[Closed] traditional O'levels

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

GLOBAL EDUCATION RANKINGS

Pisa tests are taken by 15-year-olds in reading, maths and science. Previous leaders in these subjects:

2000: Finland, Japan, South Korea
2003: Finland, Hong Kong, Finland
2006: South Korea, Taipei, Finland
2009: Shanghai, Shanghai, Shanghai

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17585201

Maybe not emulate their system, but at least consider if there are aspects that could help so that our results could emulate theirs.

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

They're sending their kids over here to do university in massive numbers in part because they don't trust the quality or integrity of qualifications awarded by their own universities and schools. Obviously at vast expense, so only the rich have a chance of getting a respected qualification. So I'm not sure they entirely have a great system that we should emulate.

Although from the article above above school teaching in China, it suggests that at earlier stages, they're investing loads on teaching the less bright and less advantaged kids, rather than having the emphasis on the A and B grade types and creating a 'pass/fail' marker for university entrance etc. So doing things that the current government would probably not approve of.

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

Two people apply for a job. They both have a B grade in maths, but taken one year apart. Who gets the job?

I love Michael Goves barking-mad, crackpot announcements. I've always wondered how the world looked viewed through the prism of the 1950's. I think, to do them proper justice, and lend them further authenticity, they should be conveyed to us (a grateful cap-doffing electorate) via a Bakerlite Wireless

obviously its hard to know what to make of it all without knowing exactly what the plans entail (stupid 'leaks'-[i] is this how politics is supposed to work?[/i])

im also very confused; do academies have to follow the same syllabus/exams as state schools ? if not wtf is the point!

finally these arent to be implemented till after the next election, so is there actually any chance that any of it will happen, in the meantime im willing to bet that a lot of money will be spent to achieve erm absolutely nothing!

still at least theres a king james bible in every school with michael goves name in it

still at least theres a king james bible in every school with michael goves name in it

Indeed. I think he's also suggested that every new Free School has his personal ethos carved into tablets of marble by the gates, and everyone must lie prostrate before them, giving thanks, before they enter the premises

Even in the world of politics, its difficult to think of anyone with such a monstrously over-inflated ego, with so little discernible justification

deadlydarcy - Member
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.

DD - isn't (part of) the role of education, to prepare people for life after school? For most that will be either further education, work or a combination of the two. Beyond tertiary education, then the choice becomes even simpler. At some point, employers of different kinds will be the (main) arbiters on the future of (the majority of) our children. So does it not make sense to listen to what they are saying? The message from them and from Universities in terms of the level of preparation that the current system provides is in contrast to the message that many in education and politics and the compilers of league tables present.

Who would you rather believe?

Two people apply for a job. They both have a B grade in maths, but taken one year apart. Who gets the job?

Are you suggesting of the 100,000s of people who take a maths GCSE each year that there'll be a significant variation in how good one year is vs. the next?

Are you suggesting of the 100,000s of people who take a maths GCSE each year that there'll be a significant variation in how good one year is vs. the next?

Having a cap on numbers per grade would mean a different grade for some students than if they'd been born the other side on the arbitrary 1st September cut-off for school years, or if they took the exam early/late. For those students, that could make a huge difference to their future.

It may not be statistically significant, but it is to the individuals.

Having a cap on numbers per grade would mean a different grade for some students than if they'd been born the other side on the arbitrary 1st September cut-off for school years, or if they took the exam early/late. For those students, that could make a huge difference to their future.

It may not be statistically significant, but it is to the individuals.

It already makes a big difference which side of the arbitrary cut-off you're born though because in general the younger you are the more Bs are available. Maybe they could do away with grades and just publish the percentile. Universities/employers could decide how much they care if one person is in the top 17% percentile at maths vs. the top 34%

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.

The pupils have no greater choice it is only who os doing the choosing that has changed.

The message from them [employers]and from Universities in terms of the level of preparation that the current system provides is in contrast to the message that many in education and politics and the compilers of league tables present.

Who would you rather believe?

