The bell is a message for me, not for you.

I quite enjoyed school, mainly because I derive a great deal of enjoyment from learning stuff. It makes me smile. Even as an adult, being shown things I had no comprehension of and being shown how to do or use it can still induce a fit of excited giggles. I really like learning stuff.

But, you may also be surprised to know that I could be a right pain in the arse at school as well. I have a habit of asking inconvenient questions like 'why do you say that?', 'why is it not done this way?', what difference does it make if I wear a tie or not, will it have any influence over the speed or depth of my learning?' I was annoyed by stupid rules which made no sense, or imposed inconveniences which seem to benefit nobody. When I was in the 5th year (is that year ten in new money?) I grew a beard, a beard you could lose a badger in. It didn't say I couldn't in the rules, so I did it, it annoyed quite a few people.

When in the sixth form I went to visit some family friends in Washington state during term time. The head of sixth form tried to carpet me for going out of school in term time without permission. I pointed out that I was in the sixth form because I chose to be, not because the law required me to be in education so where was the beef?

I turned 18 in the sixth form, and was subject to an attempted bollocking for pissing off home at lunchtime once a week because I had no lessons in the afternoon (this was a school, not a college), I pointed out that had I been in a college it wouldn't have been an issue. It was, I was told, for my own protection, that the school had a duty of care for my welfare. Which expired when I ceased to be 17, I explained.

I was an intransigent, obstinate, yet polite, annoyance. I think they were quite pleased when I pissed off to university. I steadfastly refused to do what I was told unless I could be provided with a reasonable explanation as to why certain rules were in place. 'Just because', or 'Because we say so' was never going to cut the ice.

Even now when I read stories like this about the imposition of ridiculous rules in schools it makes me bristle:

Dozens of pupils were sent home from a city secondary school this week - for wearing the wrong kind of shoes.

Around 100 pupils at Cardinal Newman Catholic School were sent home on Monday with a letter for parents explaining boots, trainers and pumps were banned.

Disgruntled parents claimed as many as 400 pupils had fallen foul of the footwear crackdown, but the school insisted the figure was nearer 100.

Why? What bloody difference does it make what sort of footwear someone wears?

I've heard the arguments over uniform for years, and I've never been convinced about them. There's the preparation argument; wearing an acceptable mode of clothing will give the child an understanding of what will be expected when they enter the world of work. And yet, the shcools will send kids out who are functionally illiterate and innumerate. How is that useful perparation? They can tell you when Eid is, quote chapter and verse on global warming, or tell you what it was like to be an Aboriginal child in the horror of the stolen generations, but they can't write a letter, construct an argument or balance a cheque book. But hey, they'll be able to pick out a nice pair of shoes (imitation leather, to avoid offence to others, naturally).

Then there's the argument about fairness and bullying; if you don't have a uniform then the poorer kids will be subjected to bullying because they don't have the latest or coolest kit. Well, bollocks. Firstly, there may well be kids who can afford it, but just couldn't care about the shallow materialism. Secondly, and this is a point illustrating an awful lot about what is wrong with this country today, how about actually dealing with the problem of bullying? Merely removing one focal point of bullying will just move the gaze of the bullies from one subject to another or one item to another. Any headteacher who tells you bullying isn't a problem in their school is either a fool or a liar. Don't remove the opportunity to bully, remove the bully him or herself. Teach a worthwhile lesson. That lesson is not 'Conform!', that lesson is 'your actions have consequences, you acted in such a fashion, here is the consequence'. Schools all over Europe and north America seem to survive quite happily without a uniform policy, why should the UK be any different?

My mind goes back to my term-time trip to Seattle. I was given the impression that those lessons were gone, irreplacable. I'd taken the trouble to speak to the teachers beforehand, to see what I would be missing out on and how to catch up. I think one of the problems was that I'd done it off my own back, rather than asking for permission and having some plan drawn up for me. Going away in term time, to see a foreign country, and to spend a good deal of time kicking around on the University of Washington campus with the daughter of the family friend who studied there was an education in itself, but I was made to feel it was an act of heresy. And yet, schools will send kids home, missing these vital, never to be repeated lessons, because they're wearing the wrong shoes? Really? I'm calling bullshit, it means either the lessons aren't all that important, or the school feels its arbitrary rules are more important than the education the teachers are paid to dish out. Which is it?

