Is it true that clever people go to 6th form and people who aren't go to college

[thistimeiknowitsforreal]

Evening all,

It was always drummed into me that after GCSE`s that if you are intelligent you went to or stayed at school and went to 6th form depending on your previous circumstances.

But if you weren't good enough you went to college instead.

Whats your experience in this area ?

Why no it could open up another possibility for them

Sure, because forcing young people to study things they have zero interest or aptitude for tends to go soooooo well! Honestly, I despair.

It is wrong to make everyone study Shakespeare and An Inspector Calls.

It is also wrong to make everyone study DT or Resistant Materials.

Got it now?

That was definitely true when I was at school but we're talking 40 years ago (how did that happen?!!). No idea if it's still the case.

No also it has been said that school leavers lack practical skills this could reverse this trend.

If you're talking about practical skills like cooking, budgeting, basic DIY etc. - that is up to parents to teach. Both my DC with their purely academic A levels manage these things perfectly well.

Those of their peers who struggle in their experience learn by doing. No need to waste precious school time during the already pressured A level years on this nonsense.

How is it nonsense ? you need skills like the ones mentioned to live and function.

Again this is small mindedness at play.

Definitely not the case here.

school offers a very restricted choice of traditional courses compared to college.

school still requires uniform, pe lessons, sign in and out at the start and end of the day. Many 16 year olds feel they need a change in environment.

ime there isn’t a link between ability and choice of 16+ education location.

That's good to hear.

Defiantly should be college only post GCSE`s

@thistimeiknowitsforreal no, smallmindedness is forcing kids into courses that are irrelevant and of no interest to them. It's wrong for under 16s - which is why we need proper, respected trade and vocational education in the under 16 years with functional skills alongside. It's also wrong for 16+. My youngest DC wants to be a marine biologist and worked her backside off to get the right A levels and grades. She's now in second year at uni and very good at adulting - because I taught her. If anyone had made her do a budgeting course alongside all that, she'd have done less well in her essential subjects.

@Muchtoomuchtodo our local 6th form (part of the local secondary but a separate entity) has no uniform and no PE. Sign in and out is required, but the students are in control of that. They are treated like young adults and expected to show the independence and maturity they will need in life and/or at university.

Small mindedness is not showing what possibilities are available.

Defiantly should be college only post GCSE`s

I've been on this thread since the beginning and I still don't really understand what you perceive the issue to be.

Sixth forms are great for the right kids. My sons get to play a lot of sport which they love, take positions of responsibility, go on school trips abroad and mentor some of the younger kids.

You seem to want to reverse engineer the current situation by making the kids taking academic A levels to take vocational ones...why? We need to provide the option for vocational and academic studies, not force kids to take subjects against their will. That's not a recipe for success.

Academic excellence isn't a bad thing. It doesn't preclude kids who have other talents from taking a vocational route instead.

Depends on your local area. Where I live there were no sixth forms for several decades so unless you could afford private or wanted to travel to one of a handful outside the city limits college was your only option.

College gave me a better choice of A-levels. I was offered a place at a very popular school outside the city to do A-levels but they couldn't accommodate a combination of science and art subjects.

I did A levels at college. I'm educated to master's degree. Being treated as an adult at college was preferable to being treated like a child in 6th form.

In my home county there were about 6 colleges and weirdly they didn't offer A Levels. You had to study A levels at the 6th forms or do vocational qualifications at college.

The college I went to was a former grammar school that converted to a tertiary college when grammar schools were abolished in the county.

A-levels were taught in the old grammar school building and some of the staff were the same. We were given more freedom though.

Vocational courses were mainly taught on a separate site down the road.

The only college in our area doesn't offer A levels at all, only vocational courses. Our local 6th form absolutely does treat its students like adults. It isn't a zero sum game. We need to improve vocational education pre 16, not force it on people post 16.

I think it should be compulsory that a practical subject is taken as part of A levels.

Dreadful idea.

Also why aren't more middle class kids being encouraged to take up trades ?

This is a completely different issue - there are lots of reasons.

Exactly.
I have formed an opinion based on the ops 1 or 2 line responses that they either haven't sorted out & thought through their argument clearly and/or they are just on a wind up.

I have formed an opinion based on the ops 1 or 2 line responses that they either haven't sorted out & thought through their argument clearly and/or they are just on a wind up.

Same. There's no problem tossing a grenade provided you offer some rationale or supporting explanation.

I have formed an opinion based on the ops 1 or 2 line responses that they either haven't sorted out & thought through their argument clearly and/or they are just on a wind up.

Exactly. People have taken to time to offer up well-reasoned and informed responses which just get ignored.

OP's position feels like powerful anti-academic bias. And while I fully agree that the UK education system caters very badly for vocational/skilled trade pathways, especially under 16, that doesn't mean levelling down by forcing those who are genuinely academic down vocational routes is the answer.

Why is it a dreadful idea ? it can open new possibilities, they might uncover skills they didn't know they had ?

Second point must be snobbery.

Nice to see someone does agree with me on something.

It's a dreadful idea because post 16 education should be about finally getting the chance to study what you want to, whether that be academic, practical or a mixture.

@thistimeiknowitsforreal forcing young people who are academic to do vocational subjects they have no interest in or aptitude for isn't 'opening up possibilities' unless you assume that these young people haven't thought long and hard about their future choices. It's limiting their academic potential by making them waste their time. That isn't snobbery, it's common sense. I can't think of any reason why you would want to force someone who wants to study medicine and has that ability to take a vocational course unless it's reverse snobbery.

We should absolutely revisit the pre-16 curriculum so that vocational courses and skills based courses are properly taught and valued. This is a model that works in other European countries. We should immediately stop the abolition of BTECs. That was always a bad idea. But leave A levels as they are so that those people who are suited to do A levels have somewhere to direct their interests. Anything else looks like you begrudge academic young people free choice.

Why is it a dreadful idea ? it can open new possibilities, they might uncover skills they didn't know they had ?

Because not everyone wants or needs to study a vocational or practical subject. There are other ways in helping young people identify their interests and skills. Good careers guidance is key here.
Forcing people to study a vocational subject is not the way to go. There are examples to support the fact this is a bad idea!

Second point must be snobbery.

It's one element but it's far too simplistic to just blame it on snobbery.