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

[Judy1234]

Most pupils do not get all As though. My local comp gets sometyhing like 34% A - C including maths and English and my daughter's old school North London C gets something like 98% A and A*. There are loads of children out there with low grades whetyher in good or bad GCSEs as yiou would expect in any competitive society where everyone is not a clone. In the early 80s I made over 100 applications when I was graduating before I found something - a recession was on. it's the same for some of my graduating children now. Plus ca change. Life and finding work is often hard. My grandfather's letters after the 1920s crash paint a similar but worse picture.

All you have always had to do and continue to do is fight your way tooth and claw over the last man in the usual survival of the fittest and the currency of that survival tends not to be brute force these days but the intelligence to know your GCSE French might be a better arrow in your quiver than GCSE something studies and that middlesex poly believe it or not may not be quite as well regarded as places where it's harder to get into.

[noddyholder]

Life is not all about this though!

[claig]

noddyholder, it is great that that is his passion, with the skills that he has picked up and a real passion for the subject he may even be able to set up in business independently and enjoy every minute oh his career

[noddyholder]

Fingers crossed!Have friends working in that business and he has done a fair bit of work experience but he is young and i think too young to make life decisions.

[butadream]

tis in Xenia world I think!

[claig]

noddyholder, fingers crossed too.
Young, impulsive and daring, not prepared to take no for an answer, that's what it takes to make it

[noddyholder]

Well he;s all of those

[claig]

well in that case I predict he'll soon be driving a Bentley past the gates of Harrow School, having done well to ignore the head's advice

[TheFallenMadonna]

IMO the problem comes when vocational and academic subjects are not viewed on their own merits, but have to be compared and made 'equivalent'. Which is of course a by-product of league tables and the like. And people not really understanding vocational qualifications too perhaps. Vocational subjects are not and have never been worthless. Of course academic children should 'pick solid GCSEs in proper subjects', but not all children are academic. And not all children would be en route to a good job in one of the professions if they took that path. Many would end up with a clutch of bad GCSEs and a disaffection with learning. How is that a good thing?

I teach across the ability range, and teach different courses to suit different abilities and interests, from A level in 'hard Science' to a 'softer' A level (Psychology) and vocational courses in Applied Science. We need to make sure that our children receive the right guidance to enable them to make informed choices regarding the courses they follow rather than ignorantly rubbishing some courses because we don't want our children to not be on that professional path.

[claig]

TheFallenMadonna, agree with you. None of the vocational subjects are worthless. It's a big wide world out there and there is room for all sorts of disciplines. If people have a real passion for something then they should follow it.

30 years ago there was hardly any computer industry at all, there were no video games companies. 30 years on millions of pounds have been made in these industries, with Bill Gates being one of the richest men in the world. Pipils need to be flexible and be able to adapt to new concepts and grasp new opportunities as they become available. Following a tried and tested route to the "professions" will not make the country rich.

[cocolepew]

Not everybody is focused on getting a university degree, and pushing themselves to finding to best possible job (which I'm taking from the op to mean very well paid). Teaching yourself GCSE subects as a sideline to 'worthy' qualifications .

I would like my DDs to be happy at school and their adult life. It doesn't all revolve around looking the best/brighest.

[noddyholder]

Amen coco

[Peachy]

Xenia in your world it takes being a brain surgeon to do well

In my world holding down ajob as acleaner is pretty impressive tbh: almost all the kids in my Primary had some level of additional needs,maybe 70%?I remember being really pleased when I heard that aclassmate of mine who had seemeddestined for prison had been diagnosed with adhd in his twenties,put on aspeicaldiet and been given help, then become a window cleaner.

It's all relative.

'Course, my boy's school is doing Shakespeare (MND and Romeo) in yr 4 along with Philosophy and a course on classic mythology. With maybe 2 statemented kids per year. They will on balance do better in life by the Xenia Definition. My kids however won't, but I would be happy with a job and independence.

[ahundredtimes]

No, but I think his point is about social mobility, isn't it. Not that everyone should do physics or MFL, but that those bright kids who could but are from disadvantaged backgrounds are given the opportunity to do so.

What I don't know is whether it's true that they can't. FM - I found your post really interesting and informative

[Peachy]

'All you have always had to do and continue to do is fight your way tooth and claw over the last man in the usual survival of the fittest and the currency of that survival tends not to be brute force these days but the intelligence to know your GCSE French might be a better arrow in your quiver than GCSE something studies and that middlesex poly believe it or not may not be quite as well regarded as places where it's harder to get into. '

Actually that isn't all it takes.

I can beat most people (in RL,not uber qualified MN ) academically but have never willingly clamberd over anyone in my life. Best description of me is Quaker I think, and that'sOK.Plenty to give and achieve,mega bucks sadly won't be part of it though. Anyway, once i'd got the house I wouldn't know what to do with it anyway.