Not only is it dress code which gets educationalists juices flowing, there are other ways to get the authoritarian beating stick out, another method of teaching the kids that the most important lesson they can learn is to simply do as they are told, all throughout their lives.

New search powers being given to schools over mobile phones are more suitable for terror inquiries, human rights pressure group Liberty says.

England's head teachers will be allowed to search for phones without consent in a bid to combat cyber-bullying.

The Education Bill, to be debated in the Commons next week, also allows heads to delete data from the phones.

The government says heads asked for the powers and will be expected to use them sensibly.

What. The. Hell?
Search without consent? Just wait for the kiddie fiddling claims.

Delete data from the phones? Uh-uh. Not even the police can do that. If my kid is being cyber-bullied, I want the data retained, because I'm going after the little shit.

Heads asked for the powers? Did they know? Is there anything else they asked for? Will you give that to them? In my experience headteachers are used to being kings of their castles, I used to have regular contact with teachers, outside of schools but on school business, and they love to stamp their feet and make demands of everyone, expecting to be obeyed by all. They quite upset when it doesn't happen, and are not used to hearing the word no, not unlike many of their charges, really. Will they use the powers sensibly? Some won't. Once again, go after the bullies, not the tools of the bully.

I don't like this. The problem with giving people authoritarian tools of control is that they will use them. And then seek to expand them.

Finally, when we do get someone who absolutely tries to do the best for the kids, she gets pilloried, insulted, smeared and sacked. Anna Raccoon has the latest quest she is on. Please do pop over and read about it.

Hang on, I've got the receipt here somewhere.

It used to be so simple, didn't it? Making a financial transaction.

I'd be walking down the street and I'd go past your shop, The Whizzo Widget Emporium and I'd think to myself, 'Goodness me, they are awfully nice widgets, I could do with a new widget, my one's nearly worn out.'* And I'd go in, and I'd buy one.** You'd give me a receipt to prove that I hadn't half inched it and to give me some redress in the unlikely event that the widget you'd sold me, in spite of your intensive QC process, was in some way defective. We'd both be happy.

But it's all changed now. Now, apparently, I have to pay. I have no choice. Whether I want the widget or not. I have to pay for it. It is entirely possible that my life is perfectly comfortable without a widget, but I still have to pay for it, as someone may want the widget, but can't afford it. That annoys me.

What really grips my shits, as I believe the phrase has it, is that if I should then want a widget, I have to pay for it. Again. Even though I've paid for it already. Even though some people still get a free widget.

That hardly seems fair, does it? To be made, forced to pay for it, I'll just about take that on the chin. To then have to pay again, because I actually want to use the service I've been forced to pay for, is just not on.

What am I wibbling on about? This:

Parents who send their children to Kent grammar or faith schools could have to pay to use council-run transport.

Just note the targeting there. Grammar and faith schools. Why them?

Kent County Council (KCC) is considering introducing a contributory fee to help towards the cost of transport from September 2012.

A contributory fee? A contribu-bloody-tory fee? That's called Council Tax you utter mongs. What you're actually doing is surcharging people because their kids were fortunate enough to have the brains to pass the 11+ or because of their religious convictions. Nice. As an aside, I wonder how many of them are kids going to Muslim faith schools. I don't know if there are any in Kent, and I've lived here most of my life, never heard of one. I bet you wouldn't bloody dare.

The council said the charge would be waived for children who were from low income families and eligible for free school meals.

Oh, that's generous of them. So they won't screw some people over twice. Bless.

Here's the best bit:

Parents will be able to comment on the plans in the near future, KCC added.

Oh will they now? Well, that is fucking magnanimous of them, isn't it? Bloody hell, they'll be saying they, like, believe in democracy, and shit, next. Parents will be able to comment! Will they have to go on some opinion forming course first? Because being able to express an opinion is such a ground shaking, pant wettingly new experience for the poor little proles, that they may just expire from the excitement. Have you thought this through? Have you made plans to cope in the event that the brains of these parents start to run out of their ears under the effort of making a comment on council policy?

It'd probably be best to keep it to yourselves that the comments they make will be totally ignored. Just give them a reminder at election time that it is your God given right to govern and they had better bloody vote for you.

