Let us suppose it is only ascribable to the weather and the effect a gloomy, wet and perhaps not unexpectedly storm laden English summers day can have upon one, but yesterday I had something between an epiphany and a horribly lucid idea that goes against the grain of all of crickets' stolid virtues of Victorianism and antipathy to the modern world.
In trying to follow the ICC champions trophy final between the erstwhile athletes of England and India one could feel a mounting sense of tension. Not based in exciting play or a closely contested match (although in a T20 format that would come later and England would again fail to win a one day final *sigh*).
No, the tension came from the fact that the weather was pushing the potential for play further and further backwards and the ICC had inexplicably thought better of having a backup day (have they not encountered an English summer before this?!?).
Thus, as the storm raged one potential outcome was a shared trophy. Try suggesting that in another sport! Our cross Atlantic cousins would have a seizure at the prospect! A draw brings them to near apoplexy as it is.
Thus the insidious idea crept into the fore of the old grey matter. Why don't we have one, just one stadium in this country, for cricket, with (gasp) a retractable roof. I'll leave a pause here so people can have a stiff whisky and soda at the club after contemplating such heresy......
OK, back with me? good. Even something as venerable as Wimbledon does this for heaven's sake. Yes, yes I know the weather plays a vital role. What other sport is there where the coin toss can almost debilitate one sides chances even before they've begun if they lose it? That is all part of the joy, the tradition, the venerability of the leather on willow world.
Yet, we are in the 21st century and perhaps, just perhaps we should make some concession to modernisation. It isn't always a bad thing. There may be those who loath T20 but it has undeniably breathed new life and money into the sport globally. Perhaps modernising to the point of being able to actually stage a final wouldn't be such a bad thing?
The heresy is over now, the suggestion has been made and I'm moving on. I'll just let all the administrators busy themselves with sticking pins in their newly created voodoo effigies of me now.
Monday, 24 June 2013
Monday, 17 June 2013
Undermining the elitism
There has been a decline in the numenb of students from poorer backgrounds attending 'top' universities. There are 126 fewer students from 'disadvantaged' backgrounds attending Russell group unis than 10 years ago. 126 doesn't sound like much of a difference, which inherently is the point actually. Governments have supposedly faced this problem full on over the last 10 years to enable greater access and engender wider social mobility. Clearly this is not happening.
As an alumnus of the wonderful Open university which lives and breathes by the motto of access to all the system as it is seems abhorrent and this is not acceptable by any measure. It appears it is easier to access a so called top tier university if one has had a private education/attended a public school than if one has attended a state school. The question is why? Apparently the fees are not the problem. Although they have risen dramatically, students themselves are aware that repayment options are what can only be described as generous and encouraging.
It is the institutions themselves that are the problem. Eminently academically capable students from state schools just don't feel like they belong there. This has to be addressed. The commission looking into this makes it clear that universities outside of this group have made 'great progress' in admitting those from poorer backgrounds. So there is no reason why these institutions cannot. Social snobbery needs to be set aside, undermine even at every turn and this would be a great starting point to do just that.
It's also clear that its not that state school learners aren't achieving the grades. They are - to the point that the commission declares there are 3,700 'missing' state school taught pupils who could and perhaps should have been admitted. This is a crying shame.
So what is the solution? These institutions need to overcome their own snobbery and look at grades and grades alone first. Then, perhaps the greatest difference maker would be if learners could apply AFTER getting A level results. Those with better than anticipated results from these backgrounds would then have much more confidence to apply to these institutions with a sense of their won worth statistically proven by their grades.
the other radical and controversial idea of course is to offer places to these pupils on lower grades than those from the public school systems. Does that sound unfair? Tough! it's unfair that so many talented intellectually competent people are being excluded right now because of their background. In fact UK/US research on that often suggests that those entering under such a system perform considerably better than those that have sailed through.
It's a big area for government, universities and admissions officers to consider. If however the government wants to really reform the education system top to bottom and allow for proper social mobility based on egalitarianism rather than elitism this must be addressed.
As an alumnus of the wonderful Open university which lives and breathes by the motto of access to all the system as it is seems abhorrent and this is not acceptable by any measure. It appears it is easier to access a so called top tier university if one has had a private education/attended a public school than if one has attended a state school. The question is why? Apparently the fees are not the problem. Although they have risen dramatically, students themselves are aware that repayment options are what can only be described as generous and encouraging.
