That time of year, teaching reforms, brains and Gibson's Laws of Nature...

Well that time of year has approached. Not just because students have their exam timetables, or year 11's are jaded and seemingly climbing up the walls in order to leave school now but mostly because my dinning room table is full of stacks of end of topic/mock/revision tests to mark through.

There goes my weekend (again).

Personally I ally myself with the school of thought that hates exams as they only test how good students are at passing exams. In a subject like science there is so much more to being a 'good' or able scientist than being able to recall and use information. In fact the whole concept of memory recall is pretty much outdated owing to the information age we live in. If you want to look up or remember something you can find not only the factually (in)correct information in a matter of seconds but also the opinions of half the world. Surely then we need to go to a more skills based curriculum. In other words training people in how to use the information, how to decide if an opinion is valid or poorly thought out or maybe I am wrong in my opinion and the current system is the biggest and bestest in the world!

Actually while I am on the subject of subjects (ish) I do find it a bit of a missed trick with Mr Gove. I am not going to slate him (though it would be easy to do) I will leave that to the Headteachers Union this weekend. I am though going to feel slightly sad that he wants us to go backwards in terms of what students learn. Surely (and forgive my science heavy leanings) he could have really revolutionized and brought up to date not only the content but the focus of 21st Century education. Look forward no backwards to the careers and fields which are going to require future graduates and workforce's. The world is ready for another massive shift forward once the privatization of space gets underway, the UK is extremely well poised to be on the forefront of that. Personally I feel we should put our eggs in that basket. Try leading the world again instead of riding on the coattails of other countries. The reason why it is a shame is that Gove seems to have the drive and self belief (arrogance) to push things through regardless of their merits. Pushing through the need for UK students to be science and space literate would mean we could have been world leaders in this area. Which would not only have been exciting but also very good economically!

As I say, a missed trick, ah well.

A long time ago (I was pretty drunk at the time) someone told me an analogy of the brain that despite mine being pickled at the time has always stuck with me, even though the persons name hasn't. They said that the brain could be thought of as a hotel. Imagine a giant hotel with different levels and each level containing many rooms. Now each level of the hotel is representative of a form of intelligence (a little like Gardner's multiple intelligence model but not abused for students to cop out of certain activities). However everyone has the same floors. So for arguments sake they could be a numeracy floor, a creative floor, a writing floor and a critical thinking floor. The overall intelligence of a person is not denoted by the floors they have because we all have them but by the doors which are unlocked.

This is the part I really liked because the door potentially could all be unlocked if you acquired the correct keys (learning). Some people with high intelligence have lots of doors unlocked. Other people have doors unlocked in different amounts on different floors giving rise to talents and abilities. Geniuses   would have almost a skeleton key allowing them access to any of the rooms at any given time.

Education should be allowing people to unlock different doors and allowing people access to the information and abilities in that room. Often, and this was why this came up in a conversation with a colleague about exams and education, I feel that with some students we are actually closing and locking the doors. That instead of engaging and illuminating things for them we are in fact providing barriers to their natural intelligence and curiosity. In other words, are their some students who don't really need us other than to just point them in the right direction?

Would those students get those grades with or without us teachers at all? Especially in an age of instant information available? I am not saying teaching is redundant but it has made me wonder if a model of teaching from a time where information required research in libraries and books etc is now outdated in today's tech savvy world? Lots of questions and not many answers, but then I am a scientist so this is a normal state of affairs for me.

Actually there is a kind of answer, and it is mainly my attempt to piss of Physicists. See as a Biologist I often feel looked down on by Physicists and Chemists. Especially Physicists, who seem to constantly be on TV these days, but this may be because I got an E at A-Level Physics despite really enjoying it (I love Physics but it doesn't love me). Anyway before this turns into an episode of Jeremy Kyle I shall move on.

Physics is looking for a law that will link everything together. If you don't know about this the short of it is that big things act differently to very small things. The very small things have some really weird properties which mean that the laws of Physics which explain the big things don't quite fit. Most people have heard of Schrodinger's cat and this is an example of how weird things can get, although as a thought experiment no cats have actually been harmed. Now Physicists are looking for a set of rules which will link the very small and the very big.

