To think that it's time the UK had a GED (High School equivalency) mechanism?

[Just5minswithDacre]

Something similar to the American and Canadian system?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Educational_Development

I've applied for a contract working in an area partly concerned withNEETS (keeping it vague on purpose) so I've been boning up for that interview.

I was also chatting to a Home Edding friend at the weekend about the expense and difficulty of accessing GCSE courses and exams, and particularly about how changes to the GCSE system will make things harder/easier for HEers and the likely effect on the NEET numbers. Then we wandered on to the raising of the participation age and who that might have an impact on.

I've been thinking about it since and it seems to me that anyone NOT getting 5+ GCSEs at 16 (for whatever reason) has an unnecessarily difficult path to 'catch up'. There's absolutely blanket provision for 16-18s and adults to take Maths and English GCSE, but beyond that, it's hard to access Level 2 general education at 16+. Anyone trying is likely to be forced down a vocational route.

So why don't we have a GED-type option? Should we?

Whoops posted too soon.

... that Science isn't promoted more to those considering Radio production, that ICT isn't promoted to girls and so on.

Does anyone seriously think we should follow anything from the US education system? On the whole I don't see it as a beacon for the rest of the world to follow - Bowling for Columbine is a good illustration.

[Eyeroll]

Bowling for Columbine is actually not a good illustration.

The GED is a really, really good thing.

I'm in the US, and my DCs all go or went to a public high school. My DCs all know a few kids who for various reasons decided to kick over the traces and skip the last year or so of high school and not graduate when they should have. 80% of those kids (4 out of 5) eventually did the GED at the local community college and now have at least some hope of getting their lives back on track. One went on to do an associate degree (a two year third level course leading to a 'junior' degree qualification with credits transferable towards a four year bachelor's degree if he wants - he can finish the final two years of university in an actual university and end up with a BA).

The high school offered different tracks depending on individual interest and test scores - lots of vocational, technical, art, science/engineering courses were offered on top of the core English, maths, humanities and mfl and science graduation requirements.

Prisoners in many US prisons are sometimes offered the chance to get their GED in prison. It is a rehab tool.

The broad curriculum required for high school graduation in most US high schools is somethign the UK should copy too, imo.

Bolograph Sat 21-May-16 23:27:14
Well a standard US/CA high school diploma doesn't give you direct access to UK universities.
Or US four year universities either, for which the standard admission test is the SAT plus SAT subject tests.
That is not accurate.
US universities look at your high school grade point average, the level of courses you have taken, and also your ACT or your SAT results.
Honours level high school curricula are designed to prepare students to do well on the ACT and SAT exams. 'College prep' level courses will normally net a student a high average score on the ACT or SAT.

Several students from my local high school go to UK, German, Canadian and other universities around the world every year. St Andrews accepted three last year. A good few head off to U Toronto and McGill and the University of British Columbia annually. This is on top of the many highly selective US universities many attend -- Harvard, Yale, Columbia, University of Chicago, Cal Tech, various smaller liberal arts colleges (Swarthmore, etc), and a host of other universities all over the country.

It should be noted that US universities dominate the top 50 in the world, and also that students from the US tend to get into them.

Glamourgates Sat 21-May-16 23:04:23
European education is better than US education so why should we dumb down? Genuinely interested why we should follow an inferior system

For starters, there is no such thing as 'European education'. Secondly, British education isn't all that. About one third of school leavers have wasted their own time and everyone else's since age four.

The 'dumb American' image is most interesting to note here.

NickiFury Sat 21-May-16 12:45:20
I think further education seems to be more accessible in the US in some ways tbh was. I have always thought this. There seems to be a "school" for many career paths and a lot more of them and you don't have to jump through hoops to get into it.
I agree with that.
My local HS offers an 87 page academic catalogue, with 79 pages of courses and course descriptions which allow a huge range of interests and accommodate a wide range of abilities.

Getting through US high school to graduation is not complicated at all.

Most states have basic graduation requirements - a minimum number of years of English, maths, science. Many high schools within each state have their own requirements on top of that - art, mfl, history, health, consumer ed, driver's ed, computer proficiency, PE, and electives.
On top of that again, there are requirements of many universities to take into account. It is emphasised that many selective universities expect four years of core coursework as well as electives, on top of the life skill sort of courses that are required.
All of this is explained by counsellors, and four year plans are pencilled in for each individual student when they are in their freshman year. This plan can be changed as time goes on.

