The English Baccalaureate Certificate

[Zingari]

Whilst I would agree that is the ideal, it's my feeling that instead of getting everyone up to scratch, the scratch line has been lowered to make it more accessible. Statistics (and I know, lies and damned lies, etc) have been trotted out to show that UK standards have slipped internationally (or other nations have surpassed us at best). There is in general, not just in education, a zeitgeist that not only is it unacceptable to fail, it is also unacceptable to fail someone. The word "criticism" has taken on a negative connotation and any offering of criticism is spurned or derided.

Not everyone can be good at everything, but everyone is good at something. To my mind that is one of the jobs of an education system. If the system can't find a child's strengths and weaknesses after 13+ years of schooling, then it is failing. As it stands, 99% of kids come out sparkling in all subjects, which just papers over the cracks*.

*That's hyperbole by the way, don't ask me to provide facts and figues to support my statement - they don't exist.

i often believe a well thought out and reasoned opinion is far better than a cart load of statistics

[Guest]

Yes if everyone passed the driving test it should be made harder, because that would be strong evidence it was too easy. Same applies to ever improving GCSE pass rates. There is no evidence whatsoever that kids have got smarter, so exams must have got easier.

Rubbish.

If everyone can drive safely on the roads you don't need to eliminate them from driving - absolute tosh.

And the second point is tosh too. Tests are not assessing cleverness. so whilst kids may not have gotten "smarter" they have gotten more knowledge of facts and understanding of process because man is evolving every year. We know and understand so much more and teach it more efficiently.

Exams are not easier, they are more difficult but need to be just to stay close to "the mean". It may surprise you to learn but you are not smarter than you were the day you were born but I'm pretty sure you can do a hell of a lot more.

[Guest]

As someone who has been involved in recruiting school leavers it makes it difficult to use exam results as a yardstick of ability if someone a year older has passed and the younger person achieving the same or better 'results' has failed because they've changed or limited the pass mark.

As explained earlier in this topic I've suffered through out my career from this tinkering.

I can't really see the point of exams if you keep moving the goalposts and changing their structure they are only useful for comparing like with like.

Great point.

And that is where you are failing as a recruiter. You shouldn't be comparing one year with another. That makes no sense. If you have the choice of two people with 8 years difference in their education you should realise that there is a difference but I'm sure you also then look at what the one 8 years older has done in those 8 years. That gives you a much better guide to whether they are better suited to the work you wish them to do.

Exam results are relevant for a very few years. I think most employers understand this, sadly I don't think most school leavers do.

If you do nothing for 5 years after leaving school don't expect anyone to have faith in your wonderful school records. Deeds speak louder than qualifications.

The point of changing exams is that the world changes everyday. You, as a recruiter, need to understan that change.

After all you didn't need the same person 10 years ago in Engineering that you need today.

[Guest]

But for some it is their first job, and these things aren't always obvious if you have never been in a work environment, or even if you have had a job before it doesn't prepare you for everything.

I started out on my IT career by working in customer services, before moving into IT, so I normally have a better understanding of the issues of the users because I used to be one, I have had some much more experienced colleagues who just shut themselves away somewhere and deal with everything remotely, whereas I prefer to get down on the office floor and have a gossip whilst sorting out problems.

Whilst agreeing with many of your arguments, I think you're making excuses for "education" These kids should have been taught what FSA is etc... I do agree that apprenticeships need to be created to lead them through systematically though. Apprenticeships are simply education in the workplace. They are more specialist. The company is getting initially cheap labour which in return they must educate in order for everyone to benefit.

[Guest]

I want to tackle this point. It should matter because the moment everyone has the same qualification, it becomes that more difficult to get selected for a job. What differentiates you from the next candidate? A 20 minute interview isn't going to massively differentiate you from an equally likeable person. So as a candidate, you then need that little bit extra to get the position. At the top professions, this can be an Oxbridge degree, a masters (which costs), or more frequently, who your parents know to get an internship or pull strings. Either way, it becomes less of a meritocracy and doors start to shut for those bright kids from poor backgrounds.