One of their problems is that they are trying to find Mathematical rules to explain their findings and nothing as yet has managed to fit perfectly. Well I have simplified things and done what I try to do in most of my life and remove the Maths (although I did argue to include statistical testing in my Masters dissertation...).

As a result, based on observation, Gibson's first law of nature states;

An object will behave in a way which is in accordance with its nature.

An object can be anything from organic to inorganic and the nature of that object is said to be the way in which it behaves naturally with nothing else impacting upon it outside of its natural setting. Imagine a chair sat in a room, no one sitting on it, just there waiting.

Following on from this we have a law which explains what happens when we alter something temporarily;

The nature of an object can, in certain circumstances be altered.

So now the chair has been tipped over, if we stand it back up it is back to being its chair but while it is on its side it has had its nature altered.

The third law of nature explains what happens to things that have been permanently changed;

If the change in nature is permanent the object can no longer be said to be in its original form.

The tipping of the chair broke a leg, so when you stand it up it no longer stands on 4 legs but 3, it is no longer the original chair as it has been changed.

There we go, Physicists you are welcome a set of laws that link everything!

Gibson’s 3 laws of nature

1. An object will behave in a way which in accordance with its nature
2. The nature of an object can, in certain circumstances be altered
3. If the change in nature is permanent the object can no longer be said to be in its original form

Now it seems to work for all the conditions I can think of from students to electrons to elements but I am sure there is someone out there who will disprove this. Or maybe prove it.

If you can Mathematically prove it I will share some of my Nobel Prize with you.

Right off to mark, now where has my green pen gone?

Some days you eat the bear...

other day's the bear he eat's you.

From The Big Lebowski. Often I think this is a pretty fair reflection of teaching. Or work. Or life in general.

There, that is life. Life is one day of being top of everything and another day of feeling down in the dumps.

I have solved it!

Or something.

There are lots of teachers who I talk to, both in the flesh - face to face not naked- and over Twitter who seem very peeved off at the moment.

I know myself that I am feeling pretty down about the job at the moment. It doesn't take much to knock me out of my rhythm and I have spoken before about the need to keep moving forward and maintain a positive outlook.

It is hard though. Especially this time of year with pressure coming at us from all quarters. SLT (who themselves are under pressure) piling it on, students who just want to be free and out in the sunshine, parents who want to know why/what/where is going on and obviously external factors OFSTED/exam entries/coursework moderation etc.

This is all aside from our general teaching and test/book marking and sweeping the floor with a broom up our arses.

Oh and lets not forget that we should have shorter holidays and longer working days.

(prick)

What was I talking about?

Oh, yeah. Staying positive.

Erm...

Actually personally it isn't too bad. Come home, put on some loud and heavy music (RUSH), drink copious amounts of tea and remind myself that I would not be earning as much as I am in another job, followed by looking at how many days until the next holiday.

Sounds materialistic and simple but I think when you're down it's whatever helps get you through?

I have been given lots of advice over the course of my teaching 'life' but I think the important things that float up to the top are sometimes the hardest to remember.

1. it is a job
2. focus on what happens in the classroom first

That's it for me. 

It is a job, nothing more and nothing less. Yes I am a professional and I am proud of what I do, but at the end of the day I am not going to get ill or sacrifice what is really important in my life for it. 

What happens in the classroom/lab/plaza that is my domain and ultimately what I am judged first and foremost on. So if you are having a bad time, make something that you are going to enjoy teaching. Bring it back around so you enjoy lessons. It doesn't work all the time or with every class but if it happens once it will start to happen more regularly. 

Remember schools seem to run on opinions. If people have a high opinion of you staff/students/SLT then you tend to get more leeway to get other things done (in my opinion).

Plus I don't consider planning a fun lesson (for me) to be work. As I enjoy it. 

So lets puff our chests out, raise our heads, enjoy the sunshine and remember it is a 3 day weekend this weekend ;-). 

Course changes, museums and long journeys with Eagles...

Afternoon, to give you the full story of my very busy day we must go back a week.

