Eton

135678

Comments

  • I'd be more concerned at GCSE rather than A levels, where core subjects are essential. I would also wonder whether the students taking MFL were bi-lingual and gaining qualifications in their first/second language? (I've worked in a secondary school where we had students pass GCSE and A level Urdu, Russian and various other languages that we didn't teach, but they had the skills in those languages so were being given the opportunity to gain the qualifications as evidence.)

    But, if you were a headteacher, would you trust the marking of the English teacher under consideration to be enough of a fair and accurate reflection on the abilities of the students to feel confident that they would stand up to scrutiny without the additional check of exams?
  • I can't say I'm all that surprised; two or three years ago a friend of mine spent several months tutoring a boy at another well-known public school so he could get the Latin grade he needed to get his university place. His classics teacher had a first from Oxford, but no teaching qualification and had only covered half the syllabus.
  • I imagine Eton does the International Baccalaureate, not A levels.
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    I imagine Eton does the International Baccalaureate, not A levels.

    Or "international" A-levels.
  • No IBacc according to the Eton College results page
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Eton I am informed for practical purposes consists of two different schools: a small academic hothouse for boys on scholarships and a posh finishing school for people who pay fees. Eton's marketing involves ascribing the results of the former to the latter.
  • No IBacc according to the Eton College results page

    Clearly I'm out of touch. Apparently there are 'Pre U' exams now...
  • Apparently Eton has never taught the IBacc; when I was trying to find IBacc results this Guardian article popped up from 2002 discussing the woeful A level results of the Royal Princes.
  • I rest my case
  • Of course, if intellectual d
    Dafyd wrote: »
    Eton I am informed for practical purposes consists of two different schools: a small academic hothouse for boys on scholarships and a posh finishing school for people who pay fees. Eton's marketing involves ascribing the results of the former to the latter.

    According to my Other Half (who went to a minor public school) this is how most of them operate. Rich people can get jobs through the Old Boys network and hire other people to do their "thinking" for them, so leaving school with a fistful of qualifications is less important for them.
  • For what it's worth (having taught in the independent sector for 15+ years) my view is that Eton is very academically strong these days, much stronger than it was 25 years ago.
  • One of the things I believe Eton does, or used to do, is operate the kids clubs/societies like private clubs - requiring existing members to approve you for membership. Which may explain why it produces so many politicians.
  • I had heard that too @Doublethink and nowadays that would be a most unusual arrangement even for a public school. I am not 100% sure that it is still like that though.

    This Guardian article seems to shed more light on the current brouhaha though I would beware of taking it as "the truth plain and simple". The really surprising thing to me is that a colleague has apparently resigned in sympathy - it makes me think that there might be more to the situation than meets the eye.
  • I think they still do it for “Pop”
  • I had heard that too @Doublethink and nowadays that would be a most unusual arrangement even for a public school. I am not 100% sure that it is still like that though.

    This Guardian article seems to shed more light on the current brouhaha though I would beware of taking it as "the truth plain and simple". The really surprising thing to me is that a colleague has apparently resigned in sympathy - it makes me think that there might be more to the situation than meets the eye.

    My guess is wider behind the scenes discussions on going co-ed.
  • Oh well I suppose it is almost the whole raison d'etre of "Pop" to operate like that! Lewis's "Inner Ring" distilled!
  • "The really surprising thing to me is that a colleague has apparently resigned in sympathy - it makes me think that there might be more to the situation than meets the eye.

    Ah on closer inspection I see the colleague has only resigned from an internal post - that doesn't seem such a big deal.

  • My guess is wider behind the scenes discussions on going co-ed.

    I actually don't think that would have caused such ructions in itself. I think "bitter arguments over wokeness or perceived wokeness" is probably on the money, weird as that may seem.
  • One of the things I believe Eton does, or used to do, is operate the kids clubs/societies like private clubs - requiring existing members to approve you for membership. Which may explain why it produces so many politicians.

    What a recipe for making all the slightly odder (read 'more interesting' and 'neurodiverse') kids feel even more shitty then their peers already ensure.
  • It may be a debate about "wokeness" but I don't think you have to be particularly "woke" to see problems with the video. My kids regard me as a dinosaur on the woke scale, but I can see the problems with the video, quite a few of which I've discussed previously. I think that the Spectator article Bro James linked to is spot on.
  • I have wondered before why Prince William had so much money spent on his education at Eton and ended up with less than stellar A level results (A in Geography, B in Art, C in Biology). Prince Harry ended up with a B in Art and a D in Geography.
    That might be a reasonable viewpoint if you think it fair to disregard what was going on in their family life. Even before they arrived at Eton both princes had their entire childhood clouded not only by parental discord but a mother who, it is acknowledged, could have wide mood swings.

