A few thoughts on the Italian vs English education system

[ItalianParent]

I wanted to share a few thoughts on the Italian vs English education system. Italian immigrant here, with children in the English system. I studied in Italy and have many extended family and friends teaching in Italy. These are just my thoughts - many Italians will disagree, as is normal.

1. I would say that, for well-rounded kids, who do well in multiple subjects, a good Italian school is much much better than a good English one. You don't choose any subjects. A levels are on more subjects, but this means that you can apply to any university course. Choosing what to do at 15-16 is one of the worst aspects of the English system IMHO. Also, subjects are studied in sync. You tend to cover the same period in literature, art, history, philosophy. This gives students a much broader understanding.

2. For kids who do well in some subjects but not in others, I prefer the English system of choosing some subjects and choosing your A level. If you are a brilliant mathematician but poems make you lose the will to live, or viceversa, I think the English system is better.

3. For everyone else, it's a mix. There will be good schools and terrible schools in both countries.

4. For uniforms and behaviour, I think the two countries are at the two extremes, and I would welcome a compromise in between. Italian secondary schools tend to have no uniforms, no detention, and no real system to punish bad behaviour. This can make certain schools in rough areas an unmanageable jungle. But too many English schools take it to the opposite extreme, with detentions if you stare out of the windows, detentions if you buy the Asda skirt instead of the 99% identical, school-approved one, crazy dictatorial headteachers like the Mossbourne one and their seminars on shouting and instilling fear in children, etc.

5. In Italy, in-year tests tend to be oral for all subjects, and written and oral for only some (maths, Italian, foreign languages, etc). Written tests are fairer and more subjective. But AI is changing all of this. A-levels are more objective in England. Italy has no centralised marking; southern regions constantly score higher at national exams, but standardises tests like the PISA ones suggest that northern Italy scores better. In other words, when marking is not centralised but done by the schools, the results are not reliable.

6. Having multiple exam boards baffles not just Italians but many Europeans. I get it that there are historical reasons for it, but I still can't get my head around it

7. Private schools are not as much of a thing. International schools are very expensive but there are very few and cater to a tiny minority. Most private schools are religious but tend to have poorer teaching, because the best teachers prefer state schools, since they get a bombproof government contract: they become employees of the central state, not of a given school.

In Ireland Maths is compulsory and double weighted for university admissions.

When you look at the choice available at sixth form (not just 3 or 4 A levels, but also BTECs, diplomas, apprenticeships, etc) I think our system is preferable for many children. 4 A lrvrks allows breadth if you want it. You can choose a STEM, a MFL, an essay writing subject and a creative subjects.

In Italy obligatory schooling starts at 6 but most people send their children to scuola materna for the three years from 3 - 5. This is also free and state run. Here they learn through play, learn fine motor skills in preparation for writing, etc. Scuola materna was a great experience for us! Before scuola materna there are state nursery places (nido) which are subsidised according to income. Again, my kids loved lido and it was very well run. Depending on your income and area though you might not get a place and have to go private instead. (This happened with my eldest son but my younger two got in). Everyone gets a place in scuola materna though so overall I paid less in childcare than I would have done in the UK.

Also re: reading there is quite a lot of evidence that it is not helpful to start reading and writing earier than 6. My son also started reading early and there were books he could read at scuola materna. He just wasn't taught to read there iyswim.

Italian is a much easier language to read and write than English.

@LiquoriceAllsorts2 I think you’ve got this wrong. Certain degrees do require certain subjects but I think you can have both a medical and engineering options with your a level choices. Some degrees will require that as a specific a level but a lot of degrees don’t have any pre requisites in terms of which subjects you do

Like I said, it depends on the university. I have already posted links to corroborate it. Eg Imperial requires chemistry and biology for medicine. For engineering, in theory it requires only maths and physics, but in practice everyone also has further maths, and those who don't have it are at a disadvantage. So having a combination of a level subjects that allows you to apply to both medicine and engineering at Imperial is de facto impossible.
Other universities may have other requirements. But beware the difference between minimum requirements and actual ones. A subject may not be required in theory but then there may be cases where every applicant has it anyway

@Sgtmajormummy Personally I think Italian Scuola Media (10-13yo) should be abolished and split between Primary and Secondary. It’s a hotbed of hormones (2nd year is the wilderness year from which they emerge in their final form), doesn’t teach much and I’ve seen so many kids get lost to the system either by bullying, lack of motivation or falling in with the wrong crowd. Much better to have an older cohort to look up to

Interesting perspective, In my case, I would say my 3 years of middle school (11 to 14) were the most important and the most formative ones. But I had great teachers in middle school and terrible ones at secondary. Many friends had the opposite experience. I don't know enough to have a view on which of our experiences is representative.

