University A-level plan challenged

[PermaBanned]

I was making the point that simply changing A levels will not solve the inherent problems in the education system, the whole pre-University system needs to be overhauled.

For decades all anyone has been doing is sticking plasters on a broken system.

Is it broken though? It could be better. It could be a lot better, and i think we all know it. But to be broken it must not be fit for purpose - it must not be able to fulfill the purpose it is there to serve. I never enjoyed the system much. But doing A Levels has taught me that if nothing else, it works. Now that might just be down to a change in attitude on my part, something that can't be relied on in order for the system to work. It may just be because i've had some really great teachers over the years. But it has taught me what i need to understand the important stuff i'm doing now. I'd say that's fit for purpose.

I guess my main complaint would be that it's taken so long for the pieces to fall into place. Well over a decade of being taught random facts to spew up in exams and nothing about how they fit together. Years of being taught everything completely separately just shuts you off from the beautiful truth of how connected everything is. How boring topics can turn into a crystal clear picture once you see where they slot in.

There is a better way. But it does work. Ergo it's not broken.

 

[Dolph]

It seems to me that you're over-exaggerating the whole 'being unprepared for university' thing. I've heard people say it's hard. But it's supposed to be. I've heard a few people say that universities often complain when they get students that can't do titrations properly, but then a lot of schools teach that anyway. What i've not heard anyone say is "i wasn't prepared for this".

What do you want anyway, for them to already know the whole course? What's the point in them doing it in that case?

They should have a certain level of existing knowledge of the subject and techniques likely to be used. If they haven't, then the school system isn't doing its job correctly. This isn't just a university issue, it applies to those going into employment as well.

Definitely agreed, but this isn't even close to a solution to that. If anything it's a move away. It's likely that the universities will want to make A Levels purely academic, when currently they're not, completely. Which means that if you aren't somebody who wants to do that sort of thing in life then you have very few education options after GCSE.

A levels should be academic, the problem is the whole 'no child left behind' philosophy that has led to a dumbing down of courses to the point where the average level is lower than it used to be, while the average grade awarded is higher.

We need to get away from the idea of one size fits all education at secondary level, it doesn't work, it never has, as not everyone learns the same way or has the same aptitudes.

 

[PermaBanned]

They should have a certain level of existing knowledge of the subject and techniques likely to be used. If they haven't, then the school system isn't doing its job correctly. This isn't just a university issue, it applies to those going into employment as well.

If they haven't. Why work under the assumption that this is the case? I've not seem much to suggest that it is. Even then, why can't it be a problem with universities? Either with the way they teach or with the transition between the way they teach and what the students are used to.

We need to get away from the idea of one size fits all education at secondary level, it doesn't work, it never has, as not everyone learns the same way or has the same aptitudes.

Yes. But we can either do that, or we can argue the toss about the tiny details with the current system, like who gets a say in what gets taught. We won't, of course, because no politician would have the balls to actually overhaul such an important part of society. Even if the benefits would be massive.

 

[Scotty123]

When I was doing my A-levels (seven years ago), the college changed at the start of my A2 to the new syllabus that came in that year for maths.

The difference?
Well originally we did pure 1-3 and 3 applied (mechanics, stats, whatever).

The new syllabus became pure -> core. So we did core 1-4 (which was pure 1-3) and 2 applied. Six modules still.

In other words, we had one less module to do on the new syllabus compared to the previous year.

How can you deny that is not an example of being dumbed down

I went to uni anyway and did maths, so I didn't miss out too much .

 

[Castiel]

Is it broken though? It could be better. It could be a lot better, and i think we all know it. But to be broken it must not be fit for purpose - it must not be able to fulfill the purpose it is there to serve. I never enjoyed the system much. But doing A Levels has taught me that if nothing else, it works. Now that might just be down to a change in attitude on my part, something that can't be relied on in order for the system to work. It may just be because i've had some really great teachers over the years. But it has taught me what i need to understand the important stuff i'm doing now. I'd say that's fit for purpose.

I guess my main complaint would be that it's taken so long for the pieces to fall into place. Well over a decade of being taught random facts to spew up in exams and nothing about how they fit together. Years of being taught everything completely separately just shuts you off from the beautiful truth of how connected everything is. How boring topics can turn into a crystal clear picture once you see where they slot in.

There is a better way. But it does work. Ergo it's not broken.

Except it doesn't work, otherwise the Universities would not be forced to institute basic skills instruction.....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...en-tuition-in-basic-skills-at-university.html

This applies to the workplace as well.

Having been in both systems I have experience of just how poor the system can be and even in industry I had to institute programs for basic literacy and numeracy for the workforce.

An individual with pass grades at GCSE should have at least the basic skills necessary for the workplace with regard to numeracy and literacy, far too many do not, and the same applies to individuals with A levels and being prepared for University, again, according to the Universities and Employers this is also not the case.....


Ergo, the system is broken and the entire system needs an overhaul.