Awwww, that is so lovely of you to say. I am chuffed that these videos are helping you in that way. Thanks so much. It really encourages me to keep going. p
I hope you have enjoyed making these fascinating Post Office videos. Having watched the testimony of the "people in power", forced to explain themselves to the inquiry, it's been shocking to see the variety of self-delusion and ruthlessness on display. Nearly all the witnesses are trying to tell the uncomfortable truth - but the worst offenders seem unable to come to terms with their own ruthlessness, manipulation of others, and cult-like loyal belief in the infallibility of Post Office, Horizon and Fujitsu computer bods. It strikes me that the witnesses who were "in power" at the time, were largely promoted beyond their competence, given top jobs as a reward for loyalty and long service, despite lacking relevant experience, intelligence or even understanding of what they and their organisation were actually doing - let alone the morality of it. So many years spent shamelessly glorying in their deceit, manipulation and punishment of postmasters for even daring to think the emperor had no clothes.
Very interesting reading. Totally agree with your great articulation of the witnesses generally appalling motives and behaviours at that time. The only thing that I am torn on however, is the question of whether they are all trying to tell the truth now. Either they are unable to accept their behaviour and, as most of us do, justify it in their own minds to make it more palatable thus presenting their ‘truth’ now or they are trying to save their skins from the consequences of their actions by blatantly lying. Perhaps both . It has been very enlightening watching this parade of human behaviour which had such devastating consequences on innocent people. I look forward to more analysis videos from Dr Duckett
Paul, don’t worry if you don’t answer every message or reply to replies. There’s a reality to keep in focus - the time it takes. I have appreciated any comments you have made, whether to my comments or to others. I’m not studying at Uni (I did that years ago) but find your perspective and teachings fascinating. I am checking out your other videos - thank you for your honesty and enlightenment. Best wishes to you. All good wishes! 😃👍
That's such a lovely comment to leave. Thank you so much. Of course I am going to reply to you, beacuse you are giving me the reason to carry on. So, I just wanted to say how much I appreciate your post. :) p
Thanks for the information. I came to your Channel for the Post Office scandal but have stayed because I have become fascinated by what thought processes could motivate people to behave in the way that they do.
What would be really really interesting is if there is somebody that explains the fundamental or principle design of Horizon which would explain what they did through the backdoor. And what reconciliation encompasses on a weekly and than monthly basis.
Thanks for your valuable work, Paul. I'd be interested in your take on the grinning buffoon Tim Parker (ex -Post Office chairman) and his testimony at last week's inquiry.
Paul, I'm a 77 year old former Soldier/ Officer with 30 years service. I am definitely learning a multitude of incredibly interesting aspects of psychology thanks to your videos. Keep up the good work!
David, I am so sorry for taking so long to acknowledge your comment. It's so lovely to hear this. It makes the time I put into making this videos worthwhile. Thank you so much and glad to have your company on this channel :)
I've literally just subscribed to your channel today. No reply needed 😊. Found it quite by chance after watching a PO inquiry vid - I've followed it closely. The video of yoursctgat popped up was your analysis of George Thomson - a man wherecwords fail me. Anyway, lived yoyr video and will defo look at your ither content too. Thanks for giving of your time and talents 👍
Hi John, his words failed him too! :)Thank you for your lovely post. I couldn't help but reply :) Thank you so much for your encouragement and for your time. Much appeciated :) p
thank you so much - the internet should be a place to have open conversations (albeit polite); instead of putting VAT on education, use the internet to make it more accessible to all. We should be helping all our students (both Nationally and Internationally) in anyway we can so that when they are in the workforce they can be as effective as possible, understand morality and ALL the perspectives (not just mob rule). The Boardroom of public bodies such as the Post office, BBC, NHS should employ people like you to routinely do academic assessments (Unfortunately this was what the House of Lords should have done but is now too political). Your posts are a great learning exercise - and hopefully the new Government will listen
I’m 56 years old and only really understanding critical thinking. This is why I really enjoy your study and breakdown of the post office scandal, and in a more general sense, your method of peeling apart the most important aspects of any subject. Keep up the good work, really enjoying the content.