Looking at our department 'headline figures' it was put to me that there were rumblings that we may need to offer BTEC or equivalent for some of our learners as GCSE was not suitable. This lead me to do a search of some alternatives provisions for some of our learners and come up with a plan. This was put to the department for mulling over (with other suggestions) the basics are thus;

• The top 2 sets do 3 year GCSE course years 9-10 core and year 11 additional - so end up with 2 GCSE's in science. 
• The bottom 3 sets do 1 year AQA entry level in year 9. Those that excel at this course and achieve a gold/silver go on to do the double award in years 10 (core) and 11 (additional).
• Those who really are not suited to GCSE do OCR Cambridge or BTEC. 

This all seemed good to our department as 1 not being too complicated and 2 giving all abilities a chance to achieve. 

So I went off to my AQA exam feedback meeting today feeling like some form of ball had started rolling. 

Now here's where the fun begins.

Firstly I must sat commuting from Maidstone to London was expensive but other than that fairly painless (I could get used to it if I was to work at one of the museums for instance...).

Anyway the first weird moment was when I saw that the conference centre was opposite broadcasting house. This was unexpected despite having route planned how to get there and where I was due to be. It is a very strange feeling when you see something you have seen in pictures , heard their output and then suddenly see it in the concrete. 

So the meeting begins with the very charming and witty Nigel English who is the chair of the chief examiners for AQA. A very lovely and knowledgeable man and he seemed very sad that this was the last of these types of meetings which he is allowed to give due to a change in rules. This I think is a mistake as personally I learnt a lot from him today and feel better armed to help my department drive forward and improve standards in our exam preparation.

The following are a list of the things which I learnt today, I will try to go through them a bit to clear up any confusion!

1. From 2015 all exams will be terminal.
2. From 2015 here will be no tiering of exams - similar to how the iGCSE works.
3. Performance tables (league tables) will be split into English + Maths, EBAcc and Value added.
4. Even if students take triple science only the best 2 will count towards the EBAcc.
5. The performance tables are based on the % of cohort taking GCSE science NOT the entire year cohort.
6. GCSE science will only be double or triple. There will be no course for single award science.
7. Alternative science courses (not double or triple) will still run (computer science, agriculture etc) but will not count towards EBAcc or performance tables.
8. Not all have to do GCSE science but so far no word on whether science is still a core or whether students could drop science to pursue other courses... 
9. Terminal means end of course, so if the students do double award in years 9 and 10 they will sit all exams in year 10  (but be up against year 11's from other schools) however if they do their courses in year 11 ALL exams are in year 11. Which means they may have 6 science exams + other GCSE's in year 11 (or 9 exams if triple) which is going to be a very heavy duty timetable.
10. Yesterday Michael Gove mentioned plans for a 'technical baccalaureate' though there was no details about it today just conjecture it seems the TecBacc is a post 16 only course. It is however worth keeping an eye on.

There, and that is before we talk about what the course was actually about!

The headline themes for me are the lack of single award (weird as we were discussing this yesterday) and the fact that we will only get reported on the students we choose to enter to GCSE. Almost like there is an expectation only to put our 'best' or most likely to get C's into GCSE and everyone else can do what they want so the results look good...

Does this mean that science GCSE's will have a reduction in people taking them but those taking them will all be A-C grade students. Then moderation will drop those C candidates lower...? 

Or at least that's how it feels. I am not going to try and pull it apart any more because I don't want to colour peoples views. Would like to see what other people think.

OK now that part is out the way part 2 was about issues students seem to have with certain exam questions. Or at least skills within the questions. 

Explanations must be an explanation - that is not just a list of facts. In 5 mark questions you need 5 points, there is no longer the 3 from 5 best fit scenario. Your explanations have to link ideas and not just be a series of 'points made'.

Evaluations have to have a positive and a negative for each point and a justified conclusion. Evaluations h Get students to ask themselves if they have made 5 valuable points and a justified conclusion at the end of the evaluation questions. These have to be comparative statements. For example 'this one is cheaper' rather than 'it is cheap'.

In the longer extended prose questions - which are poorly answered across the board - these are general level questions to be answered by higher and lower abilities. As such they are judged at a standard grade C level. Which means (from what I could gather) the answering and marking of them has to deal with the level first and the content secondarily. 

