English education is like training monkeys

[Hennightpanic]

Always working backwards from the exam requirements. So for example, in German A level, endless practice of the specific type of questions that will come up in the exam, no matter that they have nothing to do with broadening their understanding of German language or culture. Similarly in year 6 Sats preparation.
Or talking about Of Mice and Men to death without other works getting a look in.

It's nothing like this in Germany, what are other countries like?

I agree with you. I was discussing this with a colleague today. We are teachers and it saddens us.

It's awful. I wish there was a way of stopping it.

How does the German system work?

The teaching process is the other way round - the subject gets taught, then there's an assessment, not like here where exams are devised and then the teaching drills pupils how to pass in the best way.

If I hear anymore about Of Mice and bloody Men, I'll scream.
But I've got one more DC to get through that phase of eddikashun so get your earplugs ready now.

DD discovered recently that though 'An iPod' would have been a correct answer to a question in a GCSE exam, the only 'right' answer was 'An MP3 player'.

This is the madness - like telling able pupils not to write in-depth answers...

There's not an awful lot of flexibility in the German curriculum, either, to be fair. You either meet end-of-year expectations or you don't. If you don't, you repeat the year.
Assessments get planned so that the majority of pupils can achieve the equivalent of a C grade. If the results are too poor, the test has to be revised and done again for the entire class. If you are in a high-achieving class, attaining the average grade will be more difficult. It's a constant comparison with other pupils in the same class, instead of having any kind of sense as to where you are academically as an individual.
There's no differentiation within most classes, at least not in the way it's done here. Most of the time, you work through a workbook in your core subjects.

I have to admit, though, I find the content of the curriculum more challenging and some of the ideas a lot more sensible. I have tried to pick the good bits from both systems and combine them in my teaching.

If you are only going to read one American novel in your life, it should not be Of Mice and Men or To Kill a Mockingbird. Also, how does one teach without science or math textbooks?

I agree there are definitely quite a few flaws in the German system as well, but there is more content and challenge in what is being taught.

Happily, my eldest has a really inspiring English teacher who teaches above and beyond what is needed for the exam. They still had to do Of Mice & Men, but also cover things that are not directly on the syllabus.

Isn't the German system the one where children are streamed by aptitude into different levels of schooling when they are really young, with no room for mobility?

Yes they are streamed. Not a perfect system by any means.

So in Germany, each teacher, what? Teaches the content and then an exam is devised for what has been taught?

Does each teacher teach what they want then? And devise their own exams/assessments at year/term end?

The trouble is qualifications in the UK are imperative. You will struggle to get on any post 16 course without your GCSEs and large swathes off the population are planning on A levels and university.

Parents unsurprisingly seek out schools with a good track record for helping students attain those qualifications.

Teachers are judged on how many of their pupils attain those qualifications.

QED: the entire education system runs backward, starting with the qualification in mind and each lesson being focused on how to get it.

Drank, there are guidelines for the curriculum content and there are comparative assessments to see that pupils are at the same level, but within that framework yes teachers can teach what they want and devise their own assessments. Only centrally administered exam is the Abitur

I find the British system very odd.

In Portugal children have continuous evaluation which includes attendance, homework quality, class participation, debates, projects and an exam each trimester. The input in each category is added to a final grade each year.

There's a curriculum for each class and the focus is on demonstrating understanding, rather than ticking boxes in an exam. In fact, almost all exams are built around essays/equations etc.

Word, in Germany you need qualifications as well, but the onus is less on the school/teacher to make it happen but more on the pupils themselves to achieve

Poppy that sounds similar to German style assessment

I'd like to see the utter uproar if UK exams were based on essays.

Because that's what they were like when I did my A'levels a million years ago.

The in-term assessment is like Poppy described in Italy as well. The kids are under constant pressure to do well in these mid term tests. I was at school for 4 hours of "mark scrutiny" checking with the other teachers that all the averages were correctly noted ready for the reports next week.

