Leatherhead Matters

Some of the Government’s lack of joined up thinking is truly breathtaking. Having abandoned border controls over the last few years we now find that the Department of Work & Pensions has been issuing a National Insurance number to any illegal immigrant who cared to ask for one.

The scale of this cavalier approach is still unfolding but, we already know that in 2004/5 440,000 N.I. numbers were handed out to foreign workers but, the DWP only screened 2000 of these applications for immigration checks.

Richard Kitchen, the chief investigation officer at the DWP, issued (in 2005) clarification to Job Centres for staff who have suspicions about a foreigner’s immigration status. The DWP have confirmed his guidance, below is still in operation:

“Applicant in employment and has falsified a genuine immigration document. Where Department of Work Pensions is satisfied as to the individual’s identity, a NINO (national insurance number) would be issued in this situation even if we have suspicions around his immigration status.”

Garry Gibson, of the Identity and Security Branch, Programme Protection Division, at Jobcentre Plus said

“Any prosecution action in respect of the falsified immigration documentation would be the responsibility of IND (Immigration Nationality Directorate) — Not the DWP.”

So one Department of Government (the IND) is supposedly trying to curb illegal immigration, while another Department (DWP) is handing out N.I. numbers like confetti, regardless of immigration status.

You just couldn’t make it up!

This problem has been known about by several Home Office Ministers who have applied sticking plaster solutions. If you want to know more about this issue read this excellent article in the Registry

It reminds me of the Home Office approach to sham marriages, which was basically an organised scam to get UK resident status for many immigrants. Registry Offices often reported cases to the Home Office. The usual advice was classic “Do what you think is right!” ie it’s your decision not mine.

Apologies to readers for the lack of blogging in the last 3 days but, I have been completing some upgrades & tweaks on the site to accommodate the significant increase in readership…..plus some research for future articles.

Mole Valley readers will find a map of Leatherhead in the side bar. Points of general interest can be added but, no businesses or, commercials please.

Also installed a web stat widget to help understand the proportion of unique visitors & geographical area of readership. I won’t  be able to see the first analysis until February.

Did you know you can now view images on your computer in 3D. No special kit is required.

See, for example, the 3D images on this web site:

Burning Man Opera Ark of the Nereids 2002

A December 2007 survey by the Association of Teachers & Lecturers (ATL) shows that almost 60% of teachers believe Internet plagiarism is a significant problem in schools & further education colleges. Of these teachers, 72% said that up to half the work returned by pupils included material copied from web sites. Examples included one pupil who submitted a paper which even included the adverts embedded in the copied web pages.

A 2005 report from exams watchdog the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA)proposed that exam papers should be scanned by specialist computer software to tackle internet plagiarism.

Just type Essays, Dissertations or, Thesis into Google Search and up comes an endless supply of “Pay per Paper” providers. The number of providers suggest that this is big business in both the USA and the UK

Many teachers and schools turn a blind eye when plagiarised material appears in work which counts towards grades. Government targets and school league tables mean that teachers have a terrible dilemna when they see plagiarised work. An ATL teacher in Wiltshire summed up the dilemna: “I am feeling a tension between wanting to be rigorous and not wanting to put my own students at a disadvantage when competing against other candidates whose teachers are not so scrupulous.”

And there’s the problem. There is a systemic problem in UK schools, sixth form colleges and some universities. Lip service is paid to tackling plagiarism but, there is no systemic approach.

The approach used in many US schools is tiered:

1. Timetable sessions to inform pupils what plagiarism is, how to avoid it and how to properly reference the words & ideas of other people.
2. Formal discipline for plagiarism with a tiered approach. First time offenders are treated more leniently than others. Discipline is also tiered from having to rewrite the plagiarised paper, write a different paper or receive zero marks for the paper.
3. Formal plagiarism policy. Many schools require both pupil & parents to annually  sign the policy.
4. Electronic screening for plagiarism, using one of a number of commercial, web based providers. Turnitin is one of the major players. Turnitin UK provides services to many UK Universities but, schools are insufficiently funded to use this service.

In the UK there is a lack of political will to tackle this issue and therefore a lack of a consistent approach across schools. This contributes to the dilemna of the Wiltshire teacher. Only the Government can solve this problem (probably via Ofsted). However, the Government’s approach to rampant plagiarism in our schools & colleges is to tut, tut but do nothing…………Ed Balls doesn’t want the smooth curve of grade inflation to be interrupted. Better to have satisfied voters who just cut & paste government propaganda, than a future generation of independent thinking, savvy voters!