http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7514914
Wednesday 15 April 2009
Ramson Badbonez Free Downloads
here today gone tomorrow
http://www.zshare.net/audio/5827862347df3d95/
black mags
http://www.zshare.net/audio/5805010846324ec1/
Tuesday 14 April 2009
Wii Spray
What is the "WiiSpray“ project?
The foundational basis for the project goes well beyond replacing real graffiti as an art form. Moreover, WiiSpray
is to be seen as an interface to give graffiti a new virtual level surpassing tactile boundaries of the tangible world.
Within the system, there is a symbiosis of digital and analog as well as overcoming restrictions of distance and time. An advantage of the system proves to possess a user-friendly design simple enough for children to use. The virtual canvas allows the user to decide what is saved and what is discarded, all the while keeping the surrounding area clean and free of what otherwise would be a messy form of media.
The actual hardware tool of the artist – the spraying can – remains constant in its shape and
function and is a catalyst for this software supporting innovative computer interaction. The self-explanatory program requires no previous knowledge or reference of a user’s manual. This software allows users to make the game all their own, offering a wide
range of colors, interchangable caps, along with the possibility to incorporate the user’s personal photos, graphics, and backgrounds into the setting.
The WiiSpray provides a framework of different possibilities yet without any specifications on how to use it. Every user decides for themselves what his or her creative expressions might be.
WiiSpray is independent of platforms and is based on »Adobe Flash«,
a »WiiiSpray server« how is based on the »WiiFlash server«, and standard »Wii« technology.
WiiSpray, a technical experiment with a lot of potential for expansion and application.
http://www.wiispray.com/
Ian McDonald - Brasyl
Plot Summary
Brasyl is a story presented in three distinct strands of time. The main action concerns Marcelina Hoffman; a coked-up, ambitious reality TV producer in contemporary Brazil, a striving amateur capoeirista who transcends the cliches of luvvy television phony and becomes a full-fledged, truly likable person as we watch her embark upon a mad new project. Marcelina is going to find the disgraced goalie who lost Brazil a momentous World Cup half a century before and trick him into appearing on television for a mock trial in which the scarred nation can finally wreak its vengeance.
Another strand is set in mid-21st century São Paulo, at a moment when the first quantum technologies are reaching the street, which industriously finds its own use for these things. Q-blades that undo the information that binds together the universe, Q-cores that break the crypto that powers the surveillance state that knows every movement of every person and object in Sampa and beyond.
The final strand is a 18th century Heart of Darkness adventure in the deep Amazon jungle, as we follow an Irish-Portuguese Jesuit into slaver territory where he is sent to end the mad, bloody kingdom of a rogue priest who scours the land with plague and fire. He is joined by a French natural philosopher, who intends to reach the equator and discover the shape of the world with a pendulum.
Enough, population doom merchants
As the world’s leaders put the finishing touches to their proposals for restoring growth to the global economy ahead of this week’s London meeting of the G20, there is one official body that wishes them only failure in their endeavours. The UK’s Sustainable Development Commission publishes a report tomorrow – Prosperity without Growth? — arguing that “the pursuit of growth has had disastrous environmental consequences. In the last quarter of a century, while the global economy has doubled, the increase in resource consumption has degraded an estimated 60% of the world’s ecosystems and led to the threat of catastrophic climate change”.
In that familiar melange of hyperbole, manufactured statistics and prognostications of the end of the world as we know it, we might spy the handiwork of Sir Jonathon Porritt, Bt, chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission. I suspect, however, that Porritt would have preferred something even more radical. The report appears not to mention at all what he considers the chief cause of “excessive economic growth” – humanity’s perverse desire to propagate.
Last month the blathering baronet told this newspaper: “I think we will work our way towards a position that says having more than two children is irresponsible. It is the ghost at the table. We have all these big issues that everybody is looking at and then you don’t really hear anyone saying the ‘p’ word.” Porritt is a patron of the Optimum Population Trust, which at its annual conference last week again proclaimed its “target” of seeing the population of these isles halved – for the greater good, of course.
