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.

Isn't Grove also suggesting children should learn one foreign language properly in KS1 rather than 'getting a flavour of language learning', which I fully agree with. But how on earth is this going to happen. Primary teachers don't speak foreign languages, how are they meant to teach one for 4 years to a reasonable standard? Even secondary MFL teachers are often asked to teach languages they barely know the basics of.

We are a bilingual family (German/English) and I taught my DS (7) the basics of Spanish - for me languages and other cultures are fun and interesting and I would like DS to learn some more Spanish at school now (just started KS2).

However, last week I asked his teacher which language he would be learning this year she said Spanish, but quickly added that she couldn't speak any Spanish. She didn't seem to know that DS is bilingual, neither that he knows enough Spanish to get him through Y7. It's a bit disappointing as I would like DS to progress at school.

Sorry, KS2

Know I'm coming to this one late but -- I'm very upset by short-sightedness of this so-called reform, and the implications for children with special educational needs. My daughter has Asperger's and the idea of her entire exam grade and future prospects hingeing on one three-hour exam is terrifying. It's a total disaster for SEN children. Gove says schools can defer the tests for children who are struggling until they're 17 or 18. But my my daughter is always going to have Asperger's! I've blogged more about it here.

I have O levels. And A levels from the old days.

My A level history teacher dictated notes that we then learned by heart. My dd's history GCSE involved far more understanding and thought than my history A level. She knew fewer facts- but you can always look up facts. You look up what to dobwith them!

I think something had to be done.

The current GCSE just don't have the rigour to demonstrate proper proficiency. That's not to say a child can't be proficient of course. MLF are a particularly good example.

However, I'm not convinced these new suggestions are the best way forward. The old O levels, of which have many, were a test of memory, lack of nerves, strong exam technique and pot luck. Not intellect.

I agree with gabsid

GCSEs may need to be made more rigorous but the real problem is the total lack of training and qualifications in this country for non-academic people who are nevertheless very talented at other things. My brother, for example, is now a v successful auto engineer but he had to get there not through a well-designed apprenticeship but through A-levels and a uni degree where he failed at all the theoretical stuff but still made it because he did so well at the practical projects/applied elements. Uni was the wrong route for him but he had to go through it as it was the only route on offer.

What about all those people who would make great carpenters/plumbers/electricians/contractors etc? Why is no one redesigning the half-arsed apprenticeship system for them and trying to make it more rigorous and worthwhile?

This is Labour's fault as well as Gove's. We don't need yet another overhaul of the system for those destined for university - we need to think about the other 70% of the population.

BTW I'm a university lecturer and I can't find much wrong with the reading and writing skills of my humanities students.

LaQueen, some kids get that method and some don't. Yes there is a place for that kind of teaching, most notably in maths. But for other subjects you need to have an understanding of it too and kids simply aren't taught that because half the teachers don't understand either.

As a TA I was often asked if teachers had spelt things right, if the grammar they were using was ok and I often stepped in to answer questions on Dickens and Shakespeare that the teacher was unable to do.

I was bored stiff at school just copying out textbooks. I learnt nothing. I left school with nothing. If it wasn't for free state grants and a lot of help, I would never have gone to college. And actually if it wasn't for the catholic church I would never have got my diploma that resulted in my University place.

I was an intelligent child who was never challenged, never pushed and was merely ignored so long as I behaved. Nobody encouraged me or believed in me. I fear we are going back to that now only today there is no safety net as there was for me back then. If they leave school with nothing, they won't be able to afford a second chance. The catholic college I attended and which helped many many adults like me has been shut down due to lack of funding. Higher educational grants for young people have been stopped. There are few apprenticeships out there.

The future is dire for young people and it's set to get even worse.

I agree, there is a place for route learning. I am doing Xtables with my Y3 DS every day. In his junior school handbook it said that they needed a 'good quality calculator . I hope they didn't mean the Y3s as I am still trying to get his brain going with simple adding/subtracting.

willpenn I think you're the fist MNer to say that.

The place is crammed with posters all claimning to be university lecturers bemoaning the decline in standards, how they have to put in place remedial classes for their undergrads .

"Too many of today's students are spoon-fed lots of fun, fluffy and frolicksome approaches to learning...which is luffly for them. Except they don't have any basic skills, or basic general knowledge to actually apply these skills to"

Do we actually have any evidence to back this sort of statement up? I'm always reading things like this, but never actually seen any hard research about it.