Why the hell do people continue to vote for these utter wanks who do nothing but treat the people they are supposed to be representing with such total and complete contempt?

* You dirty minded little bastard.

** And, because you are a nice, decent person, you'll do this with wonderful customer service. Attentive when I need you, with deep and impressive knowledge about your widgets, but otherwise leaving me the hell alone unless I really look like, or ask for, your help.

The One That Is Shouting 'Run, You Buggers! RUN!' . . .

Right folks, just sit back, close your eyes and breathe in deeply through your nose.

Smell that?

Mmmmmm. Me too, don't you just love the smell of cretinous mongtard in the morning?

Yes, Sir Liam Donaldson is at it again.

Schoolchildren could face annual fitness tests under plans laid out by the Government's chief medical officer.

Sir Liam Donaldson wants pupils to undergo "bleep tests" - similar to schemes already running in California and Texas - to help increase fitness levels.

That's a good idea. Perhaps we should install telescreens in everyone's house, then we can have compulsory aerobic sessions in the mornings.

How about some Sokol gymnastics? Or the sort of mass gymnastic demonstrations so beloved of the Communist bloc?

It just goes to show that politicans have no concept of the connection between the decisions they make and policies they implement and the end results.

In the last thirteen years we've seen widespread sale of playing fields, a culture of fear that tells us there's a paedo hiding in the bushes of every park and the obligation for anyone that wants to volunteer to set up kids' sporting clubs to undergo the macro-examination of their lives because they're bound to be kiddy fiddlers as well.

Surprisingly, and you yourself would be a racist paedophile to make any connection between the policies and the results, children in this country have never been less fit.

It isn't the Government's fault, oh no. It's the fault of the parents who are scared to let the kids out of the house, or must seem so bloody precious about being screened, to those doing the screening, before they can work with the kids. The 'authorities' really do believe it is they who look after the best interests of the kids, rather than those who get of their arses and actually do it.

So how will this work?

The bleep test involves running between two markers laid out 20 metres apart. The child must run from one marker to the other before a beep sounds.

Must run? Or what? Will they be taken into care?

Actually, that's not funny, as it probably isn't too far from the truth.

And how will this test be administered? No doubt in some school hall in front of the whole school, where the less fit kids will waddle valiantly between the markers whilst their fitter classmates hoot with derision. Oh, the scope for bullying will be almost boundless.

And how will the kids who fail this test (Is this allowed? Or will they just be given a grade C?) improve their level of fitness? Will they magically be given time on the playing fields the schools had to sell to build houses on during PE lessons that they don't have anymore because they're having lessons on diversity, citizenship, Africa and global warming?

It really does beggar belief. We are allowed no responsibility for ourselves, unless we find ourselves disadvantaged because of the things that have been ripped from us, then it is all our fault.

The One That Is Speechless. . .

A junior school head teacher has defended the use of CCTV in toilet blocks in an
effort to deter vandals.
Len Holman, from Angel Road Junior School in
Norwich, said pupils had asked for the cameras to protect refurbished toilet
blocks.

Really, what can you say about a society where people in authority think this is an acceptable way to carry on?

The One That Says 'You Will Look How I Say'. . .

As a kid I remember England playing a qualifying match for the World Cup or Euros away to Albania. I also remember some genuine concerns about whether Chris Waddle would be admitted to the country due to his infamous mullet. Granted, even by 80's footballer standards, it was shit, but I couldn't get my head around the fact that you could be refused entry to a country just because your hair was business at the front and party at the back.

Nowadays I believe that the reverse is almost true, and that some pointed questions may be asked at passport control in Tirana if you turn up without a mullet.

Well, 80's revival seems to be the in thing at the moment. God knows why, I remember the 80's and am glad we've got 20 years distance between then and now. Still history repeats itself, and the latter day Enver Hoxha is revealed as Joe Langley, the NASUWT branch secretary in Salford.

This person has decided that it is very important to jump into the debate surrounding a moustache.

Yes. A moustache.

I feel a certain solidarity with 14 year old Akaash Iqbal. He has been banned (there's that word again) for growing a moustache. Because? Well, as far as I can make out, because he's grown a moustache.

