# Royal Institution Christmas Lectures 2015



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

BBC4 8:00pm Mon 28 Dec


----------



## ChrisandJohn (Feb 3, 2008)

So who is it this year then?


Chris


----------



## bazzle (Jan 29, 2015)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> BBC4 8:00pm Mon 28 Dec


Thanks Kev. Missed 'em last year but not this year. :kiss:


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

In years gone by I was a huge fan of these lectures.

HOWEVER, of the past few years I found them to have been "dumbed down" far too much for my taste. 

Andy


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Mrplodd said:


> In years gone by I was a huge fan of these lectures.
> HOWEVER, of the past few years I found them to have been "dumbed down" far too much for my taste.
> Andy


Regrettably all too common Andy.

At least they don't _(yet??) _spend several boring minutes after each commercial break reminding you what went on *three minutes ago*!!

Dave


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Zebedee said:


> Regrettably all too common Andy.
> 
> At least they don't _(yet??) _spend several boring minutes after each commercial break reminding you what went on *three minutes ago*!!
> 
> Dave


Thank god it's not just me, it do do my loaf in mate.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

The problem Gentlemen is that we of a certain age received a decent education back in the early sixties. Education these days is less about actually learning things and is skewed towards the pupil "self discovering"

You only have to listen to the younger generations, they would appear, in the main, to actually know two tenths of three fifths of ****all!!! and THAT is why things such as these lectures need to be pitched at such a low intellectual level. A sad sign of the times.

Mrs P bought me an interesting book a while ago, it was a compilation of questions from the old eleven plus examination. I have to admit that there were a fair few that I would have trouble answering now!!! I showed it to my daughter (4 A levels, a degree in Arabic, fluent in 4 languages and an IQ of 174) even she admitted there were a lot of pretty taxing questions. 

I wonder how our present GCSE exam taking teenagers would fare if they sat it??

Am I begining to sound like an old fart???

Andy


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I'm of the opinion that the youth of today are only taught how pass tests and examinations, and not educated at all.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Mrplodd said:


> . . . to actually know two tenths of three fifths of ****all!!!


Quite correct Andy, but they wouldn't know where to start if you asked to calculate two tenths of three fifths of . . . . . .

Dave :wink2:


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Im not sure you old farts are right. Dont get me wrong I find the yoof of today also a bit lacking in general education and know how but I think what you lot are forgetting is that your education never stops. The older you get the more wise and learned you get and of course the education of life can only be absorbed over time and of course some of you are centuries old so you must have picked up quite a bit by now.

I often have to deal with young IT people and to be fair Im way past it at 49 in the technology world and whilst they may be streets ahead of me in technical know how I often find their ability to transfer this knowledge into business solutions or to deliver satisfaction to end users extremely lacking and its just experience thats lacking not brain power or technical knowledge. I suspect this applies to everything.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Cobblers Barry!! :surprise:

When we were educated only 4 or 5 per cent were capable of getting a degree, and the work was pitched at an appropriate level to sort the sheep from the clever bu$$ers.

These days the government wants 70% of all kids to be "average" *(!!!!!!!)* and to get a degree . . . but standards haven't fallen of course! :surprise:

Dave :smile2:

P.S. In our day education was free, simply because the Country could afford to fund 5% of the population. The current generation of youngsters have to pay eye-watering costs to get a qualification which no longer sets them apart with any sort of real advantage! If the majority have a degree, what's it worth any longer?

_(Slight over emphasis I admit, but there's truth in it!)_


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

I am not sure what the education was like in the 1960's, mine was done in the 50's. The 11 plus was quite a simple exam, it just tested you on what you had been taught.This was a combination of your ability and the teachers skills.
Ours made learning interesting and if I remember rightly most of our year did pass that test.Plus of course some teachers ability with throwing chalk with amazing accuracy .:grin2::grin2:
From my age of 11, Grammar schools had tutors that were, shall we call OLD school and we in that era respected them.They combined common sense with information, it made you want to know and learn.
Many say what is the point of learning something you will never use, but the real point is in your brain being able to learn how to process information later in life.

cabby


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Think the acid test is to see who the big employers of today want to employ :wink2:. The young or the old or even middle aged.

Dick


----------



## vicdicdoc (May 14, 2005)

Glandwr said:


> Think the acid test is to see who the big employers of today want to employ :wink2:. The young or the old or even middle aged.
> Dick


. . . the Polish, Russian, Ukrainian etc - not that many worthwhile jobs open or available now unless you consider working behind the counter of McDonald's or KFC.

