Someone’s run out of ideas?

Why would we want to go backwards…

Because admitting you’ve made a mistake isn’t a bad thing, is it?

rkk01 – Member

Someone’s run out of ideas?

Why would we want to go backwards…
Because current standards of education are quite poor, aren’t they? 😕

Well, let’s see….

I did O Levels, got good results (by the standards of the day), and was very, very critical of the new GCSE – when it came in.

My specific criticisms were based on the Science GCSE, which, at the time, was in no way comparable to the separate Physics, Chemistry and Biology O Levels.

However, as a society, we are in a place today that would be utterly unrecognisable compared to the mid 80s. The whole idea of separating out academic and non-academic streams just seems so, well 1960s – or Tory / public school

My specific criticisms were based on the Science GCSE, which, at the time, was in no way comparable to the separate Physics, Chemistry and Biology O Levels.

My apologies, I didn’t get your specific critisism from the original post. 😛

<daily mail>

Pah, next thing they’ll bring out A levels with grades other than A or A*.

</daily mail>

Purist / don simon

Changing the exam system to a separate GCE / CSE type approach is politically motivated – an intellectual apartheid, if you like.

As above, I was scathing towards GCSEs when they replaced O Levels, but looking back, that was based on the science content – the academic rigour, if you like, of the subjects that I had taken.

I agree that the content and standards of attainment need to be revised (upwards), but that is not necessarily something that requires the exam system to change – especially to separate in to GCE / CSE type streams. Same applies to A Levels. Add content to the exam syllabus, by all means

The Tories’ new strapline/motto:

“Because things were better back then!”

No they weren’t.

EDIT: And anyway GCSEs are going linear from September, which means students sit exams at the end of the 2 years and so don’t get the chance to re-sit to improve on what is deemed an ‘unsatisfactory’ grade in a modular exam. This will ‘sort the wheat from the chaff’ ( the Tories love this) somewhat.

You cannot compare the two qualifications, one was designed for a small percentage of the population to sit the other is more or less universal. It really annoys me when they are directly compared 👿

any ol’ excuse

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U[/video]

No they weren’t.

Yes they were. We knew the difference between question marks and full stops.
We had proper teachers back then.

We knew the difference between question marks and full stops.

I find it’s people in there 30s and 40s that are the worst offenders for not knowing their own language. After going into business after university (graduated last year) I’m consistently amazed by the number of websites, emails, articles and advertisements I read that are littered with poor P&G. Whereas when I read some of my friend’s trivial posts on Facebook or casual emails they’re more often than not pretty spot on.

I will be honest though, I went to one of the best grammar schools in the county and even there the English teaching was awful, due mainly to the curriculum. I learned how to spell and punctuate from reading newspapers and journals and been embarrassed by some of the corrections in my first few essays.

As for science, I somewhat agree. I did separate science (3 GCSEs) back in 2005 and thought it reasonably challenging and broad but dual award and certainly single award science left a few gaps.

My biggest groan about education is that A level Maths is not compulsory. It flipping well should be! Or at least GCSE made into a more developed award like dual award science. Not knowing calculus and having an good grasp of statistical analysis is a major problem in the global market place. Furthermore, it’s a massive disadvantage for any scientist/ social scientist when going to university. If a good level of mathematical ability was assumed, our university teaching could impart a lot more I feel.

I didn’t do A level maths and it’s not been a problem for me, wtf do we need everyone at that level for?
I was in the second year to do GCSEs, seemed OK to me at the time, dunno if they’ve been dumbed down over the years since then.

.

find it’s people in there 30s and 40s

🙄

I didn’t do A level maths and it’s not been a problem for me, wtf do we need everyone at that level for?
I was in the second year to do GCSEs, seemed OK to me at the time, dunno if they’ve been dumbed down over the years since then.

Forgive me if I’m wrong but no-one is suggesting you have to do A-level maths?

Yes both GCSE and A levels have been dumbed down, a LOT. Of course I have no evidence for this other than the experience of those who taught before me and still teach now, and now the fact that students entering first year technical degrees often struggle with even the basic re-cap maths. My father covered more maths and science by the time he left high school than I did up to the second year of A level.

Modifying exams and courses to improve grades is a stupid idea, but it goes on all the time, instead of modifying teaching and expecting the same minimum standards.

Splitting folk into ‘academic’ and ‘less academic’ streams is a perfectly sane option, if you accept the research that suggests many folk just work a different way, why not put such folk into a field where they can do well at what they’re good at instead of modifying what’s taught to make sure everyone can do it, then adjusting difficulty to ensure a set number of passes.

Folk shouldn’t be angry at the people who say it’s dumbed down (I accept mine was not as tough as say my brother had 8 years earlier, that’s life), they should be angry at the successive policy changes that made them easier. The big problem is trying to negate the negative effects any change will have on current students who get the “old” grade system.

Klunk – like. 🙂

As a staunch Tory-hater I don’t think this is the worst idea in the world. From my limited experience, it does seem wrong the way everything has become so modular and you get the chance to just keep doing things over and over again. I suppose I feel like it takes academic ability out of the equation to some extent, and makes it more about your ability to jump through hoops.

I don’t agree with getting rid of the national curriculum in order to let free schools teach creationism and how to be a successful corporate slave though.

The levels of ignorance shown with regards to the current system of education on this thread are quite astounding and outstanding, even by STW standards.

Exhibit A:

why not put such folk into a field where they can do well at what they’re good at instead of modifying what’s taught to make sure everyone can do it, then adjusting difficulty to ensure a set number of passes.

