Read this.

[teejay100000]

www.cps.org.uk/cps_catalog/why%20can%27t%20they%20read.pdf

Breton, I think you have completely misunderstood 'differentiation'. No, not don't ask questions of less able students but ask targeted questions.

Also, there has been lots of research which has shown that students typically move backwards nearly a year in the transition from Yr 6 to Yr 7.

Are you a teacher?? Because you really don't seem to know very much about education.

Breton1900 you appear to have a very narrow knowledge of differentiation

Input differentiation

Resource differentiation

Support differentiation

Turn differentiation

Pre tutoring

Structured small steps with a mid point plenary to check understanding

doesn't involve dumbing down just teaching

And what would be your preferred approach instead of differntation Breton. If you're clever enough to get an A at GCSE come to the front where I'll talk at you for an hour. The rest of you get on with your cross stitch? FGS.

I needed a lot of differentiation when learning to drive and lots and lots of lessons. Like a lot of 'lower ability' students what I really lacked was confidence and experience. Should I have been told not to bother.

I cannot stand this elitist attitude that education is only for the clever or the privileged and everyone else should be up the chimneys and know their place.

5candles: Well I've taught many, many students who have achieved C grade who are perfectly academically competent to progress to FE and HE. There are so many points here. One is that I teach a lot of students who have achieved C or D in English at GCSE but much better grades in Maths and Science many of whom want to be medics or pharmacists. They're often perfectly competent in these areas and have good reasons for being less successful in English. Should we tell them they're not allowed to progress to study science at A Level because they got C in English. Likewise should I not have been allowed to become an English teacher because I got a C in Maths?

Depends on when you took your exams. In my day a C was considered the lowest acceptable O level grade to gain entry to university. Likewise candidates had to have at least a C in several subjects including a foreign language. Irrespective of whether you read Arts or Sciences those requirements were the norm.

It's too many years to be exact but as I recall a C at O level required anything above 63-66% in the exam. Somebody may correct me though!

Given the low pass rate required to obtain a C in English GCSE today I'm not sure I'd be too comfortable with a pharmacist or doctor whose literacy skills were a bit dodgy!

Obviously I'm much older than Breton because when I sat my O levels they were numeric grades 1 & 2 equating to an A grade 3 & 4 to a B 5 &6 to a C and basically I wasn't allowed to take A levels in subjects below a 3 ... how times change!

mrz: I wasn't discussing A levels but O levels. In my day no one would have got to sixth form without at least 6 O levels at C or above.

As for University, you'd be expected to have nothing less than a B at O level in the subject(s) you wanted to read and your A levels in your chosen subject(s) would have to be an A or at the very least a B. Your fourth A level at C might be considered if you had performed well at interview.

Real education should be elitist. Like professional sport - where only the best succeed.

Yet nobody seems to have a problem with only the best succeeding when it comes to sports, do they?

Breton1900 as was I if you read what I wrote

Breton1900
Do you honestly think that 'functional literacy' should be benchmarked by a teenager's understanding and analysis of As You Like it or Tess of the D'Urbervilles? This is what we're expecting the high and low achievers (AND the less motivated) to read in order to pass GCSEs.

Surely a differentiated english exam, perhaps based on useful things like reading and deciphering forms, writing cvs or mock interviews would be more useful for some young people?

Do you teach in a secondary school?

mrz: Then why mention A levels in your post?

Going back to O levels - I assume your Exam Board operated 1-5 rather than A-E. We certainly didn't have intermediate grades like the ones you cited. It was either an A or a B and a B was lower than an A. However, it was all a very long time ago.

I had to laugh at your definitions of differentiation! It all sounds rather like something required to program a computer! Would that teaching kids was simply a matter of plugging them and uploading everything on to their hard drives!

However, like so much pedagogic gobbledygook it all sounds so terribly portentous, nay even quasi-mystical!

I was pointing out that in the "good old days" pre alphabetic gradings a pupil with a C grade O level wouldn't have been allowed to study A levels never mind consider university sorry I didn't realise I had to differentiate my explanation

RollaCoasta wrote: "Surely a differentiated english exam, perhaps based on useful things like reading and deciphering forms, writing cvs or mock interviews would be more useful for some young people?"

I couldn't agree more! However, because of the league tables and the pressure to get ever more A*-C grades, coupled with the brownie points schools get when they enter every child for a GCSE these poor kids are made to struggle with poetry and Shakespeare when they'd be far better off doing the things you've suggested; or something practical like painting the school's fences or working in the school's allotment, or learning to feed themselves well on a budget.

No Breton my exam board didn't operate a 1-5 instead of A-E as I said in my post... originally O levels were graded numerically. When the A-E system was introduced an A grade equated to what had previously been graded 1 or 2 a B grade equated to what had previously been a 3 or 4 a C grade equated to a 5 or 6 etc
so you could say the introduction of the A-E was in effect a dumbing down of levels.