Many courses can be taken online or tested out of. All of my DDs so far have done Health online. Two tested out of computer proficiency. Summer school offers the chance to skip a year of work and advance to a higher level. One DD did summer school two years in a row and advanced to an AP track in maths.

AP courses offer the chance to complete (for free) the first semester of university coursework. All of my DCs have been able to start their core curriculum in university at 200 level or above. One tested out of French in university even though she had done honours and not AP French in high school.

The rationale behind the core coursework that is done in American universities, as expressed by the University of Chicago:
"This famed Core curriculum, a model for American general education, is the University of Chicago student’s introduction to the tools of inquiry used in every discipline—science, mathematics, humanities, and social sciences. The goal is not just to transfer knowledge, but to raise fundamental questions and become familiar with the powerful ideas that shape our society.

Not only does the curriculum provide the background for any major and for continuing study after graduation, it also provides a common experience for all students in the College. All students have taken the same sorts of classes and read the same kinds of texts, struggling and triumphing over the same sorts of ideas. This gives every student a common vocabulary of ideas and skills, no matter his or her background before coming to the College."

Most universities that require core courses have this motive.

Junior colleges offer the chance to study at third level for a fraction of the cost and get two years worth of credit towards a university degree. Many offer the chance to repeat university level coursework that a student might have failed, or to do required coursework over a summer that would take (and cost) a semester in university. In contrast to the penny wise and pound foolish British approach, community colleges (aka junior colleges) will be beefed up under Obama admin proposals in recognition of the fact that they are tremendous resources with the potential to make third level education and career education accessible to millions.

I almost wish I hadn't opened this thread.

I've come over all

I clicked the link to GED international centres that was posted and ...American parents of kids here can pootle to Milan (or Rome), and sit six papers. That's it. Exam organisation drama over.

Whereas I, parent of half-Briton, have had to learn how to use excel. Cos I have needed a spreadsheet to collate...

all the potential centres to call - then the few that said yes - then the 2 that said yes and didn't require a hotel stay

all the exam centres near enough to my sister's house in England for the 2 subjects the exam centres here don't offer - then the single one of the above that hasn't vetoed orals for MFLs

all the papers involved (I think we are up to 14 for five subjects)

all the exam sessions we will have to use to avoid exam clashes (and even with that safeguard I still occasionally wake up in a cold sweat with a recurring nightmare about opening the confirmed timetables from Edexcel and CIE to discover we need to be in Italy for a morning exam, and England for an afternoon one)

I didn't need a column for the cost. It has been the one easy to remember bit. It's 150 for everybody. Euros over here. Sterling over there.

Fecking lucky bastard American parents over here. Jammy gits. S'not fair.

I know I made things much more complicated by leaving the country, and that's all my own fault etc. But even without a geographical disadvantage I can see how it could be a bugger of a system to navigate when you are doing it outside of a mainstream school.

It's not surprising people end up gazing wistfully at the GED.

As it is now, I have no idea how to go about getting my GCSEs or equivalent in a way that I can manage.

Talk to your local FE college. You can take GCSE maths, English and usually science at any FE college. Most offer evening provision and day time courses.

To get another 2 subjects you could either do online courses and sit as a private candidate, which would cost, or do another course such as BTEC which is equivalent.

I'm really shocked.

I genuinely thought that local colleges did GCSEs for adults. I'm sure they used to as I remember (very very vaguely) thinking about doing something like GCSE Italian.

I've just had a really good hunt. In the (pretty large) city I live in you can do GCSE maths, English and (slightly randomly) biology. But that's it. So someone with no GCSEs can't get 5.

There are also lots of "Level 2 access courses" but they only seem to be suitable for access to another course. No good for just getting the 5 A-Cs that you need for so many jobs.

Www.hotcourses.com

Mumoftwoyoungkids

Aside from a handful of subjects that have no coursework, for the time being it's IGCSEs not GCSEs. Cos as an external candidate it is really hard to find a provider who can deal with the coursework aspect. I expect that will change when most subjects at GCSE go back to final exam only?