Not like in my day (1960) when you could open any newspaper and be overwhelmed with pages & pages of jobs


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I left school in 1965, I did not take the 11 or 13 Plus exams, I arranged to be away on those days, got caned for it, but worth it, I liked English, it's the only class I made sure I attended, and science if the headmaster was taking it, otherwise I was bored out of my mind, I could never concentrate, so I'd just not go, in summer I'd be down the railway flattening pennies on the lines and selling them to the clever lads for tuppence each, generally just wandering around being nosy, getting into all kinds of trouble, in winter I'd go to school more often, but still missed most lessons, could not abide maths, history or geography, I'd find a factory or something to watch people doing stuff, teachers were boring me to death, blah blah blah, none of it went in, my parents did not give a monkeys, so why should I.

Of course I regret it, but I learned different things, not that any of it did me any good, I've never really had much money, but I've been quite happy most of my life.


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

I find that many of the young, and not so young, people are very envious of people who have practical skills. My brother taught at a university and always said that they needed to teach life skill alongside the chosen subject. He was woefully lacking in any skill to fix his car or do any kind of diy. It gave him enormous frustration. Mr Patp is blessed with the ability to work out how to fix almost anything. Luckily our, degree educated, daughter spent a lot of her early years being chief assistant to him and has a fair amount of confidence in tackling most jobs. Her, again, highly educated, fiancé, however, lacks any kind of practical skill that does not involve searching on the computer. He, though, is keen to learn life skills now that he is about to become a home owner.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

patp said:


> I find that many of the young, and not so young, people are very envious of people who have practical skills. My brother taught at a university and always said that they needed to teach life skill alongside the chosen subject. He was woefully lacking in any skill to fix his car or do any kind of diy. It gave him enormous frustration. Mr Patp is blessed with the ability to work out how to fix almost anything. Luckily our, degree educated, daughter spent a lot of her early years being chief assistant to him and has a fair amount of confidence in tackling most jobs. Her, again, highly educated, fiancé, however, lacks any kind of practical skill that does not involve searching on the computer. He, though, is keen to learn life skills now that he is about to become a home owner.


I point people at Youtube, it's the best educator on the planet for DIY and other skills if used properly, there are usually several people doing the same things in different ways, so you get to see different aspects. I wish it had been around when I was young, but puters were all in Sci Fi movies back then.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

cabby said:


> I am not sure what the education was like in the 1960's, mine was done in the 50's. The 11 plus was quite a simple exam, it just tested you on what you had been taught.
> 
> cabby


Cabby

Sorry but I beg to differ. The eleven plus exam question book I have certainly has SOME simple questions, but there are also a fair few that I feel are far from simple and WAY beyond the abilities of many of the younger generation.

I recall a few years ago a simply brilliant TV programme where they took a bunch of kids who were just coming up to their GCSE (or whatever they are now called) exams and put them into a 1960's boarding school environment for a couple of weeks to see how they would cope.

Day one they sat an exam and all failed. The kids considered it a pretty tough exam and all assumed it was an old "O" level paper.

The problem was that EVERY question had been taken from old Eleven Plus examination papers :surprise:!! (Remember these were kids aged 15-16!)

I rest my case M'lud

Education is most certainly not as good as in the past, and, as has been stated by others, a degree is no longer considered as a badge of excellence.

In my day anyone who went to University was considered nothing short of a genius, NONE of my peer group went to Uni. These days a University education is seen as the norm!

The other issue is the plethora of totally worthless degrees. What use in the modern world (except in a VERY small niche) is a degree in say "Art History" to say nothing of "Media Studies" or even English Language, we all speak English so what use is a degree in it??? How will a degree in English Literature assist you in a job in say HR or business management roles?? I am sure employees will really benefit from having Keats or Shelley quoted to them at times of stress.

My view is that PROPER degree courses, such as Science and Engineering based subjects, which would be of benefit to society as a whole, should be subsidised BUT subject to tough entrance qualifications (a bit like medicine) but with the added proviso that failure to complete the course would result in ALL of the tuition fees being repayable.

Fat chance of THAT eh??

Andy


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Was it you who didn't fit into the school Kev - or maybe what the school offered was inappropriate to the real needs of most ordinary kids???

If you have some time to spare, have a read of the "Sabre Tooth Curriculum".
It takes a while, but I think you might enjoy it . . . and it's just as relevant today as it was in the Stone Age!!

http://blogs.bath.ac.uk/edswahs/2012/11/20/the-sabre-tooth-curriculum/

Dave :wink2:


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Zebedee said:


> Was it you who didn't fit into the school Kev - or maybe what the school offered was inappropriate to the real needs of most ordinary kids???
> 
> If you have some time to spare, have a read of the "Sabre Tooth Curriculum".
> It takes a while, but I think you might enjoy it . . . and it's just as relevant today as it was in the Stone Age!!
> ...


