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 ?

There must be other things your son could do ?

As long as he has his hands full he would be alright.

There must be other things your son could do ?

Why do you disagree with people making their own choices about what to to study? Who are you to dictate what people should be interested in?

As long as he has his hands full he would be alright.

Waft an ignorant comment. You don't know the person you are talking about.

I’m ignoring.

He was suicidal and on the verge of dropping out of school before he found music so the OPs comments are very inappropriate and deliberately goody.

And at 18 years old he earnt £600 last week for playing keyboard for a show

Good on him!
The OPs comments were disgusting.

The world would be a far more miserable place without the arts.

I am sorry for my comment.

I didn't know the back story.

He sounds like a great and talented lad.

That’s the thing OP. You never really know anyones backstory so when you make comments like you have on this thread which appear to be deliberately goady just to elicit a reaction you have to realise there are real people behind the screen.

Look i`m sorry.

I can`t imagine the state he must have been in.

Completely aside from your insensitivity, I also find your comment totally dismissing the arts as being of any value ignorant. You seem to be all about knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

Nothing against the arts and music.

The world would be a duller place without it.

Why not get rid of the Theatre and Music cobblers and do something else ?

Yeah, this is the type of comment someone who values the arts makes....🙄

Do you even read what you post??

Depends what you mean by college.

in my hometown there were sixth forms attached to schools so colleges were the further education type which were not very academic but more vocational. The specific college had a reputation for attracting students that didn’t do well at school and were retaking or taking voacationap courses as they didn’t get onto a levels. But also attracted those who were focussed and more suited to vocational courses.

where I am now there aren’t any school 6th forms except for the independent school so there are a few sixth form colleges that have very good a level results and send students onto good universities. If that’s what you mean by clever.

are you of a certain culture by any chance. I say this as people from my culture have this black and white attitude to ‘cleverness’ ie academic results. Once they get out a bit more they realise there is more to it than that!

@TheMoops thank you for retrieving that comment, I didn't have the will to live. Appreciate your effort.

No problem.
It really pissed me off so it stuck in my mind.

I was wondering, as the OP is starting to get quite rude about people's choices, and has never properly engaged, how would others feel if I reported the thread to see what MN thinks? Or is it useful for it to stay up anyway?

I am sorry to anyone i may have offended on here.

I already did and they said they were aware of the poster and were keeping an eye.

I think the OP crossed a line with you & then proceeded to do so with me. I got an apology, you did not.

but the blatant contradiction shows the posts are purely to rile people

Let's face it, anyone who describes learning arts subjects as 'that Theatre and Music cobblers' isn't worth listening to.

In our area, sixth forms do A Levels and you have to get 5 or more good passes at GCSE to attend (some schools require 8 or more good GCSEs at grade 6/7 and above).

Colleges run a wider range of courses and students who don't qualify for sixth form will find a suitable place there to study.

For people like your son they are essential i can see that.

But for people who take up those subjects and have no love for them what are they doing it.

They should have a spanner or trowel put in their hand instead.

People who don't love theatre and music aren't studying theatre and music. (Most) teens are studying something they enjoy.
For some that includes holding a trowel. For others it's drama . Or maths. Or English lit.

But for people who take up those subjects and have no love for them what are they doing it.

Do you think there are lots of young people studying music or the arts under duress? People only choose these subject if they love them and have some ability.

They should have a spanner or trowel put in their hand instead.

Why? What if they don't want to pick up a spanner or a trowel? Why don't you understand the concept of choice? Why are you insisting that forcing people into studying vocational subjects is a good idea?

As in many other countries, the range of subjects studied on starting secondary school is wide (as it should be). One could argue (and I would agree) that it could be wider still. Right now academic subjects eat up the majority of teaching time. There are different ways of fixing this and all have their advantages and drawbacks.

I come from the Dutch education system, which is selective at age 11 but with flexibility to move at different age points as students develop. In the Dutch system, those who have a more vocational aptitude get a broad academic education in their first two years at secondary, supplemented with the essentials of vocational subjects like bricklaying, welding, electronics etc. Those who are more academic have the same two years of broad education, but with a broader range of academics supplemented with arts, music, DT and PE. Actual streaming happens in the equivalent of Yr9, but it is possible for those whose academic talents develop later to move to a more academic stream by repeating a year in order to catch up with missed subject teaching. It is possible to take the equivalent of A levels at age 21 - I had someone in my class who had done just that. There is no stigma attached to this route.

Students taking the vocational route take exams at 16 and are then moved into apprenticeships where they spend 2 days a week at school learning their chosen trade and 3 days in work, earning the going rate.

It's not perfect, but it's a damn sight better than the UK system - I 100% accept that is is wrong to force people whose strengths lie in the vocational pathway to waste their time dissecting Shakespeare.

The Dutch system has some good points.

Although i have my doubts it could be scaled for the UK.

I suspect you are right about the scaling. The Dutch were lucky, in a very black and ironic way, that they were first invaded by the Germans and then bombed to hell and back by the Allies. They then got a lot of Marshall Plan money, which they used wisely to rebuild and restructure for a modern society. The old class system largely died and new ideas were allowed to flourish, which included the education system.

The UK sadly spaffed its Marshall Plan money up the wall clinging to their delusions of Empire.

I am also of the opinion that we do not want any more education reforms for at least another 10 years so that we can properly assess what the Idiot Gove's ideas have done and how things may be improved.

However, one point I would like to make: In the Dutch system, nobody studying for the equivalent of A levels is forced to do a vocational subject. English and Dutch are compulsory at all levels, but other than that it's free choice.