What does this mean? Well a good well structured coherent answer will be looked at as being level 3 (worth maximum marks) and then will be found its mark on a 'best fit' basis. This has probably been explained badly by me but hopefully you get the idea (feel for answers is very important).

So that was the crux of my course. Before I move on I have one thing to get off my chest. If the chair of examiners tells you what a student was awarded, don't argue, accept it and try to see why and how the student got that mark and why you were wrong. In fact teachers everywhere need to stop moaning so much! Yes it is a hard job and we have a lot to moan about but bloody hell, there were people today who just wanted to complain and/or get someone else to justify their teaching practice. Which isn't what the course is about. For balance I should point out that a lot of the colleagues there were amazing and very insightful plus a lot of fun to talk to. 

Trying to make the most of my day and sort my head out I hopped on a tube and headed to South Kensington.

Naturally I went to the Natural History Museum first. Whilst this was as excellent as ever I felt I needed to be around more science and engineering things so help me think about something that came up in my mind during the meeting. So off I wandered to the Science Museum to engulf myself in some brilliant innovations and inventions. 

What was worrying me was the following; 'what do we mean by education?'

This is such a deep and multi-layered question but I think we all know what it isn't. However let me share my train of thought with you.

At uni I took a compulsory course in biochemistry. I was not very good at it or very interested in it. I do remember the following quote that was on our handbook - "The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled." - Plutarch.

I also remember the Einstein quote on imagination being more important than intelligence. That always sticks in my mind as I perceive myself to be a fairly creative and imaginative person - so it makes me feel good. 

How is this relevant? Well the current changes seem to be intent on being based on learning facts (filling vessels) which means more time will be spent learning and writing rather than doing (reducing the use of imagination). So what is the solution, is there a solution?

Unfortunately the museum closed before I was able to come up with something witty and post worthy. However I do offer the following little thought;

We are programmed by evolution to question, to do and to learn. It takes a lot of effort on our part to undo 3.5 million years (ish) of evolution and create a situation where learning is not valued and the act of gaining knowledge is seen negatively. 

What is the justification for this state of things? So one country can show off to another? Or one government can point score against another? 

Learning and understanding run deeper in our species than we often give it credit. Learning is for life not just school, and this often gets forgotten. We need to ensure that students (of all ages) have the tools for life long learning. 

That should be our goal.

I do not know where standardized testing fits into this and my idea may not be practical but I do know that a system from 10 years ago does not fit in today's society where information is so readily available. Surely it is more important to have the skills to interpret and use the information you have found than just to be able to recall some facts. 

For instance I could find out what tactics were used in a football match. I could memorize them and recall them to my friends in the pub. I don't have the skill to know when to employ them in a match!

I am sure I will get some people shouting at me for that but I dunno, I just feel that where we are going is not what I signed up for. I wanted to be a teacher 1 because my job sucked but 2 I love watching people learn, whether from me directly or them taking what I have said and moving on the next step. As soon as that is lost to a succession of vessel filling, well I doubt I will stay as a teacher.

To finish on a very random note...

Leisurely went back to Victoria Station to catch a train to Maidstone. Wandered to the train no care that people were running to get it. Decided if I could not get this one then it was sunny so would just wait for the next train and read. The doors started beeping so I casually hopped on the train. 

Wandering from first class to the next available carriage I found a space where I could stand until a seat became free. I noticed some people looking at two older gentlemen with long hair and black t-shirts. 

Those two gentlemen were Timothy B. Schmidt and Joe Walsh from the Eagles (scream!?) who were on their way to the Maidstone studio to record and interview for Later With Jules Holland. 

Randomly one of the people they were talking too was a Leeds alumni (as am I) as was their 'handlers' son. Plus a tech guy for another band on Later... was sat opposite them (randomly). All in all it was very surreal! 

By the way Joe Walsh has a very dry sense of humour and spent most of the journey doing sudokus and Timothy B. Schmidt is a very nice polite man who thanked me when we left the train for wishing them 'fun' on the show. 

What a twisty turn-y day!

Not about teaching, just a musing on what it is to be an individual.

