GCSE's and National Curriculum Scrapped by 2014.....O levels to replace them

[trickycurve]

I'm not familiar with the current crop of GCSEs. During my Year 10/11 years between 2005 and 2007, there were no modular elements or mini-exams each term: we were taught the curriculum through the two years, with the odd bit of coursework thrown in, and were then required to sit an exam in each subject around May of the final year (or something like that, anyway).

 

[scorza]

Because quite a few of he things he is doing are actually quite good. The changes to ICT, the improved links between Universities and Schools, the improvements in OFSTED etc.

For most of his proposed reforms the issue isn't really with the reforms themselves but the pace of them.

And quite a few of the big things he's done have been utterly shambolic, normally grounds for a ministerial resignation. The botched cancellation of Building Schools for the Future, creationist free schools, free King James Bible for every school child, taxpayer funded smear campaigns against journalists, head teachers, and now this.

 

[RDM]

And quite a few of the big things he's done have been utterly shambolic, normally grounds for a ministerial resignation. The botched cancellation of Building Schools for the Future, creationist free schools, free King James Bible for every school child, taxpayer funded smear campaigns against journalists, head teachers, and now this.

You forgot to say "He should resign because he isn't Labour."

 

[Irish_Tom]

If it's totally different elsewhere then I can't speak for that obviously.

That's the problem. The vast majority of people base their opinion of the education system solely on their own experience.

Michael Gove wants to reintroduce the system he went through because he had a jolly good time so it must work for everyone else.

He has no experience in Education other than the fact that he went to school and yet we're allowing him to turn the entire system upside down.

The fact that there isn't a perfect solution for all students is why it's such a difficult subject to deal with.

You only have to look at the statistics on immigration and the impact it has had on wages to see that sometimes the generally held, anecdotal-based belief of the public doesn't match the hard evidence.

 

[Horse Pop]

1) How is having ONE exam at the end of two years going to mean less exam specific cramming?

Even if the schools aren't doing it I guarantee you parents will be doing it privately. Parents that are able of course.

Intergenerational social mobiwhatnow?

2) How is a single exam a better measure of learning?

Maybe you just have a very good memory and are good at passing exams.
I both have a good memory and am very lazy. I do well in exams without really knowing the subject matter. I have passed exams with a good Bs and not retained any of the subject matter a couple of months later.

By contrast longer format coursework seems much more demanding of understanding to me.

3) How is a two tier exam system not going to victimise poorer families?

This just seems like a convenient way to write working class children off early in life to me.

I feel an angry email to my MP coming on.

edit
As regards plagiarism this can be automatically detected now. They have software. If you lift your material from wikipedia it will get spotted.

You only have to look at the statistics on immigration and the impact it has had on wages to see that sometimes the generally held, anecdotal-based belief of the public doesn't match the hard evidence.

Yeah, it's amazing how much common sense is revealed to just be wrong once you start doing even a little research.

 

[Freakbro]

You only have to look at the statistics on immigration and the impact it has had on wages to see that sometimes the generally held, anecdotal-based belief of the public doesn't match the hard evidence.

I don't want to derail this thread, but where is this evidence? Because in the 29 million Bulgarians thread, I did read some of the reports (as much as I could ) and didn't find supporting evidence...in fact one of the ones Hatter posted seemed to agree with the assertion that immigration had depressed wages...

I queried it in the thread but no-one replied...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18483738&page=8

 

[blitzwing85]

That's the problem. The vast majority of people base their opinion of the education system solely on their own experience.

The fact that there isn't a perfect solution for all students is why it's such a difficult subject to deal with.

That's the point I was getting at in my original post although should have made it more clear. I mentioned firstly that there is no 1 solution and then the rest was meant to be just an example of what could work in the area I grew up in and went to school in - but even then it would not work for every single person in that local system either.

It's a bit of a nightmare really so my solution personally IF I have my own children (nearly 28 and currently zero intention to) will be to simply educate them myself outside of school. I'll make sure they are well up to speed on mathematics, English and science. Then they can pick some other things if they wish.
Between me and my partner, we have studied a vast number of subjects after school and will always be studying more so basically I will never trust the education system to deliver for my children and will take it upon myself to top them up as it were.

Not going to be hardcore on them but I believe parents should be a far greater influence on their future. I don't blame mine at all but looking back i wish i'd had more encouragement to go out and look at more options and more interesting career opportunities. Unfortunately my Mam has always just worked part-time for something to do between bringing us up and my Dads been in Engineering to provide the main income. Therefore, the encouragement from them was to simply get a stable career in Engineering or something similar - which I did and have so far done very well for myself.......BUT...It's not what I want.

But anyway - that's another matter entirely to the one being discussed.

 

[Catanonia]

3) How is a two tier exam system not going to victimise poorer families?

This just seems like a convenient way to write working class children off early in life to me.

