Yet another Coalition education screw up

[muddythefish]

This is true. But people who drop out and fail at education generally (not just university education) tend to end up as a financial drain on society. l

This is a ridiculous statement, based on lazy ideological assumptions. What are you going to come with next - all immigrants are benefits scroungers ?

In your black and white world it might not have occured to you that not everyone is academically inclined and are happy to work hard at manual jobs and the like.

 

[NSEFAN]

In your black and white world it might not have occured to you that not everyone is academically inclined and are happy to work hard at manual jobs and the like.

Surely that will have to change at some point, since more and more manual jobs are being made redundant through mechanisation. Apart from sitting around doing nothing, the only option is for more people to do more diverse, academic or creative jobs instead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is a ridiculous statement, based on lazy ideological assumptions. What are you going to come with next - all immigrants are benefits scroungers ?

In your black and white world it might not have occured to you that not everyone is academically inclined and are happy to work hard at manual jobs and the like.

I include in "education" apprenticeships, work training etc.

Neil

 

[muddythefish]

Surely that will have to change at some point, since more and more manual jobs are being made redundant through mechanisation. Apart from sitting around doing nothing, the only option is for more people to do more diverse, academic or creative jobs instead.

Degree in emptying waste bins or cleaning out drains perhaps?

 

[NSEFAN]

Degree in emptying waste bins or cleaning out drains perhaps?

My point was that, eventually, even such tasks could be automated. What do we then do with the displaced people? What jobs are we going to invent for them to give them a routine to keep them occupied?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Degree in emptying waste bins or cleaning out drains perhaps?

If you're going to speak to your customers and correctly work out their bill (assuming you're a sole trader), basic Maths and English would be a start.

But that said, I would actually rather see more respect for this kind of role and a wider use of apprenticeships like the situation in Germany. If formal classroom type education evidently isn't for someone by the age of say 14, why not provide better vocational education?

Neil

 

[IanD]

:roll:

Yes, this is exactly how it works.

I'm getting sick of having my uni discredited by people who just assume everyone bought their way in. We didn't. No-one here did, wherever they came from.

Did I say everyone at Oxbridge bought their way in?

I said thick people at expensive public schools with rich parents don't have to worry about league tables.

 

[muddythefish]

If you're going to speak to your customers and correctly work out their bill (assuming you're a sole trader), basic Maths and English would be a start.

But that said, I would actually rather see more respect for this kind of role and a wider use of apprenticeships like the situation in Germany. If formal classroom type education evidently isn't for someone by the age of say 14, why not provide better vocational education?

Neil

Basic maths and English are beyond some people - and they certainly wouldn't be in the jobs you describe.

But that doesn't mean they do not want to work and would be " drain on society" as you lazily assume.

Apprenticeships are good - as is vocational training. That's why we used to have secondary moderns and polytechnics.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Did I say everyone at Oxbridge bought their way in?

I said thick people at expensive public schools with rich parents don't have to worry about league tables.

Read your previous post.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Did I say everyone at Oxbridge bought their way in?

I said thick people at expensive public schools with rich parents don't have to worry about league tables.

If they are thick, then they won't get it. You simply can't bribe your way through GCSEs, A Levels and a degree.

People from public schools tend to go to university more than their state school colleagues simply because the school are able to attract better teachers and better teaching resources, aside from the huge competitive element in public schools in both sport and academia.

 

[Gathursty]

Public schools kick out students who will fail their GCSE/A Levels so that when you see their prospectus, you see brilliant results because those who did crap, they dropped out and so don't appear as having many, if any, D-U grades. Places like Eton will attract the rich no trouble but they have to show excellence when realistically they get the same ability spread of students as every other school, just with rich parents.

 

[Bayum]

The internet has also given them access to past papers and mark schemes and anyone with half a brain cell will soon spot that very similar questions with nearly identical answers nearly always appear in every paper. 'Learn' the correct answer and that can easily boost your score.

On a number of examinations the last thing I did the night before was read through question papers and marking schemes and it proved very effective.

What a silly comment to make. Students are passing exams because they revise from past papers based on a curriculum, and revise answers as opposed to the methods behind them? I can tell you right now that revising from past papers embeds your knowledge and understanding of concepts by applying the skills learnt in the core curriculum to a variety of questions. You cannot and will not pass an exam by revising based on reading a past paper. It just doesn't happen.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yeah but that requires effort, time and funding. Far easier to just say the kids are useless and there is nothing to be done and wasn't it so much better back in the 'good old days'.

Have you an actual clue about education these days then? I suggest not.

