The NEW Advanced British Standard qualification

[HappySonHappyMum]

Have just read the bluster being reported about this new qualification to replace A levels and T levels in 10 years time. Thought this might be a good forum to discuss it as most of our DCs have just gone through the process of 16-18 education and are probably best placed to contribute to an informed discussion. My first thoughts are - thank god my DCs will be well out of the shit show that is education by then! I will be interested to know where the government are likely to find all the extra teachers needed to staff this major change, how they are going to create a qualification that will suit young people of different learning abilities and how they can announce such a radical change without discussing it with the education community before announcing it. Any thought?

Yes my first thought was thabkgoodness its 10 years time.

But if course they won't still be in power so they know it won't happen anyway. Just complete crazy talk.

Even at this initial planning stage, they should have cooperated with education experts, teachers, and students, which they don't seem to have done. The only good thing is that they'll be out of power so won't actually be able to implement it.

And what is the name?

Advanced - fair enough. They are more advanced qualifications.
British - it isn't. This is only in England.
Standard - what? Just seems like a random word they've chucked at the end.

I’ve stepped back from the admissions process so this annoucement took me by surprise. It doesn’t seem thst there has been much consultation.

I don’t rate the odds that the changes will be fully implemented, certainly not within 10 yrs. In a way it is a shame because I prefer the IB to the A level system for a 17-18 year old’s brain. But we have more important things to worry about at the moment. This feels like a distraction

Posted too soon

Considering the achievements of the recent Tories, that is just as well

I feel like T levels were a bit of a waste, if they started in 2020 and are phased out by 2033.

I cant get why you'd combine vocational and academic qualifications for all students or have i misundertood.

I dont mind the idea of a slightly broader qualification as it seems a shame they narrow so early.

@poetryandwine

It doesn’t seem thst there has been much consultation.

There's never consultation for any big announcements from any party in power.

There was no consultation about all the flawed covid support grants.

There was no consultation when Brown announced Working Tax Credits, nor when he introduced the 10% basic rate of tax, nor the 0% of corporation tax.

Not sure why you're surprised!

It can’t come early enough for many students. I loved maths but hated anything essay based. People who struggle with either maths or English would be at a disadvantage applying to university if both become compulsory to 18. Those who are all rounders would get the advantage but are those the ones who should then specialise?

Of course there's been consultation. Just like any big organisation (not just governments though they're arguably the worst). They consult with each other on what they think is a vote winner/diversion/way to make their mates even richer and then they tell the rest of us what they've decided.

Oh, you were thinking there'd be genuine consultation with the actual electorate? What, like, ooh, cancelling the whole of HS2 anywhere north of, well, London? And an obscure bit of London at that? (Being from the other side of the Pennines originally I am trying not to find that particularly hilarious right now.)

The "much vaunted new thingie exams" will be exactly the same. They won't happen. But they have to say SOMETHING vaguely coherent in amongst all the beyond bizarre delusional vanity fuelled burbling they're coming out with this year. Sad reflection that this, along with the thing about cigarettes and whatever Rish! mentioned as the third thing was, is about the most coherent, but there we are.

It's almost like all their chips have collectively malfunctioned.

Oh it's in 10 years? Mine will be 21 & 23 by then so I'll not even bother thinking about it!

I was panicking at the headlines all day, as I have a child in Y10 who is clever but HATES Maths and English. Was very relieved that he'll be out of it before this shitshow starts.

@SpookyHollow totally agree. DD is absolutely exceptional at maths and science, to the extend of gifted and obsessed. But ask her to write an essay?? So she would go from 4 A Levels at A* and A, to a much lower grade. How would universities look at this?

It doesn’t stress me as much as I’m used to 9 or 10 subjects at this level (o/s) so 3 or 4 seems really narrow

But I can see if it’s what you’re used to it’s different

We do already have the ebacc which one of our local schools offers. Absolutely no point creating a new version of this.

My suspicion is that it will be manipulated to make the UK's results look better. I thought the point of A-Levels was that students studied in more depth as a preparation for university, other higher qualification or a career. If they are having to study more subjects, that depth isn't going to be possible.

