Are Exams the Problem With the Education System

[King Damager]

Thankfully my stats module isn't until next term.

I wrote an entire essay that was 'describe the matching function and it's impications'

Basically a couple of thousand words on three formulae.... And you get to avoid writing the essays!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matching_theory_(macroeconomics)

Is a pretty poor summary, but had the formula...

kd

 

[PermaBanned]

Life's been so much better since i dropped AS Maths

 

[Nick08]

It's too easy so you can't be bothered to do it? I knew a lot of people with that attitude and they nearly always cocked up in the exams. You have to just grind GCSE out. If you mess them up you won't get into a top university and they won't care a toss that you got bored because it wasn't challenging enough.

A level is better since you can drop the stuff you hate. You can also do stuff like AEA (i think) or STEP if you think you're hard enough. Universities will love to hear about all the extra learning stuff you might have done when you write your personal statement. Your teachers will also put it in your references.

Once you get to university all the extra work becomes useful. It's all about independant learning at that stage. In my course (maths) it's extremely difficult to get over about 80% in a module so if you work your nuts off you have something to show for it.

 

[Gundog48]

It's too easy so you can't be bothered to do it? I knew a lot of people with that attitude and they nearly always cocked up in the exams. You have to just grind GCSE out. If you mess them up you won't get into a top university and they won't care a toss that you got bored because it wasn't challenging enough.

A level is better since you can drop the stuff you hate. You can also do stuff like AEA (i think) or STEP if you think you're hard enough. Universities will love to hear about all the extra learning stuff you might have done when you write your personal statement. Your teachers will also put it in your references.

Once you get to university all the extra work becomes useful. It's all about independant learning at that stage. In my course (maths) it's extremely difficult to get over about 80% in a module so if you work your nuts off you have something to show for it.

I wouldn't say I can't be bothered because its to easy, that would be really arrogant! It's more that I've kinda lost faith in it- I no longer see the point, its just exams so I can do more exams so I can do more exams so I can get into debt! I never really liked the idea.of.going to university anyway, my current plan is to keep it up through A-Levels and get an. apprenticeship at somewhere like IBM. I've always got the option of working for a PC solutions company where I've already been offered a job, 15K a year is a good start, but I can't really see it getting me anywhere! That's if my PC case I'm going to make for A-Level product design doesn't prove a success and I can't make a.business out of designing and manufactuting PC cases! But if I did become self employed I'd be kicking myself for wasting all that energy at GCSE!

I really appreciate your insight and input!

 

[TNGL]

Well your problem is that you seem to think exams are what matter in life... which is true in many respects, just pass them, go far with them and look good. But you're missing the point about independently learning, if you have a true passion for the subject, then you will independently learn about it (in your case, physics), to the extent that your knowledge will surpass that of the required standard by the exam boards. There's no point in seizing your further learning of physics, due to exam boards not covering the topics. However, I see your point in that exams should thoroughly test your knowledge, and prove the candidate as having a relatively 'broad' understanding of the subject. But that's clearly not the case.

EDIT:
Also, I wouldn't go as far as to say that GCSEs are a waste. SATS and CATS are a waste, they won't get you anywhere. However, your GCSEs will lead on to your A-Levels, and from there you have the freedom to, as you say, do an apprenticeship with IBM, go to university or do something else.

 

[drunkenmaster]

It's not about what you learn.. It's about learning to learn, learning to have self-discipline and the ability to self-motivate. If you don't put a serious amount of effort in whilst in free education I guarantee you will regret it later in life.

It is partly this but as said exams are the problem here.

Learning to pass a test via memory and no understanding isn't learning to learn, its learning a VERY specific skill set to pass a very specific exam and kids these days are taught in such a way that they come up with little to nothing for themselves and are all but given identical questions with different(for maths say) numbers in the same style as exam questions.

Its essentially become a case of remember method 1 for question style 1, and change the numbers about a bit.

People used to be encouraged by parents and teachers to learn more, to discuss history and spend time trying to get from one maths equation to another, trial and error is a crucial part of learning. These days its spoon fed bite sized chunks any moron can put together.

