Hello everyone, welcome back to another episode of Teach Seat
Repeat. My name is.
Dylan, and my name is Hayden. And we're back with another
episode. It's just US 2.
Did we do a guest last week? We did.
We had because we recorded it a while ago.
That's why we're confused. Kate on didn't.
We have loads of guests lined up obviously.
Yes, we definitely haven't done that thing again where we got
like four in a row and then we stopped booking anyone.
We are always on the lookout for guests, so we'll see in the
future. But back to us for now.
And I've reflected on a few times.
People do like it when it is just us though.
Like they love the idea of the guests.
And I always got like not scared.
But I remember when we first got guests and then we went to again
a, a stint of us, just us two. I was really worried that not
everyone would think, ohh, just these two guys again.
But. But they love us, Dylan.
Yeah, they love it. I love that they love us.
And if they could choose to vote for us, they would.
They definitely would. And I've no, no voting on my
mind for any reason at all. I don't know anything happened
this week. Nothing to do with the.
Episode which we've got. So anyway, before we get into
it, anything you want to let me know about?
Him right now. What about you?
I'm hyper aware of where I'm talking.
So Dylan, Dylan and ignore, ignore what he said the other
week. They're like, ohh, we've
upgraded our audio. It's much better now.
And it was the worst any episode we've ever had.
So last week's episode didn't sound that great, and this week
we're really trying to talk into the microphone.
So if this sounds great and crispy, then you know why.
But if it doesn't, then you also know why.
It doesn't. Then I've just doubled down on
the idea that we think this sounds better, but doesn't.
Anyway, I'm all good. How are you?
Your weeks been right. Yeah, fine.
It's half time. We've made it half term, so lots
of people listening to this. Again, I know we've got
international listeners, so I really do apologise if it's not
half time for you. You're still working half time
here in the UK. And I'd forgotten it was half
term because obviously Hayden and I, we work Monday to
Wednesday and we do our tutoring business on the rest of the
week. But that meant that half time
for me actually started on Wednesday, but it didn't
register with me because we still had stuff to do.
You know, I work in week wasn't over.
So I wasn't like have have that huge relief about it's half term
and he got to Friday and I'm sure he's going to talk to you
about his barbecue in a minute. But we we fired up a BBQ at
Hayden's he wanted to test. Out.
Don't worry, you talk about it very soon and and because
obviously we're British and as soon as it's only like right
BBQ, we don't have a barbecue and we're wasting the day.
Yeah. And I, I remember I was sat
eating an Oreo sandwich, like ice cream things because
obviously having a bit of sugar. Now it's it's summer again.
Sorry, just never get and I got a text from my colleague who I
share the class with saying you come to the pub and other that
they're going to the pub for end of end of term.
And I was like, oh, you did mention something last week.
I really struggled to pass things over between my week.
My week seems like two really is split in half.
Yeah. Anything to do with school, I
kind of forget about it until I'm back in school.
Yeah. By Wednesday evening it's done.
It's gone. It's like that Apple TV show.
Did you watch it, Severance? No.
So the whole, the whole point of severance is there's like this
technology a bit further in the future where they implant
something into your brain and you go to work, but when you go
to work, you passed through like this, I don't know, this
technology this like you gotta go into this lift anyway.
You go to your floor to do your work, but you completely switch
off. It's almost like you turn into a
different person. Ohh, wow.
So the point being like efficient.
Yeah. You literally from your point of
view, you walk into work, you walk into the door and
immediately you walk out of the door.
And that whole 8 hours of work. That's so cool.
Yeah. 8 hours of work you've done.
You literally do not know what goes on.
I've heard good things about that.
It's an amazing watch at some point.
Yeah, because the whole, the whole point is what you're doing
there on the outside, it's great because like you don't have to
experience work if you haven't had a really dull, boring job,
you don't have to experience work.
Isn't that cool? But the the the whole issue like
the morality which is really interesting was you create you
on the inside. Yeah, so.
You're also forcing yourself to only experience work.
Yeah. And.
And the whole idea is, is like, is that person as morally
valuable as you? And you follow both kind of
people. Yeah.
Adam Scott is the lead in it and he's unreal as an actor because
he's kind of like this depressive guy who's had a
pretty bad life and wife passed away and all this stuff.
Yeah. On the outside.
Yeah. On the inside it's hilarious
cause he's this like, hey, I, I love my job like an office like,
you know. No, because he doesn't know
what's going on his outside. Line and that exactly and the
whole point is in the job there's this new woman who
starts and she slowly is like what all I'm doing is this is
all for all this is what's going on what's on the other side of
this lift and like it develops into them trying to break out
and stuff but it turns out that spoiler alert anyone's gonna
watch this that that that woman is one of the board members of
the company who are doing this and she said on the outside our
proof how this is this isn't morally bankrupt this is
brilliant I'll prove it I'm gonna do it myself that's
hilarious and she ends up breaking out yeah no but in the
end and and it's it's just really.
Thanks for ruining it completely within 3 minutes there's.
There's a bit of evidence here and a bit of research.
I would say to people that if you know how a show ends, you,
you scientifically enjoy more. Ohh really?
You scientifically enjoy things more.
You have to. Spoil, enjoy.
I don't watch it, I don't want it, so that's funny.
Yeah. That sounds good though.
Anyway. Really well off track there.
So yeah, I did hint at your BBQ. Come on, talk about it.
There's not much to say because. Most people want to hear about
it, obviously. I just, yeah, of course.
Dentist from last week, so I think about the BBQ.
Wow, you've ruined my next joke. Sorry you ruined it.
I was about to do half ruined it.
I'm about to do a whole bit then on pretending that dentists have
called me from the dentist association to not talk about
it. Thanks, Tim.
Much funnier when you do it. But back to the barbecues,
embracing the dad life. Yeah.
And, and I was just saying just before we started recording this
podcast was like, OK, really funny.
This will get him. This will get him nothing.
Gets past me, Hayden. Nothing.
Including Joy.
Yeah, Bob, who's right? So between us means that are
fully embracing the stereotypical dead life.
We'll stand around the BBQ the other day, Dylan in his Crocs,
talking about golf, me looking at my lawn, thinking one of my
my lovely freshly planted seeds are growing, cooking on the
barbecue. And I just felt it's good.
It's a good place. To be we basically what's the
word, but I was gonna say. You say basic.
Yeah, but it's not. What's the word for that?
Basic. Dad.
Don't know basic dad. Doesn't really work.
Does it got the dad bods? We had them for a while, had
that way before we were down. The other day, what was it was
talking about being on a diet. I was like, yeah, yeah, yeah,
tell me about it. I'm kind of trying on a diet.
They're like, ohh, yeah, the old dad.
But I was like, yeah, I'm trying to get back down to my dad as
I've gone past that. Ohh, it's like when we were
younger, you remember people talk about, especially the girls
we're talking about, like wanting to be curvy.
There's one thing I wanna be curvy.
And, and what curvy actually went in the 90s was stick thin,
like stick thin. And there was this whole
horrible like environment of girls, like thinking they had to
be so, so, so skinny. And and it's with dad bod.
I kind of feel like we're moving towards that a little bit
because people say dad bod, they don't mean an actual
stereotypical body of a dad with a huge beer belly from they mean
like quite a skinny bloke. You're still a bit like he's
wider at the top than he is at the bottom.
And it's a bit of a stomach like, yeah, dad bod doesn't mean
like, you know, hugely overweight.
And, and again, it's like it's turning into that, but it's
like, that's right. I've got a dad bod.
It's like that's not what they mean.
They're. Getting better and better, these
old dad bothering me, harder to achieve.
It's the dad. Yeah, it's the dad.
Chris Pratt. OK, in that case.
Yeah, it comes somehow as attached to money as well.
Now, dad bod. Yeah, you gotta be earning a
couple of million a year as an actor.
Yeah, Dad bought is actually just give your salaries strange,
but I want I want to talk about crops quickly because you
mentioned crops go on. I am really embracing like, you
know, there's a few there's a few things you go through like
watershed moments growing up where you slowly realise that
you are an adult and and to me, one of them in is I can really
like separate people out here where people are age and their
opinion on Crocs, because I think it's very ingrained with
us growing up that Crocs were horrendous.
Crocs were horrendous. Young people now are embracing
it, but anyone who's in, like, their 30s, that turning 30, late
20s, early 30s, I can tell a lot about them by their reaction
when I say Crocs. Because if they're just like,
ohh, Crocs, Oh my My Crocs are my slippers around
the house. I have to admit I obviously
tried to wind you up every day because, you know, as you know,
Dylan's and then that doesn't like being, you know, his things
being touched and all those sorts of things.
We've talked about dinner before, you know, go back and
listen to Yeah about dinner. But is that, what is that just
one? That was a bit weird talk about
you. And I was cracking up at the
idea that your mum didn't clock on that you were a bit strange
when you were eating silica packages in in Clarks or
whatever it was. Do not eat, I think I'll taste.
It wouldn't be anything else anyway.
Ohh God, that story is my favourite story.
But yeah, if I put Dylan's Crocs on, I've never worn Crocs and I
am one of those guys. Like Crocs, Crocs look stupid.
Put them on and I and I was a little bit annoyed in my head
and I thought these are nice. My first thought was these feel
good. Do you like in the movies when
like they rushes into their brain, they have like this
moment like just like Ratatouille when the food critic
gives the food, when he gets back to his childhood with wide
eyes, wear Crocs. You have that moment of rural
comfort and joy. Yeah, I'm now thinking it might
happen. I reckon for my birthday
someone's gonna get me cross because I mentioned this.
I reckon Lauren. Yeah, it's part was clocked on
you. Said it quite loudly, I reckon.
Lauren. Yeah, the other side of this
door. Yeah, our producer.
Who? Who?
We just hide away. Yeah.
And make it sound good. Sound issues yes yeah Lauren
honestly yeah yeah, but Crocs, Crocs amazing but yeah pretty
good week I mean I'm I'm quite excited it's half time I feel
like my time doesn't exist anymore but.
You've been you've been messaging me at 5:00 AM a lot.
What's going on? Who's getting up at 5:00 AM?
This is unreal. Any other parents out there,
please message me and tell me I'm not alone.
Because. Because I'm pretty sure I can't.
I'm obviously not the only one. I hate that phrase.
Am I the only one who and then insert something which is so
normal? Yeah, probably.
Generally one who has Weetabix with milk.
No, of course you aren't. What do you mean I'm I'm the
only one who sits on their chair with their bum.
But. No.
Am I the only man in the world sitting down to wee?
Well, maybe. No I think I know more blokes
who said to me than who stand up at this point.
It's come to you. We are entering the zone of just
doing what feels good and not what is proper and that is why
I'm here for anyway Rory wakes up I I honestly there is about a
4 minute window which is 458 to five O 2 and he wakes up in that
window every single day and it doesn't matter.
This is what I don't get. If every day he had 4 1/2 hours
sleep and woke up like, ohh, his body clocks developing, he could
go to bed at six or half eight, right?
He would wake up at half one in the night and at 5:00 in the
morning. Yeah.
And when he wakes up at 5:00, I think ohh yeah, a bit of food
and like a bit of a rock. Maybe another hour.
No, no, no. Like about 5.
And it's hilarious because there's a difference when he
wakes up and he we know we'll go back to sleep.
He kind of just like says yeah, because he clearly wants to be
asleep. And you know.
Yeah, 5:00 AM right? Because he is, his head is like
turning looking cuz he knows we're in the bed next to him and
he's like turning and he just goes yeah.
And I'm like Oh my As soon as I hear they are, yeah.
