, not the easiness of exams. This is due to a policy instituted by, er, the Conservative government. And isn't it such a shame that people are allowed to practice essays rather than fail at something which they haven't been taught to do.

A policy persued to extremes by Labour. Also, notice I bolded that part? Look up the difference between formative and Summative assesment. Multiple rewrites of summative essays and exams is THE major form of grade inflation. Also, you're aguing that because the school system is so screwed up that students are not taught essay-writing, they should have more re-writes?

That's a failure of the curriculem, if true.... but it isn't because you're supposed to write essays for the three years before you take your GCSEs.


The next person who says "Exams are getting easier" without having done or taught one for twenty years is going to get a punch in the gob. I'm guessing you did neither.

Besides, that has nothing to do with what I originally said.

I've done both, why the presumption?


That affects stupid rich kids as much as stupid poor kids. Stupid rich kids are much more likely to get a better standard of living though.

Rich Kids are more likely to go to private school, and therefore more likely to do the IntBach, which is about twice as hard as A-Levels.

[Furunculus]

The next person who says "Exams are getting easier" without having done or taught one for twenty years is going to get a punch in the gob. I'm guessing you did neither.


Exams are getting easier, but it was less than twenty years ago since my experience, so you're short of a reason to punch me in the gob.

[Subotan]

A policy persued to extremes by Labour.
So, the mainstream Left's position is the same as the Mainstream Right's one then? Or is the next Conservative government going to reverse their own policy?


Multiple rewrites of summative essays and exams is THE major form of grade inflation.

http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQNSDTPS&CFID=96113960&CFTOKEN=51729330&source=login_payBarrier

ARE ever-rising A-level results evidence of better teaching and harder-working pupils, as Labour education secretaries claim each August? Or are they proof of spoon-feeding syllabuses and easier exams, as the opposition Conservatives say?

This year’s results, published on August 20th, provided another chance for those on both sides to “agree or disagree”. The pass rate rose for the 27th year running, and is now 97.5%, up from 68.2% in 1982. The share of A-grades went up too, by 0.8 percentage points compared with last year, and now stands at 26.7%. The end result of this 27-year bull run is that an eighth of all candidates now get three A grades, more than used to get a single A back then.

On the face of it, this is a success story. But probe the figures and they start to look flakier. School league tables, and the less selective universities, count grades regardless of subject, so an A in photography equals one in physics. But that assumption of parity is inaccurate, according to researchers at Durham University. By comparing results in different subjects awarded to the same candidates, and grades at A-level and GCSE, they have shown that some subjects really are softer (see chart). The idea is that an educational “Gresham’s Law” is at work, with bad qualifications driving out good as schools push pupils towards easier subjects in the hope of rising up the league tables, and pupils scramble after any old As to present to undiscriminating universities.

There is evidence that this happens—but only at the margins. If the Durham team’s figures are used to adjust grades, the real value of newly minted A-levels has fallen a little compared with their face value every year since 2003, as slightly more students choose easier subjects over hard ones than did the year before. During that time a gap of around half a percentage point opened up between the two. The fact that certain subjects are required for many degrees—mathematics for engineering; the sciences for medicine—acts as a countervailing force. So do the selective universities, which generally prefer candidates who take the tougher subjects.

Lacking any such restraint is year-on-year grade inflation across the board. And that, like continental drift, is hard to see in action. One oft-tried way to spot it—looking at old exam papers—is little help, since standards are set more by the marking than the syllabus or test. (“What is love?” is easy if “An emotion” gets full marks; hateful if one must illustrate with sonnets and explain how neurotransmitters function.) But in the long run, it can have a dramatic effect. The Durham team used aptitude tests to show that pupils of a given ability get far higher A-level grades now than they used to 20 years ago. Over the same period an 18-percentage point gap opened up between pass rates in A-levels and the International Baccalaureate.