    Within weeks of starting at Eton William had to cope with all the ramifications of his mother's Panorama interview. The press may not have published much about the boys from then on but the newspapers were full of "War of the Waleses" stories which all of his classmates, teachers and other staff will have seen. Then less than 2 years later came her death, speculation about that - more horror. To be blunt, that William managed to get galf-way decent A levels is something of a triumph.

    As for Harry: he was younger, more damaged and, not to put too fine a point on it, inherited his academic ability from his mother.

    Far be it from me to heap praise on the traditional rival to my old alma mater, but bearing in mind the problems, existing and ongoing, that both princes had I think Eton did a pretty good job.
  • I'd have been happy with a 'B' in A level art! A 'C' in biology is also pretty good!
  • I've found this on Eton's web-page - A level results 2020.

    https://www.etoncollege.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/GCEStatistics2020.pdf

    I'm not familiar with A levels, but English isn't included here - did no-one from Eton sit A level English? Also, there are only four passes at A level in Modern Languages - one in Japanese and three in Portugese. No French, no German, no Mandarin?

    Nine pupils took Ancient History, but History isn't listed as a subject.

    They do seem much stronger in sciences, though - Maths, physics, chemistry and biology.

    In common with many other schools, I suspect they only give results in subjects where some element was a test or exam, as opposed to subjects where a "predicted" grade was awarded. As for MFL, you'll find more of them on the PreU results page.
  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited December 2020
    Knowland references Eton in the blurb that accompanies the YouTube video:

    The statements and opinions in this video are not necessarily agreed or authorised by Eton College or its subsidiary companies.

    No checking of social media / LinkedIn etc required.

    The wording my work’s social media manager encourages people to use says that these views are your own and you don’t represent anyone but yourself. With no mention of the name of your actual employer.

    Most contracts of employment include clauses about not damaging your employer’s reputation on social.

    My understanding is that he was sacked for refusing to take the video down despite repeated requests. The material along with the reference to Eton meant the collage could be found guilty of breaking the Equalities Act / Education Act.

    His refusal to abide by the terms of his contract of employment was what got him sacked - not his views. You have the right to say what you like ... Not the right to escape the consequences of what you’ve said. It’s amazing how many free speech advocates don’t seem to grasp the difference.

    @Makepeace, if you’re going to complain that someone got sacked for their “perfectly reasonable views”, you might want to make sure you know exactly what they are first.

    The average poster would be perfectly reasonable in assuming that you fully agree with comments like “biologically speaking the idea that men exert power over women is nonsense”,

    “... male aggression is a biological fact” and “... a world without men would be awful for women”.

    As well as ”Rape is not a unique claim for male oppression of women because male-on-male rape in jails dwarfs male-on-female rape outside them.”
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    One of the things I believe Eton does, or used to do, is operate the kids clubs/societies like private clubs - requiring existing members to approve you for membership. Which may explain why it produces so many politicians.

    What a recipe for making all the slightly odder (read 'more interesting' and 'neurodiverse') kids feel even more shitty then their peers already ensure.

    All the clubs and societies at my senior school were run by the pupils. We had a member of staff to take responsibility for oversight, but they almost never did anything. None of the clubs I was involved with had much in the way of a formal membership approval process. If you wanted to join X club, you'd either turn up or be brought by an existing member, and as long as you had a genuine interest in X, you'd be invited to stay. We occasionally kicked people out when they had no interest in the activity of the society, but didn't go in for cliques and black-balling.

    I never had a situation where a particular pupil had an interest in X, but had sustained disruptive / objectionable behaviour in X club, so I can't say what we'd have done, except that I'm pretty certain there would have been staff involvement.
  • Other quotes:
    Some people think that nowadays we don't need violence because we have the law, but in fact the law itself ultimately depends on the threat of violence (25.45)

    In what way does "the law" ultimately depend on the threat of violence?
  • Other quotes:
    Some people think that nowadays we don't need violence because we have the law, but in fact the law itself ultimately depends on the threat of violence (25.45)

    In what way does "the law" ultimately depend on the threat of violence?

    That's a fairly standard adaptation of Max Weber's contention that a state is an entity with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within its physical borders. Law ultimately rests on the ability of the state to enforce compliance.
  • "Law" has many meanings. One of those is the mechanisms of the state to enforce compliance to rules, which isn't very contentious (it's how we get to use "the law" to refer to the police, how "law and order" is used by politicians to talk about punishing criminals etc). But, within that understanding are contentious ideas - one of which being that people are naturally disinclined to follow rules, and only do so out of fear of the consequences of being caught, which I wouldn't agree with (I'd say that mostly people are inclined to follow rules, and many rules only exist because of a minority who act counter to the way most people would naturally behave). The argument would go that force is needed to get people to comply with rules, and ultimately that force is a form of violence - fines require taking money from someone, imprisonment taking their liberty, and in a few nations the state still reserves the right to take life. And, the more people resist the penalties of law breaking the more violence is needed to enact those penalties - police officers breaking down doors to arrest people can be quite violent. Though most law enforcement doesn't actually involve physical violence, at the end of the line is the thought that physical violence can be used by the police.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    The material along with the reference to Eton meant the collage could be found guilty of breaking the Equalities Act / Education Act.