You're not going back. That it's just you.
He's just mini. He's probably looking for silica
packets. Is it?
Is it me? Do I do that?
Do I get up and walk my head? I'll go.
Honestly, yeah, when you're, when you're not around other
people, yeah, that's your true self.
That is you. Yeah, that's the other thing
about having a kid. Anything that he develops that's
annoying, it's going to be just me.
Yeah. So it's gonna be hard to be
annoyed. Yeah, you'll, you'll remember
your child and be like, ohh, yeah, that's me.
That's weird. There isn't.
I think about the 5:00 AM thing. It's strange.
I don't know. There's a link between the the
daylight that comes out of 5:00 AM and him getting up every
single time there's something there that might be a.
Reason I'm trying to convince Lauren that has to do with that.
Yeah. And she was like, Nah, I was
like that one logical thing I think it is, though.
I think it is. And then she was like, I don't
think so. And I was like, this is just
with. Animals historically don't wake
up when it gets light, do they? That's that is a definitely a
thing. They do wake up generally after.
It's weird though, we're really up on the tangent here.
Like why do we go to sleep at like for like 8 hours?
Like aren't we really vulnerable as animals?
I know we're not now because we got buildings and stuff, but how
on earth did we evolve to get unconscious for eight hours?
In a row. I often think that such pathetic
versions of our like primitive sales, aren't we?
Honestly, if if you just took away my house and like money
right now, I had nothing right, I'd be dead in a week.
Honestly, I wouldn't know what to do.
If you put me in like the best place for it as well like easy
survival, I still wouldn't be like ohh.
I'd already an. Evolution, feed me someone give
me water. I wouldn't know what to do.
Ohh no survivors go back Rd laughing.
What Finally here we there licking his lamb finally after
all these years? Yeah, Bear Grylls knows what to
do. We don't Bear Grylls and Ray
Mears. Ramiers Ray Mears was a better
version of hair growth. I used to love his hair.
Grows a Tory fraud? No, sorry, not talking politics.
Politics today. Come on.
Ohh. At all.
No, not at all. Just wait half an hour.
No talk about SATS, right? Yeah, let's, let's go into our
little chat because this is the week as a recording, you're
listening to this. If you're listening to this
episode, the day it comes out, all the week comes out.
Last week the sats were released, so the embargo has
been lifted. Uh, Sats were taken by year six
children two or three weeks ago. We're gonna go through papers,
have a lot of reflection. Yeah, quick reflection, quite a
few talking points online, few talking points heading likes to
go through the test being year six teacher and he found a few
very, very, very weird things. So we're gonna have a reflection
there and reflection like rhymed really nice with election.
And it's not that I'm political or anything, it's I don't
actually want the politics. We just use it in the title.
Yeah. So we talk about Sats.
Yeah, stay around the politics. OK, Hayden, are you all set with
your framing? Your crotch.
Further back this time I was like, oh, I don't want my legs
in it. And they're watching on Spotify
in for a treat for the 1st 15 minutes.
No, it wasn't is now looking at it, hopefully not.
We're going to see a big spike on the retention, like someone
rewinding. God, what's wrong with us?
Right, Hayden, you're a year six teacher.
I sat where a couple of weeks ago and we go through all the
papers and stuff for our tutoring.
Like we we like to keep ahead on that and do videos and stuff and
explanations. Where would you put this year's
SATS papers on a scale of incredibly unfair and horrible
to too easy and there's no point doing it.
Everyone can do all these questions.
Overall bang in the middle, I think you would you say, I
think, OK, it's weird. It's a good thing in the context
of SATS, like whether OK, so just within the confines of
let's just assume we all think SAS is OK, Sure, this this, this
set of papers was OK. So she's not gonna be discussing
whether we should abolish Sats. We have done that, yeah.
We might mention it briefly, but we have done in depth discussion
about the Sats in general. But no, I think about the last
Sats and all of the controversy around the reading paper being a
bit too hard and stuff. This one was still quite tricky,
but it wasn't as bad as that. The maths I thought was
completely fair. I know you've had a little look
at the mass papers and the GPS was alright as well.
I just bought the whole process that that is exactly what that
is like. I didn't have really have any
major issues. There's a few little bits we can
pick apart and a bit, but they they're small enough where it
wasn't enough to be like, ohh, there's whole sats.
There was a sham. It was so unfair for these kids.
It was a fair bunch of. Tests so as an insight them for
anyone who wasn't involved in this act, whether they're a
teacher or even just a parent. What was your experience with
the children sitting in the papers?
Because I think a big thing a lot of people are interested in,
interested in their well-being is, you know, that that's kind
of a big, you know, problem. Sometimes it think for long
parents especially. So again, having administered
the SATS and gone through it with your cohort, how did you
find that? Well, that's interesting, that's
for it. Cause any of this stuff, if you
do write to us, if you have a comment, I know Dylan deals with
Instagram, but please, if you've got something to say because I'm
genuinely so interested in other schools and how this happened,
right? So this is me going for the
paper. So we did GPS and as always, I
think the GPS is weirdly timed. I like the majority of the
children sit in the test were finished with 20 minutes left,
15 minutes left. And I find that's quite often
the case of GPS because it's just 50 typically really quick
one mark questions and then. How long do they have?
Like 45 minutes. And I do find that children
generally with through that, which I find strange because
then when they do the reading paper, I think the next day the
reading paper to me every single year.
I always think why is it so harshly timed?
They get so much extra time for the GPS and the same group of
children. By the way, I had about 30 to 40
with me in the hall because I was administering the kind of
the bulk of the kids in our school, the same group of kids
that are all finished and sat there looking through their GPS
papers 20 minutes ago were all like generally all struggling to
finish that paper. I I saw that 10 minute timer
sort of get to 10 minutes left. And I was looking around the
hall and I was thinking, wow, half of these kids are just
scrambling now to the third text, which typically requires
almost them 2020 minutes to do. Yeah, like a bit more than a
third, maybe 25. And yeah, I just thought, this
is just seems wrong. Like there's no way these kids
have all just suddenly now. Ohh I forgot how to read the GPS
yesterday. It's like, no, the timings are
just off and I think that every year.
Do you think that's the biggest impact on well-being for the
children then? Like in terms of like we're
talking about the difficulty, the act of actually doing the
test, the timers, is that what you notice is like a bit of a
red? Flag I'd say that yes and and
I'd say it's 5050 with with the difficulty.
Sure. I think for well-being with
kids, if they find it challenging, if they find it too
challenging, whatever that threshold is for them, I think
that's really negative on their well because it makes them feel
rubbish. Sure.
And I equally think that for any difficulty for any kid, if then
if they feel like they're stress because they're not finishing
it, and then I'll get an opportunity to show what they
can do, whether they're, you know, really high ability or
not. I think that's also a massive
contributor to them feeling really stressed after it.
Ohh, didn't get time to do the last three questions.
Which they could have. Thought they could have got
right and and they really wanted to cause maybe it's.
Important to have a go at. It yeah.
And like, that's just not fair. So I think the reading comp just
needs more time. I don't know why it is an hour.
The text seems to be getting slightly longer over the years
as well. So it takes a bit more time to
read. The questions are just getting a
little bit more. Well, is that really in their
comprehension? Well, I've always found that
weird in terms of a timer for comprehension.
I know why timers existing tests, like I understand that
there are reasons. So someone's listening.
Well, of course you need a timer.
Yeah, you're OK You're testing. Can they get through a text
quick enough? And you know how, how quick do
you have to understand something before you don't really properly
understand it and all that kind of stuff.
But I, I still, my gut instinct with comprehension is that if it
takes a child an extra minute to get to the right answer, I don't
think that matters. That's that's my opinion.
I agree, I think, I think there is a place for word reading
speed. Hmm, in terms of a some sort of
measure, maybe a kids ability to read.
But yeah, I agree generally and especially when especially when
the majority of kids are struggling to read it like in
that time, I'm like, come on, this is not even reflecting like
the average reader this sort of time.
So that was mental. And then with the maths
arithmetic mean, you seen the arithmetic paper.
I'll ask you what you what did you think of the arithmetic
paper in terms of like difficulty and stuff?
I, I've got, I've got probably a potentially controversial
opinion on arithmetic in that having seen every arithmetic
paper for years now, because like I said, I always go through
and, and model answers and do them.
I, I think, OK, you can come back to this.
I think that the average child in year six should aim for full
Marks and everything paper. And I know that some children
who can't, some children who can.
And when it comes to reasoning, the average child absolutely
would be nowhere near full marks.
No, same for reading comp. Same for GPS actually, in my
opinion, like you could do well in GPS.
There's a lot of weird stuff GPS that go up when it comes to
arithmetic. The processes involved in that
question, you could write them down and get every single
process that will come up before the test comes up.
Yeah, you, you, you. OK, You will get an additional
question with 11 number has 2 decimal places.
One number has three decimal places.
You will get 2 fractions that have one as the numerator that
you multiply together. You will get a You will get a
fraction multiplied by. Sorry.
Provided by a whole number, you know, you, you can, you, you
will get short division, you will get this long division, you
will get multiplication. It's the same.
So yeah, my whole point there is I suppose over over the course
of four years or from year three up to year six, I think that as
teachers we should be aiming for them to be able to answer every
question. And I think in year six
especially the the average child should sit down and have and
been able to prove over the last couple of months that they can
answer every single question on the.
Test. Yeah, yeah, it sounds like a
really big stretch target. I think I'll just dive into it a
bit more because yeah, like you said with other tests, the
average child I don't think should be should be going the
50. Percent, I've been lined up the
children in the in the year in in the whole country who are in
year six. If you picked out the middle
code, yeah, my opinion is they should be able to answer the
question on the. Test Yeah, yeah, it should be
aiming 40. It's funny because I don't think
every child should be aiming for full marks in maths in general,
no, but yeah, the arithmetic paper is just different, isn't
it? Is just very, very different.
And I yeah, I agree. I think some people probably
listen to thinking, come on, that's that's mad.
And realistically, the average is probably the average child
should probably be getting somewhere between 30 and 30.
I was gonna say probably. 30 But I think what I really want to
stress is that you talk about aiming.
Yeah, average kid should aim for 40 out of 40.
And, and that's why I try to be really clear when I said should
have proven honestly in the in the months beforehand, having
had four years of key stage two, that there there should be
nothing that could come up on that test which they have no
idea about. Yeah, there might be something
on the test like maybe for, for example, long divisions, one I
can think of straight away where working out the multiples of 49
might be really tricky for a child.
Yeah. Or if they haven't learned their
times tables, a lot of the questions are going to be
absolutely not be able to get there.
But my point is you should aim by year 6 to 9 your time.
Should be average year six kid. No, that's exactly the average
kid. Should know that.
Well, there's some kids who can't.
It's like I know and I never expected to get. 4.
Yeah, yeah. So that, that's my opinion.
And having a look through the test, I thought the only thing
that really struck a chord of me where there were two things
where they at every single opportunity, it felt like they
formatted the question in a way that was different to what they
thought the kids might see. Yeah, they they very, very, very
often, almost too often. But the answer box first equals
and then the question. Yeah, which is such a small
thing, but. And, and I've got nothing wrong
with that being on the paper, but it felt like they did that
about eight times. And it was, Yeah.
And it was like, if you're gonna test children on that and you
know children won't get it, you are essentially saying they're
not gonna get 8 Times Now instead of just like three or
four. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And, and the other thing that really stood out to me, which
was crazy because this genuinely doesn't matter in my opinion, is
the answer to almost every fraction question was a fraction
that could have been simplified. So for example, the answer I
think to one was something like 46.