That's great. I hope you enjoy them. Maybe not all will be useful, but hopefully there something there that will be :) And, would love to hear your thoughts on them if you do get around to view any of them :) p
I spent time in Newcastle's RVI Clinical Psychology, you remind me very much of a brilliant Psychologist there. Thank you for your videos and please continue.
Not so busy that I am am not going to tell you how much I appreciate your encouragement. Thanks so much. It means so much to know that you appreciate my videos. That gives me the motivation to keep going. p
@PaulDuckett Good! And thank you! :) but, arrgghh..sorry to hear about your tech issues, awful when you lose your favorite equipment! Onward ho...may the best replacement come your way!!! And yes, it is right, to feel appreciated 😘
Yes, indeed. Tim Parker the very part-time ex-chair, so full of self-importance whilst accepting no responsibly for anything really because he was so busy with something (...?) but also at the same time suffering from a severe bout of corporate amnesia. Certainly, "A Suitable Case For Treatment"....or analysis in this instance.
Much appreciated your Post Office commentaries. As a new subscriber, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Dr Iain McGilChrist's "The Master and his Emissary" and "The Matter With Things" books.
Hiya Geoffrey, Thanks so much for your lovely feedback. I'm not sure that I'll be able to get to those books - not quite in my ballpark, but if I do get some time to spread my reading wings, I will have a look. But I do appreciate the suggestion :) Kind thoughts, paul
Thank you for posting your videos about the Post Office situation, but on a wider note, how many PhD theses I psychology and psychiatry produce results that are reproduceable?
Ahhh, replicability of psychological research. Well, I don't have any numbers to hand but I suspect way more are not replicable than the profession would be comfortable with. I think it is largely a fault of a lot of psychology tries to answer complex questions (all questions related to human behaviour are complex) with simple answers which is why it get's into such a pickle like this :) p
I really enjoy your Post Office videos. They are very, very informative and very, very ineressting, thanks. Re. your upcomming Garath Jenkins video. I'm a retired chartered civil engineer in the uk and before you finish your Garath Jenkins video I thought you might like to know what an engineer makes of his engineering answers at the public inquirey. Caviat...I've only watched a few of his answer so my following observations are limited to those. 1. It looks like Gareth Jenkins was in or he adopted the position of a junior actor who was asked or instructed to do things by senior actors who were managing the situations he found himself in. 2. It seems he limited his actions to his precise interpretation, as an engineer, of what he was asked or instructed to do. 3. It seems he did not consider wider engineering, social and legal implications of what he was asked or instructed to do and of his responses. Was that because he saw himself as a 'junior actor' and he did not consider it was his place to do so? Or was it because he was not an 'enquireing enginer' (one who might challenge his 'seniors')? 4. His definition of a robust computer system (Horizon) seems to be different from that of those who question him today. His definition seemed to be... Horizon carried out hunderes of thousands of actions a day and if less than 1% ( or whatever it was) are wrong, then it is robust.... and that is why he said it was robust at court. Today, others think, even if less than 1% (or whatever it was) are wrong, then it not robust. To my mind both definitions would be wrong, that's because they do not take into account the consequences of wrong computer outputs. Come to think of it, during the inquirey, has a ' robust computer system' been defined? If not, then participants may well be talking about different things. Having just written that it occurs to me, from a purely engineering point of view Gareth Jenkins definition may well be right, that's because computers are not programmed to take into account the consequences of their outputs. That is for people to do and that is your field. 5. I wonder, was GJ's opinion, about Horizon being robust (as he defines 'robust'), correct from a purely engineering point of view, and was he and his opinion manipulated be senior people to support their arguements? Was he naive and was he taken advantage of? I don't know because I don't know enough of the history. Perhaps your upcomming video can enlighten me..... I could go on but I'll leave it there for you to consider ... Thanks again and regards Tony (in the uk)
Hi Tony, What a wonderful post and so informative. Fabulous points. I wish I had read this before I posted my Jenkin's video. I posted it before I read your post. But, I think I end up in a similar space as you - where you make arguments about hsi focus on engineering and how he missed the socio-legal, I picked up his focus on the technical and how he lost sight of the moral. I think you put it better than me! I think you are already enlightened but I'd be interested to hear what you make of my take on things in my latest video. And thanks so much for taking the time to give me all that wonderful detail and well constructed argument. Much appreciated. p
Hi Paul, thanks very much. I commented on your Jenkins video half an hour ago. I assumed you had not read this post so I simply made the 'definition of robust' point again but more concisely and as an open question. Now I know you value my thoughts, for which I thank you, I 'll make some more comments on your Jenkins video (after I've mended our garden table). Tony
I look forward to watching some of these videos. If my daughters law tutors (undergrad) put anything on youtube about the assessments, those students would, without a shadow of doubt, cheat 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Her criminal jystice system and crime control (masters) would have been very different though, i dont think she had time to watch anything with working full time and studying full time too. Every day is a school day and i am always up for learning new things.