There is something which troubles me. Troubles me in that I can't resolve it in my mind. Maybe i am not smart enough, maybe the answer is not there or maybe I am just not thinking about it in the correct way.

Here goes.

We know that there is nothing special about the molecules that make us up. The elements that make the compounds which make us are common throughout the Universe. We know this, we also know that we are made of 'star stuff'. 

OK fine, so the building blocks that make me also make everything else I am happy with that. 

Except that really we aren't here at all. Since 99.99% of all atoms are empty space that means that the majority of what makes up us is empty space.

Right.

We also know that our DNA is not that special really, we share 98.4% of our DNA with chimpanzees, 

However the majority of the cells inside our body is bacterial, ten times as much as human cells. Which means that the part of us that makes us human is very small. 

Although that is a small part of a small part that is not empty space. Still with me? 

So what we are, in terms of what we can see, is mostly empty space and mostly bacteria DNA. The person we see when we look in the mirror is in fact a tiny proportion of a tiny proportion. 

I think I have my head around that, although the part of my body I use to understand this doesn't really understand itself. In fact it makes decisions before I have decided. Seriously, studies show that the neurons responsible for movement fire before a person has actually thought about moving. Which means the brain decides to do things subconsciously before the conscious brain catches up with it.

So the parts of us which aren't empty space are made of stars but most of that in me is bacteria not human and the stuff that makes me human and not a chimpanzee is a tiny part of that, and the thing which I rely on to control and run all this barely human bit actually makes decisions before I have thought about what I actually want to do.

Right.

So who am I then? Well surely I am the amalgamation of my experiences and memories. Except memories can be faked or forgotten.

There is a thought that we actually remember everything, it's just the brain can pick and choose what to remember. However we don't see of hear everything that there is. In terms of what frequencies of light we see and what frequencies of sound we can hear is actually very very little! We are practically deaf and blind. 

So this all brings me down to what makes me, well me. 

If its not the atoms that make me, or the DNA that is inside me, or the world I perceive and how my brain recalls this or even the decisions I make. Then what is it?

I am probably missing something or over simplifying something else. I just wonder which part of us makes creates the individual. Is it as simple as the wiring of our brain, however I can't see how that would give us something so unique as a persons personality. Not when everything else seems to be so generic. Well sort of generic. I think.

Actually I don't know. My brain probably does though, somewhere...

Back from a break... to cause a fuss!

Or at least that is what I am going to say it was. A long winter break off. Maybe. Actually the last 5 weeks (5 weeks?!) have been pretty intense and full on. Long few weeks of getting settled into a new school, getting up to speed with a new role and then to top it off OFSTED came a calling.

Having now faced all that down and relaxed over half term, no work done as yet (oops) I have decided to get back to the blog. I know all the people who semi-regularly read the blog are dying for me to continue.

*tumble weed roles by*

Ahem, moving on.

There was a temptation for a long time to leave the blog in the past, make it a thing I did for 2012 and not worry about doing it anymore. Not really sure what changed, I started tweeting a lot more than I have been and have started to find that what I want to say or talk about is not fitting into 140 characters very often. Maybe that is just me becoming more mouthy though?

Who knows?

Anyway the main point of this blog was thoughts following this quote;

“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.”

― Bertrand Russell

The reactionary in me instantly thought of Michael Gove (especially this article). However it made me wonder about whether this could be true of students as well? Then I came across the Dunning-Kruger effect.

The D-K effect basically states that unskilled individuals are unaware of their own inadequacies due to the fact that they do not possess the skills to recognize their failings.

Sound familiar?

I think one of the major failings in secondary education is that we expect too much of our learners. Not in terms of ability or even the fabled 'high expectations' of students but that we forget that most of the young people we teach are not yet mature enough to recognize their mistakes properly. So what is the solution? Is there a solution? Personally I think it comes down to use of KS3. Often (and in the schools I have worked in so far) KS3 is almost a lost key stage. It fails to bridge the gap between the safe and secure environment of primary school and the expectations and change in environment that underpins secondary education.

Before I continue what I am about to write is purely my opinion. It is based solely on what I think and not on any research or 'party line', I fully expect people to disagree but please remember this is an opinion piece only.