The answer to another one was 1420 firsts.
And, and there was all I mean by that is you will get the mark if
you don't bother touching it. So if if it's let's say it's
2514, THS take away 414th, yeah, you will get a mark for putting
twenty 114th. That's fine, Yeah.
But then if you try to simplify it and do it wrong because you
see it simplify, it could be simplified and for whatever
reason, maybe you put 14 / 7 or whatever it is you do.
Yeah, if you then try and do an extra step and then put that
down, you'd get it wrong. Yeah, you would.
Even though you've done the subtraction absolutely correctly
and you've got the right answer. And I just thought, wow, there
could have been some points at least when it wasn't option
simplify. Yeah, but you weren't even.
Yeah. Because if you're gonna get a
mark for not simplifying, that's such a weird extra step to that
you can only lose by doing. That you're highlighting now
really is that is that really nuanced stuff that I think
teachers when you're 6, you just sort of think we're just playing
a game at this point. Absolutely we're playing a game
because you know what, on average, if you had two classes
and one of them you you really explicitly drilled to them
because you know how the Sats works, right, You drilled to
them. Never simplify your answer as it
tells you to. And the other one they did never
mentioned it, but they were taught simplifying like they
both would have been exactly. They're not there.
There's probably, there's probably a high chance that one
class of app would outperform the other, not based on ability,
but because they know the test technique and the other ones
were trying to do something. And there's obviously gonna be
the occasional accidental error. Yeah.
You know, any extra steps opens up the possibility of accidental
errors. Nothing to do with ability.
Absolutely. It's just, yeah, it's really
funny, isn't it? So.
That, that, that was my gut instinct having a look through
the recipes. But I thought the content, as
always, I think it's gonna be really hard to find a year where
you look at the requisite test and you think, oh, that's tricky
because you just know what's gonna come up.
Every year there's like one or two questions.
Ohh, didn't really picture like that.
With my kids, before putting those one year, it was something
like I think it was four and 1/4 times no.
Two and 1/4 * 39. They got two and 1/4 * 30.
That's what it was, which again is not actually that tricky.
You defeated 9 * 239 quarters. It's like it's almost like a
improper fraction to a mixed number question.
Or do you wanna make it into decimals and 2.7?
Whatever you wanna do. But I felt like again, if you're
drilling as a year six teacher passed test questions past.
Papers never come. Up it's actually I don't think
it's come up before where something on 1/4 * 30.
Never. Which in fact, the only thing
that's come up with a mixed number of times, an odd number
is 1 1/2 right there. You've had like I remember the
classic 1 1/2 * 59 was that, was that in the reasoning paper,
something like that. And there was that.
There was that reasoning question that was like something
to do with the days on a different planet.
Yeah, that was like that. But you know, doing that
question, that is the correct curriculum.
Question. Yeah.
And and actually it's. A good thing, I think that.
Came out funny because I taught that fairly recently as well.
Yeah, I was like, I was just looking at numbers and just
mixed numbers in the column is like if you ever get a mixed
number times the number, then just partition it at all number
of times this and the fraction times this.
Yeah, just put it back and. That's where actually, I would
say the more they can find for those questions in Arabic, I
actually get behind that for. Yeah.
Because, again, what you're doing is the opposite of what
you said. Someone who's been drilled to
test technique, if they only ever use the same Bank of
questions when it comes to the test, yeah, those test
techniques are gonna shine through.
And I think you should be looking actively at a question
writer to find curriculum questions that aren't too
difficult but pitch nicely for the curriculum.
Yeah, that test children on their knowledge, not on their
test. Yeah, the question should be
when making it is OK, if a child understands this concept, can
they answer this question? Yeah, then call use it.
It's gonna come really nicely into a discussion.
We're gonna have a minute about, yeah, different questions.
I think maybe, Yeah, go on. Just final reflection on the
mask then. Yeah, realistic.
I agree with the right. I think most kids timing wise,
they were right with it. You know, especially I didn't
quite a lot of my able mathematicians in there.
So they were finally finished. Quite what the reason because.
The only thing this year it was the same last year, I think all
the year before I can't remember, but reasoning paper
two was like distinctly harder than reasoning paper.
Three comes before. Right.
Yeah. So the 2nd paper they did,
there's three papers altogether. The 2nd paper they did was so
much harder than the 3rd paper and all of this there's the
objective is like really wrong with that.
I don't like it when it's that way around because the only
thing I think can happen from that is it just put it just gets
some of the contacts up and knocks their confidence for that
last Test. I just think the hardest one
should be at the. End full stop, because you
because kids are children are used to that.
And then I know a lot of children who after that first
because the the next test on the next day.
So you've got a whole night of worrying and I know a lot of
children were thinking what if paper to was like that?
Ohh, my gosh, paper three is going to be horrendous and that
was a bit weird. There's no need.
To do. It's just unnecessary that that
would be my only reflection. We're gonna talk very
specifically about some questions, so we're gonna dive
in now because there are a few questions every year.
No, we've said in general we think it was quite a fair test.
I. Think it was quite a fair.
Test and there's always going to be tricky stuff and you can pick
out. Last year there was a bit more
than usual and there's a bit of a furore, especially I'm
reading. But there were still some
questions this year which we just saw when we looked through.
And then also online there's been a lot of debate and
discussion about yeah, my opinion on Sam is different to
your opinion on Sam. We have a good chat about
whether it's good or not to give 10 year olds.
This let's, Let's start with the reading.
There's one question we've got here from the reading paper
because I, I, I was looking for it very, very intricately the
other day and I was looking at the mark scheme for every single
question as well. And I stumbled across this
question right at the beginning of the paper.
And I genuinely can't believe I had to message Dillon cause
normally I jumped the gun with these things.
And he'll be like, no, you've just, you've just not seen this
thing. So I messaged Dylan and be like,
is it just me or is this question completely wrong and
actually just just broken? So here it is question three of
the reading comp paper. So you'd assume early on, but
easier as well. It says, how can you?
And this is an exact quote all the way.
How can you tell? Streaked tenrecs are social
animals for anyone listening is not in the same world the 10
reps of these little creatures the whole text was all about.
So that's not just like already. There's.
Non visual text about that. So they would have had some
context. How can you tell their social
animals now? The text says in a paragraph, a
very short paragraph, it says both Lowland 10 Rex and St 10
Rex are very social animals. So I can tell them.
Police says that and then the question says how can you tell
that that street terms are social animals?
Also question three, you assume it's gonna be easy and I looked
to the mark scheme and it's marked as a retrieval question
as well. So you so it's not even an
inference question where it's like you have to find evidence
to do it. It's it's labelled as a
retrieval. Question should just be in the.
Text. You just find the answer in the
text and it's there. And then obviously me and a lot
of the kids, this is how I would have answered it when I was
walking around, I looked at that and I thought, I'm gonna answer
that as. I would answer that as because
the text says they're very social animals.
Because it does. It literally says that it looks
at the marking. It says do not accept the text
says that they are social animals or any reference to the
fact that the text says they're social animals.
Yeah, but the question is how can you tell our social animal
unreal. I just think it's mad because
really what they're trying to do, it's very poorly worded.
Very. What they're trying to say is
what evidence is there to prove that they are social animals and
what they should have done is what they've always done in the
past, which is just quote the actual text.
Yeah, say like show the quote and quotation Marks and say what
evidence that backs up the fact that their social animals.
Then you obviously can't use the quote that's in the question.
Yeah, because I suppose a lot of children or defenders of this
even might say some children will know that they shouldn't
repeat the question. Yeah, So the question says how
can you tell St Turmeric social animals?
I would argue it's pretty obvious from a teaching point of
view. And some children might know you
don't simply repeat the question and the answer because that's
mad. However, in this exact case of
how it's worded, that is not wrong.
So to, to, for a mark scheme to say that it's wrong is
unbelievable. And what it's actually doing is
undermining the text as a whole because what it's what it's
suggesting there is no, no, you can't actually trust the text
unless you then back up with more stuff from the text.
Now, isn't it never happened before like that?
Yeah, that's that's never happened.
Yeah. It's always been the case where
there isn't a direct thing from the text.
You there's only evidence to back it up or there's not.
And if you write the quote and the question and then you answer
justifying the quote by writing the quote, that's very
specifically what we teach. They're not there.
Yeah. You know, if you have a question
saying, you know, how do you, how do you know or, or can you
explain something from the text? If it's just written in that
very simple turn of phrase, you're no longer explaining it,
just repeating it. Yeah.
So the explanation would be, and it would force you to go to the
text, find the quote and then read on.
And that's a comprehensive. Question could be like how can
you how can you tell that that street 10 rats like living
together Sure and it's OK because the text says are very
social animals exactly. Fine.
And you kind of test in Word meaning to a degree there.
Yeah, you know, in a way, because you need to know what
social means. Yeah, but that's a normal
question that's come up. Yeah, that just really annoy me
because you know what there's there's there's going to be a
huge amount of children who have been drilled.
Everything you do comes from the text and found the evidence and
they were just logically put because the text says they're
very social and they're thinking it's question three is an easy
question and and. Taken out from that even,
there'll be a whole bunch of children who have have got it
right. That's the end of it.
Like, yeah, there'll be a whole bunch of children who have
answered that question correctly.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Who?
Because of the mark scheme, because of the jumping through
hoops that they want you to do Because.
Because the question doesn't test what the question writer
wanted to test. They've just made the mark
scheme wrong because they're like, no, I don't want to test
that. It's like, well, write a
different question because that question isn't doing it.
Yeah. Yeah.
It's unbelievable. I'd say that to me.
I'm going to say right now that is the only question out of the
entirety of these tests, which I think is just completely wrong.
I think there are some we can argue weird.
There are some we can argue. Yeah, yeah, maybe too far, just.
Straight up a mistake. I'd argue that it's just a
terrible question. Yeah, it's wrong.
Yeah. Yeah, they would be able to
defend that, I don't think. No, I think it's a good point.
Now we can move on to another question that popped up.
And again, I'd love to know, by the way, anyone listening, what
your opinion is on this and especially if you're out of
school, are you aware this is what we're asking children to do
when they're ten? And do you think that's
appropriate? Because I think that's, again,
it's a separate conversation, but I think it's really
important. Or if you are a teacher, did you
notice some children really struggling on?
Some people get in touch with us.
They will find us on Instagram at Teach St People there.
Let me try one more time at Teach the Repeat podcast to find
us on Instagram. That is honestly the best way to
get in touch because I don't actually really check anything
else. So if you just go to Instagram,
you might find a few reels. Again, I'm not sure of their
political and I'm not a political.
Person No we're not. At the end of this episode and
talk about politics. So this is a really good point
to go now because Hayden and I, we love arguing.
Some might say it's debating. I'd say it's just straight up
arguing. Sometimes for the sake of it.
Yeah, because it's fun, even if we agree.
I often take up an opposing view of Hayden just to test his
opinion. Sometimes opposing.
Opposing of. You not opposing opposing this
one GPS paper. You sent me this.
Yeah, go on, you explained. It, it's a great question.
Yeah. And it's number change.
Great question in terms of like to talk about.
OK, So it's #50 it's the last question on GPS paper, which is
quite often really hard. If you look back at all the
previous papers, it's often #50 it's proper nasty.
And it says this circle, the two adjectives that are synonyms in
the sentence below and then the sentences.
The street was lined with grand houses.
The modest cottage stood out amongst its imposing neighbours.
So that's the question. Go on then, you reflect.
First of all, what do you think about if you saw that for the
first time? What would you?
