[Closed] traditional O'levels

Not exactly news that though is it but this is

There has also been speculation that in future there would only be one exam board provider per subject after Mr Gove said last week that competition had had "malign effects"

But we are told competition is brilliant I am shocked

Grammar schools next

Nope we all knew Gove is a complete **** muppet.

Competition/choice in "not always the solution" shocka. From one of the beshtest thatcherites the cabinet has to offer no less. Wonders never cease...

[edit] in fact, if you put aside the possibility of a return towards two-tier education, the bits about a single exam board, long/tough final exam, tougher grading and limitation of the awarding of top grades sounds alarmingly like how those keeerrrrraazy loony left wing folk over the channel do many of their exams. 😆

The Guardian had an article on this recently and it pointed out that the past is not a better place and it certainly wasn't a rigorous exam. Misguided education secretary wasting our money on a return to another flawed system. The Now Show have home right..

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/06/unrigorous-o-level ]Here's the article[/url]

How does the Scottish system work?

From one of the beshtest thatcherites the cabinet has to offer no less.

It was Thatcher who scrapped O Levels.

...He'll be off her christmas card list then!

Super, let's crack on renationalising everything too.

goves already succeeded in making university elitist again

now hes gonna give us a 2 tier education system

daveh - Member

Super, let's crack on renationalising everything too.

I can't see exam boards being nationalised. I can however see huge amounts of "lobbying" (coughs) to whichever government is in at the time from Capita/Group 4/Serco/ISS/whoeverthe****elsewantstohaveago about who gets to be the 'chosen examiner' though!

Can someone please explain the 2-tier thing to me?

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/sep/16/nick-clegg-michael-gove-gcse-replacement?newsfeed=true ]There will be no two-tier system[/url]

(see it as another u-turn to add to the list)

Gove doesnt even seem misguided he's just an A* ****.

back in the day when we did o levels there were several exam boards ( not as many as now though) our teacher went through the class and depending on how good you were allocated an exam board accordingly.. i was miffed and had to pay 49 quid to do the easy exam board as i thought it was a bit rich having to do a harder exam to get the same qualification..

kimbers:

now hes gonna give us a 2 tier education system

You mean, like the 2 tier GCSEs we have now? Wiki:

Tiers

In many subjects, there are two different 'tiers' of examination offered:

Higher, where students can achieve grades A*–D(E), or a U
Foundation, where they can achieve grades C–G, or a U[3]

If a candidate fails to obtain a Grade G on the Foundation tier or a Grade D on the Higher tier they will fail the course and receive a U. Candidates who narrowly miss a Grade D on the Higher tier, however, are awarded a Grade E. In modular subjects, students may mix and match tiers between units. In non-tiered subjects, such as History, the examination paper allows candidates to achieve any grade. Coursework and controlled assessment also always allows candidates to achieve any grade.

In 2006, GCSE Mathematics changed from a 3-tier system — Foundation grades (D–G), Intermediate (grades B–E) and Higher (grades A*–C) — to the standard 2-tier system described above.

The pre GCSE two tier system is usually referring to GCE for clever clogs and CSE for thickos. GCSE put an end to that, as above.

Oral?

[quote=midlifecrashes ]The pre GCSE two tier system is usually referring to GCE for clever clogs and CSE for thickos. GCSE put an end to that, as above.
Except that it apparently didn't (going by midlifecrashes)

Slightly OT, but why do this government seem to pre-announce all announcements a few days before actually making "the announcement"?

If they were to return to the traditional form of announcing things once then I feel they would be able to get twice as much done with their time.

Not sure whether this would actually be twice as good or twice as bad for the country now.

Except that it apparently didn't (going by midlifecrashes)

If you read what he posted then obviously not because those less academic can still aspire to getting a C grade CGSE as opposed to a qualification with mong written all over it.

Mr Clegg said neither he nor the Prime Minister, David Cameron, had been aware of the plans and indicated that they would not go ahead without Lib Dem support.

He said he was against "anything that would lead to a two-tier system where children at quite a young age are somehow cast on a scrapheap".

I' don't know where to start with this bit:

After extensive discussions about the proposals, however, Mr Clegg is expected to join Mr Gove in a show of unity at the launch of a consultation on the reforms.