Alan Smithers, an educationalist at Buckingham University, thinks grades inflate when examiners check scripts that lie on boundaries between grades. Every year some are pushed up but virtually none down, resulting in a subtle year-on-year shift. Wider expectations also seem to be mildly inflationary. He points to 2002, when the cack-handed introduction of a new A-level curriculum led to soaring grades. Exam boards panicked, and shunted grade boundaries to drag them back down. And when results fall, as they did with the English tests taken by 11-year-olds this summer, that provokes outrage too.
The main reform being proposed by Michael Gove, the Tory education spokesman, is for harder subjects like maths to be worth more in school league tables than softer ones like sociology. But since blanket grade inflation rather than a shift to easier ones is the main force at work, this would have little effect. And tackling it would entail limiting the share of candidates allowed to get each grade, as happened until the mid-1980s.

That would be politically tricky, since such limits seem unattractively arbitrary. Moreover, it would mean abandoning any hope of measuring even genuine improvements in educational standards. Whether or not Mr Gove gets the chance to implement his ideas after the next election, the ritual of hurrahs and boos over A-level results seems likely to continue.

It's hardly likely the probable next Tory government is going to say "For a decade and a bit, Middle England, you've had it too easy. In actual fact, all of your kids are stupid" and put grades back to pre-inflationary levels.


Multiple rewrites of summative essays and exams is THE major form of grade inflation.
I'm arguing that it's screwed up that you can expect students to somehow magically know how to get good grades on essays when they aren't taught how to write them.


That's a failure of the curriculem, if true.... but it isn't because you're supposed to write essays for the three years before you take your GCSEs.

It gets more complex every year. Introducing easy essay standards, then increasing those standards in the following year without teaching the students about those increased standards has only one logical outcome; that students who did well last year will not do as well in that year and will have to resit to display their full potential.


I've done both, why the presumption?
Do you think exams are getting easier? The majority of people who say that are generally stuck up journalists who complain when grades go up, down or stay the same.


Rich Kids are more likely to go to private school, and therefore more likely to do the IntBach, which is about twice as hard as A-Levels.
Oh my, how dreadful for Victor. All that better primary and secondary schooling (Because mummy and daddy didn't want him to mix with the louts, and so pretended to be Catholic), better facilities, smaller class sizes, more extra-curricular spending, private tutoring, more stable home environment and reduced chance to fall into crime, all counts for nothing when Victor has to do slightly harder work than Bob on the Moss Side.

[Fragony]

Kinda ironic, as it turns out the one starting the petition is a Turkish muslim :balloon2:

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So, the mainstream Left's position is the same as the Mainstream Right's one then? Or is the next Conservative government going to reverse their own policy?

Is Labour really left, though? Was Major really Right? Also, how does the current Conservative Party "own" a policy which was implemented before most of the current party members were sitting MP's? This is just a fallacy, the Conservative Party has been out of power for 12 years, they are no longer responsible for the state of the education system; nor are they bound by the decisions of the last Conservative Government and last Cabinet.



http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_TQNSDTPS&CFID=96113960&CFTOKEN=51729330&source=login_payBarrier

ARE ever-rising A-level results evidence of better teaching and harder-working pupils, as Labour education secretaries claim each August? Or are they proof of spoon-feeding syllabuses and easier exams, as the opposition Conservatives say?

This year’s results, published on August 20th, provided another chance for those on both sides to “agree or disagree”. The pass rate rose for the 27th year running, and is now 97.5%, up from 68.2% in 1982. The share of A-grades went up too, by 0.8 percentage points compared with last year, and now stands at 26.7%. The end result of this 27-year bull run is that an eighth of all candidates now get three A grades, more than used to get a single A back then.

On the face of it, this is a success story. But probe the figures and they start to look flakier. School league tables, and the less selective universities, count grades regardless of subject, so an A in photography equals one in physics. But that assumption of parity is inaccurate, according to researchers at Durham University. By comparing results in different subjects awarded to the same candidates, and grades at A-level and GCSE, they have shown that some subjects really are softer (see chart). The idea is that an educational “Gresham’s Law” is at work, with bad qualifications driving out good as schools push pupils towards easier subjects in the hope of rising up the league tables, and pupils scramble after any old As to present to undiscriminating universities.

There is evidence that this happens—but only at the margins. If the Durham team’s figures are used to adjust grades, the real value of newly minted A-levels has fallen a little compared with their face value every year since 2003, as slightly more students choose easier subjects over hard ones than did the year before. During that time a gap of around half a percentage point opened up between the two. The fact that certain subjects are required for many degrees—mathematics for engineering; the sciences for medicine—acts as a countervailing force. So do the selective universities, which generally prefer candidates who take the tougher subjects.