What do you think kids should be doing to solve that question?
OK, I'm actually going to flip it very quickly before I tell
you that because the context was Hayden sent me this saying this
is incredibly true. This is not good.
This is a bad question. They said it was really.
Well, but then also a lot of people were saying that then
that the answers are not synonyms.
Yeah. And and then my point was that
they are. So, you know, we can talk about
how difficult this question. Is disagree, I guess because I
don't think they are synonyms. Real.
No, not anymore. I've gone back around.
OK, so OK, let's go for it then. So my point here is circle the
two adjectives that are synonyms in this sentence below.
Firstly, it's a circle, the two adjectives.
So straight away what I would expect children to do in this
case is you need to find two adjectives.
I'd be looking through the text and I'd be finding two
adjectives. You might argue, well that's
tricky because you might find 2 and then there's actually
another one. Yeah, cause they're very used to
having questions earlier on which are circle the two
objectives in this sentence and there are only two and that's
the point. So firstly, I'd say that's
something you could argue is just a bit of a trick.
Circle the two adjectives, but they read on that are synonyms.
So that suggests that there are maybe more than two.
So I would look at this sentence and I'd say, OK, well the
adjectives that are only three actually, and they come before a
noun. So that's very bread and butter
for a year. Adjectives are grand, modest and
imposing. And then, then comes the
second-half of the question, which is which to a synonyms.
Yeah. And again, in year six, I would
expect the average child to know that synonyms means has the same
meaning. Yeah, it means the same.
Thing words that mean the same. So grand, modest and imposing.
My opinion is it's very obvious that modest is the odd one out
there. Yeah.
And I would be saying, OK, well, even if you didn't know what
these words completely meant to grand and imposing you, in my
opinion, if you're at a higher level of your GPS understanding
and if you can identify adjectives and you know synonyms
means the same thing. I actually think this is a
really good question to test that Can you identify synonyms
even with you're unsure what words fully mean?
And again, my point is we need to have a scale of difficulty on
questions, otherwise we just go for the lowest common
denominator and the whole test would be really easy.
So yeah, yeah. For example, a synonym question
might be match the synonyms at its most basic level.
Yeah. And that was one like that
earlier. Yeah, there you go.
So this clearly has been designed to put two kind of
strands together, which alone can be quite simple.
Then make it tricky because the words are tricky as well with
word meaning. And I think it's a really good
last question is my opinion. And what what was your biggest
issue with the question? Let's dive into let's.
Is it? Cause it's almost like it's not.
It's not like I just fundamentally disagree with that
because I actually do over. It's a separate point I thought.
You said your last question. I think you can solve it in a
really interesting way. Like you said, if you read the
modest cottage stood out amongst its imposing neighbours.
Yeah, from that sentence alone, even if you didn't know what
modest imposing meant, knowing their adjectives, the way their
sentence is phrased, you know they mean opposite then.
Yeah. Yeah.
So that immediately gets rid of one of them.
And then you just have to work out.
The brand to be modest. Exactly that.
So we've test technique. I think you can solve this
question and it's a really good last hard question.
My problem with it was just literally like the raw
understanding of of synonyms. I just, I don't think that in
this sentence, and that's what I want to stress.
It says our synonyms in the sentence below.
I don't think grand and imposing are synonyms in that sentence.
I know they are synonyms outside of the context of this question,
but I just don't think they are synonyms, and they're not close
enough in meaning to. Actually be though so.
So my point here is you're, you're imposing a different
definition, by the way, as a verb, because this is imposing
as an adjective. You are kind of put, you are
projecting your understanding of these words onto this sentence.
In that sentence they are actually used emphasise, are
they? Yeah.
The street was lined with grand houses.
Let's imagine, let's just imagine it.
They mean big. OK Yeah, the street was lined
with big houses. The small cottage stood out
amongst its big neighbours. Yeah, absolutely.
From the authors point of view, you, you are kind of saying,
well, it's not used in this way. And I was like, well, it could
be Yeah, it could be. Because if we swap big, then
that's exactly what the author means.
And my, my only point here is if you search what is the
definition of imposing? Yeah, it the first word of the
definition is grand. Yeah, I'm not gonna disagree
with that. But my my point is, those two
words literally mean large. And I think an argument that
says, well, I don't use it, I use it, I use them in different
contexts is just irrelevant like they.
Literally just been basically. I don't think it's irrelevant.
I think it's relevant enough to confuse children in this
because. I think it's supposed to confuse
them. Yeah, yeah, I get it.
I get question 50, but I just think it went a bit too far.
I don't know, maybe it. Didn't you're saying earlier in
the text it had a very simple synonyms question?
So how on earth do we make synonym questions harder?
There's only two ways in my opinion, to make synonyms
question harder. One pick words that no children
will know. It's pointless.
I think you did without the context of the sentence, but
that would be just as hard if it was like Brandon imposing.
Are they synonyms or? Antonyms.
This. This is this is my point,
though. Hmm.
Like if what we're doing here is we're making it trickier because
if we just did it straight up, two words that children won't
have heard of. Yeah.
That is literally Eva. You're testing word knowledge
then. Yeah.
You're not actually testing if you know synonyms are.
What I think this question does really well is you can know what
synonyms are and get to the right answer without actually
fully knowing what these words mean.
That's the only testing what synonyms.
Do do you think this is interesting?
I thought I had when I was talking to someone about it.
Do you think that this question would be easier to do if you had
never actually experienced the words grand and imposing in real
life for force you had no understanding?
It depends. It depends how you've how you've
come across them. There's a lot of assumption.
Going on, so you've never got my point is you've never seen the
word grand or imposing before. So it's like proper you just
going back to like you're just using the whole thing that well,
I know modest and imposing must be opposite based on that
sentence and you're using that technique versus children who
maybe have a really good understanding of what they've
seen grand use loads in text and they've seen imposing user loads
in texts. Yeah, I guess my overall point
here is I think it's a disadvantage to know what they
mean and and. Because I think the overlap is
so small and not used in real life like grand is is
exclusively used exclusive easy isn't.
It it's not exclusive. It's not exclusive, though.
I don't think so. No one uses grounded.
We'll never. It will never be used not to be
a positive. Connotation is very often but
and again, OK, so I guess my whole point stepping back again,
there is fine. Like it is used as a positive
word, but it's always used to mean big.
And if someone uses it in a way that doesn't mean big, they're
using the word incorrectly. We can't.
You can't, you know, gonna test.
Well, some people get this wrong, so we won't put it in.
No, that's the reason why it's been putting in.
Yeah. Yeah.
Because if someone uses grand and it's not large, then they're
wrong. But that is not what the way
means. And if someone's using imposing
only in a negative context, that that doesn't mean it doesn't
mean big, it means it means big and scary.
Yeah, but like the point you can argue that that doesn't mean big
in that one imposing neighbours that that is probably more often
used to mean like neighbours that are like literally like
getting, getting in your way, they're overbearing or.
Their overwhelming. That's using.
That's using the verb, not the adjective.
No, I I can impose my name is encroaching on someone.
I I've got imposing neighbours. I could say that the house is
exactly the same size as mine, but why they say they're not
imposing? That's my point.
You're using the word wrong that you haven't got imposing them
because they're bigger than you. No, I could do.
I could be describing them as imposing, surely.
How? Because they're like they're
overbearing. They're they're they're.
Being so large in a different sense.
Yeah, but like metaphorically. Yeah, but why?
Why is that? There doesn't have to be
physical size, right? Now.
But it's just my name is just supposing without specifically
meaning they are physically. Matter.
I also think in that case you're using a slightly different
definition. Yeah, but you don't know what
the definition it could be either in that one.
There's no reason to believe that that.
So you're. Saying neighbours is kind of
like the size of the house. So do you think never in
synonyms questions we should use words that have more than one
meaning? No, but there's no way to
actually know in that one. There is because it's either
modest or grand like that. There there.
There are no other synonyms in that.
Question, you know, I know, but I'm just saying you could argue
and we're just gonna assume that when we're saying posing
neighbours, we talk about the size of the houses was it could
that it could very like legitimately mean they're
imposing. Fine, that's fine.
But I'm saying so in any case where there's more than one
definition for a word, you could say, well, it might mean this.
Yeah, that's fine, but the next word should actually just make
it clear that is one context or the other if it's if.
It's important. I, I think I just disagree.
I think this is just a hard question and I I can't get over
the fact that they literally mean the same thing.
Like, honestly, someone could sit there for an hour and
explain to me how they've used it wrong in the past.
Or other people might use it in a different context.
Like I, I, my response always would be yeah, but they do mean
they they mean. Big.
I reckon even taking out the in the sentence below would
actually help a little in terms of they're just synonyms,
because I just think it's such a big argument for that that
they're not. They're as far away from
synonyms as it gets in the context of that sentence with
two words that are technically synonymous.
Dictionary definition. That's my point I guess,
overall. Yeah, I don't know.
I don't know. Yeah, it's funny cause I've just
gone for the black and white route of.
Yeah, the Arsenal games. Though they mean the same thing.
Though, Yeah, no, I know. I get it.
Yeah. And it's not wrong.
Like that's all. I will make that really clear.
Yeah. I don't think this question is
incorrect or wrong. I just think it's really hard
and and I was trying to explore why.
I don't know what you guys think.
I'm I again, I I don't want people to think I'm saying it's
a easy question. No, no, no, it's a hard
question. I'm simply arguing that it's not
a bad. Question.
It's solvable. Yeah, it's it's a hard question,
which isn't wrong. Yeah, and lots of kids have got
it right with the exact logic as we thought of and they wouldn't
have remotely thought what I'm thinking of.
No, I just or they might have known that grounded imposing.
Both mean big because they. Do.
Yeah, yeah, which is true. I can't argue with that.
They do mean. Cool.
There's another question. Yeah, this was in a maths.
I found this fascinating. I want to explain exactly what
happened in this situation. So this is from the master paper
for year six children who are 10 and 11 year olds.
What did someone find? A more interesting way, I'm
gonna read out two questions to you, and I want you to just you
can tell me and you can think if you're listening, what the
difference is. Really.
I guess there's one question. OK, that zoom in, I can't read
it. Chin.
Good old Chen Chen buys these four items.
I wonder what test this was from Rechen.
Yeah. Yeah, OK, For items you got 670
grammes of apples, 1 LB fifty, 400 grammes of bread for nought
#71 reading, as it says. Other women certainly pay full
impact of the pound. Sign.
Not every time. So it's in Pence.
Not pounds, yeah, not pounds. 500 grammes of butter, but
there's no price. And then there's 750 grammes of
cereal for £1.45. And it says Chen pays for the
four items with a £10 note. The price of the butter is not
shown. She receives £3.85 change.
So what was the price of the butter?
That's a fantastic. Question.
Great question. I love that question is really
good. And there's another question I'm
gonna read to you. Danny buys one loaf of bread for
one pound, 21 bottle of milk for 70 P, It says 70 P this time 2
packets of cheese with £2.30. Each packet.
Danny pays with a £10 note. He says I should get £3.30
change. Is Danny correct?
You must show how to get your answer.
They're two very different, 22 very similar sorry questions.
One is from the year 6 Sats and one is from GCSE.
And people might already be like, well that's crazy.
I don't think that's crazy because actually the GCSE does
go right back and it's like the Sats has year three questions
in. The GC also has some easier
questions in it. That's fine.
I'd argue the GC one is actually easier.
Yeah, I'd say it's a little bit easier the.