…that would be the wide variety of Applied (previously known as ‘vocational’) GCSEs and A levels, not to mention NVQs that don’t already exist then…

and Exhibit B:

My biggest groan about education is that A level Maths is not compulsory. It flipping well should be! Or at least GCSE made into a more developed award like dual award science.

Dual award science is for ‘non-scientists’ either due to lack of ability and/or lack of interest…as a teacher (had you guessed?) of Economics and Business I have used my A level Maths in both my working and everyday life approximately zero times in the last 20 years.

…that would be the wide variety of Applied (previously known as ‘vocational’) GCSEs and A levels, not to mention NVQs that don’t already exist then…

No, because clearly they’re of differing age ranges. There’s often no academically oriented equivalent of GCSEs in schools. At the school I attended during my teens I had no choice but to take the double award science GCSE despite finding it boringly easy. The seperate sciences had been available the year before but the school decided it got better results from the combined one and didn’t have to teach two streams so it was cheaper. At A-level age range there’s the option of vocational qualifications or academic, that’s fine. Though the maths/physics A levels are losing significant technical content on an annual basis it seems. None of the discussion of types of qualification can detract from the fact that they are losing content and getting easier.

As an engineer I’ve used my physics and maths A levels pretty much daily since leaving A levels but I agree I see no reason to make A level maths compulsory, that’s daft.

headfirst
Dual award science is for ‘non-scientists’ either due to lack of ability and/or lack of interest..

Why? I did a dual award science GCSE, followed by A level maths, physics and chemistry, physics degree and PhD. I work as a scientist. What’s wrong with dual award science GCSE? I remember it being fine (if lacking in chemistry).

Why? I did a dual award science GCSE, followed by A level maths, physics and chemistry, physics degree and PhD. I work as a scientist. What’s wrong with dual award science GCSE? I remember it being fine (if lacking in chemistry).

Me too, but it did have less content than the individual qualifications and the question was raised when I went to college to do A levels. The A level folk saw it as “everyone gets to do a bit of science” qualification versus “someone who’s interested in science” qualification. The problem is you often don’t get a choice as a kid and with the DA getting generally better grades, many schools in our area just went for that to improve their standing in the area.

There was no choice at my school, but I certainly never felt like it caused me any real problems. That said, I did do A levels at the same school, so I suppose it wouldn’t.

I am the only one old enough to be amused at seeing the left-wingers defending the exam system that was brought in by the Tory Kenneth Baker 😆

I am the only one old enough to be amused at seeing the left-wingers defending the exam system that was brought in by the Tory Kenneth Baker

Yes, because you are the most pathetically deranged individual on this entire forum. And that’s really saying something.

No, this is really saying something:

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BI9UoJvjKA[/video]

Some exam boards offer very poor GCSE science double awards. AQA’s “21st Century Science”, for example, featured this gem of a question:
“Mark is in the aisle of a supermarket dressed as a cow. Why might Shaniqua be offended by this?”. Pupils then, understandably, struggle at the start of their Physics AS level (but the teachers are aware of this and plan accordingly). It is similar for the A level – University transition.

As said above, pupils often have no choice between separate or double award science – the school has made the decision for them on what are often (sadly) financial and political grounds.

I don’t care what the exams are called. Pay teachers more and stop distributing funding based on poor metrics and easily manipulated targets.

struggle at the start of their Physics AS level (but the teachers are aware of this and plan accordingly). It is similar for the A level – University transition.

The problem is it means that either catch-up is required which means the next qualifications content suffers or the teacher is stressed to death doing extra, or the students miss out.

I don’t care what the exams are called. Pay teachers more and stop distributing funding based on poor metrics and easily manipulated targets.

Exactly. It should be a top-down process, not bottom up determining the standards.

My son sat Part 1 of his GCSE Physics yesterday. There was a question on the Cosmic microwave background radiation. I don’t recall that being part of my O level Physics. Having helped him revise (and as a former Theoretical Physicist), I can confirm that the Physics syllabus is rigorous, but the nature of testing is different. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, to be honest. He still as to make use of the same equations as I did (power, heat, speed of waves), but needs a better grasp of concepts.

Now if they would only bring back marking to a standardized normal distribution…

The problem is it means that either catch-up is required which means the next qualifications content suffers or the teacher is stressed to death doing extra, or the students miss out.

Bang on.

struggle at the start of their Physics AS level (but the teachers are aware of this and plan accordingly). It is similar for the A level – University transition.

You see, I had completely the opposite experience. A Level science to Degree level science was a breeze (well except the Yr 1 physics)

Now if they would only bring back marking to a standardized normal distribution…

This – Most often overlooked factor in the grade inflation debate

But if you normalised the results, how would students ever improve? 😉

GCSE is too easy and some teachers should be fired because they are bloody lazy.

Now I did ok at O levels, bit better at A levels, quite well in my first degree qualification and very well when returning to HE to become a nurse.

Now, I may be getting on a bit but my lads GCSE syllabus seems quite complex compared to what I had to do in 1980.

Not convinced that they are easy at all.

its all a bit confusing

Arent kids already streamed into lower and upper sets for things like maths and science?

the entire thing seems like a very disruptive and expensive exercise in not achieving much

if the exam boards need a kick up the arse fair enough,

I suspect goves grandstanding on O Levels is just his party trying to win back the support of the middle aged voters, fed up with the (perceived) tory failures on immigration, gay marriage, europe, the economy etc etc