I HATE that fucking meerkat!
Jesus, how can you? That whole marketing campaign is genius!! :1orglaugh
You must be a mongoose
Ask a British Person.......
- Thread starter HeyFellas
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 'enry 'iggins best country in the world bollocks bonkers cheeky chesty brompton dumb yanks england great britain limeys limp wristers my arse scotland supreme race tea baggers the beatles hate you united kingdom wales wanker warm beer where are the dentist? where's my ear medicine? y-fronts rule!
Jesus, how can you? That whole marketing campaign is genius!! :1orglaugh
You must be a mongoose
Probably not. There are no references to him in any of the texts that have been found that are dated from around that time period (the 5th - 6th century) so it's unlikely that he did exist. The myth is probably an amalgamation of several well known figures who lived at that time.
But you never know, there are still some who think he did. So don't take my word for it.
From what I remember not much, if at all was it mentioned. Maybe the myth may have been touched upon in passing but it was never focused on as something that must be taught.
It was mainly Shakespeare - nothing else really got much of a look in from what I remember. A little bit of Chaucer and some of the great poets. But when I was there as well as the classics, modern writers got about 50% maybe more of the share.
But the school syllabus changes so much that there could be several different answers given to that question.
Dunno if it's still the same, but when I was in high school (ages 11 - 16) we did history for the first three years, then we had to choose between history and geography for the next two (or maybe it was two years of both and three years of one, can't quite remember). As the history stuff we had been taught was really boring (mainly world war 2 politics and something about 19th century royalty :dunno I chose geography. A shame really, because these days I find 1st millenium history really fascinating. :wave2:
I chose geography. A shame really, because these days I find 1st millenium history really fascinating. :wave2:
om3ga
It's good to be the king...
Dunno if it's still the same, but when I was in high school (ages 11 - 16) we did history for the first three years, then we had to choose between history and geography for the next two (or maybe it was two years of both and three years of one, can't quite remember). As the history stuff we had been taught was really boring (mainly world war 2 politics and something about 19th century royalty :dunno
I remember Maths & English was compulsory...
I picked History, General Science, Biology, Physics, Chemistry (and Social Studies - was I crap at that subject - wished I picked French instead now...:o)
Dunno if it's still the same, but when I was in high school (ages 11 - 16) we did history for the first three years, then we had to choose between history and geography for the next two (or maybe it was two years of both and three years of one, can't quite remember). As the history stuff we had been taught was really boring (mainly world war 2 politics and something about 19th century royalty :dunno
Yeah we had the same choice at my school. I chose history because I found geography unbearably boring. Our main area of study was the histroy of the 20th century. Mainly the events surrounding the US and to a lesser extent the UK during those time periods - there were other events and times discussed from time to time of course but that was the main focus for the last year and a half. Which I always found quite strange, being in the UK you would think the focus would be on this country but no, the US took pride of place within our classroom.
I actually didn't mind that, most of the actual events were interesting. The great depression, the two world wars, Vietnam, the civil rights movement etc.
Modern history teaching is really superficial looks at very limited topics.I learned a lot of history long ago at junior school-done informally by excellent teachers who felt they had to try to explain why things in the world are as they are.I also feel that present day teaching neglects to place happenings in the context of the time and tends to apply modern values.So there is little real understanding of the role of Empire for example.
Our political leaders clearly have no understanding of history for this very reason.
He's a myth.
Speaking from my schooldays, none.
From what I understand, with the falling standards of education, I believe an every decreasing number of students are taught, or even know, about our rich literary history.
How dare you!
I think that some things, such as history, certain types of science, maybe even literature as well as a few other subjects should be taught by putting kids in a cinema and showing various Discovery / History / Nat Geo channel programmes. These shows are far more interesting and insightful than some exhausted and disillusioned teacher who is telling bored students the same thing for the fifth time that day. I learnt more from one hour of Bettany Hughes' "Seven Ages of Britain" than I did in a whole two years of schooling. :wave2:
You still go to skool?
& taking kids to watch documentaries at the cinema is one of the worst ideas I've heard!
A word of explanation-in the UK a public school is one where parents pay vast fees for their children to receive their education in exclusive surroundings. Such as Eton and Harrow.They are in fact private schools.
What an American would call a public school is known as a State school here.
What an American would call a public school is known as a State school here.
Because kids should be taught at school not dumbed infront of a cinema screen, its lazy teaching!
Do you mean the slag word for a cigarette?
Cockney rhyming slang for a cigarette is, 'Oily Rag'.
Cigarette = Fag
Fag = Oily Rag.
:1orglaugh