I don’t know where Porritt gets the idea that nobody is saying the “p” word. Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, has explicitly said that we must limit our numbers, while David Cameron has suggested that Britain needs a “coherent strategy” on population. The really odd thing, in fact, is that the enthusiasts for population control are given any political credibility at all.
In the 1960s they based their campaign on the notion that there would be mass starvation in Africa and the subcontinent unless those countries learnt to cut back the size of their families; or, worse, they would invade the developed world in their quest for food. The World Population Emergency Campaign ran advertisements in the United States showing a photograph of Africans with grasping hands, with the payoff line “People will not passively starve. They will fight to live”. The idea of the campaign was not to feed them but to make them disappear.
In fact, the past half-century has seen an end to mass starvation in the evermore teeming subcontinent, with India even becoming a net exporter of food thanks to the so-called green revolution heralded by new agricultural techniques which the unreconstructed Malthusians never even contemplated.
Without even blinking, the population control freaks have turned this complete defeat for their intellectual argument – such as it is – into a new threat to scare us with. They argue that as the billions in Asia become ever wealthier, they will use up too much of the world’s resources. Their crime, it seems, is not to have starved to death as they were supposed to. Last year’s sharp spike in food and oil prices was hailed as the warning of dire shortages to come. Yet what has happened? It swiftly emerged there was never any physical shortage of oil; just a frenzy of speculation by traders wrongly anticipating a supply crunch. As for food, it took almost no time for farmers to step up their production, encouraged by the higher prices. That is how markets work, if only politicians will let them.
This, of course, does not answer the latest proposition of the population control freaks: people breathe, which, unforgivably, produces CO2. Down the years the anti-humans have always been skilful in adapting the fashionable concern of the day to their own peculiar obsession. In the cold war they argued that an uncontrolled surge in young men in the Third World would be prey to the recruiting sergeants of international communism. Nowadays they argue that the same supernumerary youngsters are the future foot soldiers of Islamist terrorism. This is their eternal wail: cull or be killed. The population control movement is nothing more than an idea in search of an argument.
Porritt has now answered the critics of his recent remarks about the link between population and climate change. In his blog he writes: “In China it’s about 4 tons [of CO2 person per annum. It soon mounts up. Were it not for China’s ‘one-child family’ policy (which is certainly very controversial), there would be as many as 400m additional Chinese alive today – with a combined annual carbon footprint of around 1.6 billion tons of CO2!"
Note how he skilfully shows his support for the policy of the communist dictatorship of China – involving, as it must, forced abortions and a grotesque abuse of the most basic of human rights – while graciously conceding that it’s “very controversial”. He insists he’s not remotely suggesting any such policy here – and last week a similar reassurance was communicated via the BBC Today programme by his OPT colleague John Guillebaud, emeritus professor of family planning at University College London.
What, then, are they suggesting in order to reduce our own population by half? They advocate a policy of no net immigration. Brilliant: not only is that completely unenforceable under our European Union treaty obligations, but immigration is in any case merely a transfer of population, not a reduction in the global total. If there are more Poles here, there will be that many fewer in Poland.
Next, they advocate greater use of contraception and yet more sex education, as if there might be vast numbers of British women who still think babies are found under gooseberry bushes. Al Gore, America’s leading exponent of the green terror, argues that “we know how to stabilise world population” because “population experts know”. Leave aside the fact that if we wanted to “stabilise” the indigenous population of Europe we would be promoting natalist policies, since our numbers are actually in sharp decline; the truth is that the “experts” don’t really know how to “persuade” people to have smaller families.
As Nicholas Eberstadt points out in his paper Too Many People?, the past quarter-century has seen an almost identical drop in fertility levels in Mexico and Brazil – during a period in which the government of Mexico sponsored a family planning programme expressly committed to reducing its population while the Brazilian government did no such thing. Yet now the Brazilian fertility levels are below those of Mexico.