    Think you're right @Tubbs - this was probably a big part of the college's motivation.

    But isn't that a big issue with the drafting of the Equalities Act, if it makes an employer responsible for the views that an employee expresses online outside of the workplace ?



  • TubbsTubbs Admin
    edited December 2020
    Russ wrote: »
    The material along with the reference to Eton meant the collage could be found guilty of breaking the Equalities Act / Education Act.

    Think you're right @Tubbs - this was probably a big part of the college's motivation.

    But isn't that a big issue with the drafting of the Equalities Act, if it makes an employer responsible for the views that an employee expresses online outside of the workplace ?



    If the employee makes the connection between themselves and their employer explicit - as they did in this case - then no.

    He didn’t have to mention he taught at Eton. He did so to attract more users to his channel and give his views more authority.

    What he really means by free speech is the right to say what he likes and be listened too without being challenged or without it costing him anything.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Russ wrote: »
    The material along with the reference to Eton meant the collage could be found guilty of breaking the Equalities Act / Education Act.

    Think you're right @Tubbs - this was probably a big part of the college's motivation.

    But isn't that a big issue with the drafting of the Equalities Act, if it makes an employer responsible for the views that an employee expresses online outside of the workplace ?
    I suspect the school's Equalities Act / Education Act worry was that after they had told him to take it down, and he had refused to do so, their boys and members of staff would access it. By not taking it down, one would be entitled to assume that was a major part of his intention.

    There's a quite separate reputational issue which would also be an employment matter. Putting it on Youtube meant that he wanted to sell his ideas to people outside the school. The school could reasonably argue that would potentially damage it's reputation. It might give prospective parents the idea that these were some of the things the school might stand for or at least be sympathetic to. It might encourage them to send their sons elsewhere.

  • Russ wrote: »
    But isn't that a big issue with the drafting of the Equalities Act, if it makes an employer responsible for the views that an employee expresses online outside of the workplace ?

    Imagine a hypothetical line manager. He's a middle-aged white man, and has a number of people from various racial backgrounds working for him. In his spare time, he's a prominent "white power" activist, and produces youtube videos where he uses abusive racist language and talks about the inferiority of "the black race" and so on.

    Do you think this person is likely to be capable of treating his black employees fairly?

    Do you think that the employees - the black ones in particular, are likely to feel comfortable with him as a manager when they discover his hobby?

    What do you think is likely to happen the first time that a black employee makes a claim of unfair dismissal etc., claiming racial bias on the part of this man?
  • No. And indeed there's a warning against that sort of thing. There's the sad tale of a woman (at 28:26) whose husband was a stay-at-home husband. Apparently it "neutralised him as a sexual being." She "wanted to be overwhelmed by the sheer power of his masculinity in the bedroom" but she wasn't.
    This is quite honestly at 'I don't know whether to laugh or cry' levels of ridiculous. NEQ, are you going to need some counselling, going forward, after this experience?
  • While I think the school's actions are entirely justified I think it is as well to remember that this is a personal catastrophe for Mr. Knowland, even if he did bring it upon himself. I doubt his future employment prospects are bright ("occasional columnist for the Telegraph" perhaps).
  • While I think the school's actions are entirely justified I think it is as well to remember that this is a personal catastrophe for Mr. Knowland, even if he did bring it upon himself. I doubt his future employment prospects are bright ("occasional columnist for the Telegraph" perhaps).

    All aboard the conservative grievance gravy-train, stints at Unherd and Quillette beckon.
  • While I think the school's actions are entirely justified I think it is as well to remember that this is a personal catastrophe for Mr. Knowland, even if he did bring it upon himself. I doubt his future employment prospects are bright ("occasional columnist for the Telegraph" perhaps).

    There’s no even if ... Why is it when some bloke - and it usually is a bloke - brings a personal catastrophe down on himself entirely due to his own actions this is seen as a reason to feel sorry for them. Because not getting away with it is somehow very bad.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Yes, he did bring this entirely upon himself, and ought to have known at the time just what the consequences would be. Perhaps he thought that one of the fathers (and it would be a father not a mother) would give him a job. Fat chance of that, I'd say - if he's done this, what would he do as an employee elsewhere. If he did not think this would follow, even less reason to put him on the payroll.
  • Tubbs wrote: »
    While I think the school's actions are entirely justified I think it is as well to remember that this is a personal catastrophe for Mr. Knowland, even if he did bring it upon himself. I doubt his future employment prospects are bright ("occasional columnist for the Telegraph" perhaps).