On oral exams: I agree they are a huuuge waste of everyone's time, and they are less fair than a written one.
Interestingly, though, in the AI era there are those who are starting to revalue oral exams. Eg, even in the UK, there are cases where, as part of a university investigating academic misconduct (ie cheating), they may quiz a student with an oral exam to test if they really know what they wrote or not

While you do get extra points for passing Higher Level Maths (as opposed to Ordinary Level Maths) in the Irish Leaving Cert, this is not actually to the extent that it is double weighted for University admissions.

Points awarded for passing a higher level paper in any subject range from 100 for a H1 (90 -100%) to 46 for a H6 (40 - 49 %). In maths you get an extra 25 points if you achieve between a H6 and a H1 when sitting the Higher Level paper.

There are also extra marks given in most subjects if you take your exams through the medium of the Irish language rather than the English language. (Exams in English, Irish and other modern languages are excluded from this.)

In Finland in academic high school (post-16) students continue to study all subjects (17!) but only have to do 5 subjects for the matriculation exams (minimum, they can do more), mother tongue and literature is the only compulsory one but the others are organised into 4 groups and you have to pick from at least 3 groups so choices are a bit limited (groups are maths, other domestic language, foreign language, and science and humanities)

In theory not everyone has further maths as lots of schools don’t even offer it. Mine didn’t

@LiquoriceAllsorts2 even with further maths out of the picture, to be considered for both medicine and engineering you would still need: biology, chemistry, maths, physics. In theory it is possible; in practice, it is incredibly hard.
And, if your school does offer further maths, you'll be at a disadvantage vs other applicants if you don't have that.

Look, we can quibble on the exact details of the exact university and exact undergraduate course, but the gist of it remains the same: the English system forces you to choose very early on, aged around 15-16, and, compared to other countries, it is much harder, if not outright impossible, to keep your options open till the age of 18

Italian here with a classical studies-based "maturita' " and a BSc, MSc, PhD and career in science - the English system would have totally failed me!

But it works with my primary age DS (who in fairness has only ever known this system). I don't know if it's still the same, but in Y3 I was already studying independently multiple pages about history, geography, science etc from a book, DS would never survive that 😂

My DCs went to a 3500+ student suburban public high school (age 14-18) in the US.

The US liberal arts approach to education was adopted and adapted from the Scottish system, which emphasised breadth and sought to develop academic all-rounders.

My DCs were all placed on an honours track initially, where their classes were taught at an accelerated pace and thinking and writing skills of a higher order were expected. These were rigorous classes, and they were expected to be disciplined self-starters, interested and engaged in the subjects, and willing and able to work independently.

Other tracks suited different general abilities and learning styles.

In a school so big, dozens of courses were offered across all academic departments, and kids of all ability levels, potential, and with all sorts of post secondary aspirations could be catered for, from astronaut to auto mechanic.

The honours track was for kids who were pegged at age 14 to be capable of admission to very selective universities. Because these universities like to see evidence of either ability or the capacity to word hard, students aiming for those universities took a broad range of subjects, with English and math taken all four years. Other requirements for these universities were (usually) at least three years of humanities, three or four years of lab science, and three or four years of a mfl. Students did daily PE every year for four years too. PE included drivers ed and mandatory health coursework. This left little room in the schedule for the school and state graduation requirements - at least one year of fine arts, applied arts, consumer education, civics, keyboarding/ business administration, and more, but summer school and online courses were available to complete the tickbox courses.

The 'market' pretty much dictated the courses and the level at which courses were taken in high school. They moved on to universities where their liberal arts education continued with core courses, aka general education courses for two years, followed by two years of their chosen major(s). They all did Calc III by the time they graduated from university, as part of their core coursework, as well as advanced mfl (between them all, the mfls were French, German, Latin, and Persian), philosophy, psychology, history, lab sciences, and economics.

I really like the liberal arts model. It delivers exactly what it promises - a well rounded and versatile graduate who has shown ability to put his or her ears back and work hard at subjects that don't necessarily come easily.

Marking of coursework at high school level was done by teachers, with the double check of nationally administered standardized tests operating as a method of quality control.