More tales from Duty

Morning, have been really rather dour recently because of job applications amongst other things. however feeling better (though not sure why) so thought I would share some more stories from SJA duties for some comedy value.

One that always sticks in my mind was when I was at a sporting event in a London park. I was sitting in the back of our mobile first aid post (think bus with beds in the back and blue lights on the top) doing what we do best in SJA - drinking tea - when the guy in the front cab who was monitoring the radio called me forward. Naturally I assumed it was some potential incident developing so I meandered up (plus tea if you're interested) to see what was going on. Fortunately there was no incident; just some rather attractive young ladies which we duly admired. This caused us to be branded, "Tarts" by a 10 year old cadet who was out with us much to the amusement of everyone else. Fair point but she didn't have to be so mean about it!

Another story comes from a music festival. I was standing in front of the stage during the last act. While there a rather pretty girl makes eye contact with me and smiles. Naturally I smile back (slightly shocked given I'm wearing a hi-vis and a horrible polyester shirt). At this point my eye is caught by what looks like someone in distress so, reluctantly, I look away. The other person was fine so I scan the crowd and see the girl has moved closer. More smiling, mouthing of pleasantries. This goes on until the band have finished at which point I switch back into full duty mode and keep an eye on the crowd dispersal. A few minutes later I look up and see her standing at the barrier. This is where things start to go BADLY wrong. She says, "Do I know you from somewhere?"
Obviously this is a fairly strong chat up line but I'm so surprised to be being chatted up I respond, "Ummmmm, I don't think so."
Valiantly she perseveres by saying, "Are you sure? You look really familiar."
I have realised what is gone and trying to prevent the impending train wreck I search for something cool to say. Unfortunately the best I can ocme up with is, "Hopefully not from the wanted posters."
Unsurprisingly she left fairly swiftly after that. My lovely mates do of course remind me of this at every possible opportunity.

A short while after the above incident I was out on foot patrol at a busy London duty when a girl with a cut to her head presents herself to my team. As we patch her up ready to take her back to the treatment centre, a copper grabs me and presents me with another girl who had apparently overdosed on drugs. Both needed further assessment and monitoring so I got the team moving and radioed through to the centre so they could be set up for when we arrived. Unfortunately the signal was poor so at the other end all they heard was my callsign, "two girls" and "drugs... Head injury". Apparently the universal reaction of my colleagues was, "JR's pulled at last"... Charming!

Funally an awwwwww story. I was on duty in a central London park enjoying the sunshine when a daschund puppy (only a few months old) came over to investigate the cente (and probably try and get access to the contents of our lunch packs). Being a huge dog lover I bend down and give said puppy a scratch behind the ears then start stroking it's belly. Because it was so small and young I didn't realise how light it was and suddenly the puppy was levatating about a foot off the ground and looking a bit confused! He was returned to the ground unharmed and unperturbed. He didn't manage to get into the lunch packs though!

JR

Yes Prime Minister

Saw the stage play of Yes Prime Minister last night. For those of you that aren't familiar with the series, it follows a cabinet minister who later becomes prime minister in his dealings with his civil servants and advisors. There is a constant power struggle between the prime minister and the head of the civil service; Sir Humphrey Appelby and is very, very, very funny.

For those that are fans of the TV series, the stage show is very different. Although the dialogue is still expertly scripted by Anthony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, the original actors are not part of the play. This caused me a fair bit of apprehension and almost put me off going to see it.

I'm glad I did go in the end. The actors did a magnificent job resurrecting Sir Humphrey, Bernard and Jim and the new plot allowed them to make the parts their own.

The whole story was set in Chequers which I liked since again it avoided comparison with the TV series. I also enjoyed the fact that the BBC were the brunt of many jokes; I get the impression these had been stored up since the original series but like most things about the show, it remains contemporary.

Sir Humphrey had some truly magnificent polysylabic sililoquies and there were some cheeky nods to previous stories. My only two criticisms are that the plot was occasionally a little slow - never dragging but at times it seemed to have lost direction a bit. My other criticism is that, at some points, Bernard ceased to be the straight man. He never ascends to the true lunacy that some of the other characters achieve but at times things just seemed a bit silly.