Missing unknown like you know. Exactly that and, and the
problem people have in this, I got this from Facebook, the
problem people were having was that GCSE one gives you 3 marks,
right? And it's two marks on the Sats
question. And their point was for God's
sake, why are 11 year olds like expected to do this kind of in
two steps? Because it can be done in two
steps, by the way, both of them. But like in GC, they're awarded
kind of more marks. And I guess the straight up
counter argument could be maybe everything proportionally gives
you more Marks and GCSE's, in which case it's it's an
irrelevant comparison then if everything gives you a bit more
marks. Anyway, I would also argue that
the GCSE one, there are two steps mathematically, but then
you also have to explain whether he's right or wrong.
Yeah, so you are, you are actually doing another step
there. Yeah.
So it says, is Daisy correct? You must show evidence.
So you're getting your two marks for doing your maths, and then
you've got to write a sentence to explain.
What you do actually because is there any correct?
Could be yes or no and I think the evidence is just the maths
like it would be in the. Here I'm using the masking
productivity I'm assuming. I'm assuming there's a mark for
saying. Yes or no, you must show how you
get your. Answer.
I don't know. I don't.
Know, but yeah, it's interesting how they're thirty of the same
sort of questions. Yeah, four years later.
There was something else in that question I saw a lot of people
say and I, I really disagree with them again, which is that
in this question you've just described, again, if you
remember Hayden reading out, he read all the weights of the
items that they've purchased. And at no point in the question
are the weights used to get to the answer relevant.
And I, my opinion on that is that I completely sympathise
with people who say, oh, they're 10 and 11, Why are we giving
them information they don't need?
Solved question because it's hard enough to understand that
they've got to find the total of the amount that's there, work
out the change and then what's left still for how much the
butter. But, and I would completely
agree with those people. And I would say if that if the
weights were in this question, I wouldn't bat an eyelid.
I'd be like, cool, that's still a fantastic question.
I still think it's a fantastic question.
But I, I think it's fair in a problem solving question to put
information that children have to decide whether it's relevant
or not. And I would argue that it's not
hard in that question to very quickly figure out that the
grammes aren't relevant. Yeah.
And and that's a very small step to take in terms of problem
solving. And I would say that is testing
problem solving. And for a child finishing
primary school, I think it's acceptable to expect a child to
know that they don't need to know.
The grounds I agree, even though it's a maybe an overload of
information that it is so easy to tell it's not relevant in
that question. I think people's more wider
point was that it's not there's not a problem with this
question. It's more that it happened too
often in the paper. People were saying they were
just one too many questions where they were just putting in
these really intricate traps of extra information they don't
need. It was like, OK, we get the
point. It's kind of like you talk about
the answer box. Yeah, you take it was like,
yeah, OK, we, you get the idea that it's good to see if they
can interpret the answer box in different places, but eight
times, because if they can't now they got it wrong 8 times.
Like, do we really need to make every single question have all
these extra information that's not needed?
I think that was the overall point.
And I don't really think that was the case.
I think people exaggerate a little bit.
I thought most of the paper was was OK.
The 2nd paper was just particularly tricky.
And you know what, the last five or six questions on the
reasoning papers are traditionally much, much harder.
Really high level year 6 reasoning.
Problems, that's why it's it's actually a really, in my
opinion, a very, you know, high level to get to greater depth in
maths. I think it's a really good
achievement, yeah. And if a child gets greater
depth in them year six Sats, I think they're a fantastic.
Mathematician. Yeah, definitely.
It's very hard to get that again.
Yeah, it's not easy. It's not easy.
Whereas I would say reading, although I'd say you're a
fantastic reader. Thank you.
I'd say getting great depth from reading is still obviously
really impressive, but I I would expect it from more children.
Do you think? Yeah, there's just from what I
see in terms of the, the, the marks a bit lower.
There's a lot of technique to get there, unfortunately.
Yeah, I would say that there are a lot more fantastic readers
than fantastic mathematicians just from my day-to-day.
Experience with them. Quick question for you, slightly
side track, but it's still saturated our having a
discussion with our SLT recently because context everybody else
ask at the moment we're going through some English changes.
We're trying to just up level our English really our whole
curriculum. So we're really, really thinking
about it and taking it slowly and just making sure we get the
foundations. And, um, we were having a
discussion about reading and I forgot what I was going to say.
What were you just saying? What?
Was talking about in general, as a teacher, what's going wrong?
You do have amnesia. Yeah.
As a teacher, in general, I think there are more better
readers. Ohh, yeah.
That. I'm gonna finish what I'm
saying. I'm gonna finish one second,
please. There are more better readers.
And I'm interested what people think about this.
There are more people I put a high level of reading than a
high level of maths. I mean, it's harder to get to a
high level of maths. Sure.
Yeah, OK, that's fair enough. Cool.
Back to my point, because I remember it now.
So the to get expected in. Reading.
Good job. Stop editing, wasn't it?
We could be straight into this, sat through me talking now
didn't, and Hayden having a moment where his eyes honestly
died inside. Yeah, yeah.
So to get expected in reading, you gotta gotta still, OK.
Generally, Generally across the years, about half the marks on
the reading paper gets you expected right, which is quite
pretty forgiving. Isn't it?
Yeah. Pretty much sometimes, but
whatever, it's around half. And my point is always when I
talk to it, I was like, I reckon we could never, ever, ever teach
comprehension in the style of testing, right?
Sure. We just teach kids to read and
like books and we will. It wouldn't really make a
difference to our our data because I fundamentally believe
that those papers are forgiving enough that children that can
just read at age expected level will get expected anyway.
This is kind of what I'm getting at.
I agree. That's what I mean, like when I
say if you're just a really good reader, yeah, you will just do
well on that test. Yeah, that's what I think.
I really do. I really believe that.
And I'd be willing to bet that obviously it's not the kind of
bet that some schools will be like, OK, let's just gamble.
And you were worried about them. But I really, it's such a low
threshold to get age expected. It's like yeah OK, all test
technique might have got your extra 3 Marks and.
We'll test technique, help children who can't read properly
suddenly read. Properly, no, it's just not get.
It just helps them. Maybe over the line Maybe.
It looks good for the score, but not better.
Readers, do they love reading? Yeah.
Do they get exposed to lots of genres?
That's what whole class reading is fantastic and it's the way to
go. Yeah, definitely, absolutely.
I'm all for that now. I'm really, really switched my
mindset away from because you know, we've done a lot of tests,
style questions. We look at old papers and you
got right, Mark, the classic 3. Any teacher listening that will
know this. Yeah, let's have a look at 3
Mark questions guys and how to answer them.
You need two points and one evidence.
There's only ever two that come up on a paper, Yeah.
And it's so easy to get one or two marks.
Yeah, even without any understanding of those questions
about generally. I completely agree.
Shift the mindset, enjoy reading, get better at reading.
That's all that. I don't have a problem with
people saying it by the way, if I don't have a problem with
someone saying to their kids this is how you answer these
efficiently. But doing it to death years and
years and years and years over and over and lessons all the
time. Like it's just unnecessary.
Just focus on getting your kids to like reading books.
That is it. They will pass the test if they
just like reading and therefore can read.
And that is their wider issue with the tests at all.
Yeah, Is that it's only because they exist that we're even
having this. Discussion, though ironically,
we probably stopped teaching. Kids, the Sats didn't exist,
right? It wouldn't even be a question
as to how we're doing this. Yeah, but what, You're gonna
read a book? Yeah, we're gonna read this
amazing book with these kids and they're gonna.
Love it. I would go as far as arguing
that kids would be better readers on average across the
whole country if we didn't have Sats.
Yeah, because I think our natural instinct would be to do
it right. But Howard Gillian Keegan in her
election campaign say every 5 minutes.
We've got the best readers of the Muslim world.
Yeah, they can pass the test. We.
Do we? Do we have the best readers in
the Western world? Well, do you know what?
It comes at a horrible price that kids resent reading.
Yeah, it's a shame Labour brought in too much testing,
wasn't it? Done.
Yeah, they did. They did, They did.
And we're going to talk about politics right now.
Actually, we're gonna go into it.
We've heard quite a long episode so far.
But we, we do really want to talk about selection.
So let's talk about it. Cool.
This week, OK, well, if you're listening, I guess last week it
was announced that the general election will be happening on
the 4th of July. OK, you're going to get scared.
You scared of you? Anyone listening to this knows
that there is a theme running through our podcast where we're
not worried about talking about politics, basing and holding
people to account. So I wanted just to start by
saying we will talk politics in these next few weeks.
It's just bound. To Can I start by saying sorry
in advance? I'm really sorry.
Dylan is unbelievably passionate about.
Politics. So yeah, I am passionate.
I am passionate. However, I wanna just outline a
few things I found a lot interesting in the last week or
so and I found myself in a position that I've never been in
during an election. So I want to lay it all out
there. But the point is it's going to
be a general election. We know it's coming this year.
No one thought it was going to be in the 4th of July.
I can hear the Hayden's little I I thought no like it will be the
end of the year. Lots of people thought that
because what I would Rishi Sunak done sooner.
He's so far behind, but he's called it yeah.
It's gonna be in the middle of the EUR Hmm, middle of the
summer, very random. And anyway, so I just want to
start off by saying to people, we said we were gonna talk about
the election this week. And straight away I thought to
myself, right, God, I need to brush up.
I need to brush up my knowledge about this.
I want to get things right. If I'm going to be sat in the
podcast talking about it, putting out to people and
clearly saying my views and opinions.
And, and I know for a fact, Hayden, you probably thought
I've got, I don't know anything. About that, I'm way less in
politics than you. I really try to avoid it at
most. And a lot of people do.
And a lot of people I spoke to at school kind of said, what
does that mean? Then when I said they'll be an
election, I was like, I had to remember that not everyone's me.
Like, yeah, I live on Wednesdays at lunchtime.
I put Prime Minister's Questions on like, that's just whether
it's, you know, whether it's, you know, happening or not,
That's just what I do, whether it's an election.
So I know that I am part of the less than 1% of people who
really keep out of this kind of stuff.
But then I thought to myself, I don't need to brush up.
No, I don't actually. And you don't either.
No. And that's really important
because this is a general election.
Everyone gets a vote. So actually us like swatting up
on stuff beforehand and getting knowledgeable about ohh, it's
exactly this. That's not really
representative, is it? Because if, if we weren't doing
this podcast, you'd trundle through your life and then come
July 4th, you'd vote for you gonna.
Vote for represent you normal people out there that will just
sort of read the odd headline the other article and then get
overwhelmed by it all and just wait for Dylan to tell you
what's. Going on, we have a little chat
and just just just dive straight in.
So I hope people at home, you know, feel free.
Please Fact Check us. You know, a lot of it's just
going to be opinion, a lot of it, and I'm gonna talk about
that so. Where do you wanna start?
I've been making some Instagram reels.
OK, so straight away, so I'll be really honest, I'm gonna lay my
cards on the on the line here table.
Yeah, wow, that's made-up. Maybe I'll say I am incredibly
sorry, incredibly excited by the prospect of the conservatives
not being in power anymore. Yeah, I am incredibly anti
conservative. I think the whole idea of what
they stand for and more importantly what they've
actually done, I'm talking about a track record now since 2010 is
dreadful. And I've seen the decimation of
education, having worked in it as well.
And I've seen the decimation of funding and I've seen the level
of standards that we allow our children to get drop off.
And the only reason those levels are where they should be is
because of the hard work and determination of people who work
in school. So I don't think the government
have done any favours for us whatsoever, but we've seen
there's only so much we can actually do about correct
funding and we've seen the provision for our most
vulnerable kids drop through the floor.
