Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
It's impossible to seriously make that claim. There are many factors at play here, gregorius named a few of them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10094248
GCSE overhaul
- Thread starter cm1179
- Start date
It's impossible to seriously make that claim. There are many factors at play here, gregorius named a few of them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10094248
Well...
Subjects being mentioned at levels below where they were previously introduced provide no evidence whatsoever on the intellectual content of exams - or whether they are easier or not.
What matters is the level of intellectual rigour with which they are introduced and assessed. Indeed, introduction of advanced concepts with an elementary treatment may displace more rigorous content from the curriculum.
For my own speciality (at the overlap between maths and the physical and biological sciences), the best students are as bright as ever, but tend to know less unless privately educated; the intermediate students are weaker. School mathematics exams are much easier these days than they used to be (in the good old days...); comparing and contrasting GCSE with IGCSE is an interesting exercise...
Last edited:
I don't dispute that there are many factors to consider, but taken alone without any supporting evidence, it's a perfectly reasonably hypothesis to say that exam standards - and perception thereof - have lowered over time. The key information which would change this perception is some kind of independent (not exam related) evidence, showing that children have become naturally more intelligent and capable. I'm not aware of that existing, anecdotally or otherwise.
OK, let's look at this article. One of the main examples given is as follows:
The problem is that the example is backwards; in fact it does show that the "standard" of the mountain climbing achievement has lowered. The "better equipment, better training, better nutrition and so on" have made the task of climbing the world's tallest mountain less arduous, less dangerous, and ultimately easier.
It's not the best comparison in the world to start with - exams change each year, Mt. Everest does not. To make the Everest example work, the mountain would need to be getting taller and more dangerous each year, to cancel out the effects of better equipment, etc.
Last edited:
It's just as easy to create an hypothesis that teachers have got better at teaching to the test.
The increase in pass rates is there, yes, but no one can be certain why. It is most likely a combination of the reasons we have already seen in this thread.
Which indicates a decrease in standards, surely, since students are learning to the test instead of the material...
The problem with this new idea is that they are judgeing all youngesters by their ability to remember, My memory was poor as a child so i got D's and E's but my CW was of A-B grade.
Same as my Uni studys, I get 70-90% in CW but 10-40% in exams, because my memory is CRAP.
Exams should be a minor thing in schools and coursework a major component. I say this because in the real world you have all the resources available to you.
They Wont add more coursework because this would mean that teachers would have more work to dish out and mark, and they dont get paid enough to put up with the massive workload that would bring.
And the people behind it all just CBA with it so they say " ONE EXAM SO WE CAN BE ******* LAZY ALL YEAR "
if your thick then no matter how easy it is to find information you will still fail.
Same as my Uni studys, I get 70-90% in CW but 10-40% in exams, because my memory is CRAP.
Exams should be a minor thing in schools and coursework a major component. I say this because in the real world you have all the resources available to you.
They Wont add more coursework because this would mean that teachers would have more work to dish out and mark, and they dont get paid enough to put up with the massive workload that would bring.
And the people behind it all just CBA with it so they say " ONE EXAM SO WE CAN BE ******* LAZY ALL YEAR "
if your thick then no matter how easy it is to find information you will still fail.
Assessment, which factors all of the above.
Last edited:
Hmm I guess less coursework is more fair, as coursework at GCSE was far too easily cheated on or advantages given, as most schools could do what they want and help the kids out, and some schools were far stricter so the pupils don't get as much help or guidance...
I'd prefer open book essay style exams to coursework, giving it out weeks ahead just makes it too easy - the real world has time constraints! What I heard on the radio this morning did mention greater emphasise on essay questions so maybe it's a good move.
If we must have couirsework give it out 6pm due 8am next morning and automatic fail for late work, that'd get my vote
Lab work is of course different, and research assignments (which I doubt are a part of gcse).
If we must have couirsework give it out 6pm due 8am next morning and automatic fail for late work, that'd get my vote
Lab work is of course different, and research assignments (which I doubt are a part of gcse).
Oh yes, I know
A secondary worry that a number of us academics have is that the quality of "educational research" in this country can be quite woeful. I would be very happy to see some rigorous research in this area.
Oh yes, I know
A secondary worry that a number of us academics have is that the quality of "educational research" in this country can be quite woeful. I would be very happy to see some rigorous research in this area.
I think part of the problem is the different requirements for various subjects.
Something that may work for Maths might not be appropriate for English for example.
That's one of the biggest concerns about these proposals – sweeping generalised reforms that don't take any evidence into account or consider the nuances of the different subjects.
The fact that modern foreign languages, the arts and technology are being ignored by the current government doesn't really surprise me either.
