97 % pass rate for A-Levels ; how did that happen?

[m1m1rie]

I took my A-levels in 1989 and passed all three, and was in the minority amongst my peers. Most people failed at least one and only the really, really clever ones could achieve A-grades. Now, with so many passing and record numbers achieving A-grades how do we differentiate between those who are genuinely talented and those who are not? A girl I know has just passed 3 A-levels. She spends her days chatting on her mobile, obsessing about herself and often didn't bother going into college if she didn't feel like it. She even turned up late for one of her exams. As far as being 'clever' is concerned, she couldn't hold a conversation with you unless it was about celebrities or herself, and yet she has managed to pass all three A-levels. I am dumbstruck. I find it demeans those who do put effort into learning as they will all just be lumped in together now and treated with disdain by those who think that all kids are thick and only have A-levels because the exams are easier to pass now. Whatever is going on with the current system, it's not doing anyone any favours, it only serves to make Government stats look good.

And if you fail this course you are washed-up.

If Universities are right when they say that A Level system makes it difficult to identify the best students and that too many kids are passing the exams, wouldn't there be an increase in kids dropping out of University or failing their courses? Do the falling standards in education extend to University education?

There would.

There is.

So maybe at this rate only 10% of the Pop will get a Degree?

When I was applying for History (1973 so we're going back a bit here) I had offers of BBC& EE. The EE was from Royal Holloway which was part of London University and they told me that they interviewed all candidates and if they thought they were suitable for the course they offered 2 E's & if not they turned them down - so it wasn't that they were expecting them to get 2 E's. It sounds like they didn't think much of A levels as an indicator of ability even then. It did take a lot of the pressure off & in the end I got 3 B's & went to Exeter.

Re: the 'washed up' surf management course, this kind of course seems to be more like an American style modular degree course - I think they can get credits for doing sports can't they? I can see how you could put various courses together to come up with a surfing degree - management, marine science, biology, but if I'm honest I think it would be of more value for somebody to specialise in marine biology or economics and do the surfing in their spare time. I think what seems to be happening is that universities are packaging their courses to attract under graduate students in order to get funding, which I do agree is putting the chicken before the egg.

How incredibly snobby, conservative and Grandgrindish some of you are. Some of you seem to be saying 'why don't we go back to a golden-age when those nasty, thick working-class types went to secondary moderns and then down t'pit leaving the universities and the high paid and powerful jobs for the middle and upper class geniuses'.

Of course parents want their kids to go to university because over a life time it will increase their employment potential and earnings vastly over a life-time not to mention the enriching personal,social and academic time of being at university itself. As someone else has pointed out many graduates don't want to rush into a job or don't know which job to choose. Yes, you can probably easily find a job as a fruit-picker, hospital orderly or whatever at 16 but that is probably where you will still be in another 10 years unless you undertake further education and many 16 year olds or 18 year olds don't go into employment at all they go straight on to benefits.

Who is to say that one subject is worthy of study at degree when another isn't. What makes pet-grooming or plumbing less worthy than art, music or literature?? A plumber doing a degree is not going to read Proust they are going to study plumbing (science, finance, communication etc) which is as valid as a literature student (which I once was spending 3 years reading books).

And, yes a plumber may earn more per hour than I do as a teacher but many are self-employed and don't get sick pay, holiday pay and a pension as I do.

And tehre has been a previous link on quality of English. I'll find it in a minute. Not knowing or caring about where to put an apostrophe or being a good speller(like Chaucer and Shakespeare) does not mean you are not good at English.

Finally as an English teacher who has had to deal with quite a few A grade students who are or were Oxbridge candidates who have got B and C grades this week (we think because of a rogue examiner and are askign for re-marks) I'd say don't believe the hype. Yes pass rates and A grades may be rising. But those getting an A at A Level are still a minority and deserve their rewards.

Nobody has responded to my point about the lack of correlation between A Levels and class of degree. A grades at A Level don't mean you are any more likely to come out with a 1st class degree than someone with C grades. 16-18 is a very difficult age and you can't write off teen-agers and say they don't deserve to go to universitry because they have not got As or even Cs at A Level. It does not mean that they won't excel at universitry and be the teachers, business men and politicians of the future.

yes and just think of us mature students who have never done A levels

Without exception the 'best' students (most committed, organised, hardest working and perceptive) I ever worked with in university were mature students. They knoew how much they wanted to be there.

What about me then Martianbishop? Should I also have enrolled on an apprenticeship rather than discussing the merits of Proust et al for 3 years then anotehr year during my MA then another during my PGCE??

No, I think that you are missing my point. I have no issue with people discussing Proust. My point was that if I had leaking pipes I rather needed a fully trained plumber rather than an expert in Proust. We need all walks of life. All. Not just the academic. And the vocational is as valid (and sometimes a dan site more helpful) than the academic. I would prefer my children to have the choice, rather than feeling that only the academic is valid.

