to think the tories are making education elitist?

[ThatVikRinA22]

just watching the news, they are making the A levels harder, saying they are too easy

my boy did maths and physics and trust me - they were not too bloody easy!

my dd is doing GCSEs now, (at 14!! too bloody young imo!) and was doing one science syllabus, the government changed it recently and now, where she would have been awarded a C, she ended up with a D. The science teacher had a rant about the tories at parents evening....

so, now A levels are going to get harder, getting into uni is going to be harder plus more expensive, does this spell and end for opportunities for all to go to uni?

is it going to be the reserve of the very bright and the very rich?

Two thoughts which spring to mind on these threads:

1. There is an awful lot of mis-remembering. My DB (a physicist) came out with the 'but I covered that at O level type comment. Was able to show that this was utter horseraddish!

1. The constant resits I think depends on the school. My DCs' school is pretty poor and you would think would offer constant resits to up the results. It doesnt. I have my suspicion that the constant resits is something which higher performing schools do to differentiate themselves from other higher performing schools.

• Sparks I would love my daughter to go into engineering, would just love it.

I spoke to a group of teens a few weeks ago, and they all wanted Media type jobs I think really they want to be famous *

It can be very rewarding but requires hard work. And it also has a traditional heirachy system where you do have to earn respect. What it does provide is very little hiding place. You screw up a project it's obvious. I question whether that's the case in some other jobs.

At 33 i'm the youngest person i know in my position and no one seems in a rush to follow.

ThePathanKhansWitch I am actually working toward my doctorate specifically on methods of assessment and how they translate to subject mastery. Basically, I am studying whether or not the current system of standardised tests is actually promoting an indepth understanding of the subject and how that knowledge or way of thinking can be applied to other situations.
One of the things that a lot of studies show is that the over emphasis on standardised testing does reduce the apparent value of arts and other electives, when the reality is that these are an essential part of the curriculum for many reasons.

I read extra because I was really interested in my subject mumblesmum (swot!) and when I went to university it helped.

I'd be interested to know which universities are holding remedial classes in Maths for kids with A*s in it. DD1 did a Maths for Biologists course in her first year but that was because she didn't have A level Maths and I did something similar for my degree to cover the statistics needed to analyse experimental results.

There is life beyond the Russell Group but that is another argument.

I took A'levels 30 years ago, at a Grammar School. We were spoon-fed everything. Our Chemistry teacher said it was just a sausage factory. It was even worse at O'levels.

DD will be starting GCSE's next year. From what I've seen from her homework, she has already had to learn how to research, decide on the provenance of the information, to present it in a wide range of forms, etc, etc. Her written work is WAY better than mine was at 3 years older.

So are they teaching to the test more than we were, or is it just that they don't award the grades by ranking the students according to marks any more? I mean only a certain % of the top marks got A's, etc back then compared to anyone scoring x and above getting an A now.

Bojangles have to challenge that comment about only degrees from Russell gp institutions being worth the paper they are written on. There are other research led institutions (1994 group). Plus individual departments in many new universities will provide excellent courses. There are also some duff courses in RG unis. Sorrh but such sweeping generalisatioms sound as if they are based on snobbery.

OP, how come your son's fees will triple from his second to third year? As a continuing student, he should not be liable for the new fee regime.

And I do think that a-levels need to be made harder.

Remidal classes webiz

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation

It doesn't say anything about grades though - I was questioning your assertion that students with an A* in Maths A level have to take remedial classes before they can do science degrees.

Sparks Well done you!, I am truly saddened that we've lost so much manufacturing, engineering etc.

Thisis Wowzer, had to read your post twice [has now outed self as thicko on thread] to try to grasp a little understanding. When you talk about arts, do you mean as in poetry, literature etc? I would hate culture to be sniffed or seen as less than worthy.

true lequeen

in the year i took A levels, they were making them easier. the essay-based subjects were breaking single-question essay based exams into more GCSE-like stepped questions. not a good prep for university, where 'write 4 essays in 3 hours' was the measure.

Maths - polar co-ordinates were taken off the curriculum and not replaced with any other content in my year. even then there was a major stpe up for those i know doing maths courses at university - that step must be widening.

in the year i took them 14% got as (the highest number ever) - is that now 20%+

A levels have to be academically tough if they are to be an adequate preparation for university.

LeQueen I was just about to post the same. Absolutely, make it free again, so the gifted whatever their means are able to go to Uni.

There aren't enough jobs. University keeps a load of people off the dole queue.

All a bit modern art The Emperors New Clothes isn't it?.

It seems education was being pushed as a means to achieve top dollar, when I was young and my peers went to Uni, a lot went to pursue their hearts joy, some with careers in mind, but quite a few have had convoluted careers, and seem just as happy for it.
However what they might end up achieving salary wise wasn't really a consideration.

mumzy

I assume you mean Captain Corelli's Mandolin?

And, since you seem generally unsure, let me reassure you, as an actual A level English teacher, that we teach Hardy, Dickens and Chaucer, along with Wilde, Shakespeare, Lawrence, Bronte, Fitzgerald, Ibsen, Donne and numerous others. Austen is one of the optional texts at A2, but she's not actually that challenging...

Slack I did wonder at that, surely not I thought.

And add some female characters who could do with a swift kick up the arse...

The reason so many people go to university now is because vocational qualifications are seen as a second rate thing to achieve.

If vocational courses were not sneered at by employers and some parents maybe more people would be willing to go down the vocational route.

There has definitely been grade inflation, now its A, in 5 years it'll be A*s unless something is done.

She once wrote to an aspiring novelist friend (paraphrased) "Just take some half dozen families in an English town, and therein lies sufficient story for any plot"

Well, at least she used as many as half a dozen!