The point, informed by common sense and normal human empathy, rather than the soulless mechanicism of the population planners, is that individual families have the number of children they want to have for the most personal and local of reasons.
The most prominent British advocates of population control should really be able to understand this. Professor and Mrs Guillebaud have three children. The Duke of Edinburgh, who last year declared there are “too many people”, is a father of four; and what of Stanley Johnson, author of The Population Problem and World Population: Turning the Tide? He is best known for producing a son called Boris but, despite appearances, Boris is not a clone of Stanley – he is one of six children produced in the traditional fashion.
A period of silence from the population control freaks would now be most welcome.
Optimum Population Trust
David Attenborough to be patron of Optimum Population Trust
Sir David Attenborough said yesterday that the growth in global population was frightening, as he became a patron of an organisation that campaigns to limit the number of people in the world.
The television presenter and naturalist said that the increase in population was having devastating effects on ecology, pollution and food production.
“There are three times as many people in the world as when I started making television programmes only a mere 56 years ago,” he said, after becoming a patron of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) think-tank.
“It is frightening. We can’t go on as we have been. We are seeing the consequences in terms of ecology, atmospheric pollution and in terms of the space and food production.
“I’ve never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more. Population is reaching its optimum and the world cannot hold an infinite number of people,” Sir David, who has two children, said.
The OPT counts among its patrons the environmentalist Jonathon Porritt and the academic Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta. However, Sir David’s appointment has already been criticised. Austin Williams, author of The Enemies of Progress, said: “Experts can still be stupid when they speak on subjects of which they know little. Sir David may know a sight more than I do about remote species but that does not give him the intelligence to speak on global politics.
“I have a problem with the line that people are a problem. More people are a good thing. People are the source of creativity, intelligence, analysis and problem-solving. If we see people as just simple things that consume and excrete carbon, then the OPT may have a point, but people are more than this and they will be the ones to find the solutions.” Sir David said that the OPT was drawing attention to the issue of population and being a patron seemed a worthwhile thing to do.
Roger Martin, the chairman of the trust, said that the appointment would put pressure on organisations to face up to the issue of population: “The environmental movement will not confront the fact that there is not a single problem that they deal with which would not be easier with fewer people.”
The trust campaigns for global access to family planning and for couples to be encouraged to stop having more than two children. In Britain it wants to stabilise the population by bringing immigration into balance with emigration and making greater efforts to reduce teenage pregnancies.
Mr Martin said that the UK population must be reduced to a sustainable level because Britain was already the most overcrowded country in Europe.He said the world could not increase production to meet the needs of a growing population: “We can’t feed ourselves with some of the most intensive agriculture in the world — we’re only 70 per cent self-sufficient.”
Mr Martin said that Britain could not rely on the world food market because, when food runs short, exporters do not export it: “Last year, we saw India and China banning exports of rice when there was a shortage.”
A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
The first scholar to bring overpopulation to the fore was the Rev Thomas Malthus. His academic work in the late 18th and early 19th centuries outraged and inspired succeeding generations (Tim Glanfield writes).
Malthus grew up in Guildford, Surrey, the youngest of eight siblings, and during his childhood encountered some of the great minds of his age. His father was a friend of the philosophers David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and the young Malthus needed little encouragement to study mathematics at Cambridge.
He made his name with a landmark text, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions between 1798 and 1826 and underlined by strong scepticism for future human generations.
Malthus believed that all previous generations had included a “poor” underclass created by an inherent lack of resources in the world that would continue if population growth were not addressed. His theory is summarised by his assertion that “the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in Earth to produce sustenance for Man”.
He saw two significant variables in the world, those that are positive and raise the death rate — famine, disease and war — and those that are preventive and lower the birthrate — birth control, abortion, celibacy and postponement of marriage.
In practising the preventive measures and gradually reducing poor laws, Malthus argued, society would no longer “create the poor which they maintain”.
