Tories turn back the clock, it's back to O Levels

ukcarper

Pennywise wrote: »

Don't confuse what's wrong with the 11+ exam as opposed to what's wrong with lumping everyone together in comps.

There are far better ways of evaluating which children should receive a mostly academic education (grammar) against which children should receive a mostly practical/technical education (technical college).

It's the 11+ exam that's flawed not selection in the bigger scheme of things.

As for numbers, in my home town when I was a teenager, 40% went to the town grammar and 60% went to the town secondary/technical school. That was in the days when most towns had a grammar so you didn't have the stupid situation of today where only the top 5/10% get into the few grammars that remain that have caused it to be elitist.

The way comprehensive were sold was very good streamed on ability in each subject easy movement between streams if child developed latter. To me that sounds much better than separating children at 11 even if a better way of judging ability than the 11 plus is found.

On the subject of technical colleges I attended various technical colleges studying telecoms, electronics and electrical engineering and the level of maths was a lot higher than the majority of degrees taken now.

I have found it hard to find the percentage of children going to grammar schools in the 1960s but it seems to be between 10% and 35% depending on area.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

The Tories might think they can deflect from the real issue with their stupid E Baccs but they can't:-

GCSE grading row: examiners face legal challenge

Dozens of schools and councils are taking legal action against exam chiefs over their refusal to re-grade thousands of GCSE papers sat this summer, it emerged today.

“It is inconceivable that two cohorts of students enrolled for the same course in the same academic year, who have undertaken the same work and invested the same effort, and who will be competing in future for the same opportunities, should be subjected to such radically different standards of assessment and award.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9556377/GCSE-grading-row-examiners-face-legal-challenge.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19667137

WISHIWASRICH_2

Just read this in The Economist:-

Pupils taking more “linear” courses (which are tested by a single exam) currently score better than those who take modules.
But proponents think modules help some state schools to raise their game. They allow heads to diagnose teachers’ weaknesses more quickly and correct problems before a whole cohort performs poorly. A broader challenge is how to train and retain enough excellent teachers to close the gap in results between the state and private sectors.

http://www.economist.com/node/21563330

Who knew?

I always thought this must be attack on the State High Schools somehow. Wouldn't want those "F***ing Plebs" taking all the Tory Posh Boys jobs now would we?

A._Badger

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

The Tories might think they can deflect from the real issue with their stupid E Baccs but they can't:-

No, the 'real issue' is the appalling decline in the UK's standard of education - a process which has been in train since the 1960s.

There's no point 'liberals' whining about it, their experiment has failed and someone has got to fix a badly broken system.

Whether Gove is that man remains to be seen but at least he is making the attempt - not telling the great unwashed that everything is wonderful, while sending his own children to private schools.

CLAPTON

exams are not the main problem


the syllabus is the main problem; many subjects like maths and science have been totally dumbed down.

I recently looked at a 'physics' GCSE paper; if I hadn't been told I would not have recognised it as physics; the paper reflects a useless syllabus.