Thanks so much Julie. I think the big issue is that if a student cheats, we try to understand why. I was in senior leadership in a faculty in my last university and had to 'deal' with all the serious cases of students cheating across my faculty. And I never came across an inherently bad student, just students who were stressed, frightened, overwhelmed and biggest reason they cheated was they had no time to do their best work. Of course, that wasn't a law faculty so I agree ... cheating is part of their training :) p
I see what you did there 🤣🤣 there was no cheating, that i know of anyway, and my daughter did put in very hard work with a lot of stress thrown in. She walked away with a first in Law and Practice then decided that wasn't quite the way her life was taking her. The stress her masters brought her was another level but she did come out on top with distinction. She is working alongside people who have become involved with modern day slavery and people trafficking, her masters degree has come in very handy where her job is concerned. Brings us directly onto the psychology of people who use people in this way and why people are drawn into these criminal gangs. I will never stop saying that every day is a school day.
Hiya Janet, Just posted my video on Jenkins .... took longer than expected because things at work went a bit wierd and my computer broke. I will defo give Tim Parker a look. A lot of comments are suggesting I let my critical eye roam over to him. :) p
Thanks Ann, There's lots of them. I am very critical about psychology (I work in critical psychology which looks for all the things psychology does wrong and needs put right .... we have a long list!). I hope you enjoy them and find something useful there. Would love to hear your thoughts on them. p
1. Hello. 2. i'm very pleased to have found your stuff, and appreciate your responses very much. 3. You needn't reply to this. 4. Are you familiar with a book by James Hollis called, 'The Eden Project'? 5. If no, and relationship stuff is your thing, I'd urge you to find a copy. (5a. If yes, 'nuff said.) Many thanks, S
Thanks so much, I really apprecaite that. I hadn't come across that book. I had a quick google and found some reviews and it sounds really intersting. Thanks so much for the suggestion. I will try to get a chance to give it a read. :) p
Is it completely mad your students would not cheat if tempted, are you aware of the use AI got put to when it first arrived students used it to produce their exam assignments etc? Perhaps teachers can be compared to dog owners that never admit to any wrong doing the classic line being it's never done that before - you'll get more sense talking to the dog usually! :)
Back in my University lecturing/invigilation days, I was always fascinated by the ingenuity of the methods and devices employed by students “to complete the examination by unfair means”, as we were instructed to call it. I remember the time when some of them had gained access to the examination hall a night in advance and hung huge ‘crib-sheet’ posters all along the inside under-edge of the false ceiling. By sitting in a particular position, the angle was such that everything on the posters could be seen, but from no other position. The physics and geometry employed were of first-class honours standard. Unfortunately, the exam was testing technical English🙃
Thanks Peter, great to hear a view that differs from mine. I think my response would be that the focus of the unviersity sector seems to be on how students cheat rather than why they cheat. That is what troubles me so much. I have a lot of experience dealing with student cheating (I used to be in senior management and was responsbible for looking into serious cheating across the faculty). I didn't find any students who just cheated because they could. It was much more complicated. But, I get the dog analogy, that did make me smile. Cheers, p
@@PaulDuckett I thought it might bring a smile...yes interesting point the why perhaps a video exploring this? As you previously stated 2nd comments go to an unknown graveyard to die...."Show me the child at seven and I'll show you the man".