The decline in education standards with the change from the old O level/CSE to the current GCSEs has been pronounced.
A statistic just quoted on the news stated in 1988 : 8% of students got an A/A*, this increased year on year to 22% in 2010.
There may be many factors having an influence on this, but the main one seems to have been a race to the bottom by the exam boards. This also seems backed up by the criticisms by Universities over the declining standards of first year students, where they are having to offer remedial classes to bring A level students up to scratch.
A statistic just quoted on the news stated in 1988 : 8% of students got an A/A*, this increased year on year to 22% in 2010.
There may be many factors having an influence on this, but the main one seems to have been a race to the bottom by the exam boards. This also seems backed up by the criticisms by Universities over the declining standards of first year students, where they are having to offer remedial classes to bring A level students up to scratch.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 2,016
- Location
- Warwickshire
I'm guessing the change of grading system is necessary if re-introducing higher standards, so the results of the first year to sit the harder exams will not be directly comparable to those of the previous year.
Long time overdue imo. When I was doing my A-levels I remember browsing a physics textbook from the 1970's.
Explaining grade inflation via teaching methods being better, kids being smarter etc is all rubbish. You were tested on quite literally double or triple the amount of material back then.
Long time overdue imo. When I was doing my A-levels I remember browsing a physics textbook from the 1970's.
Explaining grade inflation via teaching methods being better, kids being smarter etc is all rubbish. You were tested on quite literally double or triple the amount of material back then.
I agree that MFL need to be taught to a higher level much sooner in a child's education but to say that reform at GCSE isn't important misses the point.
The only 'reform' the current government is making is to push MFL, the arts and technology further down the priority list.
Where's the proof of a 'race to the bottom' by exam boards?
I would also love to see the evidence that points to standards in education in the UK being higher between 1965–1986 than they are today.
Universities are admitting a larger percentage of the younger population than they ever have before. A wider sample is going to lead to larger variation in ability. It's got nothing to do with declining standards at secondary and further education.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,308
- Location
- Staffordshire
As stated before, I believe languages are one of the most important things to include in schools from an early age. I know for a fact that people with a relevant second language are looked upon much more favourably for employment than someone without any other language. Most other first and even third world countries recognise this so why not ours?!
What annoys me is how different ordinary schools are to any kind of work. There is nothing to prepare students for what is to come.
I am in my final week of sixth form
I chose to go to a University technical collage specializing in engineering
I have spent the last 2 years working with British engineering firms, learning about how they apply the science and the maths to solve the actual problems which are faced in these businesses. Why cant we be teaching student more about these problems and stop teaching them how to figure out how many red balls Jony has left over or whatever is in GCSE's now.
Schools also don't seem to encourage learning the soft skills which are actually important to getting a job. Skills which cant be tested in an exam but are the most important skills to get you through life successfully.
You can learn a hell of a lot more in a weeks work experience than you can in a week of school so make things like this mandatory
What annoys me is how different ordinary schools are to any kind of work. There is nothing to prepare students for what is to come.
I am in my final week of sixth form
I chose to go to a University technical collage specializing in engineering
I have spent the last 2 years working with British engineering firms, learning about how they apply the science and the maths to solve the actual problems which are faced in these businesses. Why cant we be teaching student more about these problems and stop teaching them how to figure out how many red balls Jony has left over or whatever is in GCSE's now.
Schools also don't seem to encourage learning the soft skills which are actually important to getting a job. Skills which cant be tested in an exam but are the most important skills to get you through life successfully.
You can learn a hell of a lot more in a weeks work experience than you can in a week of school so make things like this mandatory
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,315
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
English will include Shakespeare, romantic poetry and a 19th century novel.
I can see that working well for boys in inner-city comprehensive schools.
I agree standards need raising, but why can't the syllabus be given a more contemporary feel. It's not dumbing down, it's just trying to make subject matter more appealing to youngsters.
I can see that working well for boys in inner-city comprehensive schools.
I agree standards need raising, but why can't the syllabus be given a more contemporary feel. It's not dumbing down, it's just trying to make subject matter more appealing to youngsters.
Isn't that a rather patronizing attitude towards this constituency? One of the ideas for including, for example, the study of whole Shakespeare plays in the syllabus (rather than excerpts) is to facilitate access to the greats of literature for children who might not otherwise have that access. From this point of view this is a tremendously progressive and liberating step.
I think you underestimate youngsters. Children are naturally knowledge hoovers; without intervention they want to learn...they will learn. A terrible indictment of any school system is if it inhibits this natural curiosity. If it facilitates access to the best of humanity for children, then it is succeeding.