Lacking any such restraint is year-on-year grade inflation across the board. And that, like continental drift, is hard to see in action. One oft-tried way to spot it—looking at old exam papers—is little help, since standards are set more by the marking than the syllabus or test. (“What is love?” is easy if “An emotion” gets full marks; hateful if one must illustrate with sonnets and explain how neurotransmitters function.) But in the long run, it can have a dramatic effect. The Durham team used aptitude tests to show that pupils of a given ability get far higher A-level grades now than they used to 20 years ago. Over the same period an 18-percentage point gap opened up between pass rates in A-levels and the International Baccalaureate.

Alan Smithers, an educationalist at Buckingham University, thinks grades inflate when examiners check scripts that lie on boundaries between grades. Every year some are pushed up but virtually none down, resulting in a subtle year-on-year shift. Wider expectations also seem to be mildly inflationary. He points to 2002, when the cack-handed introduction of a new A-level curriculum led to soaring grades. Exam boards panicked, and shunted grade boundaries to drag them back down. And when results fall, as they did with the English tests taken by 11-year-olds this summer, that provokes outrage too.
The main reform being proposed by Michael Gove, the Tory education spokesman, is for harder subjects like maths to be worth more in school league tables than softer ones like sociology. But since blanket grade inflation rather than a shift to easier ones is the main force at work, this would have little effect. And tackling it would entail limiting the share of candidates allowed to get each grade, as happened until the mid-1980s.

That would be politically tricky, since such limits seem unattractively arbitrary. Moreover, it would mean abandoning any hope of measuring even genuine improvements in educational standards. Whether or not Mr Gove gets the chance to implement his ideas after the next election, the ritual of hurrahs and boos over A-level results seems likely to continue.

You've completely avoided the point about rewiting summative assessments.


It's hardly likely the probable next Tory government is going to say "For a decade and a bit, Middle England, you've had it too easy. In actual fact, all of your kids are stupid" and put grades back to pre-inflationary levels.

On the other hand, they can't continue to allow people with C's in English to remain functionally illiterate, as was found recently.


I'm arguing that it's screwed up that you can expect students to somehow magically know how to get good grades on essays when they aren't taught how to write them.

Failure of teaching, lack of formative assesment. Neither are an excuse to repeat summative assessment ad nauseum.


It gets more complex every year. Introducing easy essay standards, then increasing those standards in the following year without teaching the students about those increased standards has only one logical outcome; that students who did well last year will not do as well in that year and will have to resit to display their full potential.

Oh woe! It's the same at degree level, it get's harder every year. Either you shape up, or you crash and burn. Still, this is no excuse to repeat summative assessments. Summative assessments should reflect the student's ability, formative assesments are used to test whether the student is learning.


Do you think exams are getting easier? The majority of people who say that are generally stuck up journalists who complain when grades go up, down or stay the same.

I think that in the four years between myself and my sister there has been a softening of subjects, especially in areas such as biology where more subjective "ethical" questions are asked; pointless at GCSE level. There are also more "open book" exams than there used to be, or questions that are confined to a particular portion of a text, with that text provided. English exams are particularly bad, while Welsh ones are much harder. I know someone who passed Italian GSCE basically without a teacher.



Oh my, how dreadful for Victor. All that better primary and secondary schooling (Because mummy and daddy didn't want him to mix with the louts, and so pretended to be Catholic), better facilities, smaller class sizes, more extra-curricular spending, private tutoring, more stable home environment and reduced chance to fall into crime, all counts for nothing when Victor has to do slightly harder work than Bob on the Moss Side.

Not really, as Victor (who calls their child Victor?, how about Peter?) will come out with qualifications valued more by British and foriegn universities. Bob will just have three or four fairly worthless A-Levels. I will be sending my children to a Public School for all the reasons listed above. I went through State education, and I want to give my children the opertunities I was denied.

[Beskar]

II know someone who passed Italian GSCE basically without a teacher.

I know plently like that, even though who did the GCSE's in year 9. Want to know their secret? It was their native language.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I know plently like that, even though who did the GCSE's in year 9. Want to know their secret? It was their native language.

Really? This person's native language was Welsh.

