Forums

Posted: 12-10-2013 10:21 Post subject:

It is entirely possible for both to be true - that Gove is a twit and the OECD data is a true and accurate depiction of the results of our education system.

Gove certainly acts like a twit and the OECD figures reflect the almost incredible lack of basic literacy and numeracy in the majority of people I've interviewed in the last 15 years or so - some of them graduates.

The exceptions have all - as far as I can tell - done better because of considerable assistance at home. Something which, in a society where in most families both parents have to work all day, is somewhat hard to come by.

Posted: 12-10-2013 14:21 Post subject:

I believe that one problem with all this is the way GCSEs are graded.
From what I understand it works like this:
Imagine that there is a GCSE exam with 100 questions, rather than saying that to get an A* 95 correct is needed an A* is awarded to the top 10% of results. This means that one year someone who got 80 right might get an A* but the next year, if a lot of able people take the test 99 correct answers may be needed.

What I also seem to understand is that rather than taking one test on one day it is possible to take a number of tests across two years. If you don't get enough points on the first test then you just take the next test until you get enough points. I don't see that this gives a true reflection of the ability of a pupil.

Posted: 13-10-2013 02:38 Post subject:

The worse things get, the louder the cries go up for a return to basics.

The fact that children have not learned the basics seems to rile people so intensely that they want the little halfwits to be drilled and drilled and drilled some more.

They should, by now, have noticed that Back to Basics has been the policy of every Government for about thirty years.

This is how it works. You take a strong line with them. You mark every error. Then you see the script of the girl who has crossed out "lions and leopards and cheetahs" and written "big cats" instead, because she is more certain to be right that way.

Posted: 13-10-2013 10:36 Post subject:

Posted: 13-10-2013 12:56 Post subject:

"As long as this is not done in a way to bully or humiliate the child then it shouldn't discourage them from learning."

Even when done selectively with charm, tact and light pencil, this aspect of teaching - in the absence of narrative, imagination and ideas - is likely at best to produce a fear of being wrong. It does not, however, produce much desire to read more widely or explore the relationship of words and ideas.

Official policy in tests so far has been to penalise incorrect spelling of common words without discouraging pupils from risking the use of a wider vocabulary. For some that seems unduly lenient!

I find it very odd when people look at the failings of the kids emerging from the system and imagine that they have not been drilled. Day after day, week after week and term after term, they will have faced the basics and reluctantly complied or turned aside. Yet the cry goes up for more stick and less carrot. I have seen precious few carrots in the classroom during the last twenty years!

We would have our work cut out to motivate and enthuse pupils in the face of wider illiteracy and point-and-click alternatives to language. The call for greater rigour in the teaching of English has given rise to some dismal trends, however. You will find the A Level papers now contain sections where students are required to analyse non-literary texts in quasi-scientific language. The technical language of prosody is back. Meanwhile, instead of detailed knowledge of two Shakespeare plays, the candidates will study a single play and be encouraged to answer a 45 minute question with the help of a large bleeding chunk of the text.

The effects of Back to Basic teaching are pernicious across the board but when we see highly intelligent A Level candidates who do no independent learning, have no general knowledge and no curiosity, we can only speculate about the effects of the system on the failures. After five - soon to be more - years of secondary education, they will still confuse their homophones, misuse the apostrophe and have developed a grudge against the written word which will disable them from full participation in society.

Nothing wrong with Basics but they make for a most unappealing diet when they are unleavened by ideas, imagination and exploration. Discussion, which was once at the heart of English teaching, is particularly rare now. We still pay lip-service to the sentiment that pupils learn from each other but they are increasingly encouraged to focus their minds on their Levels and Targets. Lest they forget, these will be solemnly pasted on the covers of their exercise books.

They are graded like eggs but they seem destined for the shelf not for hatching.

Sad

Posted: 13-10-2013 13:38 Post subject: