to be aghast you can get a GCSE in 'digital communications'

[fyrtlemertile]

Was speaking to a family member today whose choosing her options, apparently English Literature is an option, like History, French, Art or Music used to be while 'The English suite of qualifications are English Language, Media Studies and Digital Communications. Gifted student may have the opportunity to take English Literature as a twilight course and it will be offered as an option for band 1 students' (Band 1 = top half of the year, sets 1,2 and 3 I think).

AIBU or is digital communications probably a GCSE in facebook, texting and tweeting?

StealthyKissBeartrayal, I'm glad you posted that. The amount of ignorance and assumption here astounds me.

When I was in my physics class in school, I distinctly remember being told that Pluto was a planet (I think it's been re-classified as such again, but there was a hu-hah about it a few years ago) and there were X amount of elements in the periodic tables.

Yet since then these things have changed, we've gained more knowledge, but the basic ideas and instruction taught in those classes is timeless.

And so it must be for IT. If the course doesn't teach solid principles to work with, and instead teaches facts by rote, you know it's a bad course.

My DH is a programmer. He has always claimed that you can tell a bad programmer if he ever says "I don't know that language". A good programmer knows the logic and order and principles behind computer instructions, and can apply that knowledge to other contexts if given a little support and time to master it.

You could say the same thing about language. My mother speaks 3 languages - unfortunately her skills didn't rub off on me, but she has always maintained that once you know the principles of language construction, it's easier to learn more. I've heard the same thing said by friends and relatives in the same boat.

I didn't do IT at school, but from what I've seen in any subject, kids should be taught rules and overall ideas, not facts. Facts change and are updated, teaching them from a wider POV does not become obsolete.

current not cureent

"I used to be able to get up and do a presentatino without visual aids, as long as i knew what i was talking about. Now if i do a powerpoint one its considered boring. "

Suppose it depends where you end up working then. I'd be a bit at anyone who decided they needed something flashier than plain powerpoint slides and in fact I did a presentation in my interview without any slides at all. Suppose it ws what is important to the job, but it's wrong to say that powerpoint doesn't cut it any more.

exactly - whenever we have recruited, the specific programming language we wanted was a desirable. The principles and skills are the same for any OO language - anything else is syntax and can be googled.

AHEM Did anyone actually read my post?

"It depends what Digital Communications actually involves. I think it's jumping the gun to assume it's a course on texting and using Facebook. My guess its that it'll be focused on things like managing communications portals, using LANs and intranets to share data, creating data feeds, blogging, communications, brand promotion, social media strategy and search-engine optimisation. Which are increasingly important skills to have now that so much business is conducted virtually and via digital mediums."

hear hear!

from what's been posted, this course seems to not focus on the thigns you've pointed out - a huge missed opportunity from the course planners i think.

if the course focused on what you've described, i would be very keen to get mine on it. less so with the course content that Themumsnot has outlined

its like when ohp's were on the way out, and peopel were using powerpoint. the flashier pp got you noticed and remembered. At the end of the day, i still think content is more important. if you have a flashy presentation with no content, you still wont come off as well. But its about competition isnt it. Whatever gives you an edge over everyone else.

Yes, mumsnot, I did. Thanks.

It sounds as if, although in theory one could teach useful things on a course with this title, the GCSE isn't doing so (no surprise there then).

I'm not old and bitter, just sad that this sounds like another way to shortchange students who aren't getting straight As and to pretend they're being given something useful when they're not.

As regards Powerpoint - that is now taught in primary schools. My 8-year-old can put a very competent PP together and frequently does as part of her homework assignments. No Year 10 that I have ever met would need to be specifically taught those sort of IT skills as part of a GCSE. As I said in my earlier post, the focus in the Digital Communication GCSE is on analysing text in a variety of online media.

