Worthless qualifications at state schools

[Judy1234]

Wise words.
Pick solid GCSEs in proper subjects - take a language, take English lit and lang, take maths, geography, history and 2 or 3 proper sciences and get just 8 or 9 in traditional subjects with good grades.

"The headmaster of Harrow has accused many state schools of deceiving children by entering them for ?worthless? qualifications. Barnaby Lenon said that grade inflation and a shift to vocational qualifications was masking a failure to teach enough pupils to a good standard.

?Let us not deceive our children, and especially children from poorer homes, with worthless qualifications so that they become like the citizens of Weimar Germany or Robert Mugabe?s Zimbabwe, carrying their certificates around in a wheelbarrow,? he told a conference.

?[Let?s not] produce people like those girls in the first round of The X Factor who tell us they want to be the next Britney Spears but can?t sing a note.?

He cited media studies as an example of a soft subject, for which many schools were keen to enter students because it was easier for them to get a good grade. The real route to a good job in one of the professions, he said, was good grades in traditional academic subjects such as maths, sciences and languages."

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/school_league_tables/article6998943.ece

agree with LeQueen to a large extent that many people are being fooled and fleeced. I go further and believe the head of Harrow is fooling people as well in implying that good grades in 'hard' subjects will get people jobs. With the grade inflation and large numbers going to University, many who followed the head's advice will come out jobless and saddled with debt.

I differ with LeQueen as to the importance of Russell Group universities. I would put my money on a PhD at Keele university in stochastic calculus getting a far higher paid job than a PhD at Oxford in English. You can go to universities that are not Russell Group ones, but you have to make more careful subject choices, if you don't want to come out and be the highest qualified burger flipper in McDonalds.

"When everybody is somebody, nobody is anybody... "
very good quote. What is needed is higher standards all round, no fooling people with worthless paper that was easy to obtain. Let's have quality not quantity. Artificially making sure that everybody gets at least a 'C' grade is devaluing the coinage. There would be no shame in getting a 'D' or an 'E' if the exams were tough. Employers would not look down on it, because large percentages of the population would get low grades and employers would know the exams were tough. At the moment employers don't trust any of the grades, because so many who walk through the door have an 'A'.

Instead of talking about the real problem, the head of Harrow takes easy potshots at 'soft' subjects.

Calibre of people? I assume you mean level of academic ability becuase if you think more intelligent means better person then I simply cannot engage with that notion.

The idea that a degree at a lower repestablishment isn't any use is bogus. Most of my classmates are now working as teachers after aquiring a PGCE, I hope to do my SSD conversion if I can find a means with the boy's needs.... it may not buy me a place at a glittering law firm and maybe the Bristol degree would have (or the equivalent anyway- socialpolicy asked me to apply so maybe something related?Was a different dept I applied to) ...but I don't want a place in a glittering law firm, and I prefered balancing family with the other things surrounding high performing universities- such as high accom. prices and city life.

That trade off is worthwhile for a great many, a one size fits all system is completely wrong for a great many people. I ahev no problem admitting that some universities have better reps and facillities etc, but others cope better withmore diverese students. Childcare and Bristol for example,and I as warned against studying there as a mature student by an academic. But the degree I got bought my place on my MA,and really isn't that what a degree is? currency? It might not be the currency of uberachiever-land, but that is OK as I never fancied the view there anyway.

I completely agree with Claig.

If everything was made harder only a few would achieve the highest grades (including bright but poor children and excluding not so bright but rich children) and thus the vast majority would be 'average', (as presumably they should be??). It would benefit everybody.

I note some of the private schools have rather gone off the IGCSE now as their students are not getting all As anymore, which is interesting, presumably because it is harder.

I don't know though, I think I would expect an average person to be able to pass an exam, so a C grade rather than a D or E so maybe not make them quite that hard.

It is a complete minefield though, as opinions differ quite a lot depending on the field you're looking at.

The law, it seems, is particularly snobby (unsurprisingly) as I am pretty sure that most Magic Circle solicitors firms would prefer a trainee with a degree in Classics from Edinburgh + GDL + LPC to Law from Nottingham Trent. But to be honest an accountancy firm might think more of the law degree so that leaves you wondering if students need to have their job plans sorted before they even go to university.

And Peachy, I agree that degrees can be seen as currency but looking at it that way wouldn't you want your £25k to buy you potential income of £60k +?

Also along with the children being pedalled with 'soft' subjects in state schools, there are privately educated students at Harrow or wherever who actually think they are brain of Britain because they have got 10 As, when they are most certainly not.