I would like vocational studies to be properly finded and valued (have said this many times on this thread btw).

I am delighted that you studied Proust, I'll just not be phoning you when I need a plumber.

And we have a national shortage of trained craftsmen/women.

And there are any nimber of kids who are being pressured into the A level/degree route who would be better, happier and more sucessful doing courses that allow them to excell.

(and btw I also mentioned X ray difraction patterns, something that I can analyse and that makes me bugger all use at fixing pipes as well)

It comes back to that distinction between training and education. For me a degree was never about learning to "do" something. Mine was in languages, but I don't use them in my job - well, not really, anyway. It wasn't vocational training. Whereas if I'd trained as a joiner or plumber, I'd have expected to do on-the-job learning directly relevant to my choice of career, and wouldn't really have expected to do a university course in it. Yes, you can learn other stuff in the classroom like communication and finance which may help you to run a small business, but those are additional skills.

I think your first para is a little unfair, b&wcat - I've always said people of all classes and all backgrounds and from all types of school should have the chance to go to university if they match up academically. It's nothing at all to do with preserving old-fashioned class distinctions.

The point about self-employment is a fair one. Then again, I'm self-employed too, with those same issues, and I bet some plumbers earn more than me.

The quality of English question is one we could debate for hours without getting anywhere, because there is little middle ground - I've been there before. I don't think it's fair or relevant to cite Shakespeare and Chaucer, given how different English was in their centuries; spelling was more fluid then anyway. I think we shouldn't be ashamed or afraid of asking people to be able to produce decent written English, correctly spelt and punctuated and with correct grammar.

But don't you understand that there's a link (a very very strong one) between class and academic success. If you grow up in a deprived family with no books in the house and parents who don't support you academically you're unlikely to be as successful as someone whose parents had a good education, support your education and have lots of books in the house. The first child may leave school at 16 or go to college and come out with Ds and Es at A Level while the second child is likely to be more 'successful'. If you lot maintain that universities should only allow students with As or (A*s) or Bs or even Cs in then the status quo is preserved. The second student gets in, gets a good job and has kids who do well at school and go to uni, the second student is trapped in poverty as are her kids.

And there is no easy link between success at A Levels and class of degree. The second child could get a 1st class degree and go on to have a successful career except some of you are saying she doesn't deserve to.

But Martian, I think you're missing my point, there's no easy distinction between training/vocational and academic is my poitn. What makes medicine, ICT and music academic but not plumbing?? And you can get a BEd so why not a degree in the theory of pet grooming or mechanics or whatever that both teaches you the theory and the practice of your vocation?

I meant the other way around. You can get Ds and Es at A Level and a 1st class degree (this happens much more than you would think).

And how can one set of exams really be a judge of your academic ability. I've taught at least 2 girls who have never produced a piece of writing less than an A grade and have got 3 As in their other subjects but one has mysteriously come out with a C grade and one a B in English at AS Level. Their chances of going to Oxbridge or a top uni are now dashed unless we can get a remark. I am an experienced teacher and examiner and confident that these girls should have got As.

m1 m1 rie, I was intrigued to read some of the responses to your OP as I've been feeling the same way as you for years!

I got 4 A levels in 1990- grades BBCD- English, History, French and General Studies. I was quite happy with my grades , apart from the D. I would echo your comments about A grades. At my school, usually only the Oxbridge league students got A. B was bloody good and C was absolutely fine. D wasn't considered too bad either. 'Three Cs' or 'BCC' was a pretty standard offer from the universities my friends applied to. If so many A grades are achieved now,does that mean are entrance reqirements alot higher than they used to be? Eg would you get into somewhere like Kent or Sussesx to do social sciences, with three Cs today?

I don't want to 'dumb down' the achievements of today's students, but surely the huge increase in high grades devalues the achievements of past exam successes.

or, malory towers,
D) students/teachers are getting better at teaching and learning exam technique

Because I think to have an academic subject you have to have some degree of depth of subject that allows debate and analysis. I know that this happens in medicine, where there is considerable debate about much of the science underpinning the illnesses and treatments under study.

RE the background issue, this I understand only too well, since I grew up in the Rhondda vally, and mine was the first generation to gain any form of tertiary education.( my grandfather was a miner at 12, my parents left school at 14) They key is obviously in raising expectations, but I still feel that there are many chidren following courses that do not meet their needs. I would, in all seriousness, prefer my children to carry out a vocational course if that fitted them better.

and much as I smile at some of the academics I studied during my PGCE ( I am still failing to find Vygotski a daily help ) There is a depth of study in educational theory that I don't think you will find in pet grooming.

Now as I have admitted, I have used the services of a pet groomer, but I don't feel that the lady needed 3 years training, and seriously doubt that you could find enough background for a rigorous and vibrant degree course.

I am, as ever, happy to take correction from passing pet groomers