Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#1
I have said it before but here is more evidence:
""""""""""""""""""
From The Times June 30, 2008, by Joanna Sugden
Markers award students for writing obscenities on GCSE papers
Write 'f*** off' on a GCSE paper and you'll get 7.5%. Add an exclamation mark and it'll go up to 11%
Pupils are being rewarded for writing obscenities in their GCSE English examinations even when it has nothing to do with the question.
One pupil who wrote "f*** off" was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully.
His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points.
Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.
To gain minimum marks in English, students must demonstrate "some simple sequencing of ideas" and "some words in appropriate order". The phrase had achieved this, according to Mr Buckroyd.
The chief examiner, who is responsible for standards in exams taken by 780,000 candidates and for training for 3,000 examiners, told The Times: "It would be wicked to give it zero, because it does show some very basic skills we are looking for - like conveying some meaning and some spelling.......
.......Ofqual, the Government's examinations regulator, refused to condemn Mr Buckroyd's approach. "We think it's important that candidates are able to use appropriate language in a variety of situations but it's for awarding bodies to develop their mark scheme and for their markers to award marks in line with that scheme," it said.
Other examining bodies said that their marking schemes would not reward such language.....
..........The Joint Council for Qualifications, which represents exam boards, said that examiners were required to report instances of "inappropriate, offensive or obscene material" in exam scripts, and the awarding body must investigate. "If malpractice is identified, the awarding body will decide on the appropriate sanction, which could include loss of marks or even disqualification," a spokesman said.
""""""""""""""""""""
This Mr Buckroyd is unfit for his job and should be sacked immediately. It's time that educators (and the media) started to require decent standards of behaviour and even more important set an example....
Terry Nunn
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,321
#2
Nice to know that they could actually spell F***! I'm glad I've stopped reading the papers Barry, it's all to depressing.
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
let us hope that the quality of graffitti continues to rise in line with the exam success.
#4
Extra points for foreign language filth? Pogue mahone.........
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
is that from that garlic tongue bern?
how about a contest for the best graffitti?
i will set the ball rolling, when i first moved here there was a poster extolling the evils of illicit drugs, went into great detail.
at the bottom some card had written "nonsense, drugs are good for you.
Guest 641- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,335
#6
Howard, 'Pogue Mahone' is gaelic, the garlic one (French) is 'Merde'
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
you have clearly not been an alf garnett fan baz!!
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#8
Well said Barry
I have never heard so much stupid nonsense in all my life.
It's no wonder standards are going down - sack that guy and any others who support the move for rewarding swearing - written or verbal.
Madness, absolute madness.
Roger
#9
Words are only words....James Joyce used a few "choice" ones from time to time, and in context they only enhanced the art he produced. However, used routinely in conversation the riper ones demean the text of the conversation - on trains and in public sometimes the majority of the words used by some young people are four-letter expletives, and that is a shame, as our language is gorgeous and full and worthy of much more expression than that. Why limit ourselves to s few repetetive four-letter jobbies when we could be using beautiful and far-ranging words that express our desires, needs, wishes, so much better? Some of my current favourites are Horn-swoggler and Pismires. Look 'em up!!!!!
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#10
A man thinks that by mouthing hard words he understands hard things.
Herman Melville (1819 - 1891)
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Terry Nunn- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,321
#11
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
#12
Saints preserve us......is that allowed or would that too be offensive?
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#13
Following on from the above story..I was talking with a serving Prison Officer yesterday who informed me that they are not allowed to use drug trained sniffer dogs to search cells occupied by Muslims for the same reason..ie dogs are considered to be unclean.Needless to say my friend continued to say that the nick now has a big drugs problem.They are readily available and cheaper to buy inside than they are on "the street".
Surely the individual forfeited certain rights on the day he/she decided to commit a criminal act.
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
#14
Consequences......we need to see them more often. Without wanting to seek to cause offence, surely the minoroty have to respect the majority culture? And in return have their own culture respected? I always remember the Irish situation at the beginning to middle of the 20th Century - when Catholics came over to the UK we wouldn't have dreamt of demanding Catholics take precedence. As republican Catholics - and not the violent sort who grabbed the news! - there were aspects of English culture that sat at odds with some of our beliefs and thoughts, but that didn't give us the right to demand changes, or tell Brits not to pursue their own culture in their own land - it's an outrageous thought!!! And at that time (clearly I was only a tiny child!) many cultures lived side by side without too much conflict - especially insome of the areas in London where I lived - and it really just boiled down to gratitude to a host nation, rspect for each others culture, and an awareness that it wasn't the place of the host to adapt or change, it was up to the visitirs/immigrants/newbies to adapt.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
marek
maybe some of the dogs were not to keen on getting their nostrils working either.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#16
Im afraid if theres any doubts drugs may be there bring in the sniffer dogs
go for it
#17
Bring it on...........
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#18
i was surprised some time ago when exiting the UK for france, that a springer spaniel took a very specific interest in my lunch box.
it gave fellow travellers a chance for a chortle at my discomfiture.
however, why would the government be worried about drugs being smuggled OUT of the country?
Terry Nunn- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,321
#19
Sorry Howard, it has to be asked. Which particular "lunch box" were you referring to?
I think we should be told!
Terry
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
#20
