UK spending power 'in heavy fall'

neverdespairgirl

JoJil wrote: »

My father says it's just a snob value thing when people pretend that Orpington is in Kent, as they don't like the idea that they live in south London.

Fair enough - I definintely grew up in south London (born in Greenwich hospital, grew up in Blackheath).

MissMoneypenny

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Fair enough - I definintely grew up in south London (born in Greenwich hospital, grew up in Blackheath).

That makes you a Kentish Maid.:D

Greenwich was part of Kent (albiet about 150 years ago) so according to Kent history, you were born in Kent. You were born on the side of the Medway that makes you a Kentish Maid. You are also and a native of Kent, instead of an immigrant to Kent as you were born there.:D

If you had been born on the other side of the Medway, you would have been a Maid of Kent.

I was born in Blackheath.

neverdespairgirl

My brother was a member of the boys' brigade in Blackheath - the group was called the "3rd West Kents". I also played for the Kent chess team (-:

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

!!!!!!? wrote: »

Bottom line: Ordinary bright kids find it harder to get a good education, kids with well off parents find it easier to get into the good places regardless of their academic ability.

Ucas figures (today) show the proportion of working class applications rose to 29.6% of all applicants this year:j - see the system is working:D

fc123

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

Ucas figures (today) show the proportion of working class applications rose to 29.6% of all applicants this year:j - see the system is working:D

Too late for me.....so now I have wrinkles instead.:rolleyes:

baby_boomer

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

Ucas figures (today) show the proportion of working class applications rose to 29.6% of all applicants this year:j - see the system is working:D

Applications don't necessarily equal places (or not without the bullying of the University Admissions' Tsar ).

The devaluation of our secondary education standards, in the interests of equality and access, are such that the Independent reports that:

18 universities are setting their own tests because they can't rely on A-Levels

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

baby_boomer wrote: »

Applications don't necessarily equal places (or not without the bullying of the University Admissions' Tsar ).

The devaluation of our secondary education standards, in the interests of equality and access, are such that the Independent reports that:

18 universities are setting their own tests because they can't rely on A-Levels

I agree A levels need an overhaul in their grading - maybe they need to add an A* grade. I don't know why this is taking so long for "the powers to be" to do. I also think that Uni admissions should be done on the basis of actual not predicted grades as awarding Uni places on the basis of provisional grades has been shown to work against working class kids. No idea why this is taking so long to implement either.

The tone on this article is so typical of how anything to do with Education is reported,. There was much to celebrate in yesterday's figures but the media have to find something awful to report. Kids work so hard these days to get these amazing results and "old" people just deride their achievements - "Oh it was so much better in my day" - which is just so much rubbish! A levels are harder than ever. A1/AS make everything much harder than it ever was in the past. There is no time for a lower six" easy year" anymore. Today's sixth formers have to hit the road running. I don't know why the media and "old" people are like this?

baby_boomer

They don't need an A* grade to provide more hoops to jump through to satisfy the whims of the examiners and markers - adding to uncertainty and pressure.

They need a more demanding syllabus so that the people who know their subject naturally come to the top and students can get on with the task of learning, as opposed to learning to pass exams.

I would support your post A-Level application idea - perhaps with the Universities starting their courses in January.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

baby_boomer wrote: »

They don't need an A* grade to provide more hoops to jump through to satisfy the whims of the examiners and markers - adding to uncertainty and pressure.

They need a more demanding syllabus so that the people who know their subject naturally come to the top and students can get on with the task of learning, as opposed to learning to pass exams.

I'm all for "real" learning,not jumping through hoops as I said in my previous posts. Have you seen an A level Physics paper these days? Or any other A level for that matter... A Levels are demanding. It's just that many kids work extremely hard and alot of the achieve top grades, an A* is the simplest solution IMHO.

Sir_Humphrey

This whole "A levels do not pick out the very best" is a complete red herring.

Until about 15-20 years ago, Oxbridge set their own formal entrance exams as well as interviews which were independent of A levels. They then gave the successful entrants a nominal requirement of 2/3 Es for entry. Even ten years ago when I got into Oxford, some colleges still gave out 2/3 E offers. Even though A levels were taken into account at that time, I still had to sit a written test, plus the infamous interview.

Oxbridge have never given a stuff about A levels and would still ignore them if they had their way.

Most Universities do not even interview, including York which was my second choice after Oxford.

I 100% agree that GCSEs and A levels are too focussed on passing exams rather than learning.