[pippibluestocking]

What is Xenia's world? I know she has privately educated children and is a great advocate of working mothers and private education and that she has an ex-husband, but what is your world, Xenia - what is your social background and what do you work as?

[Peachy]

I know her detai9ls but won't out her: suffice it to say she is indeed very well qualified to talk about the higher earning more competitive end of academia and workinglife.

[oldenglishspangles]

Actually I read this in the sunday times back in September -
"Mickey Mouse degrees www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article6829650.ece"

[oldenglishspangles]

Traditional academic qualifications have done well to create well rounded bankers and politicians have they

[noddyholder]

No education is worthless just as no person and what they do to put a roof over their head/food on the table is worthless.Xenia is a snob pure and simple and sees no worth in anything apart from ber model for work and life

[claig]

oldenglishspangles, very interesting article, thanks for posting it
"Traditional academic qualifications have done well to create well rounded bankers and politicians have they "
I agree with your point above. The professions such as law and accountancy are vital but they are not essentially wealth creating. The real wealth of the country is created by business, scientists, engineers, media people etc. As a country we need the wealth generated by these people in order to have the services that we need in order to live in a civilised society.

Many of the future wealth creators will be mavericks, iconoclasts, independent creative individuals rather than the individuals in the professions. Many of them will have studied vocational subjects rather than traditional academic subjects.

In countries like America and Germany, the first choice of students is not to go into safe professions like law, but rather into science, engineering, business and creative industries.

No educational course is worthless, but in order not to do a disservice to the students who take these courses, they should all be rigorous and of a high standard. As a student says in the Sunday Times article

"A lot of the courses seemed to be kind of fake ? they were, in a way, Mickey Mouse,? he says.

?I knew that in order to succeed you had to focus on either games programming or games art. You can get a qualification from universities in ?games design?, but you?re not really a programmer, you?re not really an artist, you?re not really anything.

?Where Derby was great was that they said, ?This is programming. It?s going to be hard.?

And it was. There were a lot of people who had worked in the industry who taught there. I learnt the most difficult programming languages, and I produced a lot of project work, which impressed people when it came to applying for jobs.?

[TheFallenMadonna]

If I see Xenia misapply the concept of 'survival of the fittest' again I may spontaneously combust...

Anyway...

I teach by the way in what would be consisdered a low achieving state school, the A*-C percentages of which would send many MNetters running for either the estate agents or an independent. But we take tremendous care to advise our students as to the potential consequences of their various KS4 options. Our brightest students, from whatever background, do GCSEs. And in 'proper' subjects. And they get top grades. And do A levels. And go to universities. Good ones.

And other students do a mix, and might do A levels, and might go to university. Less good ones perhaps, but not worthless.

And other do mainly vocational courses, and go to college, and train to do something useful and interesting, although not 'professional'.

But I wonder whether the Head of Harrow, or Xenia, looks at the individual students in schools like mine, and sees how they fulfil their individual potential. Or whether like everyone else they look at the numbers and think somthing must be wrong when everyone isn;t doing the same as their own little bit of the world.

[loungelizard]

The point is though that some children are being denied the opportunity to even apply for some courses because they don't have the right GCSEs to start with.

Those in the private sector (and at state grammar schools) are encouraged not to take certain subjects, knowing that they will be discounted by universities. If you read the small print in the admission criteria at most of the top universities you can see what they find acceptable.

The dreadful thing is that some bright children are not even in with a chance on some courses through absolutely no fault of their own because of their GCSEs. The private school children can get on those courses, not because they are more intelligent but because they haven't already ruled themselves out.

It's about time the government/education department or whatevercame clean about what is and what is not acceptable instead of pretending that everyone is in with the same chance, regardless of background or schooling. It is outrageous that some children should be denied an opportunity of going to a good university just by dint of their parents' ability to pay.

Obviously not all children are academically inclined and there should be courses/GCSEs to suit them, but we are talking about bright children who do want to achieve having the wool pulled over their eyes as to the actual 'worth' of the GCSEs they are taking.

[TheFallenMadonna]

Are they though? Like I said, I teach in a school with the giving away of vocational courses, but we're not going to put our brightest students on the BTEC Applied Science course. They do Triple Science. Is there evidence that these bright children are doing the vocational courses rather than the academic one, or just that the take up of vocational courses is increasing, generally among students who would, as I said earlier, otherwise have ended up with a bunch of mediocre GCSEs?

[claig]

loungelizard,
"It's about time the government/education department or whatevercame clean about what is and what is not acceptable instead of pretending that everyone is in with the same chance, regardless of background or schooling"

very good point. I agree they should lay all the cards on the table and everybody should be given access to the same information and opportunities.