Gove to announce scrapping of GCSEs

[Itchyandscratchy]

But before anyone is taken in by the leak announcement in the Daily Hate Mail here, take the time to then read this for a more informed version.

With any luck they'll be out of a job in 2015 when this is sposed to be brought in, but there's no doubt GCSEs will be scrapped. What I woud hope is that Labour will get is finger out and propose a system that has had full consultation with schools, teachers, employment agencies, industry chiefs and unions.

It will change how every child is currently taught at secondary school. And I hope that doesn't mean some children's futures are determined by the age of 11.

claig I suggest you go away and study Goves ideas on the teaching of History. It couldn't be further from how History is taught in universities now including Oxford. It has struck terror into the hearts of academic historians. He really does want to stuff our children with a predetermined body of knowledge taught from the perspective of the way in which Empire changed the world. You know what holds us back in the contemporary world above all? It is our sense of entitlement, something this government suffers particularly from. Perhaps we would equip ourselves for the global marketplace if we actually understood a little of other perspectives on global history?

What you did in answering your O level question was to summon into a order a sequence of events in answer to a question such as "The first Corn Law was the thin end of the wedge" Discuss (actual question 1973) . So you listed the Corn Laws, when they were passed, and how they evolved in terms of widening reform. Now my daughters need to have a much fuller understanding of all the forces that shape history, and it is taught in a totally relevent and fascinating way, from a variety of perspectives eg on the devided union in the USA they need to understand the perspectives of black and whites, and women, as well as sucessive governments. As well as developing arguments in answering more demanding essay questions they have to comment on original sources, demonstrating their skills in evaluating sources as well as all their background knowledge in highlighting it's relevence and usefullness. I suggest that as well as looking at Gove's vision, you look at a GCSE History text book.....

I think it is because Labour have been against two tier systems and separation of academic and vocational. They are against separation of children based on ability at 11 and up to now, I think, they have been against it at 14. However, that may be changing since quite a few Labour people are now in favour of exams at 14 instead of 16, which implies that a divide may be made based on those exam results.

Labour were against a split at this age, and I think tehy were right, because it is too young to make that divide. I think that 16 is probably teh right age, but it looks like 14 is again gaining favour with Labour. I am not sure if taht is also teh cae with the Tories. listening to Gove today, I understood him to say that he does not believe in exams at 14, as studies in Europe have shown that it is not optimal. Gove wwanst a one-tier exam system, not a two-tier system it seems, so for the time being I don't think there will be a major divide at age 14. But I don't know, I am only guessing on limited knowledge.

There was a reason there were O-Levels AND CSE's. There was a reason GCSE's awarded marks right down to 'G', and had Foundation tier and Higher tier.

Did you that you have to get a percentage approaching 98%+ to get a 'C' grade in a Foundation GCSE? No mean feat for someone with LD's, and to me is as hard won as an 'A*' on a higher paper, for equivalent effort and application.

Why people can't see this is beyond me.

You may not have personal experience of having a DC with SN's, but I'm sure that by using the superior thinking skills that O-Levels taught you, you can imagine the difficulties that people with certain disabilities, SEN and LD's could have in just being able to become productive members of society...

To make that even harder is frankly abhorrent.

CORRECTION The first REFORM ACT was the thin end of the wedge, but it could have been the Corn Law for all that I remember ...

Did they just mess up the GCSE gradings so that they could slip this one in more easily? scratches head. Suspiciously close together. IB's aren't too bad but they are hardly universal. But you have to question a system where over 60% of pupils 'fail' to get 5 a-c's, the basic minimum required for workplace training, apprenticeships or F.E. colleges as well as to move on to AS Levels. A overhaul is needed, however this, perhaps is not the solution.

Unlike you, I don't think that certificates and grades make people productive members of society. We have lots of entrepreneurs who got no O levels or GCSEs. It is not the be all and end all. What is important is to create more business and more jobs so that lots of different avenues are open to people.

'And yet, Claig, you apparently passed O-Levels despite being unable to type the word 'the' correctly consistently.'

I know and I lost a lot of marks because of it. They were absolute sticklers in those days.

I can tell you that passing was no cinch, they never gave you a flipping inch, I only made it a pinch. That was in the good old days.

They called them O levels, we called them Oh levels.

The problem is that a single tier system that is purely academic based will not prepare 75% of pupils for work because it will not be relevant to their career.

When was the last time we had a single tier system? Even my Mother was educated in the O-Level/CSE period.

How well did it work? And what studies have been done to see if that can be replicated in an economy that is based on 'thinking skills' and the service industry, with very little manufacturing industry left.

I would like to see evidence that Gove's single-tier system will work as well in the 21st Century economy of the UK as it did the last time we had a single-tier system when manufacturing jobs were ten a penny.

And when people say that it was all about remembering dates and that was easy, they haven't got a clue. I have trouble remembering my pin number, imagine what it was like cramming a list of 100 dates at the last minute and trying to work out which date you had written on the back of your hand fitted which situation. I earned my A grade, I know the price I paid.

Someone with no qualifications and no financial help available from their family is hardly going to be able to get a start-up loan for a business from a bank, are they Claig?

And if they have an NVQ in the industry they wish to start up their business in, that will be looked on far more favourably by the bank.

The bank isn't going to care if they hire an accountant to keep their books because they aren't great with numbers, are they? But relevant qualifications in the industry they are looking to start a business in, along with a good business plan - which you can pay someone else to write for you, or you can use Voice Transcription software to spell and lay out for you, as my Dbro at Uni uses for his Essays, (and despite his particular SN's he's on course for a First), are far more relevant to being lent start up costs.