He's 14, when I was 14 I was turning into the hairy wolfman that sits before you today. My 5 0'clock shadow comes at about half twelve. I'm covered in the fucking stuff, and whilst I was at school, got so pissed off with the whole shaving lark, that I grew a full beard. Not some wispy poncy Che wannabe, the full beard like that bloke from Abba.

So yes, it 'grips my shits' to see this poor lad slung out for refusing to shave his face fungus off, and why the hell should he? It's his bloody face. Where do these fuckers get off, what business it is of theirs? He is doing no damage to anyone. I've blogged in the past about kids being beaten at school by their classmates and the schools taking no action at all, but grow a 'tache, you're out of here son.

Let's see what Enver Langley has to say:

Unless you start somewhere and make children abide by a code that's the start of the slippery slope if you let them get away with it.

Sub the word children for teacher and that could have come out of the mouth of Ed Balls. Make children abide by a code? Yes, wholeheartedly. Here's the code. Sit down, listen to your teacher, realise that you have to pick out the indoctrination. Be polite and respectful. Question everything you're told, think for yourself and whatever you do, don't conform. You'll be a long time conforming, so express yourself now, you're young, take the chance now because if you don't, the opportunity may not arise again.

Anyhow. . .

All the school [Manchester Academy] is trying to do is enforce standards and I would have thought everyone would be onside with that.

Ahh yes, but who sets those standards? What if the standard was to dress in Waffen SS uniform, or to have only one book on the set text list, and you had to learn it by heart whilst rocking backwards and forwards?

Nasty controlling little fuckwits who are the first to moan when someone tells them to do something. It smacks of the parlour boy kicking the cat.

You go on and keep growing those whiskers Akaash, really put the cat amongst the pigeons and tell them you've converted to Sikhism, and then ask them about Kesh.

The One That Thinks He Is Mad, Mad, Mad. . .

He really is stark raving mad.

Once again the idea of 'voluntary' work is trotted out again. Now, there’s nothing wrong with voluntary work, as long as it is voluntary.

The Prime Mentalist cannot ensure that young people have done ‘50 hours of voluntary work by the time they are 19-years-old.’ There are a large number of young people who would have no intention of doing 50 hours of voluntary work. Voluntary work is unpaid, there is a word for the system of making people work for nothing. It is called slavery.

‘Mr Brown said a promise to bring in compulsory community service would be a
part of his next election manifesto.’

Really? Why would you do that? This government really are hell bent on self-destruction. Well here they are removing their youth vote at a stroke. Well done. If I were a party standing, I’d be right outside the schools with sixth forms and every college letting the youngsters know that a vote for Labour means they will do 50 hours of work, for nothing.

‘Under the scheme, the work may include helping charities and is likely to
become part of the National Curriculum. The scheme would be woven into plans
to make everyone stay in education or training until the age of 18 by
2011.’

Charities? Which bloody charities? Are these the same charities that receive huge amounts of tax payers’ money? Are they now to get State Sanctioned slaves to push their agenda and carry out their bidding? And you are now to stay under control and indoctrination until you are 18. You will be dependent, you will be obedient, you will work because we can't actually afford to give you any relevant education.

Gordon Brown has told the News of The World ‘It is my ambition to create a Britain in which there is a clear expectation that all young people will undertake some service to their community, and where community service will become a normal part of growing up in Britain. Arbeit Macht Frei’

Well, perhaps he didn’t say those last three words. But would we have been surprised if he had?

The One That Figures If It Is Good Enough For The Goose . . .

You see, that's the problem in schools. When you have a large number of impressionable and malleable people, you have to be careful about what they are exposed to, what they consider to be the norm and acceptable.

No, of course I'm not talking about the imminent release of Crack Whore Pimp Blows Cars Up - Vilnius Edition. Nor am I talking about the latest reports of kids on school football pitches displaying the lack of respect to match officials which is so apparent in the Premier League. I'm not even talking about the rap genre perpetuating the promotion of women as items for nothing beyond sexual gratification.

I'm not even talking about the kids. I'm talking about the teachers.

Al-Beeb is reporting that staff from Edensor Technology College in Stoke are pissing off to Marbella for four days to 'discuss the school's new curriculum and plans to turn it into an academy.'