    There’s no even if ... Why is it when some bloke - and it usually is a bloke - brings a personal catastrophe down on himself entirely due to his own actions this is seen as a reason to feel sorry for them. Because not getting away with it is somehow very bad.

    I dunno, I thought there was some bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people, or maybe some weird bit in the General Confession about being forgiven for things even though they were entirely our own deliberate fault.
  • We can forgive them without employing them.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    Forgiveness need have no practical effects without repentance.
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    I'd have been happy with a 'B' in A level art! A 'C' in biology is also pretty good!
    You would have been even happier if you had the special 'help' that he had

  • I dunno, I thought there was some bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people, or maybe some weird bit in the General Confession about being forgiven for things even though they were entirely our own deliberate fault.

    Is there a bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people for their transgressions against other people instead of against yourself? Because from a secular standpoint assuming that you have the power to forgive people for wrongs committed against people who aren't you seems both arrogant and counterproductive.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    What do you think is likely to happen the first time that a black employee makes a claim of unfair dismissal etc., claiming racial bias on the part of this man?

    Clearly what should happen is that the case is judged on the evidence of his behaviour in the workplace, on the traditional basis that he is innocent until proven guilty.

    You ask if I think that's likely.

    Do I have faith in the willingness of progressives to abide by the rules of justice ? What do you think ?
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Is there a bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people for their transgressions against other people instead of against yourself?

    So it's OK to be unforgiving provided you can point to a victim who isn't you ?

    O Lord, make me forgiving. But don't do it yet - there are still victims in the world.
  • Russ wrote: »
    What do you think is likely to happen the first time that a black employee makes a claim of unfair dismissal etc., claiming racial bias on the part of this man?

    Clearly what should happen is that the case is judged on the evidence of his behaviour in the workplace, on the traditional basis that he is innocent until proven guilty.

    You ask if I think that's likely.

    Do I have faith in the willingness of progressives to abide by the rules of justice ? What do you think ?

    Since unfair dismissal is a civil and not a criminal matter, the "traditional basis" is balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt. As such "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't come into it.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Russ wrote: »
    Crœsos wrote: »
    Is there a bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people for their transgressions against other people instead of against yourself?

    So it's OK to be unforgiving provided you can point to a victim who isn't you ?

    O Lord, make me forgiving. But don't do it yet - there are still victims in the world.

    It's not really about forgiveness or not. It's about people causing harm to others (the ones harmed are the ones you routinely deride as "victims") and facilitating them them to continue to do so or not.
  • Forgiving people who sin against you is for your benefit, not theirs. It helps you to move on from the experience and put it behind you. It doesn't mean you give them a free pass to continue in their behaviour. Jesus forgave the woman taken in adultery, but he also said "Go, and sin no more".

    I would hesitate to say that's impossible in this case, but it seems unlikely, as he's busy doubling down and playing the victim. I wouldn't want to employ him, and I certainly wouldn't want to send any child of mine (male or female) to a school that employed him. His views on rape alone should disqualify him from holding any pastoral responsibility for young people. IMNSHO.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Crœsos wrote: »
    I dunno, I thought there was some bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people, or maybe some weird bit in the General Confession about being forgiven for things even though they were entirely our own deliberate fault.

    Is there a bit in the Lord's Prayer about forgiving people for their transgressions against other people instead of against yourself? Because from a secular standpoint assuming that you have the power to forgive people for wrongs committed against people who aren't you seems both arrogant and counterproductive.
    Is there?
    "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us"
    What capacity do any of us have to forgive anyone for a wrong they have done to someone else? That is imagining one can usurp something that only the victim can do.

    On that, what you call the secular assumption seems to be correct.

  • I wouldn't want him teaching any child of mine. He portrays women as shallow, materialistic mean girls, who compete for alpha males by being bitchy towards each other. Men have to be violent, physically strong and attractive and, crucially, wealthy, in order to attract a women who can be regarded as a trophy.

    It's a sad message. By complete contrast, my Bible study is currently reading Richard Rohr's The Universal Christ which describes a way of thought completely alien to Knowland. It's interesting that many of the examples of manhood Knowland provides in the video are either pre-Christian (King Leonides), pre-Christian mythological (Thor, Sisyphus) or fictional.
  • "What capacity do any of us have to forgive anyone for a wrong they have done to someone else? That is imagining one can usurp something that only the victim can do."

    I think that's what (eg) Catholic and other Priests do in giving absolution - pronouncing God's forgiveness and saying "your sins are forgiven".
Sign In or Register to comment.