There is increasingly a large amount of pressure placed upon educators to ensure 'evergreen' pupils (pupil premium; children from backgrounds on benefits, single/split parent families, special educational needs), low ability and high ability pupils, as well as those with 'behavioural' problems identified as likely to 'fail', succeed and progress is maintained throughout their education within the UK system.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

(removed post)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Might I suggest that results got better and better every year because the teachers would actually get to grips with the curriculum due to it remaining 'stable' and being able to hone their teaching skills around it.

Youth unemployment has risen due to the lack of jobs, not under achievement.

I 'accidentally' snipped it because it prevents the quote being too wordy, I thought the articles introduction would suffice, rather than copying the whole thing. Looks rather unwieldy when people do that.

Precisely.

I genuinely believe that children these days are more intelligent than we are led on to think. Unfortunately the government seems to have a view of shoving down our throats that our young adults are 'thick' and the only reason pass rates are and have been increasing is because exams are easier - not because our children are more intelligent.

Unfortunately this rhetoric is, as I say, shoved down the throats of the masses which ultimately, helps nobody.

I'm teaching a year 2 curriculum which I would have faltered at at the age I'm teaching. Fractions of quantity, 2, 5, 10, 3 and 4x tables by year two end, along with a supposedly increasing fluency of written methods in all four number rules, (who actually thought it a good idea to teach young children sharing, considering the vast amount of studies that show children until the ages of 7 and 8 cannot share equally!) children don't have it easy - there is no room for let up in today's curriculum for children to not make progress.

 

[ainsworth74]

What a silly comment to make. Students are passing exams because they revise from past papers based on a curriculum, and revise answers as opposed to the methods behind them? I can tell you right now that revising from past papers embeds your knowledge and understanding of concepts by applying the skills learnt in the core curriculum to a variety of questions. You cannot and will not pass an exam by revising based on reading a past paper. It just doesn't happen.

Read the post again. Where, exactly, did I say the only preparation needed was from past papers? Please point it out to me. Quite obviously (though perhaps not) you need to have learnt what's in the curriculum if you're going to pass. My point was simply that past papers are a useful tool, within many, of revision and one, with the coming of the internet, that is increasingly easy to access.

If you just read past papers of course you'll fail the exam.

Have you an actual clue about education these days then? I suggest not.

Have you actually read my post and and do you have an understanding of sarcasm? I suggest not. I am quite aware of issues with education and I'm in favour of everything you've just posted about. Pupil Premium, for example, is a very useful funding stream for schools to be able to help pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds or even to deliver something of use to the whole school (in some schools, because of their catchment area, that's actually the same thing). I'm fully in favour of doing everything possible to ensure that all pupils no matter the background achieve to the best of their ability and never writing off a child.

I suggest you might want to read posts a bit more carefully before making comments which get a little close to being personal attacks.

 

[Muzer]

Yet takings in most students union bars are 60% down on where they were 15 years ago and complaints about insufficient contact time with lecturers are through the roof.

Don't let facts get in the way of your stereotypes though.

It's OK — he's clearly a grumpy old man, so I'm sure us students are fine with his stereotypes being (at least) 15 years out of date

(And yes, that WAS meant as a joke, apologies if it caused offence... actually, I don't, since most of what he has said in this thread has been pretty offensive.)

But speaking seriously, I do believe the Tories have basically ruined the whole thing. My secondary school (a state grammar school) appears to have gone rapidly downhill a year or two back, and most of the best staff have left in protest, such that in extreme cases like the maths department they've had to bring people out of retirement. It's such things as becoming an academy which have let the crazy Tory of a headmaster do many more stupid things.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What a silly comment to make. Students are passing exams because they revise from past papers based on a curriculum, and revise answers as opposed to the methods behind them? I can tell you right now that revising from past papers embeds your knowledge and understanding of concepts by applying the skills learnt in the core curriculum to a variety of questions. You cannot and will not pass an exam by revising based on reading a past paper. It just doesn't happen.

I would agree with you totally for GCSEs and A-Levels (that's not to say that I disagree with ainsworth74 — I think you just probably unintentionally exaggerated his point a little when opposing it). However, university is sometimes a different story. For example, a certain lecturer who may have appeared on Reddit at some point (NSEFAN will know who I'm talking about) has a great tendency to reuse exam questions, so much so that learning answers to the past papers will usually get you quite a fair way towards doing well in the exam

(To be fair on him, my exam this year was pretty different in most respects to the past papers, and quite well-written as well!)

 

[Starmill]

You'd be surprised how many kids are fed up of being told they're not doing well by people like Neil Williams!

