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

completely agree with claig

As one who did 13 GCSEs, I think this is how I manage to do mostly 'solid subjects'.

Maths (a year early)

Physics
Chemistry
Biology

English Lit
English Lang
History
French
Russian (in spare time)

Additional Maths O'level (AO Maths) or something like that because O-levels had been dropped in the uk - I think we took an international paper

Statistics
Music

CDT

I wouldn't recommend it. It would have been ok in the days of O'level but with the coursework involved in GCSE it was too much work. It made my four A-levels feel like a doddle. And, as I said in my earlier post, the so called 'soft ones' involved the most work.

thanks Peachy, I apologise Xenia, I didn't mean it as an insult. I haven't had time to read all of the Xenia threads, but they are always stimulating.

But in general it is an argument that is often heard, and which I think is wrong.

I think in sixth form there is an awareness and a snobbery in fact as to what are "worthy" choices at AS/A2 level.
Certainly dd is aware of a divide between the students who study serious subjects and the media/drama/technology ones.
In dd's school worthy would be Maths, Further Maths,Eng Lang, Eng Lit, History Economics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology,Politics, Modern Foreign Languages.
Those not considered serious would be Geography (too much sticking and colouring in apparently) Geology (too many trips) Media, Business, Drama, Music, Psychology, Sociology. Health and Social Care, Law, any Technology subject Food. Resistant materials , product design etc.
These are the opinions of dd and her friends not sure if they are echoed by the staff in school or what decides which list.

I am confused as to how Xenia's father was/is a pyschiatrist without ever having gone on to higher education and gaining a medical degree.

In my day (early 80s) all the thickos did A Level Geography and Biology. A lot of learning off by heart.

However a friend of mine who did those A Levels now has one of the top jobs in the whole country.

Me... you couldn't fault my exam choices but now.. well, I do a lot of MNetting...

Very interesting thread, thank you Xenia.

DD is in year 9 and we've just had the information through about her options choices and interesting to note there are quite a few BTEC subjects on there and diplomas. I am not willing for her to be a guinea pig so she will be doing traditional GCSEs. I will concede to her request for dance GCSE as the only soft option.

DS is in L6 doing his AS levels. For a number of years now he has had his heart set on reading law (previously he wanted to go to Cambridge but in the last week or so he seems to be favouring Oxford) and becoming a barrister.
Slightly worrying to read here that some think that psychology is a soft/not serious option as that is one of his subjects. His school (private if that makes a difference) are well aware of his career/university ambitions and there has been no comment with regards to psychology not being appropriate.

Nigel, I think you must be muddling up posts or me with someone else. My father, who died 18 months ago, did a physics degree as his father couldn't afford for a second son to read medicine, then they change the rules after the War so there were grants or something and then he did medicine once he'd graduated. My mother supported him. She said she was the first woman in her town to claim the married man's tax allowance in consequence.

Mumoveas - I think it's worth lookingo n the best in terms of A level results academic private school web sites in the UK and looking at what A levels they offer and what people take. Most of them set out how many pupils took which subject and then trying to limit the child's choice to those traditional subjects because those schools know what the universities prefer.

Of course it's all fashion... if you go back far enough English boarding schools for boys taught latin and greek and science was very non U, not taught, rubbished..... in the 1800s. Then science did start getting a look in. So the intrinsic or moral issue of what subjects we ought to study is very different from the pragmatic ones. I get CVs ever week and some are absolutely appalling, don't even give the GCSE grades some of them and others are classic looking good things (not that I hire anyone). So it might be good that they study happiness at Wellington or learn meditation at X or even do Critical Thinking exams in the sixth form at Westminster school but most employers will be 25 yars out of date and looking for what was good in their hey day even if the modern subject is just as rigorous.

Also go on the Oxbridge web sites because they set out what A levels "count". Even if one counts but it looks at bit modern and dodgy can be best to avoid it as the HR person in 5 years time assessing the CV may not have such liberal views as the all inclusive left wing university entrance person. My sister read psychology at Oxford and she certainly didn't do psychology A level. No decent lawyers really do A level law either. I've marked the papers. It's done by people with an IQ of 80 usually who can hardly right - laughing as I type but it really was absolutely dreadful.

Oh and of course when you're 48 like I am it's completely irrelevant, all this stuff. It's how good were you last week which counts. Last week I was in Iran and I "only" have a first degree. They had promoted me to a doctorate (apparently they'd assessed by books and reputations at a local university and decided it was the equivalent !) and issued certificates with that (my fake doctorate - oh dear) which of course is dreadful but for them the issue of whether you have a PhD was crucial. Hard to explain that in London it's you eat what you kill and if you've killed well that matters much more than the route you took in. I suppose the point is and I have 3 20 something children going through all this, if you have the right qualifications it just makes things a lot easier. There are back door ways to get into things later with different or worse qualifications but they are harder ways even if you have the other skills - hard work, look good, clever or whatever you need for that job.

Thank you Xenia. He didn't choose A level law as we'd heard it was not a good choice. He did however study GCSE law independently when he was 14 as he was interested in it and as a result of his studies this reinforced his interest in becoming a lawyer.
He is currently studying French, Economics, Psychology and Maths

Mumoverseas: Cambridge definately, and poss Oxford, do at least say on their websites which subjects they regard as 'soft' (although they don't use that terminology, can't remember was the euphamism for it is...).

