Yeah but that’s not forever. Big shifts like this don’t always happen over night, they often take years of groundwork so you gotta dare to dream in the meantime.
Sidenote, this govt being one term is entirely possible. It’s where labour/nz first was heading before covid and they decided to actually act and materially do things.
I think we’ll see an increasingly oscillating political landscape as our various crises pile up (climate change, cost of living, infrastructure deficit), and govts fail to actually do anything to address them in any meaningful way.
Even with a labour led government doubt much will be done, I was really hopefully for labour to actually do something, not just about drugs but also about housing and a land tax. They did really well through COVID but apart from that it was a lot of promises and a lot of not doing anything. Kinda odd they chose 3 waters as their thing though, considering how unpopular it was with some people.
Oh sure, that’s what the 3 horsemen are doing, but the schools could play this too… It’s risky, but every teacher I’ve met had indicated things have been bad for decades
What you have there is a standard manifold, plus a temperature-controlled recirculating pump (which is not the main pump!) and a hot-to-cold bypass line.
Try closing the bypass valve. The picture isn’t too good, but I assume those are all temperature gauges, so the only warm water flows through the bypass at the moment.
Yes, there’s another pump back in the main line from the boiler.
With the bypass valve closed, the hot water doesn’t seem to circulate at all - either down the bypass or through the loops.
And, the thermostat on the circulating pump there switches it off below whatever temp you set. Once switched off, then the top rail starts to heat (implying that got water is now going into the loops). So strange , I just can’t get my head around how it’s ‘supposed’ to work, let alone if it’s actually working properly.
The red knob is a thermostat. Hot water will flow in their, coming from the gas furnace most likely. The floor heating can’t handle too hot water, so it’s mixed with the circulating water coming from the top rail. The tube going from the thermostat to the top rail probably only has a thermometer in it, to measure the temperature of the returning water. If it’s too cold, more hot water can be mixed in.
The pump you see is circulating water through the floor heating. The gas furnace will have another pump, distributing hot water through the building.
It seems to make no sense. The top rail is hot and the water should flow through the circuits back to the cold rail on the bottom. The pump should be in-line and not across the rails. The pipe on the right between the top and bottom rails would also seem to be defeating the purpose of the two rails, allowing water to flow from hot to cold directly. It looks like a rebuild is in order.
There is another pump that is in inline with the heater. This pump is needed to mix the hot water from the heater with circulating water from the floor heating, to have an acceptable temperature for the floor. Water directly from the heater can be too hot for floor heating.
There is something wrong with the setup if the boiler is putting out temperatures too hot for the floor heating, e.g. a radiator circuit is being used for both radiators and underfloor circuits.
From what I can tell it looks like the hot water comes in from the top line and heads into the manifold but also down to the mixing/regulating valve on the bottom line. After the water runs through the system it comes out to the return line and back out to the heating system.
My first thought is to try closing the blue valve on the return a bit and give it a minute. My thought process is that reducing the cold/out flow will help the circulating pump pull the water from the mixing valve. You could also try messing with the regulator to see if the temperature changes when you adjust it.
Variety in the modes of education is a good thing: not every pupil is effectively educated in a public school.
But, I can’t help but think this is merely stealth privatisation of education: a profit making exercise. That it might actually have positive outcomes for pupils is a happy accident.
while it’s great there’s robust debate (elsewhere in this thread), gven all the other self-serving things this govt has done, I think we can take this as unlikely to go well for ‘the rest of us’…
The article points out that a large number of schools in the UK are charter schools (40% primary, 80% secondary), but doesn’t then say if that is a positive or not.
One size doesn’t fit all in education, which Seymour points out. But how do charter schools address this issue?
One size doesn’t fit all. That’s why all kids should have an hour of reading, an hour of writing, and an hour of maths every day (which takes up like 70% of the learning time available).
I’m all for innovation in education, but surely there is plenty of international data to give just a little bit of information on the positives of charter schools.