Just when you think Clegg can't sink any lower. I've one kid midway and another about to start secondary school. Fekin Pob the a$$wipe is ruining a generation, makes my piss boil.

Don't even start me on the cash for school repairs he siphoned off for his ridiculous pet projects, bloody criminal.

If you read what he posted you'd then obviously not because those less academic can still aspire to getting a C grade CGSE as opposed to a qualification with mong written all over it.

and grade inflation means a c might as well be a fail....

[quote=tinribz ]those less academic can still aspire to getting a C grade CGSE as opposed to a qualification with mong written all over it.
But surely any employer/FE institution looking for non-"mong" qualifications will just look to folk with As and Bs?

By the time these examinations come on line school leaving age will have been raised to 18, from the 17 it was raised to but almost nobody noticed a while age.

That begs the question what the hell is the point of a S**t or bust exams at 16 anyway? The Canadians abandoned the formal exam at 16 in favour of an assessment prior to doing the formal exam at 18 some time ago. Have to say I'm noit a fan of the exam treadmill anyway.

Druidh apparently Uni's already look at the percentage score of the As exams we force 17 year olds to take now. Apparently top 20 uni's are looking for 80%+ before they make a provisional offer. Or so I was told by the principal as my 17 y/o started her A levels.

Of course, a real education may well have taught people that "traditional O'levels" was utter rot.

Start a sentence with a capital letter, would you? Further to that, the least said about the slaughter of the apostrophe the better.

the least said about the slaughter of the apostrophe the better.

I was taught that an apostrophe could signify missing letters. In this case the apostrophe replacing "rdinary".

Mind you I did "mong" CSE English and only got about grade 3 or 4, so I'm willing to accept that I might have got that wrong.

So correcting grammar on an interweb forum is the best you can do. What else do you do for fun.

What else do you do for fun.

Corrects grammar on twitter.

#helloCFH

We should in fairness point out its not going to be a 2 tier system. But i do not understand how no more modules will increase standards, will make my life easier though i expect.

A three hour memory test at the end of two years studying?

For a change 😉 I will disagree here on two aspects - tiers and competition. There will continue to be a multi-tier system with the most obvious distinction being drawn between those who are free to make choices (on exams, syllabus, modular vs linear etc) and those who have "choice" forced upon them by politicians who believe that they know best - and this includes Gove. I spent two hours last night discussing the merits of two alternatives to the current A level namely the IB and the Cambridge Pre U with reps of the boards, parents and teachers. Two competing boards who recognise the flaws in the current A laws and "compete" to offer different solutions for schools and parents seeking academically challenging exams that prepare students for further education and for the workplace better than the current exams. Leaving aside the more contentious issues of the failings of current exams, the key message was the obvious fact that there is no such thing as one-size-fits-all in education. Any education minister who suggests that this is the case is doing a disservice to our children (IMO).

teamhurtmore, could you simplify that for me as I have no idea what your point is

There will continue to be a multi-tier system with the most obvious distinction being drawn between those who are free to make choices (on exams, syllabus, modular vs linear etc) and those who have "choice" forced upon them by politicians who believe that they know best

wtf are you talking aout here for instance?

Indepenent schools are free to offer the curriculum of their choosing backed up with an exam of their choosing*.

State schools are tied to whatever crackpot scheme the latest education minister has decided will be best for the children shoe horning them into a one size fits all (and therefore no-one) system.

I sat exams from three different boards based on which offered the best for us (according to the teachers). We normally sat the exams our teachers sat on the examining boards for...

*At least this was the case. I know my school largely avoided the national curriculum except at the point when we needed to pass GCSEs.

Jesus help us when we decide that the "workplace" has to be the arbiter of how effectively we have educated our children. **** the work place. It's bollocks like that which will allow the slow encroachment of private enterprise into our schools. And it can keep its dirty paws out thanks.

There has also been speculation that in future there would only be one exam board provider per subject after Mr Gove said last week that competition had had "malign effects"

Exam boards trying to show Gove that they're 'tough' and 'rigorous' in order to be chosen as the one exam board for English is probably what contributed to the grading boundary changes this summer.

I don't particularly have a problem with changing the way that students are assessed at 16, but it needs to be done openly, carefully, thoughtfully and fairly. Unfortunately, there's naff-all chance of this happening.