Having a cap on numbers per grade would mean a different grade for some students than if they'd been born the other side on the arbitrary 1st September cut-off for school years, or if they took the exam early/late. For those students, that could make a huge difference to their future.

It may not be statistically significant, but it is to the individuals.

But there's already going to be some random variation between exam years as to which paper is easier for which student. Not to mention differences between individual examiners, moderators etc. And different exam boards offering the same qualification. All those things mean that someone who is borderline can go either way.

Moving to a system where high grades are essentially centile indicators (which is what a fixed quota of A, B grades implies) makes no difference to the fact that random factors like what date of the year you are born can make a difference to your grade outcome.

You could argue that we should just publish raw grades or centiles or whatever. Which probably makes sense (and is already effectively the case for some university degrees, where people looking at graduates want to see a grade transcript), but I can't see it happening any time soon because it is quite a big change.

The other downside of centile based things I guess is that it removes the idea that qualifications relate in any meaningful way to a particular level of knowledge and understanding of a subject, and rather leaves them as being just a score for comparing students' ability at that subject.

via a Bakerlite Wireless

I bet in the '50s people knew how to spell Bakelite.

But there's already going to be some random variation between exam years as to which paper is easier for which student. Not to mention differences between individual examiners, moderators etc. And different exam boards offering the same qualification. All those things mean that someone who is borderline can go either way.

so adding more variation is good isit? why not say here is the bar, if you can do x, y or z in maths you get whatever grade Then enforce this with the exam boards. (or just have one)

Junkyard - Member
You mean the poupils can have the dedcision made for them by apolitician acountable to the peope via an electoral system or they can have it thrust apon them by a teacher who is acountable in what way exactly

The pejorative tone there leaves little room for debate - "thrust apon (sic) them". You obviously have less regard for the people directly involved in education JY than I do. Fair enough. Personally, I believe that they are probably better placed to make these choices than politicians. And oddly enough, those teachers who are able to make choices independently do tend to make very different choices from those [i]"thrust upon them"[/i] 😉 by politicians.

Perhaps a sick person would prefer that choices on treatment were made by an elected politician rather than by those trained specifically in the profession?

We educate to give people [life] skills ,abilities and potential

Very true and these include basic levels of literacy, numeracy and language skills. When employers and universities complain that these are lacking (rather than specific technical skills) then heads need to come out of the sand.

Who do I believe? its not the people whose sole legal duty is to maximise profits for their shareholders but I see why they matter to you.

Leaving aside the factual inaccuracy (legal duty?) and the personal comment (inaccurate and unecessary), I am happy to leave you to that conclusion but will take a different view myself. Otherwise, I fear that we will continue to see the upper echelons of society/business/politics dominated by the very people that you appear to despise.

so adding more variation is good isit? why not say here is the bar, if you can do x, y or z in maths you get whatever grade Then enforce this with the exam boards. (or just have one)

Which is what we've done for years. And has led to grade inflation. So either
a)people are getting cleverer,
b)teachers are getting better at teaching people the underlying concepts that they need to understand in order to do x,y and z and hence get the grade, or
c)teachers are getting better at teaching people enough that they can answer questions about x,y and z without necessarily fully understanding the underlying concepts.
d)exams are getting easier

If we assume that people aren't just getting vastly cleverer very quickly, then either b, c or d are true. So we have a situation where the same grade from different years is in no way comparable as a measurement of what the person is capable of. Whereas if we just say 'this person is in the top x% of their year for maths', the grades are comparable, and we remove a vast amount of variation which is introduced by differences in the measurement tools and variation in the quality of teaching as teaching practices change.

Grades as opposed to just numbers also add loads of time to moderation, as people moderate borderline marks up or down to avoid appeals.

Perhaps a sick person would prefer that choices on treatment were made by an elected politician rather than by those trained specifically in the profession?

*inserts humorous picture of straw man here*

Keep up at the back now...let's stick to the topinc in hand class. And that is today, how can we leave school a more productive force for our future employers? Heaven forbid we'd ever be here for education's sake. No! Profit is key kids. And donchaforgeddit.