Exams are the route cause, well not exams, how they are used, league tables and urinating contests between political parties. Look our A level results went up 0.048% this year, how great are we. how did they do that, by making the exams easier.


We used to teach kids how to learn, now we teach them how to pass specific exams written in only very specific ways with very specific question wording, all in an attempt to get higher marks while the rest of the world is quite rightly looking at the results and saying but the workers coming out of this education system are simply worse than they used to be, and people coming out of UK education aren't close to as highly sought after as they used to be.

Scoring political points has been more important than education in the UK for two decades and isn't getting better.

 

[Gundog48]

I think you've got me wrong! I don't think exams are useful as anything more than means to an end. I think they are counter productive and inhibit the progression of actual knowledge rather than promote it. I do a lot of independent study when it comes to computers, electronics and the like. I can now do things such as full 3D with virtual cameras on After Effects purely through experimentation. What annoys me is that such knowledge is not recognised because its not what they have told you to do, which is why grades do not represent someone's subject knowledge. I work for a review site testing and reviewing PC hardware, but will I get a good mark in my IT exam? Not unless I know a peripheral is an "input or output device that connects to the processor" (if I put computer there it eod be wrong). I just don't want to be one of these people who get straight As but when put in a real world situation that deviates slightly from the way they have been taught, they are completely lost. There's a guy in my electronics class who can tell you each design stage inside out, but during a practical the other week he asked if the red or black wire is positive then complained he hadn't been taught, he'll at least get the same grade as me!

 

[bhavv]

Please explain to me how a person who fails every GCSE is just as intelligent, or more intelligent than someone who gets straight A's.

Exam results are very important, and yes they are the current best method we have for assessing a persons intelligence (If you're clever, you remember stuff, simples).

 

[TNGL]

Please explain to me how a person who fails every GCSE is just as intelligent, or more intelligent than someone who gets straight A's.

Exam results are very important, and yes they are the current best method we have for assessing a persons intelligence (If you're clever, you remember stuff, simples).

I remember reading one of your posts, stating that you remember what is needed for exams, and then once that information is no longer required, you dispose of it. Which I'm sure is the case for a lot of students, however, I'd say it's an inaccurate measurement of intelligence if exams are based on memory, and not understanding.

 

[smit101]

Please explain to me how a person who fails every GCSE is just as intelligent, or more intelligent than someone who gets straight A's.

Exam results are very important, and yes they are the current best method we have for assessing a persons intelligence (If you're clever, you remember stuff, simples).

Some very brainy people can mess exams up due to stress/nervousness though. Don't a lot of courses these days get marked on course work as opposed to a final exam?

 

[bhavv]

I remember reading one of your posts, stating that you remember what is needed for exams, and then once that information is no longer required, you dispose of it. Which I'm sure is the case for a lot of students, however, I'd say it's an inaccurate measurement of intelligence if exams are based on memory, and not understanding.

But thats the thing - One definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and process new information and data, not necessarily being able to remember it.

Exams test your ability to learn and remember information. It doesnt matter if I forget it 6 months later, that only happens because I didnt carry on reading / revising the information.

If I want to remember or learn it again, all I have to do is spend a little effort reading a book. Yet there are people out there who wouldn't even be able to comprehend or learn new information even if they try to learn it. These people are not intelligent.

If a person cannot learn and remember something in the first place, then they dont possess the ability to understand it either.

 

[TNGL]

But thats the thing - One definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and process new information and data, not necessarily being able to remember it.

Exams test your ability to learn and remember information. It doesnt matter if I forget it 6 months later, that only happens because I didnt carry on reading / revising the information.

If I want to remember or learn it again, all I have to do is spend a little effort reading a book. Yet there are people out there who wouldn't even be able to comprehend or learn new information even if they try to learn it. These people are not intelligent.

Yeah, I agree with you. I was just making the point that exams should test your understanding of a topic more so than testing how well you can remember things about the subject. I also agree with you about unintelligent people not being able to learn new information.

 

[bhavv]

At university Exams arent the only method used to grade students. You also have essays, presentations, and viva voce.