It is the institutions themselves that are the problem. Eminently academically capable students from state schools just don't feel like they belong there. This has to be addressed. The commission looking into this makes it clear that universities outside of this group have made 'great progress' in admitting those from poorer backgrounds. So there is no reason why these institutions cannot. Social snobbery needs to be set aside, undermine even at every turn and this would be a great starting point to do just that.
It's also clear that its not that state school learners aren't achieving the grades. They are - to the point that the commission declares there are 3,700 'missing' state school taught pupils who could and perhaps should have been admitted. This is a crying shame.
So what is the solution? These institutions need to overcome their own snobbery and look at grades and grades alone first. Then, perhaps the greatest difference maker would be if learners could apply AFTER getting A level results. Those with better than anticipated results from these backgrounds would then have much more confidence to apply to these institutions with a sense of their won worth statistically proven by their grades.
the other radical and controversial idea of course is to offer places to these pupils on lower grades than those from the public school systems. Does that sound unfair? Tough! it's unfair that so many talented intellectually competent people are being excluded right now because of their background. In fact UK/US research on that often suggests that those entering under such a system perform considerably better than those that have sailed through.
It's a big area for government, universities and admissions officers to consider. If however the government wants to really reform the education system top to bottom and allow for proper social mobility based on egalitarianism rather than elitism this must be addressed.
Wednesday, 12 June 2013
History should be opinionated
It is my belief that the most enjoyable of all scholarly historical works are those that are the least dry. Rather than present laying the bare statistics in a creakily dull manner like a nonagenarian lecturer with nothing to derail their monologue the best histories are those presented by the historians with a rich variety of expression and tone.
they are the historians who an make it feel, as you read their work, that they are comfortably ensconced in a club (of two, - you and them) sharing opinions between friends. One does not mean they should not be rigorous. Far from it, empiricism is King in the world o academically sound history after all! yet they must display imagination coupled with wit.
Surely anybody would rather read the work of an opinionated historian than a bland one? You need not agree wit them, but at least their style and presentation and potential zeal should lead you to think more deeply about their subject.
To that end in fact one would rather read controversial history than safe works, history with leaps of imagination and strong opinions, grounded in relevance and fact.
So please historians, be controversial, be opinionated, be argumentative and strong willed, and in return we should be prepared to listen to others, to be persuaded by sound evidence.
Finally though historians I ask this one thing of you above all others - be interesting!
they are the historians who an make it feel, as you read their work, that they are comfortably ensconced in a club (of two, - you and them) sharing opinions between friends. One does not mean they should not be rigorous. Far from it, empiricism is King in the world o academically sound history after all! yet they must display imagination coupled with wit.
Surely anybody would rather read the work of an opinionated historian than a bland one? You need not agree wit them, but at least their style and presentation and potential zeal should lead you to think more deeply about their subject.
To that end in fact one would rather read controversial history than safe works, history with leaps of imagination and strong opinions, grounded in relevance and fact.
So please historians, be controversial, be opinionated, be argumentative and strong willed, and in return we should be prepared to listen to others, to be persuaded by sound evidence.
Finally though historians I ask this one thing of you above all others - be interesting!
Monday, 10 June 2013
Brilliant engineering in action - on Mars!
When high quality engineering and scientific curiosity come together fantastic things can happen...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22832673
The fact that the opportunity rover, (which is 9 years old and has spent most of its' 'life' working on the surface of Mars), has made a new and fascinating discovery is only heightend by the fact that this machine has outlived its expected duration by so long.
The Mars rovers have fulfilled their objectives, making exploration of the red planet possible, sating curiosity, raising new possibilities about the planet as it might have been. Everything the scientists can have hoped and dreamed for.
Yet perhaps the proudest people are/should be the engineers who built them. without the engineering skill the science wouldn't follow and it's a great collaboration.
Just to illustrate that point, here's another link showing what fantastic work the Rover has been doing on the red planet... http://www.space.com/18289-opportunity-rover.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22832673
The fact that the opportunity rover, (which is 9 years old and has spent most of its' 'life' working on the surface of Mars), has made a new and fascinating discovery is only heightend by the fact that this machine has outlived its expected duration by so long.
The Mars rovers have fulfilled their objectives, making exploration of the red planet possible, sating curiosity, raising new possibilities about the planet as it might have been. Everything the scientists can have hoped and dreamed for.
Yet perhaps the proudest people are/should be the engineers who built them. without the engineering skill the science wouldn't follow and it's a great collaboration.
Just to illustrate that point, here's another link showing what fantastic work the Rover has been doing on the red planet... http://www.space.com/18289-opportunity-rover.html
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)