MFLs can be even more of kerfuffle than the other subjects. Becuase many of the exam centres that do accept external candidates don't offer orals for MFL IGCSEs, and no oral=no grade for the most popular languages offered.

Spanish and French have been the hardest to find a place to sit for that reason. I chose the syllabus based not on the content/exam format, but based solely on the fact that Edexcel stick all three exams for each language on a single day. So I only have to pay train fares (fecking extortionate ! WFT has happened to train fares in England? ) twice for two IGCSEs.

Back over here I will be lugging DS on a similarly long trek two or three times per subject. But train fares are WAY cheaper here, so it's not as hair raising as it would be if we were sitting those in England.

The logistics lead to compromises. DS desperately wanted to do Human Biology, and there is a fab online provider at a reasonable cost. But he can't sit that here and I can't afford to be stuck in England for 10 days. Which is how far apart the papers can spread. So he is doing bog standard biology and lumping it. With very bad grace. Becuase apparently plants are "boring" in a way that people are not.

I can find out if Italian has a DELE / DELF equivilent. I would have prefered DS to sit DELE & DELF for Spanish and French respectively becuase we can take the exam up the road and I think they are a tougher exam, which would be great becuase he wants to do 2xMFL at uni. However... they aren't worth any UCAS points and don't "count" as IGCSE equivalents in the way that the ECDL does.

The joy of the internet is the opportunities it opens up for study on an international scale. It is entirely possible for a UK-based student to study online for an accredited US high school diploma - my home-educated DD2 did this over three years from 2011-14. She has Asperger's and difficulty accessing her short-term memory, and would have found GCSE-style revision and a barrage of formal exams almost impossible to cope with. To add to that, the only girls' school local to us insisted on putting all students - including those with SEN statements - through 11-12 GCSEs, regardless of their actual needs or the possibility that they'd have benefited from a pared-down curriculum.

For the high school diploma course, there were 21.5 units (or credits' worth) of subjects to complete, with between three and seven modular exams per subject, and DD2 could decide for herself when she was ready to take those exams, log in and sit them. The majority were multiple-choice although there were some essay-based ones in a couple of the English Language subjects.

The full course tuition fee was about US$1,300 (then around £935) and included all necessary textbooks which were mailed to us, plus study guides which we could download as PDF files and print off when ready.

In due course she graduated a month before her 17th birthday, received her diploma and transcript, and we got a statement of comparability through UK NARIC which declared that it could be regarded as equivalent to GCSE passes at grades A*-C "in all subjects studied in 12th grade". That was a little ambiguous, as the online high school had compressed four years' studies into three years and the 16.5 compulsory core modules had to be done first, finishing off with the 5 elective subjects; but we used that ambiguity to our advantage, grouped the various subjects together as they best fitted (e.g. all the English Lang and Lit modules, all the maths modules) and came out of it with the reasonable claim that DD2 had a qualification comparable to six GCSEs: English Lang, Maths, Biology, Physics, History and Business Studies.

I believe it would have been good enough for her to apply to our local sixth-form college if she'd been motivated, but TBH I think achieving it pushed her to the upper limit of her academic ability. Its value to her sense of achievement and self-worth made the whole three years' non-stop work worthwhile. (And I do mean "non-stop" - to complete the whole thing within three years, she had to take one exam every 10 days or so, including weekends and public holidays. We had only one fortnight off in those three years.)

Incidentally, the online high school we went through was also open to adult students, if anybody on here is really having difficulty accessing a path to "five or more good GCSE passes including English, maths and science". There was a wide range of electives on offer, including more challenging academic subjects and vocational ones; and as it was all self-paced, I imagine well-motivated and well-informed adult students could work through the requirements much faster than DD2 did.

If anybody's interested, PM me and I'll give you further information.

I've just had a really good hunt. In the (pretty large) city I live in you can do GCSE maths, English and (slightly randomly) biology. But that's it. So someone with no GCSEs can't get 5.

Ridiculous isn't it?

In the (pretty large) city I live in you can do GCSE maths, English and (slightly randomly) biology. But that's it. So someone with no GCSEs can't get 5.