I am sure Psychology is ok as long as the other A levels are academic subjects. Plenty from my DCs' school take Psychology and many go on to Oxbridge. I would imagine your son's school would definately know if it was acceptable or not. I am sure Geography is deemed acceptable these days too.

lounglizard thats what I thought. DC checked with Cambridge last year and Psychology was ok and also we checked with Oxford a few weeks ago and again ok.
Thats why I'm suprised to read on here it is considered by some to be a soft/unacceptable subject.

I'm sure geography is more than acceptable. A very good friend of mine who is now a barrister did his degree in Geography. This came out when he was a pupil and was coming to Court with me and was naviating whilst I drove and he got us horrendeously lost somewhere in Kent

French, Economics, Psychology and Maths

Good list. Psychology is not though a very traditional subject so just that and 3 other similar not good ones wouldn't look good.

I would imagine that if you wanted to do a Geography degree, then Geography A-level is essential and not considered 'soft'.

A sister of mine did Durham's equivalent of Sociology and her A-levels were in 'hard' subjects; maths, further maths, physics and chemistry. She had to work quite hard to get a place because her A-levels weren't in subjects like history or psychology.

Plus, if you really don't like a 'hard' subject' you are not going to do well in it.

I think that Cambridge (and Oxford) are probably more interested in the ability of the candidate than whether an A-level choice is 'soft'. However, they obviously insist on maths and physics if you wish to study engineering, or English if you wish to study English. But they make it clear on their websites what subjects you should take.

What reality does this reflect though? Unless you want to be a doctor or a barrister or perhaps work for the home office, it just doesn't matter that much. And there are plenty of ways to be successful without making these choices. Oxbridge is not the be all and end all. Fine, so go to Oxbridge or similar if you want one of those jobs, but don't tell your children that psychology or law are pointless if they want to do anything else.

Many management consultants command enormous salaries. As do some IT consultants, most of whom have got their 'education' through experience. Those I've met who have focussed on computer science fared worse in the real world than those who can develop great business applications - a skill which really comes from experience, curiosity and empathy.

I'm completing my MBA this year, but faffed around horrendously at school - I got A Levels but two in 'soft' subjects. A friend of mine is now qualifying as a lawyer and did likewise. Many more people seem to get their second wind later in life.

Certainly, I see names like the BBC bandied around here and I don't believe having an Oxbridge degree helps you one iota over someone who has a hands-on degree. The old boys' network isn't so valid these days.

Getting out there, doing your own networking and being enthusiastic are INVALUABLE though, whatever you're doing.

Geography a soft subject? A very long time ago, Oxford University rather looked down on it but still offered a geography degree. I would doubt that any university would look down on it now.
DS2 has taken it for A2 and has done no "colouring in" or rote learning. I'm sure a Geography teacher would be pleased to explain what is studied nowadays.
His college warned against studying Business Studies or Sociology to A2 level as they weren't always considered as "hard" subjects, though they would be useful for some more vocational degrees.

I didn't do a levels and only got 5 gcses at c or above.

I did an apprenticeship as a motor mechanic, I had to have a maths gcse above c to get the apprenticeship.

I am now in the middle of my second degree, the first was in Engineering Production Management on the OU, the current one is in Business.

Agree absolutely with the point about many getting their second wind later in life.

I had no parental support, I was homeless aged 15 so I would never have had the chance to get a-levels let alone go to uni as a teen. I barely went to school in my 5th year.
This still angers me even now, I feel my parents let me down massively by being to caught up in their own lives to be able to give much input to mine.

The point about enthusiasm rings true to me, I had to do everything i have done under my own steam. No one was proud of me, everyone wrote me off as a failure before I'd begun my career. Even today, my parents are not aware that I already have a degree in engineering.
I feel that no matter what you study, you can achieve with determination and hard work.
The quote in the op, that made me chuckle a little really. In a priveleged world, of course the soft subjects are not ideal.
In the real world, just getting some children to school and into a vocational role/training programme at the end of it is more than enough to set someone up for life.

The second wind is so rewarding that it is almost worth the initial 'fuck up' as it were!

I think everybody should do English and maths to gcse.Its hard to think of any career where these won't be needed.But kids should do proper industry recognised vocational qualifications rather than non-academic GCSEs
Much better to do something like AAT rather than business studies !

Princessparty - depends where you want to train to become an accountant when you look at AAT exams. Especially if you want to be chartered accountant.Great deal of snob value to Chartered Accountancy exams in terms or size of firm and and even how you passed your exams.

Oh goodness yes that's true, qualification snobbery can persist into professional life as CA is more valued than AAT and ACCA and even ICAEW isn't followed by all the big accountancy firms any more!

The whole point is that students should be told whether soft subjects are acceptable in the career they want to pursue. If you want to become a doctor or a lawyer (by the conventional route, first time round etc etc) they need to know if their GCSEs are going to be accepted by the universities.

If you don't want to go into one of those professions, then fine, it's not a problem. There is room for all kinds of qualifications but what is so wrong is that some students (mainly in the state sector, it has to be said) are ruling themselves out before they have even started to apply for some courses by taking the wrong kind of GCSEs. They should not be being told that all GCSEs are equal and all university courses are equal. It simply isn't true in the real world.

I find it sad that the op is so obsessed by peoples IQ. Try seeing someone as a person not by how clever/good looking/connected they are.

Xenia I am so sorry for you. Much of mankind is not greedy and selfish. Once basic needs are met many people do not choose to fight each other for fripperies. It is right to give children the choice of being part of that world if they wish to be, I rather hope mine will opt out.