Here is what I think (yes think) and it is based on science education only.

KS3 should be based around skills.

There I said it thank you I will now take five minutes to let that sink in.

What I hear you cry not content? What about the content, they need content especially in science education.

Yes and mostly no.

The content covered in KS3 in my experience well it sucks, it is not much different to KS2 science nor is it taught effectively. Most peoples idea of differentiating at this level is to make it easier which means that the content delivered is not stretching enough. Students go from doing science once a week or a term to it being delivered 3/4 times a week. The awe and wonder students might feel about experimentation and asking questions is drummed out of them by a relentless quest for levels and progress and stuff that I can only describe as bullshit (new year not taking any prisoners anymore).

The question that plays in my mind all the time is what is the point. Seriously what is the bloody point in delivering lessons that are serving nothing more than to put students off a subject that the are unable to drop.

Brilliant!

Instead the KS3 curriculum should be used as a tying together course. Yes there needs to be new knowledge delivered, but I feel that the crux of the 2 years (because almost all schools start GCSE's in yr9 - which is too early) should be about developing the skills to succeed.

TEACH students to link skills from history and English with science (writing and evidence analysis). TRAIN students to THINK about a problem and design an investigation. ALLOW students to experience science and link it to the real world and importantly SHOW students the awe and wonder that science can create.

Most students come to secondary school enjoying science because it is taught infrequently so it has a sense of wonder to it. All we seem to do is drum that out of them by making science just another subject, when it is so much more (yes I am now on a soap box) but it's true. As a cross curricular subject science has the capacity to branch into all other subjects. As something current and in the news or on TV  again we are ahead of the curve. So why is it that we seem to have class after class of disaffected and disillusioned students?

Because it is hard, because it is compulsory, because everything comes down to levels.

Coming back to the D-K and Russell quote. How do we expect students to move forwards if they do not possess the skills to do so? All the data and natural ability in the world means nothing if you can't apply it.

I know I got a little bit ragey in the middle but one of the jobs my current role has me doing is to re-write the KS3 curriculum. I am not best pleased with the one that is in place at the moment (bee in my bonnet type situation). Added to that the constant stream of 'why do we HAVE to do science' that I seem to encounter at KS4 and I am a bit fed up with the state of affairs.

Right having said that I am off to mark some yr9 GCSE mocks (still to early for them someone said that eyes help a mouse balance in the dark).

As ever comments are welcome but remember that this was more a personal opinion post.

 'Its very difficult convincing the young of anything. They're born knowing so much' - Leto II (God Emperor of Dune)

Looking differently

It's Christmas eve and I am sat very quickly typing up a Blog post before the bourbon sets in! I wanted to write an article based upon this piece of research published this week. However rather than write about human evolution and the aggressive nature of our species, pondering on whether this is something that is still evident - having been shoved around a few times in Christmas shopping I can say it is. As well as wondering whether we should be ashamed of the fact that we are a species that has survived most likely through baser instincts and notions as opposed to the cerebral and more insightful creatures we tend to paint ourselves as.

Instead however - and because it's Christmas so I wanted to write something a little more cheery - I came across the following idea while trawling through the internet (yes the whole internet!). Now please don't shout at me I am only re-posting what someone else has said - and probably not 100% accurately.

"Pollen is basically plant sperm, people get hayfever from it! Which means hayfever is pretty much an STD from plants. Added to that the fact that we don't want to be covered in plant sperm. So we are getting STD's from trees that are trying to sexually assault us!"

Now I am not saying that is true but it is an interesting way of looking at things. Just like the research into the evolution of the human hand, most people look at it and see an appendage for using and manipulating tools. However look at it another way and it is a weapon, and an effective one. Even though I still believe that humans evolved basically because of this:

It is the art of looking at things in multiple ways that makes us. It's like the glass half full/half empty example. There is the expectation that I should say the glass is half full - after all I am trying to be positive as much as possible in my blog. However I am a scientist and I really like this idea:

Which is it, if you think about it. The point I am trying to make in this blog is that we need in life and in teaching and in science to always be looking at the world in different ways.