I nice comparative analysis would go a long way, but no.
It’s probably pretty difficult to measure the performance of charter schools vs public schools.
A charter school might specifically cater to underachieving kids, kids for whom the public system didn’t work well. Then by selection the public schools will outperform the charter school.
Or alternatively, a charter school might outperform public school because the class sizes can be smaller and they don’t have to stick to the government set rules for schools. If you set dumb rules (like three hours a day on the three Rs) then you can then point to the charter schools and say “look, they are doing better than the public schools so we should convert more schools to charter schools” when in reality it’s just a sign the way you run public schools is wrong.
If the charter school can cherry pick which students it chooses and can expel difficult to teach students then I can’t see how it could possibly do worse.
There are countries that run charter schools and countries that don’t. Which ones are doing better from an outcomes point of view, which ones are doing better after 20 years out of school?
If we look at a country level then things like attitude towards education, the specific implementation differing between countries, or the general social structure outside of school differing may make comparisons meaningless.
Another factor is that “charter school” doesn’t necessarily mean run by a company, just that they have an agreement with the government (a charter) that says they don’t have to follow the normal curriculum. But from my understanding charter schools in NZ are privately run?
The figure below shows some notable results from the CREDO studies. The key takeaway is that charter school students, in general, perform about the same as their matched peers in the traditional public schools, but there is variation across different types of schools and groups of students. For example, students in urban charter schools generally perform better than their matched pairs—likely for an assortment of reasons—while students in online charter schools perform much worse.
This study shows that charter schools are slow to get started (i.e. perform poorly at the start) and slowly catch up to public schools over time:
This study investigates whether student achievement varies during the institutional life span of charter schools by comparing them to new public schools. The results show that there is little evidence that new public schools struggle with initial start-up issues to the same extent as new charter schools. Even after controlling for school characteristics, new public schools generally perform about as well as one would predict given their demographic and socioeconomic profile. New public schools hit the ground running and maintain steady performance, while new charter schools begin to improve after their first year and slowly close the gap.
This article talks about how charter schools and public schools are as good as the people running them:
The effectiveness of charter schools is a hotly contested and often debated issue among educators, parents, researchers and politicians. And studies have been published supporting both sides of the argument: that charters underperform public schools and that they outperform public schools. However, the key difference appears to be the state in which the charter is located and the organizing body by which the charter is run.
So I was at the kebab shop today and was about to order my usual lamb kebab but suddenly it occurred to me that even though the kebab had cabbage and hummus and tabouli on it it wasn’t woke enough to trigger any nearby National or ACT voters nearby so I switched the order to a falafel.
I ordered extra hummus but I was in a quandary about the sauce. Should I go with yogurt or avocado? I really didn’t think it would taste good with both of them and after a quite a bit of thought I went with plain yogurt without garlic. I don’t know if that was the right choice in terms of wokeness but it did taste good. What do you guys think is more woke yogurt or avocado? I think the avocado might actually be more woke because it would make the kebab vegan and nothing upsets David Seymour more than a vegan except maybe teachers, trans people, people in a union, people who work for a living, government employees, students, doctors and nurses, people who need healthcare etc.
Also are Jalapeños woke? I think they might be because of the spelling alone but then again I don’t think they have them in the middle east.
Finally the kebab tasted great, was filling and has a reasonable cost. Might have even been healthy who knows. Highly recommended.
Maybe I’ve had too many bad felafel dishes, but I reckon the yogurt is a better choice over avocado. Definitely less woke, though… Maybe I need to boost the humus?
Got my hearing aids and boy do they make a big difference for me.
I’d suffered from a very reduced high frequency hearing so everything sounded muffled. They tested my ears and set the aids up to compensate.
We have a big surround sound tv system, and I was concerned the aids would impact it. But no, it sounds great, the bass/midrange is good and I can now clearly hear the voices, though that does somewhat depend on the source as a lot of modern movies and tv series have gabbled and unclear voices anyway.