Your point?

[Subotan]

Is Labour really left, though? Was Major really Right? =

Which is exactly my point though, about the "Mainstream Left".


Also, how does the current Conservative Party "own" a policy which was implemented before most of the current party members were sitting MP's? This is just a fallacy, the Conservative Party has been out of power for 12 years, they are no longer responsible for the state of the education system; nor are they bound by the decisions of the last Conservative Government and last Cabinet.


I was pointing out that it wasn't a "Mainstream Left" policy, and that there would be quite the political kerfuffle if the Conservatives did totally reform the education system.



You've completely avoided the point about rewiting summative assessments.

I've never heard of anything of the sort.
(Besides, you totally avoided the point I made in that spoiler box)


On the other hand, they can't continue to allow people with C's in English to remain functionally illiterate, as was found recently.
True.



Failure of teaching, lack of formative assesment. Neither are an excuse to repeat summative assessment ad nauseum.
.
How are children supposed to learn how to write essays if you won't let them practice them?


Summative assessments should reflect the student's ability, formative assesments are used to test whether the student is learning.

Can you give me an example of both, as I'm not particularly clear on the differences.



I think that in the four years between myself and my sister there has been a softening of subjects, especially in areas such as biology where more subjective "ethical" questions are asked; pointless at GCSE level.
Why are they pointless at GCSE level?



There are also more "open book" exams than there used to be, or questions that are confined to a particular portion of a text, with that text provided. English exams are particularly bad, while Welsh ones are much harder. I know someone who passed Italian GSCE basically without a teacher.
So you woud rather have a situtation where students base their academic ability on their ability to memorise sections of text? :dizzy2:



I know someone who passed Italian GSCE basically without a teacher.
I did German GSCE. I needed a teacher to do so.


Not really, as Victor will come out with qualifications valued more by British and foriegn universities.
If that was the case to such a degree as you claim, then nobody would do A Levels.



(who calls their child Victor?, how about Peter?)
:beam:


Bob will just have three or four fairly worthless A-Levels.
If he has studied Dance, PE, Health and Social Care and Food Tech, then yes, they're worthless. But not all A Levels are worthless.



I will be sending my children to a Public School for all the reasons listed above. I went through State education, and I want to give my children the opertunities I was denied.
I've been through state education all my life (Voiluntarily; my parents gave me a choice), and I don't think I've been denied any opportunities. I'd send my children to state school, and if they're stupid, they'll fail, and if they're not, they'll succeed. I don't like the idea of them getting a better education than another student because I bought it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Which is exactly my point though, about the "Mainstream Left".

Ok, but that causes a problem if the "mainstream Left" has moved away from the Centre Left, either towards the Right, or towards the Far-Left. Labour seems to have done both.


I was pointing out that it wasn't a "Mainstream Left" policy, and that there would be quite the political kerfuffle if the Conservatives did totally reform the education system.

Perhaps, but that's not because the current policy is Conservative, more that changing the status-quo is always difficult.


I've never heard of anything of the sort.
(Besides, you totally avoided the point I made in that spoiler box)

I dissagree that boundaries are important to grade inflation, when compared to the ability to retake and improve scores.


How are children supposed to learn how to write essays if you won't let them practice them?

Can you give me an example of both, as I'm not particularly clear on the differences.

Formative assessment is used to assess learning, but doesn't usually contribute to the final grade, Summative assess attainment and does contribute towards grade.

[Beskar]

If you set the same test for ten years, all other variables aside, and on average people scored better each year, is the test getting easier or are the students just better?

If improved teaching methods and skills increases performance of the students, is it the fault of the students that they are scoring well? Are the tests getting 'easier' ? (answer to both of these are no)

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

If you set the same test for ten years, all other variables aside, and on average people scored better each year, is the test getting easier or are the students just better?

If improved teaching methods and skills increases performance of the students, is it the fault of the students that they are scoring well? Are the tests getting 'easier' ? (answer to both of these are no)

Today people can get C grades at GCSE and be functionally illiterate.

The tests are getting easier.

[Beskar]

Today people can get C grades at GCSE and be functionally illiterate.

No they cannot. :inquisitive:

[Furunculus]

interesting perspective on Islam in europe:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,668750,00.html