I think there should be a core set of knowledge/skills on which everyone is assessed, covering English, maths, science, IT, and general studies. This should be to the same depth as GCSE grade C (O-level pass) in those subjects but much narrower.

Beyond that, there should be a range of routes and qualifications which students of all abilities and aptitudes should be able to choose. These should include vocational subjects as well as academic, and a range of assessment methods. All should be viewed as equally valid, so just as much value is placed on getting a decent 'grade' in a vocational course as in an academic course.

I use 'grade', because I think grades are pointless. The certificate should give the UMS mark achieved by the student, plus which percentile group they fell into that year and how many students took that course in that year. I [i]really[/i] dislike the proposal to cap the number of As and Bs issued, as that'll lead to an inability to compare between years and courses.

wow, so for a qualification to be useful as a benchmark for someones potential there must be some sort of tiered or graded, or both, system in place

then you have to score individuals against that, consistently - 20yrs of results shows that is not happening currently.

first tho, we might have to accept and agree that not everybody has the same 'academic' potential. Encouraging everyone to have the same qualifications leaves the job market awash with everyone holding the right (looking) certificates.

Two Tier? I can see five or six tiers from the purely vocational to the highly acedemic. Still gonna be stuck with teachers streaming kids at a very early age (a la grammar schools)

I really dislike the proposal to cap the number of As and Bs issued

arh yes but it does give the opportunity to look tough and be seen to be rasing standards when actually standards could be falling! It gets round the problem of having to raise the bar by removing the bar

I really dislike the proposal to cap the number of As and Bs issued

Harvard kicks out the bottom 10% at the end of the first year on their 2 year MBA. Seems to work for them.

Do you think the Chinese kids are bleating about their exams being difficult or parents complaining that little Johnny should have got an A.

[b]anagallis_arvensis[/b] - Member

arh yes but it does give the opportunity to look tough and be seen to be rasing standards when actually standards could be falling! It gets round the problem of having to raise the bar by removing the bar

.

arh yes but it does give the opportunity to look tough and be seen to be rasing standards when actually standards could be falling! It gets round the problem of having to raise the bar by removing the bar

Plus, gaming the system by strategically choosing subjects with fewer high-achieving students? Worried you're 'only' going to get a B in history*, so switching to leisure studies* to increase the chance of an A or A*?

The system's a mess at the moment, but I doubt very much these changes will fix anything. Plus, as long as there are league tables, we're going to see people entered for the most qualifications possible and the lowest level possible so we're going to keep seeing 16-year-olds with 10 GCSEs which turn out to be two BTECs in art and PE plus GCSEs in maths and English at a grade C.

*subjects chosen for illustrative purposes only 😉

@miketually - people are aware of that sort of grade shopping, they tend to specify grade requirements for specific subjects and they favour "hard" subjects

Hah... not sure Harvard is something to which we should aspire, tbh.

Anyway. End-of-course exams do not need to be memory tests. The syllabus should be teaching you how to think in a subject, so the exam then presents you with problems to solve. They are nit necessarily simple fact drills.

Harvard kicks out the bottom 10% at the end of the first year on their 2 year MBA. Seems to work for them.

How applicable is a system run by an elite university for post-graduate study when looking to reform universal pre-16 education?

Do you think the Chinese kids are bleating about their exams being difficult or parents complaining that little Johnny should have got an A.

I'm not sure aiming to emulate the Chinese is the best option.

I think the proposal is to have a cap not a floor.

A B should be a B. Not a C because lots of kids did well that year, or an A because it was a weak year group.

@miketually - people are aware of that sort of grade shopping, they tend to specify grade requirements for specific subjects and they favour "hard" subjects

I know, but the league tables don't (or didn't) discriminate. So, bright Little Jimmy at a weak secondary is going to get entered for qualifications which boost the school's chances of not getting close down. Meanwhile, Little James in the leafy suburbs or a private school is entered for the 'hard' subjects in 'proper' qualifications.

Jimmy and James then head off on two very different paths in life.

They should definitely cap the number of As and Bs. If A meant top 10% and B meant top 20% etc. then you could have multiple exam boards and not worry about grade inflation