My aids have an app that can slightly adjust the sound, so played with that a bit, but to be honest, I don’t think I’ll need to tweak the basic setup.
The only thing that currently stands out, and it a tad annoying, is the aids amplify my own voice when I speak. Makes to me my voice sound echoey and louder than I’m used to.
The only thing that currently stands out, and it a tad annoying, is the aids amplify my own voice when I speak. Makes to me my voice sound echoey and louder than I’m used to.
A quick search and it seems it’s normal you’ll probably get used to it, but also there are some specific things that can make it worse so if you have a follow up appointment then mention it then as there might be some adjustments that can help to some minor extent.
I also saw mention of specific hearing aids that you can train your voice on and it filters it out. But I’m assuming they come at a premium.
It’ll, I’m sure, take time to get used to the hearing of my own voice amplified thing. The aids don’t, certainly at the moment, feel particularly intrusive in my ears, but I guess YMMV on that.
They told me about the “own voice” thing, it was the first thing I noticed on initial fitting. I guess I’ll get used to it, and maybe it’ll make me speak quieter but then Mrs Floofah won’t hear what I say, so a complete reversal of our recent communication difficulties!!
I sang semi-professionally for quite a few years. Used to use in-ear monitors and they do a similar thing - you do get used to it pretty quickly, or at least it becomes less annoying!
The audiologist said that if after a while I felt my voice echo was unacceptably intrusive, they could adjust the aids settings. It’s early days for me with the aids, but I’m pleased to say they do seem to be working well.
I accidentally bought 1kg of espresso-ground coffee, so drinking lots at the moment! I was intending to get beans which would hold their flavour for longer. I’m also using an aeropress and espresso grind is a bit hard to use in that.
I was at Briscoes and saw coffee machines and thought oh, maybe I should get an espresso machine to use with my espresso grind coffee! I don’t know what I was expecting a small, basic espresso machine to cost but I was not expecting them to start at $400 and go up, up, up from there!
Anyone got a small sized espresso machine (doesn’t take much bench space) that makes coffee and froths milk that they can recommend?
Or put another way, what’s the cheapest machine worth having?
Just bought the Breville Bambino over ANZAC weekend. On sale it was about $250 and I’d expect it to be discounted again over King’s Bday in a few weekends time.
We were looking at the Breville Barista Express as well, but all the info online suggested that the grinder breaks first and isn’t economical to repair, so you end up having to buy a separate grinder anyway. Bambino on sale + Baratza Encore ESP is not much more than the Barista Express and the Encore is a much better grinder than the bundled one and is designed to be repairable at home.
Otherwise the Brevilles actually review well for their espresso making capabilities. I fell down the rabbit hole on /r/espresso and they come highly recommended as entry level machines.
Thanks! Looks like this one is currently on special, $150 off so now only $400 😆. I’ll keep an eye on it, I might be willing to spent $250 if it makes good coffee. Thanks for the recommendation!
Yup that’s the one we got. Definitely makes decent coffee, heats up instantly and my wife is happy with the milk frother. Only additional thing we bought for it was a tamper as the plastic one it comes with is crap. The stainless steel milk jug and 4 portafilter baskets are all good.
We brought a Delongi Magnifica about 6 years ago, use it multiple times a day.
IMPORTANT NOTE not the cheapest machine
Makes great coffee, can take beans and ground coffee (I have never used the grounds part, we only buy beans). Grinds the beans and produces coffee from one button press…awesome.
I drink my coffee black, so if it tastes bad…I know. It does do the milk thing and others have used that function on my one.
I would buy another one if mine broke. Side note, I brought one for Mum about 4 years ago…partly so I could have good coffee at her place.
Range of machines now…the model I have is not there, closest one is the Magnifica S, with the rise of enshitification I worry that they have somehow made this great machine worse…
We got ours on sale for $500, 6 years ago, the Magnifica S is about $800 normal price now, PriceSpy hasn’t had it below this for at least 18 months.
newzealand
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.