Do you think my DD doesn't have long term plans? She is working towards opening her own, high-end specialist chocolate shop, with unique combinations being her selling point.

Just because she can't personally use a pen and paper to write her business plan, and her 5, 10 and 15 year goals, doesn't mean that she has no entrepreneurial spirit!

'Just because she can't personally use a pen and paper to write her business plan, and her 5, 10 and 15 year goals, doesn't mean that she has no entrepreneurial spirit!'

That's what I said. Most of the successful entrepreneurs did not do very well at school. Passing exams has got nothing to do with business acumen. Lots of millionaires left school at 16 or earlier or were even expelled from school. But when they look back now, lots of them are glad that their teachers taught them Shakespeare rather than an NVQ in car mechanics.

Education and school years are priceless. You'll probably never read anything like 'Of Mice and Men' ever again, but at least you have read it once in your life. You can learn to fit pipes or fit carpets any old day.

No one is saying that you found that easy. But how easy would you have found it to describe how an author was feeling if you had a specific SN that meant you couldn't describe your OWN feelings, much less a long-dead author's?

Just because YOU, with your specific difficulties, were able to get an A grade, it doesn't mean everyone can, or even that everyone can achieve a grade at all in an academic based qualification.

Two cases : My Dbro. Has Aspergers. Gained 9 A*s, 3 A's and a B at GCSE. Now on course to get a First at UEA in Environmental Sciences. Has no idea what to do post Uni for work whatsoever.

My DD : has HFA (High Functioning Autism), Hypermobility Syndrome, Epilepsy, is partially deaf, has LD's, Has cardiac issues requiring surgery post 16. Has known for years what she wants to be, had secured relevant Work Experience for Y10 by halfway through Y9, and has 5, 10 and 15 year goals, and has researched the most viable routes for her into that career already at 14.

Does that tell you how two different people with SN's might be affected differently by their SN's?

My DD hasn't read 'Of Mice and Men', and even if she did, it would be taken far more literally than it was intended.

(As an aside, is that still on the GCSE curriculum?! I remember reading that for my GCSE's. And it was the first time I had examined the crushing responsibility it is to be caring for someone with SN's, and trying to steer them to keeping gainful employment, as Lenny's obvious SN's made that difficult for both him and his carer...)

I wonder how much of 'Of Mice and Men' might be based on John Steinbeck's personal experience of having a relative with SN's? If it wasn't, then he was extremely empathetic to the trials faced by both those with SN's and their Carers.

My DD IS Lenny. She wouldn't understand all the meanings hidden in the text. She would take it at face value. Reading a book like that is not going to give her the insights it gave me.

That in itself is proof to me that a single-tier education system won't work for everyone.

How to temper chocolate? DD can understand that. The hidden meanings in literature? Not so much.

Your DD sounds very committed, focused and dedicated and I am sure that she will succeed in her wishes.

I got a B in history, I mixed my dates up. A grades are not the be all and end all. I think it is beneficial to try and understand what an author is portraying. Just discussing what it might be is enlightening. Sometimes there is no correct answer, it is a matter of interpretation and exploration. It can also be a lot more interesting and stimulating than learning how to fit pipes for some people.

I have to get some kip, good night.

And no, actually Claig, if your parent's finances aren't going to cover your living costs, as they rely on CTC and Child Benefit, and they need you to be working by 19/20 at the latest to cover you food and clothing, then no, you can't 'learn to fix pipes or fit carpet at any time'.

By 19/20, my DD will have to be in employment IF SHE WANTS TO FUCKING EAT.

So no, she can't learn to do those things at any time...

Do you REALLY not get that lots of people cannot afford to feed their adult offspring? Yet their adult child cannot move out of the family home until 25+ because there is no Housing Benefit help for under 25's now, and rents even for a room in a shared house are more than NMW for that age group...

It's a case of education or starve. Because without the education, they can 't get a job. And without the job they cannot eat...

Claig, the last sentence there in your post is the important one 'For some people'.

And that is the issue, in a nutshell. While the ability to examine literature like that is important 'for some people', it is not important to ALL PEOPLE. While the ability to perfectly temper chocolate is important 'for some people', it is not important for all people.

You have just proved my point for me there...

'It's a case of education or starve. Because without the education, they can 't get a job. And without the job they cannot eat.'

Come off it. So everyone who leaves school with no qualifications starves, do they? There are people with degrees who can't get jobs. An NVQ may not be the ticket to employment.

One size doesn't fit all in clothing, and it certainly won't fit all in education!

But Couthy, they don't teach how to be a chocolatier at school. They teach English literature at school. They can't teach everything, they have to teach the curriculum that they think is most valuable.

No, not everyone who leaves school without qualifications starves. Not if their patents can afford to feed them. But if the parent/s are unemployed, or working for NMW themselves, they cannot afford to feed an Adult Child that they get no financial help with feeding, and they even lose financial support they were receiving while that child was still under 19/20.

But far more will starve once Universal Credit rears its head - because under UC, a HOUSEHOLD income that hits the cap due to younger siblings/disabilities in the family will mean that they are unable to claim ANY benefits for themselves, and their parent/s might already be stretching things if they have lost a significant amount of financial support as it would take them over the cap.

And the local shelf stacking jobs in my town ask for a minimum of Grade C English and Maths GCSE. They can afford to be that picky with 200+ applicants for every job.

I just WISH I could make you understand, Claig. I wish you could walk a mile in my shoes, and then maybe you would understand why I so vehemently oppose a one size fits all, single tier education system.