I did, Themumsnot what you explained vs. what Egsit posted I think highlights the missed opportunity here:

From you:
"The content has nothing to do with learning about IT. Basically, they will be reading and analysing examples of digital text (websites, blogs, social networking sites etc) and then creating a website of their own. It is in no way a suitable replacement for the Eng Lit GCSE for an able student, though it might be valuable for keeping less motivated pupils engaged. The content in my opinion is not sufficient to keep a pupil of average ability sufficiently challenged. "

vs.

From Egsit:
"My guess its that it'll be focused on things like managing communications portals, using LANs and intranets to share data, creating data feeds, blogging, communications, brand promotion, social media strategy and search-engine optimisation. Which are increasingly important skills to have now that so much business is conducted virtually and via digital mediums

Did the course planner really come up with the actual scope based on industry needs, what kids need to come out of school knowing, etc? What a shame, really.

Have read it now mumsnot and disagree with your opinions about it. And of course it is teaching IT skills, it is inevitable to learn new IT skills this way whether it be a side result of the course or intended result.

So what we are saying is it's okay for 'less able' ( working class) students to take a soft GCSE. I guess it won't affect league tables as they won't be getting poorer grades in Englit and it keeps them quiet building websites while other children learn critical thinking skills and essay composition.

NormanTebbit, I'm not sure building websites is a bad way to go, my brother (also a programmer) has his own firm and he charges £800/day for training. No that's not a typo. I was when I asked his rates last month

although, if i'm being serious, i think shoving less academic students into easier GCSEs (even if their titles means it could cover some rigorious content, which it doesn't sound liek this one does) in order to keep the stats down is a little

I'd agree with LRD

DH's degree course includes DMX which is a form of digital communication (of data, via netwroks to control different things- lights, enginerring whatever (heck it's not my degree course LMAO)

I cpuld see how a GCSE of this title could link into a lot

But doesn't seem to

Shame really, missed opportunity. DS3 won;t ever do a GCSE in English 9able child but ASD so very narrow porthole of skills) and anything IT linked is fantastic for him.

Woudln;t want the others doing it though, and they (ds2 cewrtainly) are far from Oxbridge material

ladysybil we reacently did PP presentations on our MA and anyone who tried to hide content with flashiness was downgraded: rightly so. They specifically said no silly transitions etc.

peachy - FWIW, I had one student who did a powerpoint presentation last term and though it was sort of ok, it wasn't necessary and I didn't give him extra marks for it. The other students assumed I would, though, which is interesting.

Mine aren't allowed to hand things in by email - they had to send a hard copy, though personally I think this is a bit of a shame. We use lots of computer technology and I wouldn't be without it, but none of it is remotely challenging to pick up as you go along, so I don't think most university students need special training in IT.

It has nothing to do with PPT etc. It's about analysing how meaning is communicated in digital form, so in a way is quite similar to English and Lit which are equally about how meaning is created and communicated by writers.

My problem with it is that, as an English teacher, I love Literature and teaching Lit is far and away the best part of the job. It saddens me that Lit is a dying subject in many schools now.

Funnily enough my DP is self employed, designs and builds websites, programmes stuff ( I switch off after that) and he receives CVs all the time from people who have done some training course in web design which qualifies them for precisely nothing but gets them off the unemployment stats for awhile.

That said, I'll get him to look into training, sounds good

It would be nice if logic was taught in schools - doesn't even need a computer but would be useful in so many other areas

NT can I PM you about that?

NT, it's a bit more specialised than general programming, his firm does web development and specialist SEO, the only reason i know anything about it is because i helped out for 6 months for their general admin very interesting if you're into that sort of thing. unfortunately i'm not. so when DH, who isn't self employed, he is a n IT project manager for an international software firm, and bro come over, you can imagine that i take any excuse to get into the kitchen and escape their tech talk

Absolutely.

Yes occasionally DP enthuses about databases and my eyes glaze over

its IT innit?

From what I understand digital communications qualifications tend to cover the hardware involved in sending and receiving digital information and different types of data sent, how the networks are made up etc.

Assuming it's a GCSE in facebook studies based on nothing but the name is a little Daily Mail really