The expectations of population growth outlined in his essay had a significant influence on Darwin’s evolutionary th
Sir David Attenborough said yesterday that the growth in global population was frightening, as he became a patron of an organisation that campaigns to limit the number of people in the world.
The television presenter and naturalist said that the increase in population was having devastating effects on ecology, pollution and food production.
“There are three times as many people in the world as when I started making television programmes only a mere 56 years ago,” he said, after becoming a patron of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) think-tank.
“It is frightening. We can’t go on as we have been. We are seeing the consequences in terms of ecology, atmospheric pollution and in terms of the space and food production.
“I’ve never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more. Population is reaching its optimum and the world cannot hold an infinite number of people,” Sir David, who has two children, said.
The OPT counts among its patrons the environmentalist Jonathon Porritt and the academic Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta. However, Sir David’s appointment has already been criticised. Austin Williams, author of The Enemies of Progress, said: “Experts can still be stupid when they speak on subjects of which they know little. Sir David may know a sight more than I do about remote species but that does not give him the intelligence to speak on global politics.
“I have a problem with the line that people are a problem. More people are a good thing. People are the source of creativity, intelligence, analysis and problem-solving. If we see people as just simple things that consume and excrete carbon, then the OPT may have a point, but people are more than this and they will be the ones to find the solutions.” Sir David said that the OPT was drawing attention to the issue of population and being a patron seemed a worthwhile thing to do.
Roger Martin, the chairman of the trust, said that the appointment would put pressure on organisations to face up to the issue of population: “The environmental movement will not confront the fact that there is not a single problem that they deal with which would not be easier with fewer people.”
The trust campaigns for global access to family planning and for couples to be encouraged to stop having more than two children. In Britain it wants to stabilise the population by bringing immigration into balance with emigration and making greater efforts to reduce teenage pregnancies.
Mr Martin said that the UK population must be reduced to a sustainable level because Britain was already the most overcrowded country in Europe.He said the world could not increase production to meet the needs of a growing population: “We can’t feed ourselves with some of the most intensive agriculture in the world — we’re only 70 per cent self-sufficient.”
Mr Martin said that Britain could not rely on the world food market because, when food runs short, exporters do not export it: “Last year, we saw India and China banning exports of rice when there was a shortage.”
A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
The first scholar to bring overpopulation to the fore was the Rev Thomas Malthus. His academic work in the late 18th and early 19th centuries outraged and inspired succeeding generations (Tim Glanfield writes).
Malthus grew up in Guildford, Surrey, the youngest of eight siblings, and during his childhood encountered some of the great minds of his age. His father was a friend of the philosophers David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and the young Malthus needed little encouragement to study mathematics at Cambridge.
He made his name with a landmark text, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions between 1798 and 1826 and underlined by strong scepticism for future human generations.
Malthus believed that all previous generations had included a “poor” underclass created by an inherent lack of resources in the world that would continue if population growth were not addressed. His theory is summarised by his assertion that “the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in Earth to produce sustenance for Man”.
He saw two significant variables in the world, those that are positive and raise the death rate — famine, disease and war — and those that are preventive and lower the birthrate — birth control, abortion, celibacy and postponement of marriage.
In practising the preventive measures and gradually reducing poor laws, Malthus argued, society would no longer “create the poor which they maintain”.
The expectations of population growth outlined in his essay had a significant influence on Darwin’s evolutionary th
Spector guilty of murder
MUSIC legend Phil Spector was found guilty yesterday of murdering actress Lana Clarkson.
It took a jury 31 hours to convict Spector, 69, of shooting the B-movie star at his mansion near Los Angeles.
The 1960s “wall of sound” pop producer — described in court as a “demonic maniac” — stood silently as the verdict was read out.
Deputy District Attorney Alan Jackson said Spector — who was remanded in custody until May 29 — faced a minimum of 18 years in jail.
It was the second time Spector had been tried for Lana’s murder.
A first trial in 2007 ended with the jury deadlocked.
Last night her pal Edward Lozzi said: “A crazy psychopath is off the streets.”