Thank you Paul, we are drowning in snake oil, your expertise is helping me to make more sense.
Awwww, that is so lovely of you to say. I am chuffed that these videos are helping you in that way. Thanks so much. It really encourages me to keep going.
p
I hope you have enjoyed making these fascinating Post Office videos. Having watched the testimony of the "people in power", forced to explain themselves to the inquiry, it's been shocking to see the variety of self-delusion and ruthlessness on display.
Nearly all the witnesses are trying to tell the uncomfortable truth - but the worst offenders seem unable to come to terms with their own ruthlessness, manipulation of others, and cult-like loyal belief in the infallibility of Post Office, Horizon and Fujitsu computer bods.
It strikes me that the witnesses who were "in power" at the time, were largely promoted beyond their competence, given top jobs as a reward for loyalty and long service, despite lacking relevant experience, intelligence or even understanding of what they and their organisation were actually doing - let alone the morality of it. So many years spent shamelessly glorying in their deceit, manipulation and punishment of postmasters for even daring to think the emperor had no clothes.
Exactly! Elegantly and cogently put! 👍🙏⚖️🙏
Very interesting reading. Totally agree with your great articulation of the witnesses generally appalling motives and behaviours at that time. The only thing that I am torn on however, is the question of whether they are all trying to tell the truth now. Either they are unable to accept their behaviour and, as most of us do, justify it in their own minds to make it more palatable thus presenting their ‘truth’ now or they are trying to save their skins from the consequences of their actions by blatantly lying. Perhaps both . It has been very enlightening watching this parade of human behaviour which had such devastating consequences on innocent people.
I look forward to more analysis videos from Dr Duckett
Wonderful post and beautifully written. Thank you so much for sharing this. I know others will find great strength from reading your words.
p
Yes, I agree AuntSally, scepticism is very much needed regarding the apparent turn to truth some tell us they have taken :)
Loving the integrity of your content. Integrity, coupled with insight is rare, sadly.
That is a lovely thing to say. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
p
Paul, don’t worry if you don’t answer every message or reply to replies. There’s a reality to keep in focus - the time it takes. I have appreciated any comments you have made, whether to my comments or to others. I’m not studying at Uni (I did that years ago) but find your perspective and teachings fascinating. I am checking out your other videos - thank you for your honesty and enlightenment. Best wishes to you. All good wishes! 😃👍
That's such a lovely comment to leave. Thank you so much. Of course I am going to reply to you, beacuse you are giving me the reason to carry on. So, I just wanted to say how much I appreciate your post. :)
p
Thanks for the information. I came to your Channel for the Post Office scandal but have stayed because I have become fascinated by what thought processes could motivate people to behave in the way that they do.
Ahhh, that's lovely to hear. It fascinates me too :)
p
What would be really really interesting is if there is somebody that explains the fundamental or principle design of Horizon which would explain what they did through the backdoor. And what reconciliation encompasses on a weekly and than monthly basis.
That is a most excellent question. I hope the inquiry answers it and thanks so much for posting.
p
Thanks for your valuable work, Paul. I'd be interested in your take on the grinning buffoon Tim Parker (ex -Post Office chairman) and his testimony at last week's inquiry.
Awwww, thank. Because you have been so nice to me, the grinning buffoon is next on my list :)
p
Looking forward to seeing more from you.
Awwww, that's lovely. I will try not to disappoint :)
p
Paul, I'm a 77 year old former Soldier/ Officer with 30 years service. I am definitely learning a multitude of incredibly interesting aspects of psychology thanks to your videos. Keep up the good work!