"However, like so much pedagogic gobbledygook it all sounds so terribly portentous, nay even quasi-mystical!"

No Breton it sounds like what good teachers do in order to reach all the pupils in their pupils not just the elite few while disregarding those not worth the effort.

Breton1900 - I hope I wasn't being quite as dismissive as 'painting the school fence'. I was thinking of something more literacy-based.

You sound as if you think low ability children/adults are lesser human beings and not worth educating.

mrz: Well I don't know how far back you are going but in 1962 O level grades where I went to school were A-E. However, you did write that you are obviously much older than me! The only exams that I recollect being graded numerically were CSEs but my school didn?t take them so I couldn?t comment.

?No Breton it sounds like what good teachers do in order to reach all the pupils in their pupils not just the elite few while disregarding those not worth the effort.?

Well that doesn?t actually make sense but I think I get the gist of what you are attempting to say. However, I?ve never said that any pupil should be disregarded. I?ve simply stated that advanced academic ability is not inherent to all and society shouldn?t go on pretending that it is!

RollaCoasta wrote: ?You sound as if you think low ability children/adults are lesser human beings and not worth educating.?

Yeah that?s right bloody Deltas and Epsilons ? quick pass me my Soma!

I never made any such statement. You have automatically assumed that I did so. I don?t disregard less academically able pupils I just believe that higher level education is, of necessity, elitist and if an individual can?t cut the mustard then they have to find something else to do. What is ?dismissive? about ?painting the school fence?? I don?t think it is me who is being elitist here. There is nothing demeaning in honest and useful manual work of whatever description. Anyway, where would we be without those people who perform essential tasks like emptying the bins and cleaning the streets?

Strangely enough Breton1900 I remember the old CSEs being graded A-E although obviously my grammar school didn't support CSEs

Advanced academic ability isn't always evident in 5 year olds Benton or indeed in 11 year olds

mrz: No, and neither did mine!

I would be interested to know your sources for CSEs regarding grading A-E. As I recall CSEs were always graded numerically but you seem to be more familiar with them than I am.

mrz wrote: Strangely enough Breton1900 I remember the old CSEs being graded A-E although obviously my grammar school didn't support CSEs."

Perhaps you could explain how you, who sat your O levels prior to 1962, seem apparently so familiar with the CSEs that were not in fact, introduced until 1965?

mrz wrote ?Advanced academic ability isn't always evident in 5 year olds Benton or indeed in 11 year olds?

No indeed, but sometimes it actually is!

recent research has shown that academic ability in young children is a very very poor indicator of how well they will do in later years.

Says who? Some documented evidence is required to support any such sweepingly generalized statement.

So much rubbish Breton. ANYONE can get involved in sport. Doesn't mean they have a chance of qualifying for the olympics.

Likewise ANYONE can and should be involved in lifelong education. Doing GCSEs or A Levels or even going to university doesn't mean you're going to go to Cambridge.

Suggesting that education should be elitist is one of the most odious things I've ever read on here.

And it is rubbish to say that a Grade C was required for university.

In fact when I applied to Oxford they routinely offered 2 Es!!!!

Now, as 20 or 50 years ago C grades or less at A Level will get you into very few universities (mainly new universiites or old polytechnichs). Russell Group universities demand A grades. and Oxbridge and co are on the road to demanding A* grades only. So universities are more elitist than ever.

But just because you are not going to get into Cambridge or get A gradess does not mean that you are not entitled to go on to FE or HE.

Are you seriously suggesting that only people getting A grades should be allowed to go on to FE or HE?

Don't you realize that you would be talking about a very small minority.

And what are the rest supposed to do?

What you're suggesting is offensive beyond belief.

Gosh you are an academically elitist bunch .

I did CSE's at my comprehensive. And I can confirm that they were graded 1(equivalent to Olevel C to 5 (I think). I have a grade 2 german and a grade 1 history certificate to prove it. Btw - the grade 1 history counted as one of the 5 olevels needed to get to 6th form to take 3 Alevels.

'There is nothing demeaning in honest and useful manual work of whatever description. Anyway, where would we be without those people who perform essential tasks like emptying the bins and cleaning the streets?'

In fact, why bother with educating the masses at all? Reading and writing will only give them ideas above their station. At birth lets divide people into the deserving and undeserving (i.e. rich and poor). We'll educate the rich and get the poor sweeping the streets and polishing their boots as soon as they are old enough to follow instructions. They should be grateful too.

mytyl, po bronson has a whole chapter on teh subject in teh book nurtureshock with an extensive refernce list of evidence based research