Overall, I am compelled to say, after due consideration and consultation with other parties present at the previous performance pertaining to the merits, or otherwise, of the aforementioned show that; although not a total and faithful replication of the eponymous televisual broadcast, the play could in fact, if one so chooses, be described as being excellent.

Oh and the girl playing the bbc producer was STUNNING!

JR

Update on Previous Post

I am writing this on my mobile so I can't do all the fancy link stuff to the previous post referred to above. Not entirely sure I could have done it on my computer to be honest!

Suffice to say, in a previous post I wrote about how I work for a private ambulance service to get a bit of cash while job hunting. As part of this, I provide medical cover for a club that runs, rather unusually, during the day on Sundays.

Last time I was there I wrote about how schocked I was by some of the antics that went on; specifically girls wearing virtually nothing the flashing their boobs - encouraged by the organisers. Today, I worked at the same club and things sank to a new low.

Firstly there was the girl I saw tuck in her top. So far, so good. However to do this she lifted the lower hem of her skirt (such as it was) up over the waist band and tugged the top down. Her skirt was essentially inverted and round her chest. Now had I been treating someone in the ladie's cloakroom and she had (unaware of the presence of a big, hairy scotsman) done this in front of the mirror, it would have been fair enough; if a bit exhibitionist. She did this in the middle of a crowded dance floor. She was not wearing substantial underwear.

Another girl's mates decided it would be rather fun to lift the back of her dress up, exposing her essentially bare buttocks. Said dress admittedly was little more than a linnen sheet safety-pinned round her but it offered marginally more modesty.

Finally, at the girls only stage session, not content with flashing boobs, one girl decided it would be fun to lift her skirt; both front and back. More of the same.

Once again, I am far from averse to seeing girls in a state of undress; rather like it in fact, but the context that this occurred genuinely shocked me. It seemed so tacky and gratuitous.

Once again I ask what sort of message this sends out to those around them and what are the consequences, intended and unintended, of these actions?

JR

Jobs and other stuff

Had a job interview of sorts today. It was a conversation/interview with a recruitment consultant about being a recruitment consultant. Not exactly the same as a lawyer but it sounds interesting. As importantly, he was making very positive noises about the skills I have and my prospects of getting a job. This is more than a little reassuring since I am getting to my wits end about hot to get gainful employment.

In other news, I was reading in the paper about the women's olympic handball team. I'm not particularly into handball (in fact the only time it ever came into my life before was in german lessons at school). What made it stand out was the fact that the firls in the team all had proper jobs.

I have always been against the professionalisation of sport. Not just the obscenely overpaid footballers but all those that do nothing but play sport.

I understand the importance of exercise in a healthy lifestyle and support those who try and remain active. That is the sensible level. People who want to take this interest to a competitive high-level should do this on their own time as a hobby. Paying them to do so is a monumental waste of money that could be better spent and human resource that can be better employed. Encouraging people to devote their whole energy, commitment and enthusiasm to an activity which should be reserved for idling away a bit of free time is toxic for them and those around them.

Rant over (for now).

JR

Blogging

Blogging, what is it and why do I do it?

Some do it as an outlet for personal frustration, others for educational purposes, yet more because they have something to say. So far, I have written about a mixture of things that I have seen in the world around me that have provoked particularly strong feelings and things happening in my life.

The next question is why... In the case of the issues of the day, I want to say my piece and possibly raise awareness. To what end I'm not sure. It just feels somehow right to write about them. In terms of the stuff more specific to me it's a different ball game. Writing about things does offer a form of personal catharsis. Doing it on computer rather than on paper means I can read it later (my handwriting is utterly bloody illegible). Putting it out there on the internet will hopefully give others some form of amusement.