David, I am so sorry for taking so long to acknowledge your comment. It's so lovely to hear this. It makes the time I put into making this videos worthwhile. Thank you so much and glad to have your company on this channel :)
Thank you. I’ll give each of your videos a like, whether I watch them, or not.
Because you’re worth it! 😊
Awwww, that is so kind ... but please don't sue me if you get RSI - I have over 200 videos! :)
p
I've literally just subscribed to your channel today. No reply needed 😊. Found it quite by chance after watching a PO inquiry vid - I've followed it closely.
The video of yoursctgat popped up was your analysis of George Thomson - a man wherecwords fail me.
Anyway, lived yoyr video and will defo look at your ither content too. Thanks for giving of your time and talents 👍
Hi John,
his words failed him too! :)Thank you for your lovely post. I couldn't help but reply :) Thank you so much for your encouragement and for your time. Much appeciated :)
p
thank you so much - the internet should be a place to have open conversations (albeit polite); instead of putting VAT on education, use the internet to make it more accessible to all. We should be helping all our students (both Nationally and Internationally) in anyway we can so that when they are in the workforce they can be as effective as possible, understand morality and ALL the perspectives (not just mob rule). The Boardroom of public bodies such as the Post office, BBC, NHS should employ people like you to routinely do academic assessments (Unfortunately this was what the House of Lords should have done but is now too political). Your posts are a great learning exercise - and hopefully the new Government will listen
I completely agree with you about education. And thank you so much for your lovely feedback. I very much appreciate it - it helps keep me going :)
I'm really enjoying your channel. Snake oil? Opinion and analysis make me think and reflect. Keep it up, can't wait for your Jenkins video.
Thanks so much for your lovely feedback. Just posted my Jenkins video today. hope you enjoy it :)
p
I’m 56 years old and only really understanding critical thinking. This is why I really enjoy your study and breakdown of the post office scandal, and in a more general sense, your method of peeling apart the most important aspects of any subject. Keep up the good work, really enjoying the content.
I am 56 years old too ... I think we come from a very good vintage :)
Thanks for the update. I will have a peek at your non post office videos as they may prove interesting to me.
That's great. I hope you enjoy them. Maybe not all will be useful, but hopefully there something there that will be :) And, would love to hear your thoughts on them if you do get around to view any of them :)
p
I spent time in Newcastle's RVI Clinical Psychology, you remind me very much of a brilliant Psychologist there.
Thank you for your videos and please continue.
Wow, that is lovely encouragement. Yes, I will keep going. Thank you.
p
@@PaulDuckett You're welcome and thanks for the reply.
Thank you for sharing those teaching videos that you can!! Appreciate you! No need to respond here, you're a busy guy ❤
Not so busy that I am am not going to tell you how much I appreciate your encouragement. Thanks so much. It means so much to know that you appreciate my videos. That gives me the motivation to keep going.
p
@PaulDuckett Good! And thank you! :) but, arrgghh..sorry to hear about your tech issues, awful when you lose your favorite equipment! Onward ho...may the best replacement come your way!!! And yes, it is right, to feel appreciated 😘
Cheers Dr. D! Looking forward to future videos on whatever subject, but especially on the post office horizon scandal! 🙋👍🙏⚖️🙏🧑🎓
That is so lovely of you to say. I've just posted my latest POL video ... Gareth Jenkins. hope you enjoy it :)
p
Always something of interest on your channel, Paul. Hope you get around to doing something on Tim Parker (ex-PO chair).
Yes, indeed. Tim Parker the very part-time ex-chair, so full of self-importance whilst accepting no responsibly for anything really because he was so busy with something (...?) but also at the same time suffering from a severe bout of corporate amnesia. Certainly, "A Suitable Case For Treatment"....or analysis in this instance.
