New Hp Printer - Small Problem Since...
Technology2 mins ago
A Step Too Far?
18 Answers
It is for me. Far too young.
http://
http://
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
youngmafbog
The headline is:
A) misleading
B) clickbait
This is the key passage:
She tabled an amendment to the Children and Social Work Bill which would see primary and secondary school children be given age-appropriate sex and relationship education.
I think it's a great idea. As mentioned in the article, children today have access (via their smartphones) to a world of misinformtion on the Internet. Not only does this need to be countered, but a framework needs to be put in place to protect them from forming inappropriate relationships and to recognise how their digital relationships can negatively affect their real lives.
This is not about advocating sex ed classes for two year olds, as the report erroneously suggests.
The headline is:
A) misleading
B) clickbait
This is the key passage:
She tabled an amendment to the Children and Social Work Bill which would see primary and secondary school children be given age-appropriate sex and relationship education.
I think it's a great idea. As mentioned in the article, children today have access (via their smartphones) to a world of misinformtion on the Internet. Not only does this need to be countered, but a framework needs to be put in place to protect them from forming inappropriate relationships and to recognise how their digital relationships can negatively affect their real lives.
This is not about advocating sex ed classes for two year olds, as the report erroneously suggests.
Ahhhh......the good old 'extrapolation-principle'.
Take a story with a vague reference to age i.e. 'nursery-school' and work backwards to about the earliest age children usually start attending and use that to outrage your readers.
If only parents could be trusted to answer their children's questions honestly, openly and non-judgementally there would be no need for this sort of educational programme.
Take a story with a vague reference to age i.e. 'nursery-school' and work backwards to about the earliest age children usually start attending and use that to outrage your readers.
If only parents could be trusted to answer their children's questions honestly, openly and non-judgementally there would be no need for this sort of educational programme.
The headline is not misleading (as has been suggested).
The article makes direct quotes from the speeches at the conference:
//But teachers passed a motion which called on members to "campaign to ensure a comprehensive age-appropriate content including promotion of LGBT+ matters for all schools from nursery throughout all phases of state education".
Annette Pryce, a member of the NUT executive committee and teacher in Buckinghamshire, added that the “right wing, religious lobby” had prevented ministers from proposing a more “inclusive” agenda for sex education classes to include teaching about LGBT+ issues.//
Note the word "promotion". Also note that the speaker must believe that there is at least some content that IS appropriate to nursery school, otherwise she wouldn't have mention nursery education in the first place.
Also note the slur against parents with conservative religious views who may have moral concerns about LGBT+ issues being "promoted" at school. Are these concerns illegitimate?
The article makes direct quotes from the speeches at the conference:
//But teachers passed a motion which called on members to "campaign to ensure a comprehensive age-appropriate content including promotion of LGBT+ matters for all schools from nursery throughout all phases of state education".
Annette Pryce, a member of the NUT executive committee and teacher in Buckinghamshire, added that the “right wing, religious lobby” had prevented ministers from proposing a more “inclusive” agenda for sex education classes to include teaching about LGBT+ issues.//
Note the word "promotion". Also note that the speaker must believe that there is at least some content that IS appropriate to nursery school, otherwise she wouldn't have mention nursery education in the first place.
Also note the slur against parents with conservative religious views who may have moral concerns about LGBT+ issues being "promoted" at school. Are these concerns illegitimate?
Another example of the arrogance of modern man (person)
We seemed to have decided a few decades ago that two million years of
accumulated wisdom and experience in the fields of child care/education and many others, counts for nothing, and we would just pull some new methods out of a hat, because we're clever and know it all, like 15 year olds.....
We seemed to have decided a few decades ago that two million years of
accumulated wisdom and experience in the fields of child care/education and many others, counts for nothing, and we would just pull some new methods out of a hat, because we're clever and know it all, like 15 year olds.....
1 to 18 of 18