I must confess, I have always fancied the idea of being a writer and, looking at the stats of my blog, it's rather flattering to see that people are reading what I write. Not only do I enjoy the process of arranging words and playing with English to try and convey exactly what I'm thinking but I also like the fact that people seem to think I'm interesting enough to read (unless they stumbled here by mistake; in which case, sorry!). So far the comments I have received both on my blog and in response to other comments I have left have been warm and friendly. Before I started blogging, I followed a number of other blogs. Since I have started, I have been following yet more. What has always impressed and intrigued me is the strong sense of community that appears to be present on line. Slowly, I am beginning to feel part of that community. Although almost everybody uses screen names etc, I think the semi-anonymity is quite a good thing. It allows everyone (myself included) to interact in a totally new way and free of preconceptions and prejudices that govern every-day social interaction. That said, sometimes I still feel a wee bit like Adrian Mole (don't worry, no long passages of adolescent, lustful poetry or banal details about spots... promise!)

So far I have enjoyed this process. Finding things to write about hasn't been nearly as hard as I thought (probably something to do with being a gobby sod) and writing them down has become much easier with practice. Hopefully whoever reads this will continue to enjoy doing so for as long as I write.

JR

Shock, Horror and a fair dose of Outrage.

Before reading further I suggest reading this (excuse the source).

If you've skipped the article let me give you a brief summary; the daily wail is up in arms about the amount some police officers are claiming in overtime. Some of these amounts run to tens of thousands of pounds per year for some officers and in some cases exceed their basic salary. On reading it, you can almost taste the outrage although there is the concession that average overtime payments are around £4, 000 per annum.

Before I launch into full song I should qualify what I say by pointing out I only know what is printed in the article which is hardly objective.

Do these police officers deserve the over-time payments? Unequivocally yes. If they are doing the work, the deserve to either be paid for it or be given much higher salaries to compensate for the extra time worked. Currently the police grades entitled to overtime are limited to constables and sergeants; essentially the ones that do the majority of the grunt work. Also the ones that have just been royally shafted in relation to their pensions and working conditions. Overtime seems the sensible option for these officers not least because increased salaries have been shown not to work; Inspectors were awarded an annual salary increase in lieu of overtime, this has not increased in line with inflation and rarely reflects the true hours worked (source Inspector Gadget if you're interested).

Many Police Officers do an extremely demanding job under very, very trying circumstances. They have to deal with the most unsavoury aspects of our society, the ones we would prefer not to think about and, thanks to them, we rarely have to. While doing their job, they get abused by those they try and keep in check whilst facing contempt and derision from the media and some quarters of society for doing it. In addition to this, they face the real and distinct possibility of severe injury every time they go out and do their job (apparently the baddies don't like being nicked... who would have thought?). They do this for a fairly modest wage (yes it is better than some but is it truly reflective of the sacrifices they make in terms of personal safety, family life, free time and low-stress working).

Bearing in mind the above, can anyone really suggest officers don't deserve to be paid for the hours they work? Like I say, I don't know the details of the case but I struggle to see how one can be paid overtime without working. Therefore, for these payments to be claimed, the officers in question must have put in the hours. I hope they were on the front-line rather than dealing with bullshit but even if the latter were true, it's not the officer's fault that they are ploughing through paperwork. Blame years of government who are incapable of appreciating anything unless it has a number attached. Officers are now expected to fill out pages of forms as part of their job, we cannot expect them to do this in their free time. Yes, policing is a vocation/calling and most officers do it for the love of the job but that doesn't mean we as a society have the right to expect them to sacrifice either the quality of their work of their free time doing it.

In addition to the payment for work done argument we should remember that police pensions have just been decimated while pay and conditions have been made considerably less favourable. Why then should we be shocked that officers are doing overtime to get some extra cash either to live on or to stash away for later. Who can blame them, especially when your job carries the risk of career-ending injury on a daily basis? In fact, if the officers are using overtime payments to plan for the future then should they not be applauded for taking a responsible attitude to the future rather than relying on the state? And if they are not, well frankly who cares. We have all been in positions where we could do with a bit of extra cash, why should we deny police officers the opportunity of making some?

Rant over.

JR

Job Hunting

Currently I am job hunting. The process is not going well. Ideally I am looking for something in the legal sector given that's what I have been studying for the last few years. The gold standard would be a training contract that would allow me to become a solicitor however there aren't that many going at the moment.