Thank you so much :) I will put Parker on my todo list :)
p
Much appreciated your Post Office commentaries. As a new subscriber, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Dr Iain McGilChrist's "The Master and his Emissary" and "The Matter With Things" books.
Hiya Geoffrey,
Thanks so much for your lovely feedback. I'm not sure that I'll be able to get to those books - not quite in my ballpark, but if I do get some time to spread my reading wings, I will have a look. But I do appreciate the suggestion :)
Kind thoughts,
paul
Thank you, Paul. I have gained some knowledge about Psych, a subjest of which I am ignorant
That's lovely feedback. Thank you. Of course, I have a twisted view of psychology, so bare that in mind :)
p
Thank you for posting your videos about the Post Office situation, but on a wider note, how many PhD theses I psychology and psychiatry produce results that are reproduceable?
Ahhh, replicability of psychological research. Well, I don't have any numbers to hand but I suspect way more are not replicable than the profession would be comfortable with. I think it is largely a fault of a lot of psychology tries to answer complex questions (all questions related to human behaviour are complex) with simple answers which is why it get's into such a pickle like this :)
p
I really enjoy your Post Office videos. They are very, very informative and very, very ineressting, thanks.
Re. your upcomming Garath Jenkins video. I'm a retired chartered civil engineer in the uk and before you finish your Garath Jenkins video I thought you might like to know what an engineer makes of his engineering answers at the public inquirey. Caviat...I've only watched a few of his answer so my following observations are limited to those.
1. It looks like Gareth Jenkins was in or he adopted the position of a junior actor who was asked or instructed to do things by senior actors who were managing the situations he found himself in.
2. It seems he limited his actions to his precise interpretation, as an engineer, of what he was asked or instructed to do.
3. It seems he did not consider wider engineering, social and legal implications of what he was asked or instructed to do and of his responses. Was that because he saw himself as a 'junior actor' and he did not consider it was his place to do so? Or was it because he was not an 'enquireing enginer' (one who might challenge his 'seniors')?
4. His definition of a robust computer system (Horizon) seems to be different from that of those who question him today. His definition seemed to be... Horizon carried out hunderes of thousands of actions a day and if less than 1% ( or whatever it was) are wrong, then it is robust.... and that is why he said it was robust at court. Today, others think, even if less than 1% (or whatever it was) are wrong, then it not robust. To my mind both definitions would be wrong, that's because they do not take into account the consequences of wrong computer outputs. Come to think of it, during the inquirey, has a ' robust computer system' been defined? If not, then participants may well be talking about different things. Having just written that it occurs to me, from a purely engineering point of view Gareth Jenkins definition may well be right, that's because computers are not programmed to take into account the consequences of their outputs. That is for people to do and that is your field.
5. I wonder, was GJ's opinion, about Horizon being robust (as he defines 'robust'), correct from a purely engineering point of view, and was he and his opinion manipulated be senior people to support their arguements? Was he naive and was he taken advantage of? I don't know because I don't know enough of the history. Perhaps your upcomming video can enlighten me.....
I could go on but I'll leave it there for you to consider ...
Thanks again and regards
Tony (in the uk)
Hi Tony,
What a wonderful post and so informative. Fabulous points. I wish I had read this before I posted my Jenkin's video. I posted it before I read your post. But, I think I end up in a similar space as you - where you make arguments about hsi focus on engineering and how he missed the socio-legal, I picked up his focus on the technical and how he lost sight of the moral. I think you put it better than me! I think you are already enlightened but I'd be interested to hear what you make of my take on things in my latest video.
And thanks so much for taking the time to give me all that wonderful detail and well constructed argument. Much appreciated.
p
Hi Paul, thanks very much.
I commented on your Jenkins video half an hour ago. I assumed you had not read this post so I simply made the 'definition of robust' point again but more concisely and as an open question. Now I know you value my thoughts, for which I thank you, I 'll make some more comments on your Jenkins video (after I've mended our garden table). Tony
I look forward to watching some of these videos.