The problem is compounded by the fact that it both does and doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because if you want to go on to the next level(s), GCSEs aren't required. You can do (in the sense that you can get admission to a course leading to) A Levels as a mature student without GCSEs, you can go to universities with access courses which in turn don't need GCSEs (and with the rise of foundation years this looks more plausible) and you can do an OU degree I think without any qualifications (the foundation courses are still open access, aren't they?)

So the government can say "why do we need GCSE provision?"

Because the reality is (a) there are people who need GCSEs, just that, GCSEs to do things that they want to do. They want to apply for "5 GCSE" type jobs, not do a maths degree over ten years and graduate in their fifties. And even if they do want to do higher qualifications, GCSEs are a damned good preparation for doing so. Everything we know about "failure to progress" in universities says that the further you are from the obvious three A Levels done at the obvious time, building on the obvious 8-10 GCSEs at the obvious time, the more likely you are to drop out. If you haven't got GCSEs at 16, my informed guess would be that getting some GCSEs at 26 would be better than scraping into a university on special dispensations and failing the first year because, unsurprisingly, you don't have the background.

I'm not sure the GED per se is that right answer: I think what's really needed is access to standard qualifications throughout your life.

iPost

I clicked the link to GED international centres that was posted and ...American parents of kids here can pootle to Milan (or Rome), and sit six papers. That's it. Exam organisation drama over.

Where are the testing centres? In which organisation?

The London one is at the Pearson centre in High Holborn.

I'm just thinking about the logistics of 'when you feel ready' style testing.

It is bloody stressful to HEer. I started looking into it when DD was an HE 13 year old and it seemed possible she might HE right through. Even then, with three years in hand, my tentative spreadsheet gave me nightmares. Thankfully she enrolled ins school at 14.

So the government can say "why do we need GCSE provision?"

Because the reality is (a) there are people who need GCSEs, just that, GCSEs to do things that they want to do. They want to apply for "5 GCSE" type jobs, not do a maths degree over ten years and graduate in their fifties. And even if they do want to do higher qualifications, GCSEs are a damned good preparation for doing so. Everything we know about "failure to progress" in universities says that the further you are from the obvious three A Levels done at the obvious time, building on the obvious 8-10 GCSEs at the obvious time, the more likely you are to drop out. If you haven't got GCSEs at 16, my informed guess would be that getting some GCSEs at 26 would be better than scraping into a university on special dispensations and failing the first year because, unsurprisingly, you don't have the background.

Well summarised. Exactly that.

I'm not sure the GED per se is that right answer: I think what's really needed is access to standard qualifications throughout your life.

Maybe affordable GCSEs with online and evening study and computerised testing whenever you're ready would be the compromise. (And no coursework).

On the subject of the limited usefulness of Access courses, the adult ed department at our local sixth-form college even offers a Pre-Access course for students that aren't academically experienced enough to drop straight into A Level standard studying.

The one-year Pre-Access course comprises foundation tier GCSE English Lang, Maths and Biology studies, three evenings a week and some additional daytime tasks. All very laudable, but it's still by and large limiting the more able students to a top achievable grade of C.

I think it's actually very difficult to shine at GCSEs if, for whatever reason, you end up taking them at a later stage of life than customary.

Where are the testing centres? In which organisation?

Milan & Rome, both at TechNet which is some sort of professional exam centre network... thingie. Looks like they hold exam sessions for mostly international tech exams, but they also let you sit GED, TOEFL and UKCAT.

But not IGCSEs.

HE hasn't been too bad for us, (education wise... I've sweated bullets and aged 10 years with the time/effort involved in keeping him fully inserted in his peer group locally). DS was such a bad fit with the local schools that the alternative has been quite relaxed in comparison. But ... ouffffff, the exam logistics have been a right bugger. I have had many many sleepless nights trying to keep all the balls in the air organisation and expense wise.

I know many people are unhappy about the A level reform, and I'm sure they are justified. But I punched the air with joy at the concept of one less set of exams to organise.

All very laudable, but it's still by and large limiting the more able students to a top achievable grade of C.

I think it's actually very difficult to shine at GCSEs if, for whatever reason, you end up taking them at a later stage of life than customary

Quite. There will be potential theoretical physicists out there who don't have their GCSEs yet. RG & Oxbridge material. The next great What are they supposed to do?