 

[Muzer]

Yes. I get the feeling from various things I've read that it's been a thing throughout history of older generations assuming the younger generations were all rowdy/stupid/etc., when in reality at worst nothing really material changes and at best people are actually getting more intelligent. I find this behaviour curious — I wonder if it's just a strang side-effect of how the brain works, something created entirely within the mind, or if it's actually a genuine perception of this effect, possibly because of the likelihood of remembering particularly rowdy/stupid/etc. people while not really noticing people who keep themselves to themselves, or possibly because of the likelihood of meeting such people out and about (especially if you're not in a university town/etc.) being higher than meeting someone at home or on campus/at school/etc. studying hard!

 

[ainsworth74]

Yes. I get the feeling from various things I've read that it's been a thing throughout history of older generations assuming the younger generations were all rowdy/stupid/etc., when in reality at worst nothing really material changes and at best people are actually getting more intelligent.

I remember whilst doing some background reading for a seminar (no idea what the seminar was about now though ) I came across an extract that was very concerned about the future of the nation when the behaviour of its youth, especially their selfishness and 'wanting it all now' attitude, was so poor. The date of this extract? Mid 2000s perhaps the Daily Mail? Nope. The mid 1950s in some long forgotten magazine. So that 'concerning' youth would be the same people who are now decrying the hoodlums of today then...

I also agree with you last point that people remember bad interactions more than they do neutral ones. Who remembers walking through a university library and seeing dozens of students working hard? But students having too much to drink and getting themselves into trouble that's easy to remember.

I also think the media play a part in this because there are sections of society that want to be told the youth of today are terrible and wasn't it so much better when we were young. It also makes a much better story so will sell more papers/grab more audience share. Telling us how students today work as hard (or even harder) as they always have? That does not make for a good story.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I remember whilst doing some background reading for a seminar (no idea what the seminar was about now though ) I came across an extract that was very concerned about the future of the nation when the behaviour of its youth, especially their selfishness and 'wanting it all now' attitude, was so poor. The date of this extract? Mid 2000s perhaps the Daily Mail? Nope. The mid 1950s in some long forgotten magazine. So that 'concerning' youth would be the same people who are now decrying the hoodlums of today then...

I also agree with you last point that people remember bad interactions more than they do neutral ones. Who remembers walking through a university library and seeing dozens of students working hard? But students having too much to drink and getting themselves into trouble that's easy to remember.

I also think the media play a part in this because there are sections of society that want to be told the youth of today are terrible and wasn't it so much better when we were young. It also makes a much better story so will sell more papers/grab more audience share. Telling us how students today work as hard (or even harder) as they always have? That does not make for a good story.

“Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.”

- Socrates

 

[muz379]

In the end if you want to learn, you will. The biggest problem in this country is kids who don't want to learn.

Neil

I disagree . I think the biggest problem is actually kids who cant learn in this once size fits all curriculum we have in high schools .

The problem is those kids who cant play the system and get good GCSE's are written off by the system age 16 because of a grade in a qualification that might have no relevance to them . Things are getting better with more and more colleges offering vocational courses but that is too late in my opinion because the focus when you are in high school is getting good GCSE's which for some people isn't about the will to want to learn its about the ability to learn in that way .

In my opinion rather than forcing all kids to sit the same GCSE's there should be a division in education earlier on and more vocational qualifications and courses for students of GCSE age .

 

[Bayum]

I disagree . I think the biggest problem is actually kids who cant learn in this once size fits all curriculum we have in high schools .

The problem is those kids who cant play the system and get good GCSE's are written off by the system age 16 because of a grade in a qualification that might have no relevance to them . Things are getting better with more and more colleges offering vocational courses but that is too late in my opinion because the focus when you are in high school is getting good GCSE's which for some people isn't about the will to want to learn its about the ability to learn in that way .

In my opinion rather than forcing all kids to sit the same GCSE's there should be a division in education earlier on and more vocational qualifications and courses for students of GCSE age .

I agree.

The thing that confuses me most about the system is that GCSEs are a measure of how much students have learnt within their education post year 6 SATs.

How and why the significance of GCSE results has such a faring on further education experiences has continued to surprise me.

 

[deltic]

Surely that will have to change at some point, since more and more manual jobs are being made redundant through mechanisation. Apart from sitting around doing nothing, the only option is for more people to do more diverse, academic or creative jobs instead.

The problem is that it is the middle level jobs that are being hollowed out - most job creation has been at either end of the spectrum, either minimum wage or very well paid. As one group in society becomes well paid they employ more cleaners, bar staff, waiters etc. What we have lost is all those clerical jobs that were suited to people with reasonable GCSEs and A-Levels. On the railways think ticket office staff, guards, signallers and in due course drivers.