If my daughters law tutors (undergrad) put anything on youtube about the assessments, those students would, without a shadow of doubt, cheat 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Her criminal jystice system and crime control (masters) would have been very different though, i dont think she had time to watch anything with working full time and studying full time too.
Every day is a school day and i am always up for learning new things.
Thanks so much Julie. I think the big issue is that if a student cheats, we try to understand why. I was in senior leadership in a faculty in my last university and had to 'deal' with all the serious cases of students cheating across my faculty. And I never came across an inherently bad student, just students who were stressed, frightened, overwhelmed and biggest reason they cheated was they had no time to do their best work. Of course, that wasn't a law faculty so I agree ... cheating is part of their training :)
p
I see what you did there 🤣🤣 there was no cheating, that i know of anyway, and my daughter did put in very hard work with a lot of stress thrown in. She walked away with a first in Law and Practice then decided that wasn't quite the way her life was taking her. The stress her masters brought her was another level but she did come out on top with distinction. She is working alongside people who have become involved with modern day slavery and people trafficking, her masters degree has come in very handy where her job is concerned. Brings us directly onto the psychology of people who use people in this way and why people are drawn into these criminal gangs. I will never stop saying that every day is a school day.
Looking forward to your thoughts on Jenkins.
Did you watch the testimony of Tim Parker? He’s interesting too.
Hiya Janet,
Just posted my video on Jenkins .... took longer than expected because things at work went a bit wierd and my computer broke. I will defo give Tim Parker a look. A lot of comments are suggesting I let my critical eye roam over to him. :)
p
Point taken, and quite right.
Wow, thank you. Wish I could be that succint :)
p
Can't wait to see the Gareth Jenkins one!
Just posted it today. Hope you enjoy it :)
p
Your psychology videos sound interesting.
Thanks Ann,
There's lots of them. I am very critical about psychology (I work in critical psychology which looks for all the things psychology does wrong and needs put right .... we have a long list!). I hope you enjoy them and find something useful there. Would love to hear your thoughts on them.
p
1. Hello. 2. i'm very pleased to have found your stuff, and appreciate your responses very much. 3. You needn't reply to this. 4. Are you familiar with a book by James Hollis called, 'The Eden Project'? 5. If no, and relationship stuff is your thing, I'd urge you to find a copy. (5a. If yes, 'nuff said.) Many thanks, S
Thanks so much, I really apprecaite that. I hadn't come across that book. I had a quick google and found some reviews and it sounds really intersting. Thanks so much for the suggestion. I will try to get a chance to give it a read. :)
p
I believe you should participate in the Post Office Horizon IT Scandal, giving your views on each person's testimony.
Is it completely mad your students would not cheat if tempted, are you aware of the use AI got put to when it first arrived students used it to produce their exam assignments etc?
Perhaps teachers can be compared to dog owners that never admit to any wrong doing the classic line being it's never done that before - you'll get more sense talking to the dog usually! :)
Back in my University lecturing/invigilation days, I was always fascinated by the ingenuity of the methods and devices employed by students “to complete the examination by unfair means”, as we were instructed to call it. I remember the time when some of them had gained access to the examination hall a night in advance and hung huge ‘crib-sheet’ posters all along the inside under-edge of the false ceiling. By sitting in a particular position, the angle was such that everything on the posters could be seen, but from no other position. The physics and geometry employed were of first-class honours standard. Unfortunately, the exam was testing technical English🙃
Thanks Peter, great to hear a view that differs from mine. I think my response would be that the focus of the unviersity sector seems to be on how students cheat rather than why they cheat. That is what troubles me so much. I have a lot of experience dealing with student cheating (I used to be in senior management and was responsbible for looking into serious cheating across the faculty). I didn't find any students who just cheated because they could. It was much more complicated. But, I get the dog analogy, that did make me smile.
Cheers,
p
@@PaulDuckett I thought it might bring a smile...yes interesting point the why perhaps a video exploring this? As you previously stated 2nd comments go to an unknown graveyard to die...."Show me the child at seven and I'll show you the man".