does anyone know name of school that doesnt do GCSEs or A levels?

[sensit]

does anyone know name of school that doesnt do GCSEs or A levels? I found this school on the internet and cannot find the link again. They get all their pupils into university without doing GCSEs or A levels and apparently the universities think very highly of these pupils. If anyone can help please???????

It is the Acorn school as a PP said Link to Guardian article Is this the one you are thinking of OP?

Er, any Scottish High schools.

Frankly Hak I found these children rather odd although I think to describe them as "brats" is exceedingly uncharitable to say the least. But they were getting the right education for their needs, clearly benefitting from it and were going onto top universities without the usual qualifications therefore proving it can very done.

Sorry. "Poor little brat" conveys sympathy in my family. Please replace mentally with "poor little scraps" Or chicks. Or similar word of choice.

The problem with the OU now, is that it has become very expensive. There is/was a scheme to allow Sixth formers to do special modules along with A'levels.

I have heard of HErs getting DC into Uni with no qualifications, but none of the HErs I know have done this, they have all got A'levels or OU modules (as you can't do IB at home).

Bedales is the one which immediately came to my mind www.independent.co.uk/news/education/schools/bedales-schools-innovative-newassessment-course-shuns-gcses-8913919.html or Summerhill of course.

I think you'll find that Bedales offers a "core" group of GCSE's and three A levels, they then offer their own additional qualifications at yr 11 and an extra subject, their own qualification again, instead of a fourth A level. It is also not considered an academic school, not the necessarily the first place to send your DC to if you're aiming for Oxbridge etc. although of course some will go onto the top universities.

and after University, what are their options / long term outcomes?

talkin are you aiming that comment at me?
IME once you've been to university few have any interest in your GCSE's or A levels or whatever alternative you do. By the time you get to my age (greying, a tendency to be over weight and middle aged) I couldn't even prove I took any exams at school and luckily no one has ever in my whole working life ever asked me too. They are of absolutely no relevance to anyones employability.

In professional life, HG that's usually true. But not in all other walks of life, or if you want to retrain, or change jobs.....

I've retrained and changed jobs over the years I've done a wide variety of jobs no one asks to see any proof of my O levels/A levels etc or seems cares!
DH ditto.
We were recently at a lunch with old school friends who work on a variety of careers (all successful), including one who is now a very successful head hunter. We were all saying how no one ever asks about O levels A levels etc and that our schools had made such a big deal out of them at the time or even what Uni you went too by the time you've got into your late 20's/early 30's, employers are more interested in your reputation/ability to do the job.

And I had to do a course a couple of years ago because I couldn't prove I had O level maths................

I've done numerous courses some immensely tedious two actually required a very high level of math and no one has ever asked me to prove I have got O level math; help is nearly always provided for those who struggle with math. Many years ago I endured one very niche course that as far as I could see should only have been open to those who not only had a A level in maths but an A level in physics as well (my proudest most useless qualification).
Surely a good degree in an academic subject is a better indication of ability than an O level?

I agree. But tell that to the local authority that said "No maths certificate, no job. Unless you do this course and pass the exam at the end. And no you can't do the exam without doing the course"

The problem is that we've become obsessed with paper qualifications which not only in my opinion but also in my experience are frequently no indication of academic ability or more importantly ability to do a job.
There is no thinking out of the box qualification, or A level in rapid decision making, a compassion and empathy O level, a GCSE in following instructions or even I can happily work independently but get along with my work colleagues IGCSE and there certainly isn't a hard working punctual BETEC.

The problem is only going to get worse as more employers, and universities use the automatic filtering options that online applications offer. In my department we have a filter set for our lowest grade posts that rejects any applicant without C grades in English and Maths GCSE or equivalent. This rejection occurs before a human has even read the application. We were told at DS options evening that there are now several universities who computer filter before the applications go to the admission team, so if you are going down the non standard qualification route you would need to avoid those.

And there are plenty of kids in ds's school that are perfectly capable, willing and able to hold down good jobs but who will struggle to get GCSE Maths and English. Particularly the new syllabus English. It's a crying shame.

Out of curiosity what's been done to the new syllabus for English?

Actually I think I remember; someone's changed the set texts?

My comment about post university outcomes was more to do with how people reared in a bubble : home schooling, then Open University
cope after graduation in the rough and tumble world of employment

TBH I've never been asked for my lower certificates once I got the higher ones

Closed book exams, compulsory 19th century set text, more learning by heart- no problem for top set types- an almost insurmountable hurdle for many who need the C....

But Hakluyt that does n't apply to English Language and nobody needs English Lit GCSE.

Talkin it would be interesting to know whether self motivation and direction required earlier in Home Ed or alternative schools results in worst or better outcome for those young people. I suspect the latter for those with appropriate social skills.

"My comment about post university outcomes was more to do with how people reared in a bubble : home schooling, then Open University
cope after graduation in the rough and tumble world of employment"

Here's a discussion of a recent American survey into this, which may interest you: blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2014/09/how-do-unschoolers-turn-out/

IME, school is much more a "bubble" than home education is. For example, my 15yo has the chance to integrate into wider society now, rather than waiting until she has finished formal education. Because she has time on her hands and isn't restricted by spending most of her time with people of her own age in a closely directed environment, she has opportunities to do things alongside adults: clubs, voluntary work, education, and daily life. Sometimes adults play the role of mentors to her. Sometimes they are her peers. Sometimes, in her turn, she helps and teaches them. This makes for a gradual transition to adulthood.

Like many of the young people in Peter Gray's survey, she is already engaged in work which is likely to be relevant to her future career. It would sound shallow to say that this will "look good on her CV". That isn't why she's doing it: the acquisition of actual skills is more important. Still, she does already have plenty to put on her CV.

In The Myth of the Teen Brain, Robert Epstein explains why we do teens no favours by segregating them from the rest of our society, in schools for example.

Saracen, sorry not had time to read that stuff but I don't really agree with your last statement for the majority of young people who are socially at ease. Being in school and at college gives them their social framework and shared youth culture experiences, why push them into an adult, non teenager world before they need to be?

talkin I'm not sure the particular group of home educated pupils I observed were ever going to cope in the "rough and tumble world of employment" regardless of where they were educated. As I said above all has abnormally high IQ's and most were firmly on the spectrum. I don't know enough about home ed to comment on more normal children. I do know a couple of children educated at Steiner Ed all their school lives, they are articulate, creative, broad, minded individuals, they are unlikely to do well in the cut and thrust world of say investment banking (no crime) but are also unlikely to choose this occupation but in their own fields of work they seem to be coping fine.