It was all Catholic schools Dave, and I stopped believing in fairy stories at a very early age, so I was disillusioned anyway, the written word has and always will be a problem for me.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Mrplodd said:


> My view is that PROPER degree courses, such as Science and Engineering based subjects . . . . .


Where do you get the well qualified applicants Andy?

The National Curriculum did more to destroy the science and engineering skill base in this country than anything else before or since.

When making their subject options in Year 3 (_or whatever it's called now_) the National Curriculum decreed that ALL pupils were REQUIRED to take ALL the Sciences . . . Chemistry, Physics and Biology.

The reason given was to ensure that all children would have a firm foundation in these subjects and would be able to continue at A-Level and university.

What a load of utterly stupid and misconceived bo££ocks!!! (_Sorry ladies_)

When Science was an option, the only pupils who opted for it were those who were interested in the subject and actually enjoyed learning it. They were relatively few, because it's a demanding and unforgiving subject - and as boring as hell to many _(most?)_ kids.

As soon as *every *pupil had to take Science, those few who *were *interested were surrounded by a majority who were bored, inattentive, and didn't want to be there, some of whom were constantly disruptive and regularly prevented the progress of those who *wanted *to learn.

What a surprise!!!! Who would have thought it???? But the schools were given no option but to (_effectively_) destroy the prospects of those pupils who aspired to a sound education in the Sciences!!

But what do the schools know . . . compared to the Papal Infallibility of your average politician!!!

Dave


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> . . . I stopped believing in fairy stories at a very early age.


You would believe in this one Kev!!

Dave :smile2:


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

A lot changed, I think, when teacher lost the respect of the general public. When I was at school, teacher were held in high regard by the general public. It was considered a good profession to enter. Nowadays most people regard them as just feeble. I think this all changed when there was a chronic shortage of teachers in the 1970's. I, at the time, was working in teachers staffing dealing with their pensions. The recruiting arm had the devils own job getting teachers. I remember one particular case where I was asked by the interviewer to collect an interviewee from reception and escort them to the interview room. This particular candidate had a degree in Russian. I forget what the post was but it certainly wasn't Russion!
The candidate stood in reception in, what can only be described as, hippy clothing. Open toed sandals showed grubby feet. In the lift up I noticed s distinct body odour - need I go on.


After the interview I asked the interviewer how it went and did she get the job as I knew they were desperate. His answer was "she is upright and breathing - of course she got the job!" 


Now in those days all they needed was a degree or to have gone to teacher training college, not both. So this young lady had no training in how to teach. She would be put in front of a class and told to teach them English or Maths or whatever was needed at the time. She would not have been the only one doing this and that is where, in my opinion it all fell apart. Once in post these candidates, with no teacher training, being given jobs all over the country, would be almost impossible to eject. Only in extreme cases of misconduct, or complete inadequacy, could they be fired. 


How many kids were educated by these teachers recruited in those years of severe teacher shortage? Is it still going on?


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I watched the first one last night and it was awful, managed about half of it and turned it off, then deleted it, dumbed down doesn't cover it.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Kev

Things have clearly not altered then? 

Everything these days is geared to the lowest possible denominator, no one is allowed to be "cleverer" than the thickest thicko because THEY are the ones everything is aimed at.

Years ago my daughter was assessed (aged 13) as having an IQ of 174 (that put her in the top 0.5% of the population) Try as I might I couldn't get any additional assistance with her educational needs because she was assessed by "experts" as not having any "need" being super clever apparently doesn't require any sort of extra help. 

She was disruptive at school because the poor soul was bored out of her mind dealing with the "lowest common denominator" ethos that the teaching staff and LEA operated under. (I often wonder what the IQ of those people was! Probably a bit less than 174 c:wink2

Fortunately she rose above it all and is now seconded to the UN in Haiti

Andy


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

I passed the 11+, one of only two in our class.

Went to Grammar School, Sutton County School for Boys which I hated, then we moved to Sussex and I went to a mixed Grammar school there.

I left in 1962, having achieved little in educational terms but found that life wasn't that bad outside the school environment.

Some of our teachers were good, but many couldn't cope with pupils who were sharper than the rest, as mentioned above.

By the time our two sons went to school it was mayhem, neither had a decent education in my view and too much emphasis was placed on 'airy-fairy' qualifications like NVQ's rather than hard O or A levels.