We've seen it in front of us. We've seen that we can't afford
our heating bills anymore because the energy price cap
came in for households, but it did not come in for schools
because it's classes like a business or a separate thing.
So schools never got a cap on their energy prices, they just
doubled. Schools are ordering books and
paper for their children to do stuff in.
That cost is just doubled. I was talking to the person who
orders books in our school two years ago.
It costs £1500 to get all the books for the year.
Now it costs £2800 to get all the books of the year.
No more. So I said to him, ohh, it's a
good job at least budgets doubled sarcastically.
And he went no, no they haven't. I was like, I know I'm just
joking, but these are the things that you don't see and and that
1300 LB extra that we've got to find now for the books just to
deliver children. The curriculum that has to come
from somewhere. So that's coming from, I don't
know, maybe a TA we. Can't.
Either way, we're talking about exercise books.
We're not even talking about like actual reading, but we're
talking about blank books for them to write their work in.
Quick thing about actual work, by the way.
Had a discussion with the other day and we were trying to think
of other ways around buying books because we literally can't
afford the reading books. Yeah, literally can't afford
them. Like we do not have the budget.
We're gonna have to think of another way to show kids books.
So that was like brilliant. The the big thing that I wanted
to talk about here is, and I want people to understand this,
like whatever you want to vote for, whoever you, whoever you,
there are a lot of people sat there going ohh, but I don't
like Labour. I don't I like Labour probably
the least I've ever liked Labour right now in terms of they're
not exciting to me. They seem very close to the
Conservatives and a lot of stuff in terms of we'll see, Yeah.
And I really want them over the next few weeks to come out with
some stuff I've seen when I lower the voting age.
And that's brilliant. To me.
That's very anti establishment. Yeah, I like that because I
don't think many people in places of power would actually
be thinking that's a good idea, because it would, it tends to be
against. Traditionally, younger people
vote Labour. And people vote, so of course it
makes sense for Labour want to do that.
Yeah. So I quite like that.
But you know what? Ignore that for a second,
because what winds me up, and I want people to do more of
instead is judge on what's happened.
The people who have been in charge 14 years.
Rather than imagine what other people might have done in
charge. Yeah, and, and I can't deal
anymore with anything going wrong and someone saying, yeah,
because Gordon Brown sold the bloody gold for peanuts.
No, it's not though, is it? It's not because of something
happened in 2008. Really.
At this point, austerity was a choice.
And he might argue it was a good choice.
We had to do it because of the global situation.
Fine. But it was still a choice.
The the level we went to for the cards.
And. And, yeah, when someone says
they're all the same, aren't they?
They're not, they're not all the same.
Now that's the point. And do you know what?
If they are all the same? Right.
Let's try the other ones for a bit then.
Yeah, let's just see, shall we? So, you know if Tory and Labour
are the same, which they're not. But if they were.
OK, cool. Well, have the the one, the one
thing that I've had power 14 years.
Have you liked what they've done?
Do you feel better off because of what they've done?
No. OK, well, I'll try the other
thing that you're saying. It might not be, but it is the
same. What's grounded?
Imposing, isn't it? It's like, oh, they're all the
same. They mean the same.
Yeah, they're not really. They are.
They never actually used in the same, actually completely
different and never use the same ever.
So I don't think Labour and Tory are synonyms.
So. Funny, all the same, they are.
All the same, in that they both mean politicians.
Ohh need joking your brain like. I'm worried like what my
argument? If you're wrong actually.
It's OK to what I think, Yeah. And the thing that honestly gets
me wound up the most, I've been making quite a few reels about
politics and it's hilarious because some hit the algorithm
and they just go to people. They've got nothing to do with
teaching obviously causing politics post and the amount of
people seen who go all the same. You should just fight reform.
I'm like ohh that that's the thing you shouldn't do what
makes. What on earth makes you think
that reform are better than them too?
Why do you not automatically think reform are the same?
Like because they sound like they want to reform.
It's in the name. It's like it's just run by a
millionaire who. Backed rolls.
You realise it's a bunch of ex bankers?
Yeah, OK. Yeah, like this is the
establishment you're saying? You are fight against on social
media reform. It's I don't know about anyone
that just on like TikTok, Instagram.
Reels on one of the things that makes about 15 over the.
Cheers all round about all the comments.
Are anything politically like I'm voting reform, reform.
It is just a flood of it. But you know what was exactly
the same? It was the same with UKIP.
Remember everyone, everyone vote.
UKIP was unbelievably loud about it.
Yeah, ohh, vote UKIP, right. You only about Ukip's like OK,
I'll just ignore it now, the reformers or whatever.
And it's like, OK, you can talk about conspiracies and if you
think people putting, I think corporations absolutely are
putting their fingers in all the pies and influencing people.
And when business come out and say they're supporting Labour
now, it's actually a bit of a red flag.
Me, I don't think that's an amazing thing.
You can see why the establishment might think it's a
good thing or the papers or whatever.
But when like, you know, if Walmart, you know, they're
American, like come out and sell Tesco, come and say, yeah, we're
backing Labour. I'm like, ohh, yeah, that's
weird because for me, Labour stands for the working rights of
the people. Yeah.
And I don't feel like you would care much about that at all.
So like, whilst people might be like, ohh, that's cool.
Personally, that's not that's making me.
Less it just gives you an idea that maybe Labour have more
centric than they are. They're right in the centre,
they're right in the centre and there's a place for centric
policy. And someone made a comment and
it was really good point. I was like, there there is a
place for being in the centre, right?
Yeah. And if you get stuff done and,
and it comes boils down to this for me, cause a lot of people
are very anti care Starmer saying, well, they promised to
scrap tuition fees when he became leader.
He promised to do this. He promised to do that.
I was like, OK, that's a fine grievance because you might have
backed him thinking he wants to stand for this stuff.
And now he's not. That's fair grievance.
But what I would say to someone who's saying that is to become
to be in power, he had to become the leader of the Labour Party.
And the way that works is you need to be voted in by its
supporters who found at the mouth of Jeremy Corbyn, who's
extremely left wing. And they were thinking of
reforming how they even choose it because the base is so left
wing and the Labour Party that unless you have those left wing
policies, you'll never get chosen as leader.
Yeah. So we have to do that.
That's this is what like someone who's just maybe being a bit
more straightforward might say. And then when he became Labour
leader, if he ran on the same principles as Jeremy Corbyn,
he'd get absolutely rinsed. Them would never come anywhere.
You had to do something. Different, yeah.
So to me, the number one thing you have to do is get in power
and then you can start judging people on a different kind of
note and the same way I've just said you should judge the Tories
and what they've done. Yeah, OK, cool.
Well, we might hold our noses and vote for Labour.
A lot of people, because we just can't stand with the Tories,
have done. But then what we have to do from
day one, if Keir Starmer gets in is be on his back.
It's OK. What you gonna do then?
We're gonna keep accountable. And I really don't want to give
him a free pass. Like a lot of people will like
what people do for the Tories. Now, I would hate if I became
that for Labour. And just like something that was
clearly wrong, they just went, oh, that's alright, Labour.
So I'll just I'll. Agree.
I agree. It's a weird system, isn't it?
Very, very. Weird.
What's your core instincts now? As someone who's not involved in
politics, I'm very interested. But right now, what are you
thinking? What are your thoughts?
On my core instinct is is is a is a is a broken system anyway.
It's two party system. Literally nothing matters unless
you vote Tory or Labour. Genuinely.
Like I get you argue the seats and all that but honestly it
really doesn't matter if you only care really about who's
actually in charge. The only thing you can do at
this point if you don't Tories in is vote Labour.
That's the way I see it. Which I don't like.
I don't like that. That's the thing.
Vote tactically or vote tactically?
What do you mean by that? Because to me that is just
voting Labour. Yes.
So the way the system works again is there are 650 seats
across the country. Yeah.
Countries get into 650. To have a government, you need
more than half because then when someone suggests a law, you know
you've got over half. So it will go through.
That's how government works, basically.
You just need. So we could technically work on
our government where no one has more than half.
That's what coalitions are for. Yeah.
They basically say we'll work together and we'll all vote.
Yes. Yeah.
So we get past halfway. Yeah.
Or you might work for minority
government. I think Theresa May for a bit
had one where she had like she was like 8 seats less than half.
So that's why she had to deal with the DUP.
Right, Irish people make up some.
Who said, OK, well, we're not, we're not necessarily a
coalition, but we've got a deal. You'll vote through our
policies. We'll give you 1 1/2 billion
pounds. That's what happened.
Yeah. So they, you know, there's deals
to be made. Voting tactically is simply
saying every single individual scene, you look at the general
vibe of the population and you vote for whoever is the best
party in terms of number of votes that isn't Conservative.
Yeah, so, and this is what I would do.
Sure. So I'm, I'm so I'm much more
anti Conservative than pro Labour.
But in my constituency where we live, the 2nd place was Labour.
So I'm voting for Labour. Yeah, so and, and, and the point
of voting tactically would be if you really support the Lib Dems
or the Greens or even reform, whatever, whoever it is, if you
are more anti Tory than you are pro any kind of Labour or any
other one, you would say, OK, well I want them to not be a
Conservative MP. So I'm going to give my vote to
Labour this time. Yeah.
So the ones that are gonna get most likely to get it so.
In my constituency, if someone said they're gonna vote leave
them or Green, I would say to them, would you consider holding
your nose and voting Labour? Otherwise, Conservatives will
get in because we need to get past the Conservative.
But yeah, what stupid system. Right.
It's completely broken and I completely agree and a lot of
people and that's not right and I'm like it's not right.
But is the system we have. So actually we gotta use it for
now. Yeah, all you need to do is
Google tactical vote or vote tactically and there's literally
websites where you can put a postcode in.
It'll show you a breakdown and who you should vote for if you
want to vote. Tactically, yeah, absolutely.
Mental to me, absolutely. Someone not in the world.
I just think I just don't know what to think about.
It is crazy. But yeah, I, I mean, I will be
like, I will be voting Labour for that exact reason and I
probably would vote Labour. Anyway, if you were somewhere
where Labour were literally pulling it like 5% and and Lib
Dems were 30 and Conservatives were 40, would you still vote
Labour? I know I did the tactical thing
hundred percent, 100% because like you, I'm, I'm more anti
Tory than anything else. I just want them out of power.
I don't really, I don't, I don't care who comes in next.
I just want to be Tories again. I, I think, I don't think
there's much they could have done to make it worse.
And a lot of people always say that like, oh, I'll be worse if
Labour. I'm like, would it would be
quite hard, genuinely. You're not even disagreeing that
it could be. Yeah, I'm not those people.
That's like, ohh, no it couldn't possibly because Labour are
great. Like the idea.
So no, the idea. I actually don't really care if
Labour and and Conservatives switched all of their policies,
I'd then be voting Conservative. I'm not against the word
conservatives, I just don't like what they've represented
generally and what they've done to the country.
I think it has diminished in lots and lots of ways when it
didn't need to. Some things are out of our
control. That's fine.
I'll never blame the Tories in the same way I won't blame
Labour for the global market crash and things like that.
It's like, but there are other things where it has just
diminished that they have just literally chosen they, they did
it did take a footballer to convince them to give kids food.
Yeah. And it's like stuff like I'm
like, but that's, that's one example is like that happens
every year. There's a massive thing like
that where they just don't wanna do help anyone.
But they'll line the pockets of their mates visibly and
obviously and have a WhatsApp group where they laugh about it
and get away with it and have a party during COVID and nothing
ever comes of any of it. And I'm sick of that.
So I, I just want to give someone else a chance.