Sci-fi actress Lana, 40 — who was also a bar hostess — was shot in the mouth hours after she met Spector at a nightclub. He had invited her home for a midnight drink.
The jury heard Spector had played Russian roulette with women in the past.
He also pulled guns on those who would not go to bed with him, especially while drunk.
Mr Jackson said: “February 3rd, 2003: Lana Clarkson — a woman, alcohol, a loss of control — and Phillip reaches for the gun. Pow! Lana got the bullet. It’s as simple as that.”
Prosecutor Truc Doalso called Spector “a very dangerous man” who had played Russian roulette with five women before Lana.
He said: “Six women. Lana just happened to be the sixth.”
Spector pioneered the 1960s girl group sound and wrote The Righteous Brothers hit You’ve Lost That Loving Feeling.
He worked with stars including John Lennon and Tina Turner.
He refused to testify at either trial. Yesterday, he spoke only to whisper “yes” in agreement to the date of sentence.
Both trials heard his driver claim that Spector had emerged from the house brandishing a gun, saying: “I think I killed someone.”
But Spector’s lawyers insisted Lana — who starred in the 1985 movie Barbarian Queen — accidentally committed suicide.
In a magazine interview, Spector said she “kissed the gun” before pulling the trigger herself.
Yesterday’s jury had the option of an involuntary manslaughter verdict. But they convicted him of second degree murder.
Defence lawyer Doron Weinberg said his team had “every intention” of appealing.
House Of Blues
DO not adjust your screens.
AN architect has painted his entire house, and everything in it, bright blue as part of a barmy experiment.
Not even the pot plants have escaped an airbrushing.
Arty Peter Kaschnig said he wanted to see the psychological effects of living surrounded by just one colour.
But the masterstroke has outraged locals in the quiet neighbourhood of tree lined Klagenfurt, Austria.
The house, with its blue shutters complete with blue bedroom and blue bathroom, has become a colourful hotspot for snap-happy tourists.
“It looks ridiculous and out of place and all the visitors it attracts are a real nuisance. You can’t park any more and there is no privacy. This used to be a quiet neighbourhood,” moaned neighbour Heidi Manning.
Unrepentant Kasching said: “The results exceeded my expectations. It really does have an amazing impact on the senses to have everything in one colour.
“It changes the whole 3-D impact of a room. I know there are critics but there are also a lot of people who are very interested in my project."
Pop Star Kid Porn
FORMER Lighthouse Family pop star Paul Tucker’s Ibiza villa has been raided by cops investigating child porn allegations.
The songwriter, 40 — who has sold 15 million albums worldwide — insists a fraudster used his credit card details to view a vile website.
A Scotland Yard tip-off led to Spanish cops seizing computers from Tucker’s £2million home in Ibiza Town, where he lives with his wife and two kids.
A credit card in Tucker’s name is alleged to have been used to access indecent images of children from the Russian-based website.
A dozen officers in marked police cars turned up at the house.
The keyboard genius, whose first album Ocean Drive sold six million copies in 1995, was quizzed for two hours at a police station.
A pal of Londoner Tucker, who was not arrested, said: “He is distraught that he has been caught up in the investigation and insists it was a terrible mistake.
"Paul maintains he was mystified as to how his card details were used and believes he is the victim of a fraud.
“He has given the Spanish police the names of people who had access to his credit cards.
“He is hopeful he will be completely vindicated. But it is a terrible time.”
Monday 13 April 2009
EXCLUSIVE; SHEARER’S BAN TO BACKFIRE
Alan Shearer’s ‘get tough’ policy at Newcastle could have a beneficial effect on arch-rivals Sunderland, who have grown increasingly concerned over Djibril Cisse’s nightclubbing antics.
Shearer’s decision, exclusively revealed in yesterday’s Daily Express, to clamp down on players’ socialising, means Cisse arrested in the early hours of Monday for an alleged assault – will not be able to invite any Newcastle players to the city’s nightspots for the next two months.