I have been slowed down a bit in the process by a couple of factors. Firstly there was the fact that I had a resit a few weeks ago which knocked my confidence severely. I have therefore been reluctant to send out CVs with the exam outstanding on it. Secondly is a general lack of confidence in my abilities. I have a good degree from a very good uni, a range of extra curricular activities and interests to talk about and a few positions of leadership and responsibility to my name. Unfortunately so do most others in the job market. I read a column by Boris Johnson a few years ago speaking of his frustration at being almost entirely unable to distinguish between candidates when recruiting for a job.

As a result of this, I have been extremely cautious about sending out CVs which I know is about the worst thing to do. However the near-constant rejection is soul destroying. Then again, so is the fact that I don't have a job and therefore a waste of space.

A bit of a lift came on Friday when I received feedback from a CV review by my college saying they thought it was very well written. A minor victory I know but still a confidence boost that will hopefully  bear fruit.

Part of the problem is my academic history so far. A lot of jobs won't touch me because they know that's not what I want to do and I will be off like a shot. Fair enough. I don't hold it against them. Unfortunately, this extends to a lot of graduate level jobs too and ones that I would be perfectly prepared to stay in for the long term. Because I have now done the professional practice part of my law course as well as the academic stage, it gives the impression that I want to be a lawyer. That's true to a point, I wouldn't have done the course otherwise but it would be nice to be able to communicate discreetly that I really am open to a better offer if they've got one. Law was a decision made with the head not the heart: good salary, bearable hours, vaguely engaging subject matter in that order. Because of this, I am more than happy to consider other things on similar grounds. Obviously some element of interest would be fantastic but there are very few things I can think of that I find interesting that could be converted into a career. Grrrrrrr!

Hopefully I will find something soon:s

JR

Boundaries

First of all a bit of a plug. Today I saw "Top Hat" on stage in Southampton. Although I generally appreciate the more classic offerings in most genres I have never really seen an all-singing, all-dancing number before. I thought it was excellent. The famous tunes were delivered with due gusto, the costumes were excellent and overall the performance was pretty slick.

Special mention should go to the star, Tom Chambers. I was aware he had been in a few shows such as "Holby City" and "Strictly" but had never really seen him in action. His presence worried me as I, somewhat cynically, take the view that shows featuring minor to middling tv personalities do this to distract the audience from other deficiencies in the performance. Not so here. As someone who cannot act, sing or dance (the local ambulance service usually declare major incidents when I get on the dance floor) I am generally impressed by people with any one of those talents. Chambers was managing all three simultaneously and singing in an American accent to boot. That impressed me. What impressed me more was that he compensated for the fact he was neither a singer nor a dancer with sheer enthusiasm. A good performance from him and a good show all round.

Because the show is out of my usual stomping ground of London I am staying with my girlfriend at her parent's place. This brings on the usual minefield of parental relations.

I'm sure everyone has had some memorably cringeworthy moments with, "the in-laws". Some of my best ones were getting drunk in a bar with one girlfriend and her folks. At one point her father leans over to me and proceeds to describe, loudly, the meaning of the song; specifically the bit about waking up next to a fat girl and wanting to chew your arm off to get away. He ended somewhat rhetoricaly, "you know what it's like!" How does one respond to that? To any other man you can simply grunt in assent, roll your eyes, drink and have a laugh. However in this case, you're sleeping with his daughter, the inner neanderthal is best kept under wraps (in mitigation this guy had three daughters, a wife and two female dogs; I think he wanted the male company!)

On another occasion, the one and only time I met a girlfriend's dad, she was in hospital and we met over visiting. Her mother and father were estranged and she was strongly on her mother's side. I lost severe brownie points because I got on with her dad like a house on fire. Apparently classic cars were not an appropriate topic of conversation.

Awkwardness is not confined to fathers however. One girl's mother came over one evening in slightly tense circumstances only to be very visibly disappointed we were drinking tea and eating chocolate rather than drinking beer and having sex.

I think I get on with my current girlfriend's parents really quite well. We have a lot in common and fairly similar outlooks on lives. This brings it's own complications.