If you are in a boarding school, being reasonably bright to start with, being taught properly, having homework supervised, having coursework going backwards and forwards, re-marked til its up to the right grade etc etc, it would be fairly hard not to get a grade A.

i agree with lequeen on this one - which is rare - but that's good in itself!

Also agree with Peachy in as much as education isn't only about getting top jobs and earning lots of money. My family is not interested in earning lots of money, some people have different values.

But, if a student does want to go into Law or Medicine they do need to know which qualifications are going to be acceptable.

I dod agreewith that LL. I really do.

We should tailor the advice to the child, not have blanket rules dictating witholding information that could affect life chances.

Well said LeQueen.

The point is the poor can't go on line and work these things out and the rich can. Is that because of low IQ or laziness or are the rich lazy but their schools do this stuff for them so they don't need to go on line and work out for themselves the value of their degree "in lighting design and technology at Uni"... (was that a joke by the way?)

The better schools educate not just to do well in exams but the whole person which is why the private sector leads on that too - best musicians, sportsmen, more likely to have stuff like happiness lessons, better religious teaching if you're into that, best chapel choral music etc etc. In other words we dum down and give children even dreadful music in state primaries where as perfectly equivalent children in private primaries are expected to sing in latin in parts in tune. That's too tough for the poor so let's pretend they are all brilliant because they can sing wheels on a bus.

FFs here we go again with the poor unable to work a computer but the rich can?

its a bit laughable?
otherwise I may weep

"He who is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and He will reward him for what he has done." -Proverbs 19:17

Okay so why do some (not all) of the children of the poor not know what counts as a good A level or university and others do? I see it all the time - friends which children in state schools making ridiculous choices. You think well can't you use google?

Your contempt for professions other than legal is disgusting, Xenia.

who do you think does the lighting for the stadium concerts and events and for TV? People who are trained to do it, of course. And they make a good living too.

TIme to join the real world.

I notice you ignored my post about my achievements...presumably because it didn't fit into your narrow matrix of "success".

Arf. No offence, Xenia - but are you quite the ticket?

xenia - if you read some of the education threads on here some non read brick universities are being hailed as great learning institutions

change happens- movement in education as well as the class system

your view of russell group or sutton 13 may not be everybody's ideal ...i am trying to go with the flow and learn

No she isn't. Xenia starts these threads to support her own choices in life, not to admit the possibility there are other avenues to success. Its pathological behaviour.

Its a hiding to nothing really, but I wonder what a good therapist would make of her insistence that the only choice is either her way or degraded poverty would be.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

deliberate typo ! red

I'm a bit at the 'standard' set of GCSE options offered at our local school.

They do the standard 5 plus RE and then choose 4 options from all the usual suspects (including lots of quite soft ones).

BUT
The brightest children are invited and encouraged to do AS Critical Thinking and Separate sciences as two of their options (and also AS Photography as a third option, but this isn't encouraged as strongly). So the brightest children only get 2 (or even just 1 choice). A friends dd has chosen PE and Sociology - this is a bright child who wants to be a vet - but no mfl and no humanity except RE or does sociology count? Her list will then be: English x2, Maths, Science x3, RE, PE, Sociology and AS Critical Thinking which just doesn't seem meaty enough for a very competative course to me.

I can't help thinking the brightest children should be steered towards history and a mfl rather than Critical Thinking and Photography, even if those are AS levels (but I don't have a problem with the separate sciences). The real travesty is that many of the children opting for the critical thinking end up with rather low grades (Ds, Es and even fails) - very few of them get C or above.

snorkie i agree does not look meaty enough

dd has chosen
maths
english x2 ( SUPPOSED to do media but i put foot down so not doing)

sciences x3
rs
history
geography
french
ict

already done something worthless short course last year

yes, Snorkie, that is the point.

Unfortunately Xenia's mad postings make a mockery of the real problem and wind every one up so there can't be a proper discussion.

Those children at private schools, with all their advantages, might like to dwell on the fact that they aren't brilliant scholars, they are just better versed in how to pass not very hard exams.

What is not well in xenia's life that she feels she has to belittle so many others? She is obsessed with her own choices as the model for success!Sad really not to embrace all.My ds is well versed on all aspects of education and exam choices but that is what they are CHOICES! he has known for years what he wants to do and even if he changes path on the way it doesn't matter as long as he is healthy and happy I will be pleased and anything more esp financial/career will be a bonus.

Xrenia fuck off insulting my Dh,he designs electronic circuitry and studies degree levelphysics aswell as stage management and CAD.... you might not like it but it is well regarded.

Funny, I defended you early on never agin.