It seems to me (from the Italy point of view) that what is done within the school year is harder than what is done at each real exam stage, which seems a bit mad really. Bring me a kid who is getting 8 in English and I can tell you what their English is like. Bring me an 18 yr old who has passed their "maturita'" diploma (Italian equivalent of Abitur but much easier) and all I know is they managed to get through 5 yrs of high school without failing a year. Because no-one fails it. Ever.

There is no point in having a qualification when there is no real knowledge or education to back it up. I have seen threads on MN where parents are bemoaning the fact that their child has a GCSE A grade in a language, yet cannot have even the most basic conversation in that language. Another was complaining that their child had never read the whole of Romeo and Juliet for their English GCSE, just a few relevant scenes.

My favorite example though (if favorite is the right word) was the young man in Peckham, who was interviewed on the Today programme a few years ago, who had 6 or 7 GCSEs but, because he couldn't read or write, was unable to go to college or to find a job!

It is totally ludicrous, to the extent that teachers get told off for teaching the subject in depth and not focussing enough on exam technique

I am not defending the UK state system - but I would not hold up the German system as a better alternative. Ten year olds are divided into 3 streams on the basis of school/pushy parent recommendation and thereafter there is little mobility upwards, though some downwards. School day often ends at 1200 with tons of homework to be done at home. So parental support is crucial.
The teaching we have experienced in the Grammar (gymnasium)school stream is rigid, with high levels of rote learning and little creativity. Our bilingual Eng/French daughter had to sit in the regular English and French classes with children who could not speak a word of either and was actually marked down by the teacher for "using constructions we have not studied". Our request for extra German (she came to Germany aged 9) was turned down and we had to organise extra German for her independently. Had we not been pushy, forced the issue on the Gymnasium and able to fund extra tuition, she would have been sent to "an integration school" - special school for immigrants and gone from there to a sink secondary modern equivalent. Instead, after a really tough couple of years she is thriving. There are loads of clever children from immigrant families without family help who really have no chance here. For all its faults the UK system is much better at ensuring that the majority of children get a fair chance.

I've been reading a lot about the Finnish system lately, which strikes me as in many ways a better approach to combining giving children a fair chance with maintaining some degree of academic rigour. Teaching there is based on a national curriculum, and teaching methods are pretty traditional. Children are taught in a mixed ability grouping, but with a mastery approach, where everyone in the cohort is expected to master each concept before the class moves on, rather than a differentiation approach as in England. Children who are struggling are given individual or small group tuition at the point where they are struggling, to ensure they keep up. They are able to do this because the school day is shorter, and teachers have more time due to no paperwork burden and the fact that lessons are generally textbook-based, so they don't spend a lot of time devising resources etc. Each school has a separate special education class, and children can move in and out of it according to need. After 9 years of formal schooling (age 15/16) they split into separate academic or vocational schools.

If there is no differentiation and everyone in the class has to master a concept before they can move on, what happens to the bright kids who can grasp something first time round, but then have to sit there bored senseless waiting for everyone else to get it?

Sounds a bit bonkers to me.

Surely we should be encouraging children to broaden their own minds by reading round the subject? You can read other books besides the wretched Mice & Men...

Italian education didn't seem that great to me. Lots of my friends can recite bits of Chaucer and Shakespeare, but can't hold a conversation in English. At least ML in the UK equip you for a weekend trip to France/Germany etc (or they did when I did GCSE).

"what happens to the bright kids who can grasp something first time round, but then have to sit there bored senseless waiting for everyone else to get it?"

I think that this may be less of a problem than it would be here, precisely because the slower children are given extra help outside of lessons, or spend time in the special education classroom. Also, there is evidence that more traditional teaching methods, like direct explanation by the teacher and whole class teacher-led discussions rather than "group work" or "problem-based learning", are more effective with lower ability children in particular, so again, the gap would be likely to be less than it is here. Also, a mastery approach ensures that children are given sufficient practice first time round, so less time would need to be spent going over and over the same material every year (something I know my older DD found pretty boring in our system). That said, I believe there is some complaint along the lines of boredom! No system is perfect - it really depends what you are trying to achieve.