Or e) teaching is improving both in terms of passing exams and understanding of the subject.

Years ago you used to get drilled on facts and you could repeat them and pass. This is no longer the case afaik.

And, for what it's worth, remembering tons of dry facts is quite hard, but once you understand the subject doing problem solving is a cinch. So exams could well be getting both better AND easier.

Heaven forbid we'd ever be here for education's sake.

How about we set up a system with say, two tiers.. it could teach academic stuff to those who would likely benefit from it, and practical things to the rest. Makes sense, no?

Did you not have specific George Clooney Hair Double classes at school Bravisimo? Or are your skills entirely self-taught?

They showed me how to colour things in without going outside the lines with my felt tips. I've never looked back

those of you defending the rise in grades, are your views aligned with higher education establishments and employers?

or are you defending a position that is personal to yourself?

If we assume that people aren't just getting vastly cleverer very quickly

Why would we assume that?

Every year, the interpretation of IQ tests has to be modified as the average intelligence creeps upward. To prevent the bell curve from drifting to the right, the tests have to be interpreted differently.

See also: athletics world records

those of you defending the rise in grades, are your views aligned with higher education establishments and employers?

I wouldn't even begin to argue that the grades mean the same as they did in the past. Grade inflation is real.

I'd also not argue that the system doesn't need reform. It does.

It's the proposed changes and the methods being used to introduce them with which I have an issue.

How about we set up a system with say, two tiers.. it could teach academic stuff to those who would likely benefit from it, and practical things to the rest. Makes sense, no?

So at what age would a child's future be decided? And who would be making that decision?

What if a childs practical knowledge at say 11 years old was to develop into high level engineering knowledge later in life apart from the restrictions now placed on the teaching of mathematics and sciences required to help build that deeper understanding, all because someone decided that he was destined to a life of carrying bricks or filling shelves when he was 11 years old.

Does that mean older people are inherently thicker?

Does that mean older people are inherently thicker?

There'd be a gradual weeding out of the really thick ones, due to [url= http://failblog.cheezburger.com/ ]accidents[/url], which would pull the average up.

You obviously have less regard for the people directly involved in education JY than I do.

It was sitting in the staffroom as a teacher that did it for me. Plenty of nobbers there with little skill and little respect for the kids. I am sur eyou have met them - many ar ein mangement as they like power and they want to drive success - whihc means league tables and they car e nothing for anything that wont be measured or will help their career.

Personally, I believe that they are probably better placed to make these choices than politicians. And oddly enough, those teachers who are able to make choices independently do tend to make very different choices from those "thrust upon them" by politicians.

Perhaps a sick person would prefer that choices on treatment were made by an elected politician rather than by those trained specifically in the profession?

Glitchy thicko bump

Arse off binbins 😀

I've been mobbed here in Germany. (or at least, my hair has)

Dont worry DD, those at the back are able to keep up and consider alternatives. Some with interests in wider aspects of education consider the "competition" provided by organisations such as the IB to current exams among other things ( http://www.ibo.org). It would seem that you would probably have sympathies with the IB goals and aspirations, particularly their focus on learning skills, the theory of knowledge and community service. And who founded this approach - professional "unaccountable" teachers or politicians?

To give Gove some credit, at least he has considered some of the lessons from IB. Learning from these alternatives is surely a better approach than sticking our heads in the sand - even if they are neither better in all aspects nor suitable for all.

edit for Xpost: yes JY, I agree there are teachers who make good choices and those that make bad ones. That's true in life generally. But there is still probably more knowledge within schools about the future of education than in the Palace of Westminster IMO.

So at what age would a child's future be decided? And who would be making that decision?

Quite, I was not supporting the old 11+ system, I was merely pointing out that there is a conflict in education as a concept - do you teach practical skills, or knowledge for its own sake? And that this conflict of aims is exactly what led to the 11+ in the first place.

You can do both of course, but only for half the time. And it has to be managed since for every person who resents having no education other than training for some job, there is someone who resents wasting their time being taught rubbish about which they don't care when they need job skills.