Cisse has been seen frequently with Newcastle players in local bars and clubs, but Shearer’s ban means his men will now not be able to socialise with Cisse.
Controversial striker Cisse may decide the better, and wiser, option would be to stay in and concentrate on Sunderland’s relegation battle but Shearer’s warning is an effort to ensure all his staff are focused on keeping Newcastle up.
Officer suspended
The police officer seen hitting and pushing a man during the G20 protests who later died of a heart attack was yesterday suspended by the Metropolitan police.
The action came after it emerged that a second post mortem examination into the death of Ian Tomlinson will be carried out by Dr Nat Carey, one of Britain's most eminent forensic pathologists.
The officer was suspended after a request from the Independent Police Complaints Commission "in the public interest".
A spokesman for IPCC said: "The IPCC has called for the officer to be suspended. The MPS has now informed us that the officer has suspended with immediate effect.
A Met police spokesman said: "An MPS TSG Police Constable has been suspended, effective immediately, in relation to the IPCC investigation into the death of Ian Tomlinson. Although the MPS consulted with the IPCC the decision was taken independently by the MPS having considered all the circumstances."
The second post mortem is expected to focus on whether Mr Tomlinson shows signs of having been bitten by a police dog or of bruising to his legs or body that is consistent with being hit with a baton.
The first post mortem examination was carried out on Friday afternoon and found that the father of nine died from natural causes.
This was minutes after footage showed him being violently shoved to the ground by a helmeted and baton wielding Metropolitan police officer last Wednesday evening.
The IPCC told journalists at the start of the week that Mr Tomlinson did not have any bruising or scratches on his head or shoulders, but did not mention whether he had any other signs of injury.
The family of Mr Tomlinson have asked Dr Carey to conduct the examination on their behalf as have the IPCC.
As Dr Carey’s independence is not in question he will produce a report for both parties.
IPCC investigators were on Wednesday still looking for CCTV footage that shows Mr Tomlinson coming into contact with police towards the end of the G20 protests last week.
They are also readying themselves to interview four Metropolitan Police officers that were near to Mr Tomlinson when he was hit who have come forward. One of those is the officer seen pushing Mr Tomlinson.
The Met issued a statement yesterday saying that they had no intention about misleading the public about Mr Tomlinson coming into contact with their officers.
“It is now clear that Mr Tomlinson did come into contact with police prior to his death and that a number of the officers depicted in the footage on a national newspaper's website have identified themselves as MPS officers.
“To clarify, there has been no denial from the MPS that this was the case, nor any deliberate intent to mislead. This is information that could only have been known as the investigation progressed as this was not known at the time of providing medical aid to Mr Tomlinson.
“It is only right and proper that any circumstances surrounding Mr Tomlinson's death form part of the thorough investigation by the IPCC.”
Schools Call In The Bouncers
Bouncers are being employed by schools to take classes when teachers are not available.
One London school went to a doormen’s agency for “cover supervisors”, who watch over lessons when teachers are away, and gave jobs to two bouncers, one of whom is still at the school.
The National Union of Teachers conference in Cardiff heard that schools were advertising for cover supervisors with military or police experience. Andrew Baisley, a mathematics teacher at a secondary school in Camden, North London, told delegates that head teachers were hiring almost anyone provided they had been checked by the Criminal Records Bureau.
Cover supervisors hand out worksheets and make sure that children behave. They have no teacher training and work is normally set by a teacher who does not stay in the classroom.
The wage, half that of supply teachers, was an incentive for supervisors to be used, he said.
In Birmingham an education recruitment agency posted an advert online saying: “Hard core cover supervisors needed now!” and offered £50 to £70 a day. It said: “Aspire People are on the hunt for dynamic, inspiring, hard core cover supervisors. You might be an ex-Marine, prison officer, bouncer, policeman, fireman, sportsman or actor. We need someone who thinks they can get involved in a school environment and control the kids in schools.”