I always don't really care. Do you know what if Reform UK
were the highest voted thing in our in our thing, they were 45%
and and the and the service on 46 that said I don't know, but I
would though. I would just I'd be like, yeah,
OK, it knocks off another Conservatives.
Is that not a tactical? I'd rather have a Conservative
government than a reformed government, so therefore I
wouldn't. Deal.
OK, Fair enough. Yeah, absolutely.
If the choice was between before on Conservative, yeah,
absolutely. Rather have a Conservative
government because Reform are just the fringes of the Tories
who are left because they're annoyed going eating their full
English going. How long till the full English
is called racist? That's the kind of people who
are going to. Reform fair enough is where I
don't know stuff. Knowing that would obviously
impact my. Reform have some policies like
they want low tax, they want written constitution, yeah,
there's there's there's things that they can say which which
sound good. Yeah, I'm not again, it would be
stupid to say that everything about them ever is awful because
if they came out and said yeah, we want to recruit more teachers
and Labour have said they want to recruit more teachers, it's
not now bad because Reform said it.
Yeah, but as a whole, Reform being bankrolled by Richard
Tyson and his own personal wealth and having people like
Lee Anderson joined them, who's just an idiot, like, OK, that's
OK, That's the vibe. Then I.
Don't want them in charge. I think maybe terrible old
Nigel. He's normally loud around this
time. Lost every single election he's
ever been involved in, never become an MP.
He has come out and said that he won't be running because he
because John White, because he's focusing on the US election,
which by the way is later on in the year complete Trump's Mr
Trump. But you know, he cares so much
about Britain. Cares so much about Britain.
Yeah, he couldn't possibly involved in general election
though, because there's not American beneficial.
The reason is because you wouldn't.
Win. Yeah, he's a celebrity and he
got out of it. Yeah, so fair enough.
Been popping up on my feed recently.
Jeremy Corbyn? Really.
Have you seen his standing independently in Islington?
Yeah, he'll probably win. Yeah, he's been around for so
long and that yeah, that whole idea of I imagine in his, in his
seat, he is very well known and and I think I, I get the
impression he's a really good local MP.
Can you explain to me? I actually don't understand this
and you probably will. So a lot of people were saying,
ohh yeah, Jeremy Corbyn for PM, but he couldn't possibly, he
couldn't possibly be taking votes to be the Prime Minister.
He's only trying to get a. Seat in his area, right?
So, So no one votes for a Prime Minister.
So no, no one ever actually, because the Prime Minister,
right. And they sure, that's why that's
why you know when Liz Truss took over Boris Johnson and when
Rishi Sunak overtook Liz Truss of technically there was nothing
wrong with that because people voted for their local MP.
That's cool. So you know when we.
Vote how it works. But so many people in the
comments were like, yeah, we're voting for the Prime Minister.
I was thinking, I don't think that's how.
I'm pretty sure that's not how it works.
So he's just trying to be voted in.
That and as an independent, he has literally zero chance of
becoming Prime Minister because even if he got voted in all that
was happening in the backbenches, yeah, he'd have one
vote every time. Yeah, but you know he wouldn't
be at all in a. Party to remember there, though.
I like that different there. Well, this is the thing about
Corbyn. I've really like shifted off
him. But I think that's because it's
always the context of like, yeah, he he, he does.
He's really, really, really, really left.
I want to talk to you about this.
He's really, really, really left.
And that pushes a lot of people out because he's very, very high
tax, very, very much, you know, is seen as, you know, an
extremist sympathiser. We can talk about whether
specialist, yeah, we can talk about how true those accusations
are or not anti-Semitic because everything happened in the
Labour Party and stuff like that.
But yeah, again, we can talk about whether that's true,
whether that's false, whatever, whatever.
It's like a conversation that is honestly not even relevant
anymore because we're living in a different time.
But the thing that I find interesting is how influential
people on the extremes can be when it comes to running a
party. So let's take the Labour, the
Conservative for example, right now, she soon hack is very much
beholden to the extreme right wing of the Conservative Party.
So that's why we've got policies like the Rwanda bill.
Yeah, that's why he's trying to really crack down on student
immigration to come. And in our universities, which I
don't think anyone who's moderate thinks is bad, but he's
like, yeah, I'm gonna, I'm going to clamp down on that because it
makes the right wing of his party happy.
They'll keep supporting him and things like that.
And the point is in the current system we have, let's say Labour
get a majority of on it, like 20.
Let's just say they get 20, more than half it within that 20,
let's say there's 30 or 40 of them out of 380 MP's who are
extremely left wing and the Labour Party, they then have the
power to veto any law. So these small minorities
extremes have huge power in these parties because let's say
here Slama wants to bring something very centrist in the
left, the left, right. No, no, no, no, no.
We can't lower tax for rich people for whatever reason.
They have the power to vote no, and it won't get through as law,
even though it's only about 40 people, because that, that, that
number of votes takes you past halfway.
Hmm. And that's what's happened with
the Tories a lot in the last few years.
Yeah. Which is the right wing I've got
No, no, not voting for that. And then they can't get law
through. That's why Theresa May stopped
being. Prime in their own party.
It's like, yeah, because. Theresa May could get Brexit
done because there was nothing could get through Parliament
because the extreme right wing were like, no, it's not right,
we're not leaving. But you, you want us to stay in
the customs union? You want us to stay linked with
Europe not having it. And their own party were
blocking them. So my point here is we could end
up seeing if Labour get a smaller majority.
Yeah, we could end up seeing these small pockets of Labour
having a lot of influence and a lot of people won't like that.
Really interesting. A lot of people voted Labour
will be ohh, don't know about that.
Get Jesser back, you're gonna do yourself up for a lot of haters.
No, I think I'm because I'm not really that into politics.
I just they're all like. Everyone gets broadband that
sounds good. Yeah, do you know what even
that's all I resonate with Jeremy Corbyn is.
I just think he's a nice human being.
And in my experience of politics in my whole life, I don't think
any other politician is a nice human being.
I'm not even not even joking. I'm not even exaggerating.
I I genuinely don't think that is in single other politician at
the top is a nice person. I think they're all horrible,
horrible people. Whereas I think Jeremy Corbyn,
yeah, was an actual nice human being and I don't think it was
even fake. I think he genuinely cares about
people. So a couple of things gonna come
back on very quickly is he's got a lot of anti-Semitic people
saying he's anti-Semitic. So I would be very careful
saying. That to me, that's just being
completely, completely derailed and debunked and and very much.
Proven to be. That's fine.
The the cause of like big money and conservative.
Partners I don't know because it's just there's a lot from
inside. The Labour Party said he was
anti-Semitic as well. It just, it's just nonsense to
me. Cares about everyone in the
world, is in his whole life talking about literally everyone
and every action he's ever done proves that he loves and cares
about every single human being except except Jews.
Jewish people. But he also didn't condemn
Hamas. Who?
You just didn't. He hasn't condemn them, but in
this whole Israel. Have you seen the entire
government also not doing that now?
No, they've condemned Hamas. I took my while I didn't.
Read about they hate hammer. You mean the Israel government?
No, our government, they were very much throw up ages.
They weren't taking. They weren't taking sides.
Right, They took Israel side immediately.
That was the whole. Point, right.
OK, Yeah, everyone took it did, yeah.
That's right. Yeah.
But I'm just saying like, not condemning Hamas is insane.
Yeah. There are terrorist organisation
who attacked and invaded another country and took hostages and
killed hundreds of people. So as soon as someone doesn't
condemn Hamas, yeah, I am like, that's really weird and it does
stink of antisemitism. Does it?
Does it ring through the same other other way round though?
When it was like it took them months to not condemn Israel for
literally like decimating suggestions.
I think there's there was a bit of a grace period where it was
like, you gonna retaliate. Yeah.
But when they're consistently
bombing innocent children in Palestine, I think Israel are
disgusting as well. Yeah.
So all I'm saying here is it's fine for us to say that's how
could you not condemn Israel for literally killing millions of
innocent people? That's crazy.
Why are they still doing this and coming off the water and
doing war crimes? Yeah.
OK, but also we can't then ignore people who don't condemn
Hamas. No, but it's the same thing in
terms of but the problem is because Jeremy Corbyn was then
derailed. He lost his whole career and
he's anti-Semitic for not doing that.
The the current government for literally doing the same thing
and not condemning Israel for months after they killed
millions, but they took thousand children.
It's ohh, no, they're they're not all they're not racist.
They're. Not racist, no.
No, but I'm saying they are. Yeah, I know.
A lot of people are saying that. My point is it was very active,
very differently. We'd happily talk about
government now, but this is right.
Areas like Jeremy, Ohh, no, those anti-Semitic things like
yeah, it's no different to. Yeah, but what I'm saying is I'm
not. I'm not stood here.
You're stood here and you'd really like Jeremy Corbyn on
those eyes and I really like she's doing that or I really
like. No, I know.
Yeah. Like so that is the difference.
But my point is you could you were you were in anyway that was
a bit dangerous to say, like Jeremy I.
Think it's also dangerous to say like.
Yeah, but it is OK, that's completely fine.
And our society like you wouldn't get people could come
at me now and be like you're anti-Semitic now because you
like Jeremy Corbyn. But yeah, if if I said I'd like
to wish you soon out and people would come up to me and say,
ohh, you hate Palestinians. Yeah, I think it's just, it's
just I think a lot of people. Would entail maybe?
But yeah, you're But we got right wing press.
Yeah, you got the establishment who are considerably right wing.
And that's what I don't get when people say like everything's
left wing. So yeah, what is it is.
It I, I don't, yeah, I'm, I'm too down a hole now.
Jeremy Corbyn. There's so many logical reasons
for that. Just just so.
Obviously he wasn't honest. I, I don't know enough.
I'm not gonna sit here and say it wasn't.
Because it's so obvious, it's just mental to me.
It's. OK, because.
He didn't like it. I don't like what they're doing
right now. He just also didn't like them.
What they doing literally the same thing years ago I.
Agree. And I think anyone being called
anti-Semitic for that, I I think that's crazy.
That's something being against the state actions and against a
race of people. Yeah, but I think not condemning
Hamas is anti-Semitic. Yeah.
Do you think so? Yeah.
Anti-Semitic. Yeah, I mean, unreal, they asked
quite clearly. A terrorist organisation going
after Jewish people. And where they then as well, I
don't know. Yeah, Hamas 100%.
Yeah, Hamas by definition there are terrorist group backed by
other Middle Eastern countries. And this is not me saying people
who live in Palestine are all anti-Semitic, this is me saying
an organisation which is a terrorist organisation which are
act on October the 7th Israel because well, they want their
land back as well. I get that.
But that that is they are anti-Semitic, They are anti
Jewish people. Yeah, whatever you can justify
as much as you want to say, well they took their land as a
whatever. They are anti-Semitic though.
Yeah, sure. Completely.
Netanyahu is Islamophobic, who's the leader of Israel?
He is, that's it. That's Islamophobia hate, that's
anti-Semitic. That is absolutely true.
So not condemning Hamas to me is completely insane.
And if anyone tries to defend him and say that what they're
doing is accept I would just be like it's not though.
And I know it's a like massively grey area, the whole peace talks
and stuff, but not condemning a terrorist organisation for
crossing the border and literally murdering innocent
people? Yeah.
Is insane when you're then saying, well that's what they're
doing to Palestine, they're medicine.
Yeah, that's awful. Both awful.
Yeah. Yeah.
That's what, that's my opinion on that.
But you know, we're going down a rabbit hole here.
Macro politics, these nice light hearted teacher podcast.