It's a little likes the people/person who came up with this:

A year ago I started this blog as a way of looking differently at my working day. That is why the name of the blog is 'Good things in life' I was originally aiming to look at the good things in my day and through that improve my perception of being a teacher. As anyone who has regularly read this will know it has worked and that I love what I do now.

Now I am not saying we should look at the world too differently (we don't want a parallax error - the only bit of science my Dad seems to know about!) however perhaps a different thought is needed.

So just like the people who looked at the hand and thought 'I wonder why that evolved in the way it did to be different to other great ape hands' or looked at the amount of data transmitted in a sperm and related it to electronic data transmission I feel we need to start looking at the same things in a more subtle way.

Just like Christmas and all the people wandering around and complaining about not having sorted their presents sorted, surely they are not looking at the holiday in the right way?

That said I am going to wish you all a Merry Christmas and I will blog again in the Happy New Year!

Keep happy, keep going and keep looking for the 'Good things in life'!

Last Week of Term Mixed Bag

Well we made it just about, Christmas is in sight and a long over due two week break stretches before us like some form of heaven (if there is such a thing).

I had planned a blog on some results from my year 9's however on reflection - and during the writing - I decided to write it up formally as some action research. I know get me trying to be all swish!

Anyway as I have very little left in the tank and much less creativity now that my main focus is missing I thought I would comment on two stories from this week.

And not the end of days predicted for Friday! I have been hearing this rubbish for 3 years from students now and it has gotten so very old so very quickly it does my head in. Although the best was hearing a year 8 explain what he would do if the world did end on Friday...

First story is this one to do with fracking. Now i am not going to talk about the merits of fracking as an energy source as I am not really qualified to weigh the pros and cons of it too seriously. I am concerned that this smacks of short term ism again. Once again the solution seems to be non-renewable fossil fuels rather than developing more renewable forms. Like I said I am not going to discuss the fuel source itself. Rather once again (from the sounds of it) we are going to go ahead with a technology without really considering the environmental impact. Now I am not saying we should not use it but do we know what the long term wide scale impact will be? Especially as I am sure I read somewhere that most of the sites for fracking will be greenbelt (or greenfield) land. Something just doesn't ring right with me here.I'd love for things to not be so determined by finances and for people to make more informed decision on what might be best in the long term. Yes I know its wishful thinking!

It's like we have not learnt any of the lessons from our industrial past. Next they will be saying that there is going to be new nuclear power plants in Somerset!

Oh!

This reminds me of a conversation with a TA this week where we were talking about tsunami's and natural disasters and it made me wonder if that was the Earth's immune system. Maybe we have our place in the world completely wrong and we are no more than bacteria causing an immune response?

I wish things were not so determined by finances and people could make a more informed decision. Yes I know its wishful thinking!

Something to mull over!

Next on my stuff that caught my magpie like eye this week is this story about the X-37B space plane. Now this caught the attention of one of my year 9's so much he went and measured just how big it would be. It blew his mind that something so small could be in the air for so long (469 days on the last flight - epic!).  This lead to speculation as to what it is for - personally I find it hard to see past it being a spy drone - and a conversation about space travel and the future of our species going into space. Which unfortunately is something I do not think I will be able to ever afford if the stories about the cost of private space flight are to be believed, well if Britain ever catches up with other countries. Although my Dad sent me a picture of the Virgin Galactic space vehicle and it does look awesome! So maybe... However at the minute I console myself with the very excellent Zooniverse and their planet hunters website which really piques the interest of those students who like space.

Speaking of people who like space it was a shock to hear of the passing of the great Sir Patrick Moore. I watched the last Sky At Night he did before he died and found his message about next months programme very moving. He was one of those people who's life stories seem made up.

I remember seeing him on Room 101 (as well as him being the Gamesmaster), I can't remember what he put in the room but I do remember this at the end!

Brilliant!

I'll finish with something for Dr Chris Linott's comments on Sir Patrick Moore;

'In short, Sir Patrick dedicated his life to talking about astronomy at any opportunity - not out of a desire to make a name for himself or to further an agenda, but because he thought the world would be a better place if he did so.'

Surely that is the best reason for doing anything?