I had such a funny dream the other day. I actually woke up laughing to myself. It goes like this...

I was in my classroom and I got an email asking me to send all the small people down to the hall. I sent them down then wondered what they were doing so I went in to have a look. They were all sitting on chairs, swinging their legs because they were too small. I went and looked at the questionnaires they were filling in and they had questions like:

"When it's windy, do you get blown over?"
"Does this interfere with your learning?"

How funny! Even funnier that my mind made all that up. Once, in a dream, my mind made up a four or five page long booklet all about birds and I read it word for word. I don't even know anything about birds!

My father-in-law:
My husband (a self-portrait years ago):

As you probably know, most governments are under immense pressure to raise standards of literacy and this government has responded by introducing The National Literacy Strategy. Which is not all bad, it has to be said. Although quite a lot of it is bad. The NLS, which does just has a recommended status (although recommended in the sense that if you don't follow it you've got to prove you're doing it better), instructs teachers to spend a significant amount of time on grammar teaching, some at word level and some at sentence level. There are so many opinions that everyone has on this but here's a fact for you...

The government introduced this recommended grammar on the basis of research that showed that grammar teaching improves writing. And that's what we all want, isn't it? HOWEVER, this is the state of that research:

The EPPI-Centre and English Review Team (an independent team who review vast quantities of research) searched their comprehensive database and came up with 4566 studies that had looked into the value of teaching grammar, specifically syntax, to improve children's writing. They then applied four criteria to each study to work out if they were thought out carefully enough and relevant enough. This slashed the figure of appropriate studies down to 58, only 33 of which were primary studies (as opposed to reviews). They then studied in depth the 10 best studies (according to their criteria) and only three of these were of medium-high quality. The review team concluded that all three were inconclusive.

This leaves teachers in a tricky position. Especially as the call for better functional literacy comes around year after year alongside all the debate surrounding exam results and standards.

There's more to say but I don't think you'd read it! I'll post a link to my essay one day and here's a link to the review that I was writing about. Enjoy!

I've just been reading everyone's blogs (literally all the links working from Toby's) and everyone does a "sorry I haven't blogged for ages" post. This is mine. I feel a bit self-conscious about what to write. That's why. I don't have Toby's way with words when it comes to writing about nothing.

Well, I love my new job. Actually LOVE it! It's a good feeling.

I'm really trying to think of something interesting to say but it's hard.

Ok, Romeo and Juliet... Shakespeare uses anthithesis in the form of oxymorons to describe how love is never simple. Romeo describes his love for Rosaline by saying things like "bright smoke" and "cold flame". So love is always tainted. We can conclude.

Oh, this is cool: A Shakespeare insult generator. Everyone wants an insult.

Toby's got a new iPod thanks to consumer rights and YOU need to know about them...

European law states that ANY electrical good that fails because of a fault with the product within two years of the date of acquisition (i.e. when it got delivered as opposed to when you paid for it) must be replaced or repaired.

The Sales of Goods Act says that consumers should expect goods to work for a reasonable amount of time. If the company says their product should last for at least five years then you have a case for demanding a repair or replacement if it breaks down within that time. In fact, you have a case whether or not they say it should last for that long. I imagine it's harder to get repairs/replacements on these grounds as they're a bit vague. The European law seems pretty solid though.

A friend in retail did say that companies can get round it by saying that it was clear at the time of purchase that the product was only guaranteed for, say, a year - something from the Office for Trading Standards helps them there - but I don't think the European law actually specifies anything about that; it's just a straightforward law that it must be repaired or replaced if it goes wrong.

Lots of companies only give a one year warranty - even for products like washing machines and ovens. This is caused by the concept of extended warranties where you pay the company to guarantee your product for longer. But don't, at least for the first two years, because they have to repair/replace it anyway.

Anyway, nice Apple people