I know, Jesus, I actually kind of forgot we're recording a
podcast and I'm just anyway, this is the most genuine chat
I've ever had. You know more than I do actually
quite interesting. I do genuinely no, but you do
the expert. Cause I don't, I don't expect
you expect, but you know more than me about some of that
stuff. Like I, I don't, I didn't know
that, you know, I mean, I didn't really know that he had actively
hadn't condemned Hamas. So what he does really well,
yeah, is he'll be like, he'll say, someone say to him, do you
condemn Hamas? Yeah.
And he'll do the He'll turn into that classic politician that you
hate. The question.
Of course I don't like it killing innocent people.
Yeah, so don't do you condemn what Hamas did.
Of course, I don't wanna see innocent people.
Yeah. Can you just say that you
condemn Hamas for what they did as a terrorist organisation?
Yeah. Look, I think whenever innocent
people are killed, it's bad. And then his defenders go see,
he said it, See he said and yeah, but he's doing that
politics thing. Yeah, sure.
Whereas he were very, very, very, very, very comfortably
talk about how horrendous the Israeli government are.
They should never be doing it. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
That's that's when it's like, and that's fine.
Yeah, yeah. But he when his hearts around
doing it the other way. I'm like, there's something
there. Is weird, but the way I see it
is he was years ahead of pop culture.
Now now everyone finally is suddenly like you look at any
social media ever. It's like, ohh, 3 past nine.
Everyone is now being like, oh, this is a bit mental actually
what they're doing. He, I think he was just years
ahead of that. And, and back then, you know,
when no one knew the full context, it was like, oh, he
just hates Jews run by. And he was like, well, it
probably is deeper than this, though.
It probably is deeper because actually I might be able to say
the same about 90% of the population in England right now.
Then you will. You will.
Hate what? I love you a lot of people.
You just not like what Israel are doing.
A lot of people are Islamophobic in this country.
Islamophobic. Yeah.
Yeah, completely. And the other way in terms of
that's that's why, that's why he's seen even extras like this.
He's he's lefty, Muslim, social social.
Life. Yeah, OK.
He's just got a different opinion.
Yeah. Probably just sort of there are
horrible inequality and injustice that's happening.
There were certain things that he's done which are a bit weird.
Yeah, in that respect. And it's like, ohh.
And could approach it different. The whole idea again of like,
you know, it was ingrained in the in the Labour Party.
And like there's been reports and stuff that worth reading.
It's. It's not a straightforward.
It's just. He's a nice guy.
He's like, and everyone else is a bad guy.
It's like, do you know what? Rory Stewart was a Conservative
MP for a long time. And I really like him because I
listen to his podcast. Yeah.
And he's left the Tories now because he went under Boris
Johnson. He was like, I'm not serving on
this guy. Yeah, yeah, and I was and and
you know, there's a few conservative politicians who are
good people, but I can't get on board with them that they enable
that machine right now. OK, well, I'd never vote for you
because I never that I think you're a nice person.
But you have also imposed a cap on benefits.
You have also overseen austerity.
You also defend austerity. You think the King's the best
thing in the world. And I'm like, I don't agree with
any of that. But we can be humans on a human
level. And I cannot hate you.
And I'm not think you're out to get me.
I can think that you're trying to help in a different way to me
for sure. But yeah, as as a machine, my
overall arching point here of politics is for a 14 year
machine since 2010, which is literally my adult life, by the
way. Yeah, literally my adult life
has been a Conservative government.
I couldn't vote in 2010 but I could vote from then on and my
life has not got objectively better for the same what I would
be as a 30 year old at this point.
I don't think there's, there's been multiple times where it's
been proven that they're just scumbags who are just literally
lining their mates pockets. Yeah, I don't want them in power
anymore and that's the bottom line for me.
So whatever anyone else can say to me, I'm not.
That's great. But if you also don't want them
in power, there is things we can do to try and make that.
Happen. I've got devil's advocate for
you. It's been thrown at me before.
And it's one of those questions where I think the trick is in
the question you just said life is not objectively got better
since, you know, since you became an adult.
But you're in a better position right now.
Yeah. You're like you're you're in a
much better position than you were personally.
I'm 15. Years, I really tried to get
that in my first answer and I couldn't get the words out.
My trajectory, yeah, of life, obviously my wealth has improved
over time. I think my wealth and and
well-being and of the country in general would have improved much
more on this trajectory. Because obviously as you move
through time, you yourself, that's why as you grow older,
people tend to become more conservative because they've
built their wealth now and they want to hold on to it because it
was a struggle to get there. On the macro level of the
country, if you just took a snapshot in 2010 and a snapshot
in 2024, yeah, the average person is worse off.
Yeah. And you think it's OK to mention
these sorts of things even if you personally have actually?
Benefited quite well. I've hated it.
I've always hated it when someone uses phrases like
champagne socialist and stuff, which is essentially just it's
OK for you to like socialism because you're well off.
And it's like, what? Yeah.
Tax me more like, yeah. Like when we pay tax for our
business. Hmm.
Like I, I genuinely never care. Yeah.
I'm like, cool, that's built in. And that's because we need to
pay tax. And what I will never understand
is people who want to pay, like, have much lower tax, like have
big tax cuts. Basically.
It's like, cool, well, do you want the NHS to work?
Do you do you like this system we have?
Because currently it's broken. We've got the highest taxes ever
since World War Two and probably the worst, honestly, the worst
systems and care that we have. And I don't this is gonna be a
hard thing for any government to solve because we got an ageing
population as well who need the services more but will
contribute less tax. And I think the only way to go
about it, I'm just saying right now is some kind of wealth tax.
Like if someone sat on a property for 40 years and it's
gone from costing 30 grand to 1.2 million.
Yeah, I don't think that person should get all of that money.
They've not all that's happened in that case.
Is just do that? Why would they?
Socialist change because they could, they could sell.
What I mean is I don't think I should just stay in the family.
I think it should be a really big wealth tax on that.
OK. Well, the reason isn't it is
that it's already 40% capital. Gains over a million,
inheritance over a million. There's not.
It's your, it's your first house.
There's no capital gains. Yeah, there is.
No, it's not. If it's your only property,
there's no capital gains tax. It's on the second property.
Ohh. Is it?
Yeah. So if I sold this house and just
didn't buy another house, I just get the full profit?
Yeah. That's mad.
I thought it was 20% first property.
There's no. I didn't know that it was all
properties. I'd be very happy to prove him
wrong, but I'm not completely under the impression that it's
second. It makes sense.
It might be. Yeah.
But there is inheritance tax and stuff.
And it's like some people want that car.
No, no, no, no, no, no. Especially for if it's your
business and you build stuff up. I I see that.
I do see that differently from living in a home that you got
when it happened to be affordable.
And now that is just honestly nothing.
And again, Rishi Sunak, look at his numbers because he's made
millions right through investments and stocks and
shares. The the idea that that is taxed
less than actual work is insane to me.
Yeah. And that should be immediately.
Passive income, yeah, he didn't trade time for.
Like someone working as a nurse who earns 40 grand a year pays a
higher percentage of tax on their income than Rishi Sunak
pays on his millions. Than Rishi Sunak does on
interest he got for those 40 grand.
Yeah, interest or or investments or dividends or anything like
that. The the threshold is lower.
We take evidence through our company, if they turn round and
say dividends are going to be taxed exactly in line with
income, we pay more tax. I also don't think we'd have a
leg to stand on pretending that that was not fair.
Yeah, we we'd have less money, right?
But I think that's where you gotta stand on moral duty and
say, well, we are also just working, you know, that is, that
is our work. So why should it not be the same
as attaching work? It's insane to me.
And that's where a lot of people were like, Nah, it's especially
when you talk about Rishi Sunak level.
I think the system's OK at the minute.
I mean, why would we change that?
Yeah, it's not. Fair.
Yeah, we all benefit. Percentage, I paid way more tax
than you. Yeah, but as a percentage you
don't. Yeah.
The idea that I think Rishi Sunak pays something like 26% on
his tax, it worked out he had 4 million and paid about a million
in tax. Yeah.
If you earn 40 grand and and spent 12 grand on tax, that's a
higher percentage of that's going on.
Tax, yeah, yeah. And.
That's wrong, and it doesn't matter that a million to 12.
Grand doesn't have a place, is it not?
A lot of people do confuse like, well, he did put a million into
the system. So you know it took 3,000,000
out. They got a lot more like his
life is better though, yeah. Because it only because he had
money in the 1st place to put into these.
You know, investments and stuff. Yeah, I hate that argument.
It's unbelievable. This episode going really long.
We haven't actually done any of the things we planned.
What do I do? Well, yeah, we should.
We should. We should probably end it.
Yeah, I'm gonna come to you maybe with.
Well, I guess we can summarise. We're going to say here.
Now we're not going to talk about this again.
Why don't we say this? The next episode we talk about
it. Properly, we were going to talk
about like what Labour did last time and how much of it was
good. How?
Much people off. No, no, we'll, we'll put it in a
way that's digestible because again, lots of people listen.
Our teachers, we're gonna talk about education in particular.
What do we want to actually see? Happen yeah, we're gonna reflect
on yeah, New Labour when they were in and what they did for
education compared to the last 15 years and maybe think.
What can we actually do in the future to make education?
And it's gonna be, we're not gonna be like Silver Linings we
could be looking at. A lot of labour done was
probably. Bad.
Yeah, yeah, we'll reflect on all of it.
We're gonna pick out the good stuff, so.
Stick around for that. I've got some questions from
people and I'll just knock them onto next time.
Yeah. You said as a question, yeah, I
am still do one, I am sorry one. Question And this is the end.
OK, OK, so the only question here is let's go for OK, Should
I? OK, you've gotta vote here.
You gotta tell me for the last question, should I do the
incredibly one that made me like burst out laughing and was just
really provocative, or should I do the one where you can
actually give me a proper answer?
Provocative one, because we've had a lot of serious chats.
Be nice to end on this actually. OK anyway, this is just write
this. I said any questions for
podcast. We talk politics, but it could
be about anything. But mostly about politics.
Question, Any idea how on earth there are people who work in
schools that actually vote Tory? I just don't understand it.
I have an idea because you know what, it's people like me and
saying I'm sorry, who don't really get that involved and
probably just have lots of other influences that say, yeah, do
this. Loads of people just vote based
on what their family tell. Them to do or who just don't
really care as much about education as they do about like
social wars and stuff. Like I I've talked to people who
worked in a school who said they vote Tory and their whole point
was, yeah, well, they do something about immigration,
aren't. They yeah, yeah.
And last one, all big, all big corporations generally vote
Tory. They got a lot more money back
in them. There's a lot more money to
brainwash you into thinking a certain way.
So it's gotta work on some level, isn't it?
They wouldn't keep doing it. So instead listen to this
podcast and with our very, very tiny budget of £0, we will try
and brainwash you the other. Way sorry we've got the one
legit legitimate one. Or they just think Tory is
better and they vote for. Legitimately.
Ohh, I'd definitely so. Yeah, which is fair enough to be
honest with. You, it's fine if you wanna see
the decimation and the action, the absolute destroying of, of
the funding for our children and children going hungry.
And they had a whole macro level of children coming into school
with like dirty clothes more often because their family don't
have any money at all and there's no support whatsoever
before school. And then they come and they
can't even be toilet trained. And then we've got to have much
more pressure as teachers and actually our jobs got worse over
time. If you liked all that, vote.
Tory and if you want to see tuition fees go from nothing to
something and and that's becoming the most important
thing of schools in Blair, right, We'll talk about this
next week. Thanks guys.
See you next time.