When I was just the boyfriend, I had an easy role to fulfil. Essentially, smile nicely, make polite conversation and be sycophantic in the extreme. Now however, we are growing to know each other in our own rights. Mainly, this is a good thing. It shows we get on as people and will inevitably be beneficial to my relationship with my girlfriend. I have seen the strain poor relationships with the other-half's family can put on relationships. Trouble is, being too matey at this stage could be disastrous.

To put the last remark into context a bit; a big concern on my part is that her father and I share a very similar sense of humour... a bit smutty and silly. This is great for a bit of chat but I'm always wary of engaging too fully as a) I don't want to play the buffoon too much since I am going out with his daughter and I don't want him to think I'm an overgrown schoolboy who can't take anything seriously and b) her mother is a very serious person so too much larking about is ill advised until I can read both better. That said, I also don't want to appear a prigish killjoy. Like most things, I think time will help. And maybe a few ales (another interest I share with her father along with tweed and boats... I swear my girlfriend has an electra complex!)

Anyway, the ramble through my mind (such as it is) is now concluded. Over all, I am happy with how things are going, just wish there was a guide book.

JR

Changing Times

"Bollocks!" Not a crude attempt by me to be offensive but a direct quote from BBC Radio 4's morning news programme Today. This word featured not just on the BBC but on Radio 4 (admittedly it was in reference to Downtown Abbey so entirely justified). Immediately I e-mailed my dad (a St. Andrews Ambulance volunteer - the Scottish equivalent of SJA) and my unit leader and told them to expect an emergency call out; middle Britain, as the typical demographic who listen to radio 4, would collectively be choking on their breakfasts and having aneurysms of outrage.

The call out never came but the fact that such language occurred is still surprising. This comes on the back of George Osbourne talking openly and jokingly about boys pleasuring themselves during a speech at an awards dinner and David Cameron talking about Tweeting Twats. Who can forget, during the most recent Conservative leadership elections, David Cameron and David Davies discussing their preferred choice of underwear on Women's hour?

All this goes to suggest our society is becoming much less formal.  Our elected representatives are allowing a more human side of themselves to be seen and institutions known for their conservatism are becoming much less stuffy. After all, we all let slip with bad language from time to time. Although it should never be normalised and accepted into polite conversation the odd slip is forgiveable.

Oddly enough, I find this change rather reassuring. I quite like the image of our Prime Minister having a cheeky pint before dinner and being gently scolded by his wife when he nips out for a fag. We all do it (or similar) after all. It is rather nice to know that the holders of the great offices of state are not consumed with pomposity and their own importance. Osborne gently poking fun a politicians, while vulgar, shows that he is aware of the stereotypes surrounding them. What better way to start tackling them and create a more positive impression of our government. Ultimately, the relaxing of conventional formalities does not denigrate the intellect of individuals. In fact, I would argue a pervasive sense of self-importance is likely to make an individual far less open to receiving advice and suggestions for improvement. If the reduction in formality required to create this atmosphere means our elected representatives are occasionally caught making a risque statement or indulging in pleasures that are not entirely wholesome then so be it. That said, a line should probably be drawn at making "your mum" jokes in response to awkward questions... unless it's a really, really good one.

This attitude, perversely, doesn't really sit easily with me. Normally I am a very conservative person. I write with a fountain pen wherever possible, I own (and wear) tweed, I always err towards the formal and am generally not a fan of change. I am the kind of person that will turn up to a party in a suit as being overly smart doesn't particularly bother me whereas being overly informal is incredibly stressful. I would never dream of wearing sports clothes in public unless participating in exercise and I'm not terribly sure I'm comfortable with the current vogue of calling bosses by their first name (although even I admit a near-ubiquitous "Sir" is a bit much). I suppose it's no surprise that my mother refers to me as her "Young fogey".