The latter tests what you describe - you do a presentation or a research topic, and then you have to sit through 10 minutes of Q+A with your lecturers where they asses whether you've actually learned and understand the stuff.

Though I remember one time I turned up to a group presentation without having prepared a thing, and the people in my group gave me stuff to present that I spent a couple of hours reading through and learning. The presentations were marked individually even though they were done in groups of 3-4, and I got the highest grade in the class (The only B+, one other person got a B, and everyone else had a C grade or lower).

I was just good at presenting and speaking fluently in front of people without muttering or going 'erm, arrrggghhh', and my super fast memory meant I barely ever had to read anything off paper, just a list of bullet points with the order of my discussion topics is all I needed, and a few hours of reading.

 

[TNGL]

At university Exams arent the only method used to grade students. You also have essays, presentations, and viva voce.

The latter tests what you describe - you do a presentation or a research topic, and then you have to sit through 10 minutes of Q+A with your lecturers where they asses whether you've actually learned and understand the stuff.

Yeah, university seems to be more about understanding the subject, rather than just learning it. This is mainly due to the methods of assessment you've listed above, and that you'll probably be learning about the subject for at least 3 years.

 

[bhavv]

But the only thing I remember from my degree now is the word 'mutations', and stuff about genitals.

The rest is long gone.

 

[TNGL]

But the only thing I remember from my degree now is the word 'mutations', and stuff about genitals.

The rest is long gone.

I lol'd

 

[bhavv]

I lol'd

You would have lol'd when studying mutations + genitals together. Hermaphroditism, the only thing that anyone will remember from a Biology degree

How genitals develop / differentiate, and what happens when it goes wrong due to genetics, fun fun fun.

All the rest of it is just *SNORE*, in through one ear, out of the other. Or not even that, I used to fall asleep in my other lectures.

Apparently my Genetics lecturer used to alternate each years of students between genetic obesity and sexual differentiation, so Im glad I didnt go to uni one year earlier, or later

Unfortunately the basics of DNA, RNA, mutations, and cancer had to be taught every year, and then either obesity or genitals.

 

[StriderX]

In state schools, you get everything forced down your throat til you choke to death at exam day.

All you end up doing is copying the information into the brain with little understanding of it and simply pasting it onto paper when the time comes, then you'd be lucky to remember it, years later, ofcourse depends on the subject, some are easier than others to retain, also depending on the student (obviously).

Not only that but Search engines have been detrimental to our retention of knowledge, why keep it all in your head if all you need to remember is www.wikipedia.com?

Universities and to a lesser degree Colleges, have no need to pass people, they get funding at the end of the day at the behest of the student himself, where as you lose or gain funding based on your grades in State schools. (Sounds like a good idea at first, completely ruined at the end of the day, not only that, but it ruins students at the same time).

Its not technically the exams that are bad, the entire system is pointless and does no one any good.

The paperwork needs to be cut out or cut down, funding should be granted as a static amount and increased or decreased after a state review of the school, the dont touch rule needs to be revoked (Think it was, but i dont know), exams should only be a small part of the overal achievements, the work done over the course of the subjects should be much more valuable, at least then you can pick out people more easily and students should try harder.

Other than a few other things like healthier foods or whatever, im not sure what else is needed, but ive given my input as a ex student of the labour's "education, education, education" failure years.

 

[ikillbears]

these are brilliant

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html

 

[TNGL]

You would have lol'd when studying mutations + genitals together. Hermaphroditism, the only thing that anyone will remember from a Biology degree

How genitals develop / differentiate, and what happens when it goes wrong due to genetics, fun fun fun.

All the rest of it is just *SNORE*, in through one ear, out of the other. Or not even that, I used to fall asleep in my other lectures.

Apparently my Genetics lecturer used to alternate each years of students between genetic obesity and sexual differentiation, so Im glad I didnt go to uni one year earlier, or later

Unfortunately the basics of DNA, RNA, mutations, and cancer had to be taught every year, and then either obesity or genitals.

Hahaha. I actually used to quite enjoy biology, but that's probably because it was one of my best sciences. Just out of interest, do you have a job now which involves biology?