This is why in my opinion we need more rigorous exams to differentiate the brightest. I like your idea about printing individual results, so that top universities have a better choice for selection. However, we do need to arrest the decline that has seen Britain fall down the international education tables.

Or maybe we need continuous learning or maybe companies should NOT be basing their future potential on a 20 minute interview or maybe the companies think it doesn't really matter about the difference in skill level as we're going to teach them ourselves (and that could be the saddest indictment of education possible)

[Guest]

Well anything is possible but it's hard enough finding the right ones with 5 GCSEs and if you get it wrong you're stuck with them unless they are totally incompetent and you also miss your day release window if you get rid after a few months.

We always gave them an additional test but that was mostly to determine attitudes.

The problem with school leavers is there's often no previous employment history although we would take into account temp jobs/refs and voluntary work. But from a technical aptitude perspective and potential the GCSEs are really all you've got.

Also these people are going to be doing 4 days a week on the job and you have to be careful you're not burdening those supervising and mentoring them with additional responsibilities and alienating them.

So it seems that there is a step missing between "school education" as it now stands and "work".

You seem to have given a very good argument for the need of more "internships" in "education hours" maybe the increase of school leaving age from 16 to 18 will allow this. I tink you also make a good point but maybe you don't accentuate it enough in your own mind regarding temp jobs and voluntary work.

Temp jobs teach kids a hell of a lot and those that never do a temp job are already making a statement about themselves.

Edit: another relevant point about the 4 days a week - mentoring etc... This is where the company needs help from "education" you are performing the work that the education system should be performing. You are in fact part of my idea of extended (lifelong) education. These mentors need the training and the recognition that they deserve. they are as important as any secondary school teacher.

[Guest]

Iranian Education

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19665615

[Daggers]

For decades business and industry have been complaining that the education system does not produce people ready for the world of work.

Clearly, being able to recall shitloads of 'important' facts in the space of 1.5-2 hours, once every five years, will put that to rights.

[fleckneymike]

Why, when students will be forced to remain in education until they are 18, are we designing a system which tests them at 16?

What do we tell the students taking GCSE's between now and the introduction of the eBacc?

[Guest]

Why, when students will be forced to remain in education until they are 18, are we designing a system which tests them at 16?

What do we tell the students taking GCSE's between now and the introduction of the eBacc?

Make sure your grades are good enough to go to university?

[Daggers]

What do we tell the students taking GCSE's between now and the introduction of the eBacc?

Stay clear of drugs, don't have pre-marital coitus and never, ever vote Tory.

[fleckneymike]

Make sure your grades are good enough to go to university?

and if you aren't going to University?

[Guest MattP]

and if you aren't going to University?

Do what thousands of others do and make your own way in the World by working hard.

I've never went to University as I couldn't be arsed at the time, turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to me, probably be taking orders from someone else now had I gone.

[fleckneymike]

Do what thousands of others do and make your own way in the World by working hard.

I've never went to University as I couldn't be arsed at the time, turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to me, probably be taking orders from someone else now had I gone.

it will be quite difficult to 'work hard' when by law you have to remain in education until you are 18. Also having been forced to study traditional subjects up until the age of 16 and continue to take English and Maths until you achieve a C grade you might find it difficult to join a vocational course (should one actually exist)

[stevelcfc]

I'm currently doing my gcse's and I'm the first year to do coursework in science (practical/experiment the write up twice) and will also be the last year, I'm also one of the last years doing modular work which means it's not just a memory test at the end of the year, which benefits the less able, which these new ideas clearly don't. All of my exams are on different boards, and have had the scheme of work changed twice during my English coursework. They are constantly changing what i need to do and this new EBacc thing is one of the governments ideas to re-invent education which happens every 20 years of so.

[Guest]

and if you aren't going to University?

Obviously that's not an option.

Do what thousands of others do and make your own way in the World by working hard.

I've never went to University as I couldn't be arsed at the time, turned out to be the best thing that ever happened to me, probably be taking orders from someone else now had I gone.