I'm not sure how, or indeed if, this has a knock on effect on everyday life. The only tangible example I can think of where it is quite useful relates to clothing. Like I say, I usually dress smart-ish. This means I can comfortably switch from relaxing with my peers to meeting with academic staff/line managers to going out to a fairly smart bar in the evening and never feel massively out of place by the way I am dressed. I would say that my fairly traditional attitudes mean I try to do right by others as well as myself, don't see reward as being distinct from effort and don't view sex as a fleeting social exchange. Maybe that simply shows how out of touch I am with the rest of the world!

Either way, I may loosen my tie slightly and occasionally write with a ball-point. I hope these changes signify that our leaders are more interested in doing their jobs than of their own importance (as a seasoned Yes Minister fan I doubt it) however if I am proved wrong then it's national service for the lot of them!

Musings

I haven't posted in a while. This hasn't been because I've had nothing to write about, rather the opposite in fact. There are many serious items in the news I would like to pass comment on a) to explore my thoughts on the subject and b) in the hope that they get read by someone of influence and considered, even if they don't lead to change. Many more stories are less serious but make me grumpy. If I post about these it will be in the form of a bit of a rant that hopefully those of you that read this will find amusing. A lot of stuff is happening in my personal life at the moment as well. I'm not sure I will write about this as it would be really rather narcissistic of me to think that it would be of interest to anyone else. I realise that what is happening is nothing more than the slings and arrows of normal life and, while it isn't too pleasant for me, it isn't the biggest deal in the world. Overall, I know I have a pretty good lot in life and it would be extremely selfish to complain about it.

I see from the stats on my blog that I have a reader in America (yes I am sad enough to check these things). I purposefully didn't write anything yesterday as I thought the day was better suited to quiet reflection and found the hyperbolic sentimentality and action replays that featured heavily in the British Media insensitive and distasteful. However my thoughts were with those that suffered on that dreadful day ten years ago. My heart goes out to those who have perished and their families. I hope the resulting conflicts can be resolved swiftly and with the minimum loss of life.

I, like so many, remember exactly where I was ten years ago. I remember so clearly how I felt. Initially I didn't believe it. I thought the person telling me was making it up. When I saw proof on telly I felt numb disbelief. It took many minutes for the enormity of the events unfolding to sink in. Fairly quickly I found myself thinking, "The world is never going to be the same again". Along with this I was angry. I don't agree with killing people however I accept in limited circumstances it is necessary for the greater good. This was not one of  these circumstances. Killing innocent people going about their daily lives is inexcusable. Killing people on this scale was a work of pure evil. It made me angry that some twisted individuals saw fit to do this to their fellow human beings.

Ten years have passed. In this time, Britain has suffered attacks on her soil and against our citizens. The anger has galvanised. How dare certain individuals attack innocent people who are simply getting on with their lives?

Today, Britain and the U.S. stand together fighting those that seek to oppress and destroy us. It has cost us dearly. Hundreds of our troops have died in battle. Hundreds more have been wounded. However this fight is just. We cannot bow to those that seek to destroy us; we must defend ourselves and our way of life. We must fight the bully that tries to stop us choosing how we live but we must be careful not to lose ourselves in the process.

Ten years have passed and I hope we can soon find lasting peace and security.

JR

Soldiers in Schools

Over the course of my revision, I saw a story in the paper that was detailing plans to get demobilised soldiers to retrain as teachers. I must say, I think it's an excellent idea.

I can't think of many better models for our young people today. Our armed services are institutions where exceptional levels of discipline, professionalism, dedication, motivation and integrity are the norm. Individuals in the forces understand that the world does not revolve around them; something the rioters of a few weeks ago with their latent sense of entitlement would do well to understand.

Of course there have been the predictable objections to this idea. Some say it is a bad idea to put trained killers in the classrooms. I think this is a very narrow-minded view. A far better representation of the job of someone in the service is of an individual skilled in getting a given task done often under extreme time pressure, with minimal equipment and, of course, adverse circumstances. Experienced problem solvers in other words. Admittedly the problems solved are military in nature and may well involve the use of force; however the use of force is incidental and not the objective in its-self. In short, portraying our forces as knuckle dragging thugs is ignorant.

