Thread 2: VAT on school Fees- High court challenge

[EHCPerhaps]

Following on from thread 1
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5160565-vat-on-school-fees-high-court-challenge

Background to legal challenge (not yet a case):
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13824931/amp/Single-mother-autistic-child-launches-High-Court-challenge-Labours-private-schools-VAT-raid-claiming-violates-daughters-right-education.html

Sorry to begin a new thread, OP, but your thread filled up very quickly!

@nearlylovemyusername ,

Well I taught in two schools in London and my observations and that of the other teachers I worked with is that the ‘tail’ has increased. The top sets are still strong but the bottom sets were becoming increasingly hard to teach to a decent GCSE grade.

There is no evidence that bursaries are increasing in number or size. There was a recent UCL study (I can link if interested) which showed this.

As for league tables, there is an increasing trend for successful schools to remove themselves. This is because there is little merit in getting huge numbers of GCSEs. It is neither good for pupil wellbeing or for developing rounded individuals.

As someone who looked at pupils entering at 6th form, we weren’t impressed by a pupil with, say, 12 GCSEs because what does it tell you about them bar their school was a real hothouse,

I think there is too much rote memorisation in gcses. Maths is a skill based subject and the important thing is that you can use the techniques you have learnt to solve problems. If a child panics and can't remember a couple of formulas it doesn't tell you anything useful about their level.

The Edexcel computer science gcse has a programming booklet with key syntax available in the exam. It then has a relatively challenging programming exam on a computer. Students who come to a level having studied this board are in a much better position. It's the opposite of dumbed down.

Maths, Computer Science (coding bit), Physics (maths bit) are all about skills, concepts and problem solving. No point in adding to the huge amount of stuff they have to commit to memory and regurgitate in exams.

I feel the same about GCSE English Literature.

Being able to memorise hundreds of quotes doesn't tell you anything about their understanding or appreciation. It doesn't encourage critical thinking or passion. Just ticking some boxes and skewing the exam in favour of a certain type of student and a certain type of learning.

@remotecontrolowls
I think you are right about English literature too.

However there are other subjects where memorisation is more useful but even in these subjects it is out of control and students have resorted to memorising mark schemes. It isn't enough to remember the concepts and definitions if you don't word it exactly as the mark scheme wishes you may not be credited.

I feel that part of this is the desire to apply a standard mark scheme to exams with examiners given little discretion.

There is no ‘right’ answer. This often goes in phases from thinking knowledge doesn’t matter to it is all important.

In my subject, Physics, I do think students should know the basic formulae as they link to physical principles and definitions. So, if you know and understand Newton’s second law, you don’t need to memorise F= ma, it should be obvious. OTOH, at GCSE level, deriving SUVAT from first principles is both time consuming and hard, but it’s applications are important and can lead to many interesting questions, so it should be given.

What you are after is students occasionally looking up harder formulae, having read and understood a question. What too often happens is students just underline data given and desperately search for a formula that links them.

I agree. I teach Economics. There is the odd equation it's useful to memorise (the collection of things like that essential for A-level, I could easily fit on an A4 page), but it's what you DO with it that counts. And you can't do anything with it effectively until it's in your long term memory.

Elaborative rehearsal is a good technique.

https://apple.news/AZIDw6haNRwOWwP8MzJPZJw

I don’t know if you’ll all be able to access the link, but there’s a very interesting article in the Telegraph today. Universities and nurseries could inadvertently be caught.

Another article re possible ISC legal challenge

https://apple.news/AlBNmkmxQSHOpLHjlEgZPcA

@Newbutoldfather

That's interesting. I noticed this trend of reducing the number of GCSEs taken as well. I've also seen some top public schools removing themselves from GCSE league tables, but what does it have to do with the number of subjects taken? I was under impression that these tables are about proportion of high grades achieved per exam taken?

Re increasing tail - is there any chance at all you could share what type of schools you're talking about? is this Westminster, SPS/SPGS, Kings or Dulwich/JAGS or Emanuel and the next level? asking out of interest, not to argue.

On the same note about tail - this might well be the case, but what is the explanation then of stellar A-levels? do they cull off massively after GCSE?