I've never went. - evidently.

[Captain...]

Hello fif, a lot of points to respond to, but going specifically to the debate with Jon the hat, I agree entirely that education is not just about passing exams, but my argument was about exams, the passing of which is a part of education.

As you put it the idea that you should make an exam harder because everyone passes it is tosh, it lessens its significance in the event of selecting a candidate for a job, but exams are not their to find you jobs, they are there to prove your ability or knowledge.

If you know it, then you know it, they shouldn't then change what 'it' is, that is my view. Exams need to change with the times, and if they do not provide a challenge then perhaps they should be made harder or more complex, or have an added element for gifted pupils, or be taken earlier.

But regardless of all of that you need an exam of a level that can reflect people's ability accurately, even if the lowest level of these exams have a 100% pass rate.

Going back to Spain, they have something similar with civil servant jobs where they have regular exams called 'oposiciones' which you need to pass to achieve a higher position. Which are hated by all that have to take them, but it does reflect a commitment to continual education which isn't evident it the UK, over here once you have your degree, you stop learning and start working.

The also have a similar process at school with the baccalaureate, but it is split into 2 streams, arts and sciences.

I think there are certainly things we can take from these other countries rather than just go back 20 years.

[Guest]

I think we agree on all of the above Cap Shrap.

Exams changing with the times is an interesting sentence. and herein lies the problem.

They must but then some people will say but ours is harder than last year's etc...

Driving is a good example, no point having the same test now as when cars first started to replace the horse and carriage, nor even as 30 years ago.

Not really on topic at all but drivers should have to sit a re-test (modified) every 10 years or so and especailly 50, 60, 70, 80.

edit: particularly like the highlighting of tests once in a job forcing people to keep up to date in their job.

[Guest MattP]

Exhibit A of "Exams might have got easier" from the pub tonight.

Girl: "I got an A in geography" (3 years ago)

Lad: "I'll test you then, capital of Japan?"

Girl "Hong Kong"

[davieG]

I'm not sure how relevant her ignorance of that is to having an A level in geography, when I did geography, admittedly many years ago we never covered anything like that it was all about where wheat grows best, how ox-bow lakes where formed and the affects of weather on agriculture.

I would say that was more general knowledge which isn't really taught at senior schools but should be part of home/primary school learning.

That's not to say they've not got easier, I simply wouldn't know that.

[Daggers]

Exhibit A of "Exams might have got easier" from the pub tonight.

Girl: "I got an A in geography" (3 years ago)

Lad: "I'll test you then, capital of Japan?"

Girl "Hong Kong"

How the fvck is that an example of exams getting easier? Since when was remembering capitals of the world part of any curriculum? Do you bother to look at what is included in the Geography curriculum because that certainly isn't.

[Fox in the North]

Reformed A-levels are also confirmed now for 2015;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21156370

I do despair sometimes. A-levels were hard enough as modules anyway and now they're going to be a memory test at the end of the year/two years. I feel sorry for any who'll have to take them. I'll be intrigued to see if people actually learn more, but I do doubt it.

[Carl the Llama]

As someone who took the European Bacc I'm all in favour of this as hopefully now any British employers I apply to in the future will have a realistic idea of what my grade actually means.

[leicsmac]

Yes Gove, a single maximum-pressure 2/3 hour window at the end of two years is by far the best way of assessing understanding and execution of a subject, and is an accurate simulation of applying subject knowledge in the working world.

The man is so out of touch it's frightening. And I'm sure my buddies in the teaching industry are going to love having to change the curriculum around majorly once again, which will no doubt result in yet another batch of unnecessary paperwork.

[FoxyPV]

The problem is the exam boards when it comes to grade inflation. The exam were made into quangos and thus have to compete with each other for business. If one particular board is deemed easier then those schools who seek to improve their stats will move their business to that board.

The examiners are put under pressure by those above them to give marks for things that should never been given marks. MsFoxy is a chief examiner for a local board and has been told in previous awarding meetings (against her and other chief's wishes) what the level for an A has been set at "because enough people aren't getting them"