Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
a) Do we really need another upheaval? I swear exams get jigged about every few years.
b) The idea of having one exam board for all exams taken at 16 in England sounds, on the face of it, pretty sensible.
too many people are passing! exams getting easier!
rinse und repeat.
I have an English Language English Baccalaureate Certificate.
As for the rest of this news, the implications are too fucking depressing for words.
I think the one exam board could be a good thing too - the competition element of multiple boards is a bit strange. Not to mention that Pearson, the biggest educational publisher, owns Edexcel, one of the big exam board players...which seems a bit wrong to me.
But definitely agree with the 2nd half of what you said. I'm only hoping that Nick Clegg pushed for the first round of exams in 2015 because he hopes the Conservatives won't be re-elected, so Labour can come in and scrap it just in time.
if it is, it's one 99% of the country's never used or even heard.
It seems deliberately designed to immediately show up 90% of the population as thickos when they mis-spell it on their job or UCAS applications.
I don't know that everyone with a GCSE knows what that stands for.
It means that the board structure as established in the mid-1980s by the then Conservative government will be scrapped, and it all centralized, removing competition from the market and denying choice to schools.
Or do the LEA's choose it for them?
and they can have different boards for each subject.
Some even enter students into the same qualification through different boards at different times of the year to maximise pass rates.
And the LEA thing is becoming a moot point anyway. Gove's already made it pretty clear that he want to make LEA's obsolete by turning as many schools as possible into academies, making them accountable to central, rather than local, government.
1) one exam board SHOULD mean better competency and less idiosyncracy in how exams are delivered, so long as they're made properly accountable and subject to appropriate performance review
2) trying to improve the standards and delivery of education is obviously a good thing, and a major revamp holds the potential for actual positive change (e.g. valuing languages more highly, improving the content of history/geography courses to make them more interesting/inspiring)
3) on the other hand, a staggered introduction of a new system sounds like a recipe for pure chaos. And anything Michael Gove comes up with in terms of actual tangible content ideas is usually utter drivel, and I fully expect him to be pushing stuff like 'learning about the history of our great nation'...
4) and I hate hate hate how schools, teachers and kids who acheive above expectations are patronised and insulted by talk of grade inflation and slipping standards. I know it's an obvious point but it's really really infuriating.
what right an embezzling Tory criminal with no background in education has in determining thousands of young people's schooling. It seems like a vanity project drawn up to stamp his mark - seeing as it was unveiled after complete secrecy with seemingly zero consultation from education experts, headteachers, students, parents, governers etc.
I really can't see the merit in returning to a system that was considered obsolete before most of us were born - and I can't imagine how hard it's going to be motivating kids for an exam that they'll be sitting in two years time. It'll result in untold amounts of stress for both students and teachers, and you can't possibly achieve a holistic impressions of students capabilities based on one exam that caps off two years of study.
Also, he's a complete and utter lying bastard as regards this Summer's English exam grades. The renumeration that's been offered by AQA / WJEC / Edexcel proves as much, yet he still won't admit he had a hand in it (despite the fact that Ofqual report directly to the Government)
In the end it'll be a world of pain for all concerned, until the Tories get voted out just as its implemented and it'll be all change again. FFS
i don't see the problem in having a two tier system, it gives a clearer picture of the standard of education a person has reached by having more grades across the board
5 at level one, 5 at level 2, rather than 5 at one level say
I thought O-Levels just had regular A-C or A-E grades or something like that?
also, in the Maths course i took, you could either take the higher papers, which could earn you an A*-C grade or the intermediate papers where you could get B-E or something. no i don't know anything about O-Levels, but this seems to be 2 tiered to me?
They just aren't/weren't as prescriptive as O-Levels. The emphasis was still academic.
a market completely monopolized by one service provider?
Fucking dickhead Conservatives can't even get their own politics right.
I think years of the government forcing schools and exam boards to show Ofsted how great they are by showing how many A-grades they've got probably emphasised the latter over the former. Unfortunately good student ability is what makes you the sort of person who can infer an answer from what you know already and research well, which is what employers probably notice first and certainly what Universities notice first, meaning we get loads of whingeing about how exams are getting easier and standards are dropping, blah blah.
I've read  that we have one of the shortest school term lengths in Europe and some of the shortest school days. And if primary school these days is anything like primary school when I was there, you didn't really learn an awful lot. I'm not saying I'd like to have had algebra and complex historical topics flung at me and I don't even know if I could have handled them, but I'd certainly like to first see something from the Govt. saying they've definitely investigated how much time kids spend in school and it's not too little, and they've looked at how much they're pushed to learn at an earlier age, and it's not too little either.
I would defer to experts; unfortunately Gove doesn't appear to have any better expertise in education than I do, which is what scares me most.
Theo was desperate to do calculus when he was 4.
that Gove thinks the number of top grades should be limited, which implies he doesn't understand that if you're teaching 30 kids something they can all learn it to the same standard. Apparently in his world if all 30 kids got an A you would have to apply some ridiculous distribution so that there was a spread of grades.
Maybe I know more than him after all.
Or vice versa.