Seeker. Well heres a turn up for the books. I entirely agree with you. I had several A grade students at A level who just wanted the plain facts. No fun and games, they worked in a simple way and wanted to learn this way. As an NQT and year of ofsted, no way would my superiors allow me to teach like this. I had to do all singing, dancing lessons that they just did not want or need. At one point they were quite nasty to me, and whilst a bit out of order I couldn't help but agree with them. It was their A level, not the colleges, nor mine, nor ofsted.

THERubars - that's why I felt so sad when I read the article in the Guardian today.

I was a quiet, shy and dreamy child, my parents were busy and left me to my own devices. I left school with an OK qualification, started an apprenticeship (in Germany) but then I felt I wanted to do more academic study after having worked for a while in the UK - and there were free University places (Germany and UK) and grants, I wouldn't have gone otherwise.

What options do the kids have today here? Medicore apprenticeship system, £30,000 debt, few job opportunities.

Nope, no decline standards from where I'm sitting wordfactory. I'll admit I'm at a university with pretty high admission requirements so we do get the cream of the crop - but they at least are as good as they've ever been.

My perspective might be a bit different as DH comes from a country that values practical education equally with academic pursuits to the great benefit of that nation's economy. I think it is destructive to the UK economy (esp the manufacturing one) that politicians won't recognize that the continued devaluation of practical training is the real problem with British education they need to fix in order to make the country competitive again.

I thought it too good to be true. I only read the first part of your post Seeker, infact its LAQUEEN I agree with, nothing personal though Seeker.

seeker - I was just a TA. I was working alongside other TAs and teachers who could not spell. TAs who would actually mark homework wrong. Who couldn't be bothered to correct spelling.

My Yr 4 son does not have regular spelling tests.

Local newspapers employ journalists who make basic spelling mistakes all the time. Shops such as Waterstone's are dropping the apostrophe because no-one uses apostrophes anymore, they don't know how to.

Trust me, in school the emphasis is on getting kids through, first the SATs and then the GCSEs.
I'm not a Mumsnet pedant. I don't leap on posters if they spell something wrong, make a typo or put a comma in the wrong place. I'm not that much of a snob. I'm just telling you what I've observed in the schools I've worked in.

I can't say if it's any better or worse than when I was at school because I can't remember. But I do think that teachers have stopped bothering with the basics.

gabsid is from said country!

LAQUEEN. I'm not sure about your school, but we knew all our times tables at the end of year 3/ first year junior. I was bottom of the class had severe learning difficulties and even I knew them. No it wasn't fun, humiliating if you were picked on but it gave a sense of having to get them right. Mostly we said them all together as a class during registration. I only went to a bog standard local (council) school. At my dds last school they do a couple every year with the goal being completion during y6. What flamin good is this when they need timestables to progress past first base?I don't believe in singling kids out but there are other ways and rote learning helped a full generation learn their tables.

In my DS's infant school I found they teach spellings I wouldn't use in formal letters, such as I'm or I'll. I was and still am a bit confused, why can't they teach 'I will'?

Maybe I am just too old and not on top of things but wouldn't it help with grammar teaching too?

Rhubarb, that is what Gove is trying to change. There will be greater emphasis on the basics of spelling, punctuation and grammar. He wants to move away from teaching to the test, coursework and controlled assessment, and allow more time for indepth teaching and learning.

Well, if you think "just facts" is good enough for A level, so be it. I have higher expectations.

WillPenn - yes, vocational education is good there and its not a dirty word! A number of my cousins left school with the A Level equivalent, did an apprenticeship and then backed the practical knowledge up with a degree in that field - I would call that well qualified!

However, the 3 tier-school system should be improved.

Surely good exam technique requires good analytical skills? You can't answer an exam question without breaking it down and working out what is relevant and what isn't. Maybe less of the thinking outside the box but that was taught in class anyway, as part of the process of learning or it used to be, in the days when you weren't taught for the test so much.

FWIW - My DS2 is in Yr 4 and is rote learning times tables. The school know that leaving the mental maths until year 6 doesn't work if you want to be able to do the higher level maths without forever stopping to work out the basics first. Rote learning does indeed have its place.