Mr Baisley said: “I know of a school which went to an agency to employ bouncers. They were taken on as permanent members of staff. One ended up with a disciplinary issue within the first term. The bouncers were monitoring lessons. They were big guys who had no teaching experience.”
The school was a secondary in a “not particularly tough area”, he said. “Some adverts for cover supervisors ask for applicants with ex-military or police experience. I think there’s something questionable about thinking that is an appropriate skill for the classroom.”
Cover supervisors are paid up to £20,000 a year; experienced supply teachers earn twice as much. The NUT wants all classes to be taken by qualified teachers when the regular teacher is ill or away preparing for lessons. More cover supervisors are likely to be recruited after September, when rules barring schools from asking teachers to cover for colleagues other than in emergencies come into force.
One teacher discussing the issue on a web forum said that his former school had “full-time security on the corridors and on call for classroom and playground fights. These security were actually nightclub door staff, topping up their income with daytime hours — and believe me they were needed.”
Sarah McCarthy-Fry, the Schools Minister, said: “Heads should ensure that the people they employ have experience and training — and that checks are carried out. Cover supervision should only be a short-term solution.
“Pupils should continue their learning through pre-prepared lessons and exercises supervised by support staff with appropriate skills and training. It is up to heads to determine systems for cover in their schools.”
The behaviour expert Sir Alan Steer, asked by the Government to examine behaviour in schools, is to report this week that disruptive children should be removed to “withdrawal rooms” and taught in isolation.
One London school went to a doormen’s agency for “cover supervisors”, who watch over lessons when teachers are away, and gave jobs to two bouncers, one of whom is still at the school.
The National Union of Teachers conference in Cardiff heard that schools were advertising for cover supervisors with military or police experience. Andrew Baisley, a mathematics teacher at a secondary school in Camden, North London, told delegates that head teachers were hiring almost anyone provided they had been checked by the Criminal Records Bureau.
Cover supervisors hand out worksheets and make sure that children behave. They have no teacher training and work is normally set by a teacher who does not stay in the classroom.
The wage, half that of supply teachers, was an incentive for supervisors to be used, he said.
In Birmingham an education recruitment agency posted an advert online saying: “Hard core cover supervisors needed now!” and offered £50 to £70 a day. It said: “Aspire People are on the hunt for dynamic, inspiring, hard core cover supervisors. You might be an ex-Marine, prison officer, bouncer, policeman, fireman, sportsman or actor. We need someone who thinks they can get involved in a school environment and control the kids in schools.”
Mr Baisley said: “I know of a school which went to an agency to employ bouncers. They were taken on as permanent members of staff. One ended up with a disciplinary issue within the first term. The bouncers were monitoring lessons. They were big guys who had no teaching experience.”
The school was a secondary in a “not particularly tough area”, he said. “Some adverts for cover supervisors ask for applicants with ex-military or police experience. I think there’s something questionable about thinking that is an appropriate skill for the classroom.”
Cover supervisors are paid up to £20,000 a year; experienced supply teachers earn twice as much. The NUT wants all classes to be taken by qualified teachers when the regular teacher is ill or away preparing for lessons. More cover supervisors are likely to be recruited after September, when rules barring schools from asking teachers to cover for colleagues other than in emergencies come into force.
One teacher discussing the issue on a web forum said that his former school had “full-time security on the corridors and on call for classroom and playground fights. These security were actually nightclub door staff, topping up their income with daytime hours — and believe me they were needed.”
Sarah McCarthy-Fry, the Schools Minister, said: “Heads should ensure that the people they employ have experience and training — and that checks are carried out. Cover supervision should only be a short-term solution.
“Pupils should continue their learning through pre-prepared lessons and exercises supervised by support staff with appropriate skills and training. It is up to heads to determine systems for cover in their schools.”
The behaviour expert Sir Alan Steer, asked by the Government to examine behaviour in schools, is to report this week that disruptive children should be removed to “withdrawal rooms” and taught in isolation.
Sunday 12 April 2009
Saturday 11 April 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)