You what? You have to go to Spain to discuss this? Apparently the trip to Marbella was 'best value for money'. Really? How much an hour does it cost to hire out your own fucking hall then? I'm guessing it's a lot, I'd hate to think you were spending MY money on this jolly, so you must have raised the revenue somehow.

But then, why the hell should they not spank thousands of taxpayer's cash on this? Teachers see council officials, MPs, Civil Servants, MEPs and anyone who gets within half a mile of the public purse going to Can-bloody-cun to see how a municipal building looks with a wheelchair stairlift, so why can't they get a bit of the gravy?

I hope that parents remind them of the fact that they closed down the school for two days and nipped off for some early winter sun the next time they start bitching about how much work they have to do, and how little cash they get paid.

What a bunch of bastards, I hope all the kids accuse the teachers of touching them inappropriately.

The One That Thinks It's All Arse About Face. . .

I had a very interesting conversation with a friend of mine on Sunday morning. Her 14 year old daughter was recently attacked by a gang of 12 girls in Ashford, Kent. Now, I've never considered Ashford (the town where I grew up) to be a particularly bad town, it has one estate of local bad repute, but it certainly isn't Fallujah.

The disturbing thing, beyond the obvious, is this; two of the girls in the gang were classmates of the unfortunate young lady. As far as I can gather even though the ringleader and other members of the gang, including these two girls, have been identified, the school has declined to take any real action as the incident happened out of school.

Now, dear reader, if you set about a colleague outside of the work-place you would expect to lose your job as a result.

Another friend of mine, who works as a foster carer, recounted an incident involving one of her charges. This time there was an assault in the classroom by a young man on the girl in her care that involved her being punched in the stomach and the face. The school in question requested she attend the campus and take her foster daughter home as a result.

'Have you called the Police?' she quite reasonably asked.
'No.' came the reply. 'We would only summon the Police in the event of a serious incident.'
'She has been assaulted. If I were to do the same to you, now, would you call the Police?'
'Well, yes.'
'So what's the difference?'
'Well, we're adults.'

Now, there's a difference between a scrap in the playground (although a scrap in the pub car-park would probably attract the attention of the local constabulary) and a focused assault in a classroom. To say that the Police are not needed suggests that a child has less right to protection against assault than an adult. Or worse, children have a right to assault other people, a right that adults do not have.

Of course the foster mother reported the incident to the Police, who said they preferred not to get involved with incidents such as this. Yeah, I fucking bet you don't. Any other areas of law enforcement you don't feel like getting involved with? Arson? Murder perhaps? What about detection and solving of crimes? Too much for you? Perhaps you'd be better off attending another diversity workshop.

The thing is, we'll criminalise someone for dropping a fag butt on the ground, but actually get a proper crime with like, a real victim, and they'll run a mile. The message sent out is two-fold, to the wrong-'uns it says 'Do what you want, you have carte-blanche, neither the educational nor judicial authorities will take any action.' To those that act as responsible, pleasant human beings it is 'Forget it. You are sooooooooo fucked. Oh, is that an apple core you just put in that bush? Tut tut, see you in court.'

Is it any wonder that kids are taking to carrying knives? No-one is going to defend them, so they might as well do it themsevles.

Then we have the case of Sarika Watkins-Singh, the Sikh girl who was suspended from school for wearing a bangle as a sign of her faith. This, apparently, contravened the school's no jewellery uniform policy. She won, thankfully. What a ridiculous state of affairs. What is a 14 year old girl doing in the High Court defending her right to express her faith? Is a bangle really that important to the school?

No, the only reason this went all this way is because this young girl didn't shut the fuck up, sit down and do as she was told. Who the hell does she think she is? How dare she challenge these totally arbitrary rules set down on a whim. The only winners were the lawyers, the whole lot would have paid for by public funds. That's our money, by the way.

So we have one girl, excluded from school for wearing a bracelet* that you wouldn't even notice unless you looked for it, whilst no action is taken against those who violently assault their classmates. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this picture?


*I understand that the bracelet shouldn't have been classed as jewellery anyhow. The school apparently only kicked up a fuss about it when the girl's parents complained of racist bullying. Obviously it was her fault for drawing attention to herself by wearing it. That's a great bullying policy isn't it?