If poor maths and English are the concern, it would be better to keep A Levels, but include a mandatory resit of GCSE maths/English for anyone who has failed.

It would be a disaster for students like ds2 who have a spiky profile. Excellent at Maths and Science but struggles with English.

Glad DD is out of any hiatus a change could make.

I love the idea of all YP being competent in maths and English. Seeing threads from admin staff pleading for comprehensible emails on WIWIKAU shows the current system has failed. But a system that punishes someone like my DD who did FM GCSE and did well but hated it, what else that they ‘need’ to learn for two more years is there? I think skills like budgeting, information literacy (how to effectively search, judging sources accuracy etc, appropriate use of AI and writing an email, complaint etc) would be more useful. I hear of YP doing resit after resit of GCSE maths and English that they will never pass, this proposal does not seem to solve the range of abilities but may come out if they ever get to the detail stage.

@SpookyHollow all English state schools currently have the English Bacc. It is just a name given to a combination of GCSEs, it is also 14-16. There is the IB that some schools do however that is 16-18.

It will be similar to the IB (A-level equiv) but 5 subjects rather than 6.
Bear in mind that if a DC is good at STEM then English would be taken at the Minor level. Reverse for Arts and Maths.
Instead of saying IB 36 points with 6 at Higher (Major) Maths (IB is 1-7 + extra 3 for an essay piece) then they might say ABS 25, 18 from Majors with 6 at Major Maths and 3 (or whatever is deemed a 'pass') in English.
They would have to change to be a bit more generic as IB is only taken by a few.

Same. Bright y8 who definitely wouldn't want to do either English or Maths beyond GCSE...very glad it won't affect her.

Given there’s already the IB which is internationally recognised, why reinvent the wheel with an English IB?

For those who want to study a broad range, go with the IB.

For everyone else, focus on the subjects you enjoy and study them in more depth with A levels, or the vocational BTECs.

I think in the abstract it's a good idea, if a fresh government with a long thought out plan was doing it, it would be great.

But a dying government with no plan, it's just one of those announcements.

My kids are in France doing the bac and it is undoubtedly much better than A-levels, they are basically doing 6 A levels plus an oral exam, plus a third language, plus sport.

But the entire school curriculum is geared towards this, even in primary, putting this in place in the UK would mean huge investments in staff and buildings.

School days for mine are 8.30 to 5 or 6 with hardly any free periods, it's a completely different experience, certainly compared to my A-levels, and would take years of sustained effort to get into place.

Perhaps they are assuming that the climate crisis and lack of affordable housing will have reduced the amount of children so much that there will be enough teachers in 20 years time.

@PettsWoodParadise i did mean the international baccalaureate, just got the acronym wrong.
The other issue is where the teachers come from. They already have a shortage of maths teachers and incentives in place for recruitment. They will need a lot more if the aim is to get all abilities to a level standard in maths. Also how will the people who plan to study maths/engineering etc at degree level be prepared for those degrees?

My ds took the IB diploma and it’s a well-rounded programme with six subjects, an extended essay and theory of knowledge course. Students also need to complete the CAS element (sport, community service etc) on top of a heavy academic workload. Continuing to study a range of subjects is a positive imo, but we are already short of specialist teachers in secondary school somewhere will all these maths teachers come from..?

To study a wider range of subjects until 18 is a good thing. The U.K. system is pretty restrictive, but of course to teach everyone maths until 18, requires a lot of maths teachers, which we do not have.

Teaching English to a higher level would be good too. As an employer, some of the cvs I receive from graduates are really badly written. Regardless of core skill, every employee needs to be able to communicate effectively which is not true now.

So I agree, in principle it would be great, but it needs money and skilled resources which I'd like to see first.

I think they should use this and ditch the GCSE apart from in English and Maths, so that they can assess levels in those subjects post 16. If they are going to be in education to 18 and they are doing 5 subjects, the GCSE is them effectively useless
but yes they can say what they like. They won't be in power in 10 years. Who knows if they will even exist after they completely tear themselves apart over Brexit/ hard right/cenrists.