If driverless cars come to pass another couple of million of average paid drivers will be looking for new jobs.

 

[muz379]

I agree.

The thing that confuses me most about the system is that GCSEs are a measure of how much students have learnt within their education post year 6 SATs.

How and why the significance of GCSE results has such a faring on further education experiences has continued to surprise me.

I know , its stressful for students as well . I recall when I was applying for a place at university despite having straight A's in my A levels my GCSE profile was made up of majority B's . The fact that the university I applied to stated in their prospectus that they required a strong GCSE profile really did cause me a great deal of stress . Eventually I was fortunate enough to be made an offer but from speaking to someone who works in university admissions some universities do decline students just because of GCSE profile .

As for some jobs being automated . One area that we really are seeing a skills shortage in is the health and social care sector . With our aging population this shortage is only going to get greater unless we really fill the gap .

 

[TheKnightWho]

I know , its stressful for students as well . I recall when I was applying for a place at university despite having straight A's in my A levels my GCSE profile was made up of majority B's . The fact that the university I applied to stated in their prospectus that they required a strong GCSE profile really did cause me a great deal of stress . Eventually I was fortunate enough to be made an offer but from speaking to someone who works in university admissions some universities do decline students just because of GCSE profile .

As for some jobs being automated . One area that we really are seeing a skills shortage in is the health and social care sector . With our aging population this shortage is only going to get greater unless we really fill the gap .

From my experience with speaking to admissions people, GCSEs play a very, very minor factor. They're generally used as a tie-breaker, or if they're really bad (say, Ds and Es compared to As at A-Level) can often be a reason for them to call you to interview so they can see what sort of person you are.

 

[Bletchleyite]

From my experience with speaking to admissions people, GCSEs play a very, very minor factor. They're generally used as a tie-breaker, or if they're really bad (say, Ds and Es compared to As at A-Level) can often be a reason for them to call you to interview so they can see what sort of person you are.

That's my experience as well, with the possible exception of Maths and English.

Neil

 

[muz379]

From my experience with speaking to admissions people, GCSEs play a very, very minor factor. They're generally used as a tie-breaker, or if they're really bad (say, Ds and Es compared to As at A-Level) can often be a reason for them to call you to interview so they can see what sort of person you are.

I wonder if their policy towards them depends on the competitiveness of the course .

 

[Bayum]

I wonder if their policy towards them depends on the competitiveness of the course .

For many competitive courses, particularly those in the health and sciences and education, good GCSEs are essential. A neighbour is on the admissions board and lectures in general practice and he said you're lucky to even be looked at without straight As at GCSE.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just had a look on Admissions criteria for medicine at Liverpool. 18 points from GCSE where A*/A=2 points and B=1 point.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I wonder if their policy towards them depends on the competitiveness of the course .

It depends.

If you didn't do something at A-Level that is relevant to the course then it will probably count against you. However, if you got a C in GCSE maths but managed an A* at A-Level that would obviously take precedence.

 

[muz379]

It depends.

If you didn't do something at A-Level that is relevant to the course then it will probably count against you. However, if you got a C in GCSE maths but managed an A* at A-Level that would obviously take precedence.

not what I have been told , but then this was by someone who handles admissions for a course where they receive up to 8 applicants for every place so obviously they have to use numerous criteria to sift down to a manageable number of candidates before final offers are decided upon .

 

[Trog]

I am of opinion that the grade inflation "problem" is mainly attributed to students becoming even more educated than before and there are even more resources on the internet to go over the bits you don't understand.

I am not sure if it is that simple, the results got better every single year for years on end. If the improvement was a natural effect of better teaching and internet use I would have expected an upward trend but with odd years where there was a some drop back due to random factors. The results being better every single year strikes me as being too good to be true, and hence I suspect an element of foul play.

 

[NSEFAN]

The problem is that it is the middle level jobs that are being hollowed out - most job creation has been at either end of the spectrum, either minimum wage or very well paid. As one group in society becomes well paid they employ more cleaners, bar staff, waiters etc. What we have lost is all those clerical jobs that were suited to people with reasonable GCSEs and A-Levels. On the railways think ticket office staff, guards, signallers and in due course drivers.

If driverless cars come to pass another couple of million of average paid drivers will be looking for new jobs.

That is a fair point and something I hadn't considered. I still wonder though what we are going to do with ourselves as more jobs become automated. We are the only species which actively seeks to make itself redundant.