Milan & Rome, both at TechNet which is some sort of professional exam centre network..

Same kind of thing as Pearson then.

But I punched the air with joy at the concept of one less set of exams to organise.

There will be potential theoretical physicists out there who don't have their GCSEs yet.

This sort of romantic ideal is trotted out, but there's not a lot of reason to believe it's true. There was a time when great academic geniuses were denied access to education on a large scale; these days, the pool of people who did not have the opportunity to access education at 16 for reasons that are fixed by the time they are 26/36 is small. Not zero. Small. Mature university students in undergraduate programmes in RG universities are incredibly rare and the chances of someone managing to do a mature degree, a PhD, a post-doc and get a research job are very small indeed. I'm not saying zero, I'm saying very small (and pointing to examples in the past is irrelevant: the whole point is that access to education is now much better).

No, distracting ourselves with unrecognised Paulis is missing the point of people who missed out of education in their teens for all sorts of reasons but whose lives would be transformed by some GCSEs and a BTEC higher diploma if but they could access it.

I think it's the full range of abilities and aptitudes who miss out at 16 Bolo.

There has been such a surge of eating disorders and autism, to name just two things that can disrupt a secondary education.

The numbers of people in each category of potential don't really matter as far as I can see. Going back at 19+ (or 16+ to catch up what you missed (or mucked up) is a wholly good idea for those that want to do it and it doesn't matter if those GCSEs could be used as the first step on a path to medical school or for immediate use securing an admin job (or both), they should be available and accessible and the full range of A* to U grades (or equiv) available too.

My DCs' high school offered online courses through Brigham Young University in Utah (Mormon affiliated afaik but don't let that put you off).

is.byu.edu/site/# Click on Courses link on top left. You could also look at the Programs link.

I am not sure if anything they offer would be useful but who knows..

Also, the way it worked with my DCs was they had to do a paper exam after completing the online material and the multi choice exams at the end of each chapter. Their counsellor in school acted as proctor for this. If you were to do something like this, you would need to find someone to act as a proctor.

I can't say I've made an exhaustive search of the internet, but I did find this "5 GCSE course" which Bournville College offers to adult learners, full-time over one year:

www.bournville.ac.uk/courses/certificate-in-fe-gcse-course/

I wonder what sort of take-up they had on it this year, and whether they'll offer it again in the 2016/17 academic year?

It's strange isn't it? The variation from town to town?

I've been boring on about this IRL since the weekend and apparently Kingston (SW London) and Swindon are quite famous in the HE community hereabouts as being places that DO offer 5 GCSEs in a year and some students travel quite a distance to those courses.

Probably still no good to working adult learners either.

I've just had a really good hunt. In the (pretty large) city I live in you can do GCSE maths, English and (slightly randomly) biology.

Nothing random about it, if you want to be a teacher you need GCSE (or equivalent) English, maths and science, biology is often seen as the one it is easier to achieve in than single subject science.

My SIL finished school at 16 with virtually no qualifications, and then in her thirties took an access course, went to university and has completed a masters (she is a teacher now). For those that want to progress onto degrees I think that there are options, and it's also recognised that studying so much later is much harder than at the right time so you don't require the same sort of qualifications (eg As at GCSE) that you would if you went down the traditional age appropriate route.

I'd agree that it's the need for GCSEs for non academic things that's probably more challenging, and that's where countries that allow you effectively to go back to school do better. Although really they shouldn't be allowing anyone not to graduate in the first place. I don't know about the States, but graduating school here in Canada is really really not that difficult, with the exception of the Grade 12 English course it's more about turning up and doing expected classwork than anything else.

Does anyone seriously think we should follow anything from the US education system? On the whole I don't see it as a beacon for the rest of the world to follow - Bowling for Columbine is a good illustration.

I don't think we'd need to scrap gun control to copy a qualification format was grin

The point about the Film title is that regular Bowling had become part of their "education"

Oh yes, I see.

I've been reading the recent memoir of the mother of one of the Columbine killers; Apparently bowling was a 7am elective option. I'd be impressed with anything that got students up at that hour TBH. I was thunderstruck that7am electives existed.