[Further evidence, if such evidence is needed, can be found here here in the speech given by Colonel Tim Collins on the eve of the second Gulf War]

The demands placed on our forces today means that the testosterone-fuelled, macho stereotype no longer holds true. Young men and women are being sent into war zones before they have even reached their 20s. Many have lived with their parents all their lives, yet more have never been to a foreign country. When they get into theatre, it is very likely that they will be attacked. They will lose friends and must quickly come to terms with their own mortality. The Officers and NCOs who's job it is to lead these people have to be sensitive to their needs. Typically, rather than doing the bare minimum necessary to get by, they excel inspiring their troops to ever greater feats of heroism, bravery and sheer physical endurance. It is not only the leaders that are possessed of these traits. Every soldier I have spoken to (I always seem to end up sitting next to squaddies on long train journeys) had profound emotional intelligence and as far from mindless thuggery as you could wish to imagine. Why then, would we not want these qualities brought into our classrooms?

Members of our forces also have to be able to partially integrate and work within completely alien environments and cultures. They need to do this quickly and they need to do this while fostering as much good will from the local community as possible. Again, why not have our children taught by people who are used to building strong rapports with a diverse range of people quickly. Surely this skill could be used to engage the children and enthuse them about the subjects.

Military personnel also need to be able to react quickly to dynamic and changing situations. While the classroom is not a war zone, there is the potential for things to develop rapidly whether that be from an unexpected question prompting a class discussion to a disruptive pupil causing the whole class to lose interest.

To my mind, one of the biggest advantages of employing demobilised soldiers, sailors and airmen(people?) as teachers would be their uniformly strong sense of discipline. It is not fashionable in certain circles (and among the readership of certain newspapers) to suggest that children need discipline and boundaries to flourish. None the less it is true. Many people have been coming round to the idea after the recent riots and looting. Although giving kids a beasting may not be practical (or desirable) a strong sense of discipline and a no-nonsense attitude would go a long, long way. Couple that to an understanding of the concept of responsibility and a dash of self-respect and we would have the majority of young people ready to face the world when they leave school.

As for specialist knowledge, well that is attainable. Again, to assume the role of the military is simply fighting causes one to miss the bigger picture. The military regularly has to adapt to new situations and to do that, the people in it must learn new skills (and usually pretty quickly). Therefore it should be entirely possible to educate service people in specialist subjects. Law now operates a year conversion course covering the salient points of law an individual needs to know to practice effectively and some universities are now offering condensed medical degrees. This shows it's entirely possible to give an individual good subject knowledge without lengthy study. Furthermore, it is an error to think that currently all teachers of specialist subjects have tertiary education qualifications in their subject matter. This is particularly prevalent in the sciences where chemists regularly teach physics and biologists regularly teach chemistry due to a lack of teachers with specialist knowledge in those subjects.

I think there is a place for military personnel in our schools and I think all would benefit from it (and if nothing else, if the tabloids are to be believed, it would be very advantageous having people who are used to coming under fire in our inner city schools).

JR

Revision

It's exam time. I'm revising. I'm not enjoying it.


Normally I love finding things out. I think I have a very inquisitive mind. The problem is that I find revision contracts the intellectual ability (such as it is). There is something about having to know something which makes it almost impossible to remember.


The subject matter doesn't help much. It's business law. Some of the stuff is genuinely very interesting; unfortunately it is balanced by a lot of stuff that really isn't. What really doesn't help is that the idea of business evades me entirely. I really cannot relate to it. I struggle to relate to the idea of making money for the sake of making money. Don't get me wrong, the idea of making a few quid appeals (suits from saville row and an Aston Martin wouldn't go amiss) but I want to do it something with an outcome other than profit. Profit for profit's sake reminds me of friends from school that were into computers. They regarded the use of a computer to complete the task as the desireable outcome rather than the completion of the task.


Returning to the topic of exams; the revision process is made all the more arduous by the fact I don't usually perform brilliantly in exams and certainly not commensurate to my subject knowledge. Exams seem to be an arbitrary way of trying to find out how much someone knows. Then again, I can't think of a better system off the top of my head so, like everyone else, I will have to grin and bear it. At least I'm still aliv

They could, of course, just accept I'm wonderful! Night night.

JR