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.

To be fair, I think his philosophy is that he was 'saved' by a traditional education, therefore everybody should have that education..

I think his whole educational policy is about saving little Michael Gove over and over again. Opinions/evidence/experience that fall outside this mission do not seem to be of any interest to him. I honestly suspect that people like couthymow's daughter rarely enter his thoughts. Bit of a mess really.

Not all independent schools are selective on the basis of academia. Some of them have a really fantastic work ethic and great teachers which mean that average children end up doing amazingly well. They are doing something right somewhere and I would DARE to suggest that one area is homework (more of it encouraging independent thought and learning) and more internal school exams (from year 3 at ours) so GCSE's/Ebacc just seems less scary. Also it's just not cool at dd1's independent girls school to piss about and not work hard. This attitude is paying dividends.

Independent schools vary. They don't all have the same ethos, but they do overwhelmingly have children from families who can pay fees, and the right to select their intake.

They may do what they do well. However they do not have the same brief as non selective state schools.

walpole
"They are doing something right somewhere and I would DARE to suggest that one area is homework"

I am in the first throws of this years "I don't believe in homework, so my dc is not going to do it" phonecalls. So I would dare to say... parents support the school?

Yes, walpole even independents which are not academically selective are still selective. They select on wealth and parental involvement with the child's education. Small classes, great facilities - that's what you pay for.

Only most of us can't. State schools have to deal with everything that is left - the naice engaged middle class parents who are not wealthy enough to afford fees of any kind but who support their children's education. Those children will do well regardless.

State schools also have to take everyone else - the children of parents with addictions, physical/mental illness, abusive/neglectful behaviour, the children with serious special needs. They have to deal with those children without the benefit of tiny classes and superb facilities.

Stop pretending that indies don't have it much, much easier with their intake.

Boney I don't believe in homework, but my children will do it to the very best of their ability because that's what I signed up for when I sent my children to their schools.

You'd be shocked how many don't.

I volunteered at my local primary for a few years and I'd say well over half of those parents never bothered listening to their DC read.

pointythings

You support the school which is great.

But the amount of times that I have the homework discussion is really quite silly.

Add to the homework discussion - uniform, behaviour, detentions, time keeping and handing work in on time and you have yourself a fairly major problem that no class teacher can really deal with.

I think teachers can never win, Boney. Some parents want more homework, some want no homework, some want their child to move up 18 book bands... It's a thankless profession. My mum used to be a teacher (secondary) as did some of my friends, and I've seen the stress at first hand.

Which is why I support the school in everything. Teachers are heroes.

Ok - we found some old O level and CSE papers today.

My top sets would probably manage the O level. CSE doable for middle groups.

What worries me is that the concepts and texts are outdated, and I am not sure Gove understands that. I can see a return to the dead white male canon of Eng Lit looming. Even the wording - answer no more than two questions - is awkward for today's 16 year olds.

In English, we only moved to modular recently so I am not greatly attached to it. But surely being tested on stuff as you learn it is sensible? If it was good enough at university...

GetDown I am a trained technical writer and an instruction like 'answer no more than two questions' would be considered bad writing - unclear and woolly .

@getdown My 9, 12 and 14 year olds would all understand 'answer no more than 2 questions'.

Although I do agree with pointy (I too am a technical writer) that the instruction could be phrased in a much more sensible way. But they would understand it, with no problems.

Oooh, Mordion not just one of the coolest NNs on MN but a technical writer too!

My DDs would understand the question too, they're 9 and 11. The point GetDown is trying to make is that we have to be careful not to step completely into the past. And I just don't trust Gove to do this, since he has form for ignoring expert advice.

' But surely being tested on stuff as you learn it is sensible? If it was good enough at university...'

But isn't that the problem with bite-sized learning, where you test things independently in small chunks rather than seeing them as part of a whole, where teh bite-sized chunks are easily digestible and independent of the rest of the course? These modular bite-sized chunks are OK for an introduction, for the antipasto, but they can't compare to the main meal. You don't get tested on clutch control independently of the final integrated driving test.

'Even the wording - answer no more than two questions - is awkward for today's 16 year olds.'

Gordon Brown! Then how are they going to cope with Dickens or Shakespeare or Mark Twain? They may be dead white males, but they are giants of English literature.

'What worries me is that the concepts and texts are outdated'
What worries Gove is dumbing down.

Mordion, can you please send them to my school then?

Every year, despite numerous lessons looking at and doing real papers, at least one kid tries to answer all twenty questions on the paper...

claig they cope fine with Shakespeare and Dickens, thanks. But preferably with we'll worded questions.

And a few books have been written since then which are also worth reading...

As for 'bite sized chunks' - no, that's not what I mean. The current Eng Lit papers, though, separate Prose and Poetry onto two different exams. That is worthwhile.

Excuse the sodding autocorrect of well to we'll - oh the shame!

claig So are the Bronte sisters, George Eliot, Virginia Woolf, all looked down on and not taught at Gove's Oxford. They are now, with passion, along with Andrea Levy, Eileen Chang, Alice Walker. but I wonder if Gove would realise that?

And Mark Twain is a giant of English Literature?

They have to understand English in all its forms, not just monosyllabic sentences.

'Every year, despite numerous lessons looking at and doing real papers, at least one kid tries to answer all twenty questions on the paper... '

The paper is probably too easy and the kid has enough time to answer all twenty questions.

But people have alwqys failed to read the rubric- even in independent schools. That's why teachers in both sectors spend most of the lives trying to find ways of making the kids read it!

And they do both Shakespeare and Dickens at my children's very different state schools.

There is so much mythology around the subject.

@pointy sadly the stuff I write tends to be incredibly boring. Therefore not terribly cool. :)

I believe that if we (and by we I mean parents, and those opposition politicians we may be able to persuade to stand with us - and, I suppose, teaching unions, universities etc) are to gain any traction at all in arguing how poorly conceived some of these proposed changes are, we need to be very careful not to look like kneejerk naysayers, frightened of change and opposing it purely on the grounds that it is change, rather than on its merits. Arguing that 16 year olds cannot understand basic English these days will look like feeble naysaying. The vast majority of much younger kids would have no problem understanding that instruction and honestly? I doubt that someone who couldn't understand that instruction (unless they were not a native speaker...possibly) even deserves a qualification in functional English let alone anything purporting to be more sophisticated. We need to focus on the arguments we could (and deserve to) win - not the ones we can't (and probably don't deserve to) win.

claig they don't have time. That is the point. So they fail.

In English, for example, they have two to two and a half hours in which to write responses to two texts - Shakespeare and a novel - and produce a piece of persuasive or informative writing. But there are different options - three plays, eight novels. Hence the number of questions.

Mark Twain is one of the finest satirists in the English language.