@ THM I also like the IB and they tried it locally to me

It was unpopular with students as it was harder than other options.
They voted with their feet [ choice of the students ] and did other easier stuff instead.
Lasted two years as a pilot??? iirc - I was not directly involved in it.

Im also a fan of the baccalaureate type approach too - at least in terms of a broader shallower education to (around) eighteen. It's similar to what I got and I'm pretty awesome, even by my own standards. 😀

Blimey a moderately sensible debate 🙂

I mentioned the Chinese because they are the competition, we should see them as a benchmark for what is required in today's world. Chinese kids come here to study as it's the best way to elevate their English to another level and this leads to a better chance of a good job. IMO it's got nothing to do an assessment of the technical quality of Chinese vs UK University.

As a parent I am well aware of the sensitivities of "chosing a child's future", when and who should make that choice. But the reality is we are not all created equal, we have different aspirations and the world is an increasing competitive place. I'd rather be prepared for that and not wrapped in cotton wool.

Examinations are flawed in many respects but there has to be a test and it must be possible to mark that test in a repeatable and pragmatic fashion. I know there have been problems recently but the less "fact based" you make a test the more difficult it is to mark to a point where it's not practicable. The more "course work" you include the easier it is to fudge.

I have mixed views on IB in truth, JY. I like the objectives but less sure about the practicalities. Something that came up last night. The issue of whether it is harder or not is interesting and debatable. I am just making those choices (!) now for one of my sons and it is not clear cut.

I think Scottish Unis have a sensible approach - two years of core subjects plus additional ones, followed by two years of specialisation to the final degree. I value my additional ones at least as highly as my core ones even though (or perhaps because?) they were taken to a lower level of academic rigour.

The problem is that a broad shallow education suits some, but others would prefer a deep narrower one.

Indeed mol, which is why its a shame that the debate gets wrapped up in this one-tier versus two-tier (multiple tier?) BS.

Anyway, has Gove made his statement yet?

He's just about to, I believe. Annoyingly, I have to go and teach so I'm not going to be able to watch it live.

Im also a fan of the baccalaureate type approach too - at least in terms of a broader shallower education to (around) eighteen. It's similar to what I got and I'm pretty awesome, even by my own standards

you are Mr Gove!!!

so its the EBacc

i suppose the biggest difference it comes down to 1 final exam vs coursework

personally i dont see a problem with gcse being 100% coursework assessed at 16 and then an exam at 18 when kids (now) leave school

this made me chuckle in goves speech

And this year thousands of ordinary students have suffered because [s]the modular design[/s] [I decided to **** it up by influencing regulator] of the English GCSE — linked to the amount of coursework in school — has undermined faith in grading and marking ...

He does not even believe that himself

I know they have to spin stuff but why the need to lie their arses off [ not a political point many politciains do this]

I dont think there is anythign worng with a balance of exam and course work as course work favours those who work hard and exams favour those who are brightest [ as defined as good at tests] I was the later and anything course work harmed me as I was incredibly lazy.

Not sure what the actual plan is as it the BBC is low on detail

Have the scrapped RE from the curriculum - I will pray for that one

[quote=Junkyard ]
Have the scrapped RE from the curriculum - I will pray for that one
Irony LOLs

Seriously though - isn't RE pretty essential (we call it RME up here)?

No.

I agree druidh - whatever one's religious position, I think that the A level Theology, Philosophy and Ethics paper ticks a lot of boxes in terms of what wider education is all about. Excellent, critical analysis of theology, some challenging philosophy (16-18year olds dealing with Kant) and practical Ethics. Provides an excellent platform from which individual's can make informed and critical decisions across many topics that they face every day.

The GCSE exam for 16-year-old children in England is to be replaced by an English Baccalaureate certificate (EBacc), with the first courses to begin in September 2015.

- http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/sep/17/gcses-replaced-english-baccalaureate

The "bacc" bit sounds like a deliberate smokescreen to me.