Ok forgetting about some of the exemptions to any comments here as there will always be people that fall into this category.

There is nothing stopping a child from a poorer part of society from achieving the grades apart from the parents and the child. As long as the child is given the oppurtunity to study, it is possible and I am an exacting case.

BUT

You should NOT downgrade everything to allow a lazy bum of a family to get their kids the same educational grades as someone that actually tries hard.

Perhaps, just perhaps we should punish the parents of these children.

All children have equal opportunities to do well, if they attend school and thier parents encourage them. There are methods already in place to allow this.

The only exception to this is private schools, but that is a different ball game and poorer students have methods of going to them too sometimes.

 

[blitzwing85]

Since leaving comprehensive school I've flourished and got pretty much top marks on everything I've done since.

That's got to be saying something.

Yup - that's it's almost entirely down to individuals attitudes towards it at the time I think.
My grades were pretty poor and should have been A for everything. But I was more interested in other past times for my high school years and so my grades were no reflection at all on my intelligence.

Edit: I also had to do my exams on crutches and in total agony under loads of painkillers due to a serious leg injury which tore all the ligaments in my leg. The sods at my school then seated everyone else and kept me a seat at the back!! So I had to walk all the way to the back every time after standing waiting on the rest of the year to get seated. Very decent of them - shows you what it was like at my school and I wasn't even cheeky or nasty to teachers. They simply didn't give a ****

Since then, i've got all sorts of qualifications and found degree level and beyond really easy to get 95%+ in. Yet if you seen my GCSE results you'd think I was a complete idiot.
I'd have got better grades at the age of 10 because back then I loved learning. By 15 I couldn't give a damn then by 19 I grew up and went back to that eager thirst for knowledge I had when I was 10.

Funnily enough, many people go through their most immature stage in life during their exam time and high school time!!

 

[Repta]

Since leaving comprehensive school I've flourished and got pretty much top marks on everything I've done since.

That's got to be saying something.

See im the opposite, breezed through gcse's and A-levels with no work, not even handing in coursework. (4A's, 4B's, 3C's at gcse and 3B's at A level). Struggled massivley with uni as doing no work and turning up to exams just doesnt work. I've never cared about academics and all my time and effort goes into sport and hobbies, probably because when i was growing up i could get away with it

 

[Horse Pop]

Ok forgetting about some of the exemptions to any comments here as there will always be people that fall into this category.

There is nothing stopping a child from a poorer part of society from achieving the grades apart from the parents and the child. As long as the child is given the oppurtunity to study, it is possible and I am an exacting case.

BUT

You should NOT downgrade everything to allow a lazy bum of a family to get their kids the same educational grades as someone that actually tries hard.

Perhaps, just perhaps we should punish the parents of these children.

All children have equal opportunities to do well, if they attend school and thier parents encourage them. There are methods already in place to allow this.

The only exception to this is private schools, but that is a different ball game and poorer students have methods of going to them too sometimes.

But if we're saying home environment makes a difference (and research indicates it does) then that to me is already a disadvantage.

There's no end of research about this. There's a bunch of factors these studies tend to identify.

To my mind capping all of this off with a "special" lower grade of qualification would just compound the existing disadvantages.

 

[Irish_Tom]

I don't want to derail this thread, but where is this evidence? Because in the 29 million Bulgarians thread, I did read some of the reports (as much as I could ) and didn't find supporting evidence...in fact one of the ones Hatter posted seemed to agree with the assertion that immigration had depressed wages...

Your comments in that thread are clear and you make a good point about reports covering the national average rather than localised impact. Interesting that you were in the QT audience with Dr Mary Beard as I watched that broadcast.

I was thinking about this report from LSE:

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/pa014.pdf

There are potential economic benefits associated with migration, especially to fill gaps in the UK labour market – where there are shortages of workers, whether high- or low-skilled. While there may be costs to particular groups, there is little evidence of an overall negative impact on jobs or wages.

There is no evidence that EU migrants affect the labour market performance of native-born workers (Lemos and Portes, 2007; Goujard et al, 2011).

It's the same with education; the reality differs from the perception and while there may be areas or individual schools that fit the public belief, generally it's not as bad as people think.

The fact that the international league tables that the government wants to compare us to are disputed doesn't really help their argument when using them as evidence that our system is failing.

It's a bit of a nightmare really so my solution personally IF I have my own children (nearly 28 and currently zero intention to) will be to simply educate them myself outside of school. I'll make sure they are well up to speed on mathematics, English and science. Then they can pick some other things if they wish.

While I agree that a lot of the responsibility of a child's development should come from the parents, I don't believe that home schooling is the answer.

What a lot of people don't understand is that just because you know about a subject, it doesn't mean you are capable of effectively conveying that information to another person.