With regard to the number of GCSEs, taking a large number isn’t just to do with being a hothouse or trying to get as many as possible. Ours do 10 or 11 (the majority do 11), but it’s done deliberately to keep the curriculum broad and so pupils can see the links between subjects. Admittedly that approach would only suit fairly academic children, but if they can cope with that workload (and most at the school obviously can),it’s a good thing to keep them interested in a wide range of subjects. A child is picking options when they are 13/14 years old. It’s quite early to narrow down subjects.

@Another76543 ,

‘It’s quite early to narrow down subjects.’

I am afraid I disagree with this, as do many schools now (including very academic ones) which are cutting out GCSEs in favour of enrichment.

You can get bright kids through loads of GCSEs, but the type of learning will be very exam-focused, and do the opposite of broadening interest.

For example, in the sciences, practical work is really time consuming and many teachers cut it out in favour of a 10 minute video, where you can learn all the key marking points. But you miss out on getting investigations long and learning from mistakes and all the actual fine motor skills which hands on investigations encourage.

I wouldn’t send my own children to a school which did 11 GCSEs, it is totally unnecessary. Even for pupils who can get 11 9s, they probably haven’t got deep knowledge of the subjects, just a really good short term knowledge of model answers and mark schemes.

Almost as if it’s not been given any serious thought. Still, they’ve got 3 months to let people know the details of the policy that will be life changing for lots of families. No rush.

It does mean that it keeps a wider range of options open for longer for A Level though. For example, I don’t think a child could do A Level history if they hadn’t done it at GCSE. I know my own children would struggle to decide which subjects to drop if they only did 8/9 GCSEs. They genuinely enjoy a wide range. This is precisely why different schools suit different children!

As @Newbutoldfather says, many have much less choice for GCSE but greater enrichment

DS's school have 9 GCSEs.
They must do all 3 sciences
They must do at least one MFL
They must do history or geography

Then they get to choose between art, music or DT. Or they can choose another language or humanity instead.

It leaves plenty of timetable for sport and enrichment. Enrichment includes drama, debating, philosophy, cinema, sports journalism, comic books and various games and sports. If there is a teacher passionate about something, it goes on the list.

They also all do an EPQ.

So a child can’t do history and geography? They can only do one or the other? What if they want to music and DT (as mine did). They can’t do both? Our timetable still has lots of time for enrichment and non GCSE activities, but admittedly they are long days (and Saturdays) and it wouldn’t suit every child.

Tbf we found choosing between history and geography hard

And having to drop art and DT for music

I’m not sure about number of GSCEs but it felt quite young to drop those two

I think that’s the difficulty for a lot of children. By the time you’ve got the compulsory subjects (2/3 science, 2 English, maths, MFL) it only leaves free choice for 2/3 subjects. It’s hard for a 13/14 year old to know what they might like to do for A levels and to restrict choice so early. On the other hand, 10/11 GCSEs is a lot and not right for many children. I don’t know what other countries do at a similar age, but I’m sure I’ve read that many countries leave the curriculum wider for longer.

But there are plenty of A Levels still an option with core subjects.

I don't think there can be many children longing for A Level geography who didn't take it at GCSE.

DS is struggling to choose his A Level options due to too much choice as it is. Only a few that he has no interest in have been discounted because he didn't do the GCSE.

It does feel comparatively narrower, we actually studied 9 or ten subjects across the board (maths and English may have been compulsory) up until we left at 18

So it’s quite different. Although I have appreciated what they’ve learnt here, FM at A level for instance looked far more in depth than our equivalent which can be a positive.

I don’t know if I’d switch it as I’m used to this system now. My only thing is 14 is quite young to leave learning on history

It really depends on the child. My DS will be taking 13 GCSEs altogether and I love the fact that he’s doing a wide range of subjects including both PE and art as well as academic subjects. I appreciate that it’s not suitable for all children but it is for him.

How do they fit in the schedule? Or does everyone do that many?

For us it’s not so much narrowing for A level, Ds is pretty sure he knows what he’ll be doing, around maths and physics but it does mean dropping a broad range and he loves art plus DT

It is actually an academic school but I’m not sure the option is there for more

They do a MFL language GCSE in year 9 and then RE and statistics (if they are in second or top set maths) in year 10. They don’t seem to have any problems fitting the subjects in but they are all exceptionally bright kids. They finish school at 4pm unlike our local comp which finishes at 3pm so I guess that helps.

The gov statistics about GCSEs, including about the number of GCSEs taken by 16 year olds in England, are interesting.

@Boohoo76 - Westminster? if yes, it's totally different level and won't be applicable to most of other schools