Teaching is too 'learn by rote' based and not enough time is spent on actually getting the pupil to learn the subject by understanding it. Too many pupils in my year were anxious about subjects that they could not master in the allotted time, leading to cramming at evenings and weekends to get through exams and tests.

Peter


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Isn't the emphasis more on continuous assessment though now? I left school in 1982 with just two O levels in English and Geography. I wasn't thick, I just couldn't be bothered to learn anything that didn't interest me and I was rubbish at exams as I would leave it all until the last minute. At least with continuous assessment you cannot do that. Your course work and projects are equally as important as the final exam.

I left school at 16, couldnt wait to get out but bummed around for three years doing all sorts of daft thing including running my own (very successful amazingly) mobile disco. 

When I finally decided to go back to college I did an HND in Computer science which was all modular rather than a final exam. It was brilliant and I loved it. I enjoyed the modular project work and the rest is history. If it had all been traditional O Levels and A Levels or a degree with just a final exam I wouldn't have got anywhere. I think some of the changes are for the better and an HND or degree in Computer science should surely still mean something even now.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

barryd said:


> At least with continuous assessment you cannot do that. Your course work and projects are equally as important as the final exam.


Assuming that you actually do your own coursework Barry!

In very many cases it's the parents or Mr Google who really deserve the grade! :surprise:

Dave


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

I have a pal (at the time was a serving copper) who's daughter did NO coursework for her GCE in art. 

He found this out on Friday evening with coursework due in on Monday morning, he takes great pleasure in the fact that is daughter (?) got a "C" for her(?) coursework :wink2::wink2::wink2:

Andy


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

My art teacher who I was very friendly with finished my exam piece for me and I still failed.


----------



## Mrplodd (Mar 4, 2008)

Has to make you question the teachers ability if THEY failed YOUR exam doesn't it??

Andy


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

Probably one of those teachers with a degree in Russian, or similar, that they employed during a shortage.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Back to the RI lectures, Faraday in 1860 delivered 6 lectures on the chemical history of a candle. Now I might be out of step here but I suspect that he would have been leading us through it by the nose and not presupposing prior knowledge. In fact anyone with a basic understanding of physics might have considered it dumbing down even then.

The lectures have always meant to be more about entertainment than advanced science surely?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chemical_History_of_a_Candle

Dick


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Glandwr said:


> Back to the RI lectures, Faraday in 1860 delivered 6 lectures on the chemical history of a candle. Now I might be out of step here but I suspect that he would have been leading us through it by the nose and not presupposing prior knowledge. In fact anyone with a basic understanding of physics might have considered it dumbing down even then.
> 
> The lectures have always meant to be more about entertainment than advanced science surely?
> 
> ...


Did you find the first one entertaining though Dick?


----------



## siggie (Oct 2, 2010)

It's not only school coursework that others do for students. 

I used to know someone that the year after she had graduated with a law degree got paid by her friend to write her friends final year dissertation for her! After finding out what she was doing I very quickly decided that she was not the type of person I wanted as a friend. Had I known what university her friend was at I would have dropped them a line to let them know what was going on!


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> Did you find the first one entertaining though Dick?


I'm afraid I didn't see it Kevin. I'm half way down Italy. But I would say that I wouldn't be their target audience, aren't they primarily designed to interest children in science?

As such surely to accommodate those already with an interest or knowledge would seem unnecessary.

Dick


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

Mrplodd said:


> Has to make you question the teachers ability if THEY failed YOUR exam doesn't it??
> 
> Andy


Yeah she was rubbish (at teaching art) but I only took it as a subject cos I fancied her like mad. Even with extra help after school I still failed.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Glandwr said:


> I'm afraid I didn't see it Kevin. I'm half way down Italy. But I would say that I wouldn't be their target audience, aren't they primarily designed to interest children in science?
> 
> As such surely to accommodate those already with an interest or knowledge would seem unnecessary.
> 
> Dick


That's a fair summation of what I saw, very good considering you didn't see it  

Hope you're having a good time down there


----------



## greygit (Apr 15, 2007)

Glandwr said:


> I'm afraid I didn't see it Kevin. I'm half way down Italy. But I would say that I wouldn't be their target audience, aren't they primarily designed to interest children in science?
> 
> As such surely to accommodate those already with an interest or knowledge would seem unnecessary.
> 
> Dick


 I thought, like you, that these lectures were for children not intellectually superior ex policemen. :wink2:


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

barryd said:


> Yeah she was rubbish (at teaching art) but I only took it as a subject cos I fancied her like mad. Even with extra help after school I still failed.


We had a french art teacher, long blonde hair in a pony tail, glasses, endless legs, the full monty, I never liked him though > >


----------