Equally, school is about a lot more than just the individual subjects. There are a wealth of other traits that are developed in school like inter-personal skills and personality and it would be detrimental to keep your child in isolation rather than exposing them to that experience.

 

[Irish_Tom]

double post

 

[malachi]

It’s all good the Government changing their minds about GCSE's etc but again the problem with schools is that they train kids to pass exams instead of teaching them life skills. It’s good having straight A’s in the 3, now 4 core subjects but pointless if you don’t know how to present yourself and look after yourself once you have left.

I did my GCSE's back in 2000, I didn’t get good grades, (apart from in IT) but I still got GCSE's, went to college and carried on life from there. Some of my friends, including my best friend had top marks in all 3 of the main subjects. Now at the age of 29 going onto 30, it’s like he’s never moved on from school because he feels scared or not prepared to take on real world challenges.

8 years ago, I had an interview and while waiting I over heard a conversation. I think it was a manager giving advice to a family member or staff. Told them not to bother writing GCSE’s on their CV’s because it only shows you can follow instructions, paper them down. Do write down any NVQ’s, A level’s, Degrees and with grades highlighted. If thats true or not, I dont know but still with all these changes why would it matter? As long as Maths and English are upto reasonable standards.

 

[Catanonia]

But if we're saying home environment makes a difference (and research indicates it does) then that to me is already a disadvantage.

There's no end of research about this. There's a bunch of factors these studies tend to identify.

To my mind capping all of this off with a "special" lower grade of qualification would just compound the existing disadvantages.

you are deliberately ignoring the cause here. The parents.

I wish the government would "man up" and stop pandering to the huggers and say it as it is. Lazy a$$ parents who don't give a toss about their children or thier own future. Obviously there are exceptions, but let us not concentrate on a few minority to force policy. Such people who have "real" problems can be dealt with with "special" measures, but let us not make general policies that downgrade everyone for the sake of correctness.

The methods are there for the children to do well, they just don't take them for the reasons you highlight and others do in studies.

I just wish there was a politian that would say it "as it was and we all know". But we know the media and public who love to winge would hound them out of a job.

 

[explicit4u]

Multiple exam boards offering the same subject probably needs to change too, combined with league tables this provides an obvious incentive towards choosing the "easier" exam board. League tables themselves are also problematic, the information they provide is good but the pressures they impose have harmful effects, schools G&T systems or example seem to be paying lip service to the concept as those students are already on for the C+ grade the school needs. We can also see the impact this has with the GCSE English issues, some teachers were teaching to a C grade so when the boundaries moved it had a massive impact on results.

I've never been able to compare the same subject on different exam boards but pretty much every teacher I've ever had is adamant that there's no such thing as an easy exam board.

No it isn't, I sat mine eleven years ago now, I was stoned for most of the second year, I put absolutely no effort in at all and achieve A*/6A/3B/2C.

Half of me wishes I tired as I reckon I'd have got straight A's like most of my peers. The other half of me realises how utterly useless they are unless I'm applying for a menial job at OCUK.

You obviously put in some effort otherwise you would've ended up with Us and Es. Granted GCSEs are easier than whatever they had before but I don't think the exams themselves are getting easier at all.

 

[RDM]

I've never been able to compare the same subject on different exam boards but pretty much every teacher I've ever had is adamant that there's no such thing as an easy exam board.

I did say easier rather than easy. I have had a head of department say that certain boards were easier for certain subjects and then we had that hassle a few years back about exam boards coaching teachers about exam contents to help with pass levels.

You obviously put in some effort otherwise you would've ended up with Us and Es. Granted GCSEs are easier than whatever they had before but I don't think the exams themselves are getting easier at all.

So why have exam results gone up continually for 20+ years and why was the A* grade needed? Have students really got that much brighter a whole new grade was needed?

 

[estebanrey]

Michael Gove seems to be when of those "when I was young everything was great, not like now" type people. I'm surprised he isn't telling the working class that they should stop buying their Kids Christmas presents and return to giving them a lump of coal and an orange as it "did him no harm".

I fully expect his next policy to be a return to the cane and individual desks.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

I don't want to derail this thread, but where is this evidence? Because in the 29 million Bulgarians thread, I did read some of the reports (as much as I could ) and didn't find supporting evidence...in fact one of the ones Hatter posted seemed to agree with the assertion that immigration had depressed wages...

I queried it in the thread but no-one replied...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18483738&page=8

Because I had already repeated myself too many times - no one is saying that immigration didn't depress wages; it's just that where it did, it was negligible and more than compensated for by government policy (which studies since the low pay commission report found).

 

[scorza]

So why have exam results gone up continually for 20+ years and why was the A* grade needed? Have students really got that much brighter a whole new grade was needed?

Well if you're going to impose private sector best practices on the education sector, then naturally the handful of KPIs will get better over time - otherwise what's the point of measuring them? Would it have been better if there was no improvement in exam results?