I'll let readers decide if it is relevant if a politician opposes others benefitting from a system from which they benefitted.
so your experience of two schools tells us more than the actual GCSE results of millions of bright poor kids, does It?
-
-
besides you said all comps dumb down bright kids. That's disproved by one that doesn't. Logic.
-
where did I use the word "all"? Another failure. It just gets worse and worse, doesn't it?
-
ah well "comprehensives fail" has a universal implicit. If you can't do that I can suggest revision material!
-
smoking causes cancer. Does that mean ALL smokers get cancer?
-
good, but let us be precise: "smoking increases risk for cancer significantly" is accurate
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
no. The evidence does. But you know that!
-
no, it doesn't actually. And you know that too because you're a teacher.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
poor bright kids do better in comprehensive areas. Anything else is untrue.
-
if you think the evidence from the few concentrated areas of grammars today is an argument against grammars in every neighbourhood
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
you could try an existential. There exist comps that FB down bright kids. That may he true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
but you went for a universal. My two anecdote suffice.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.