This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Do you think it's unfair for students to have extra time + laptops?
- Writing after the end of an exam
- can i get special consideration for my a level?
- Feeling guilty about Extra time in GCSEs
- My friend might be getting extra time and i hate it.
- Laptop battery died mid exam
- Mat 2023
- A Level English Lit - is it worth it?
- 3 or 4 a-levels for maths at Cambridge imperial or Warwick
- Is doing 5 A levels hard?????
- ACA exams
- extra time in exams
- BSC biomedical science 2 years buckingham
- I'm really annoyed.
- self study further maths worth it?
- AS grades
- Contextual offers and predicted grades
- Extra time
- Extra time in a level exams
- uk education system
Do you think extra time in exams is fair?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by morgan8002
Ok. How do you suggest going about that? If you don't know of a root cause then any treatment is likely to be ineffective.
If nothing is wrong then the root cause is just a lack of skill, or idleness... The way to improve? The same way you improve any other skill... Practice.
Please be more respectful to others as you are just being rude, but I guess it's due to your lack of knowledge with disabilities. Extra time is not spoon feeding it's just providing extra support to people who may require it and the same support can be put into place in a workplace which the Equality act 2010 support. An allocation of extra time under no circumstances shows incapability to handle a job because if the right adjustments are made for the person.
Of course it's fair if there is something proven whereby the student needs that extra time. However I have to admit I've seen some people who seem to have an advantage with that extra time, although I can't judge because I don't know what their reasons for it is. if there was honestly no proper reason for them to have the extra time then they wouldn't have it, the people receiving it (as far as I know) all go through assessments for it.
Kind of like some people needing to use computers in exams I suppose. Some agree, some disagree...but if you're on the receiving end of course you'd be fine with it, like myself.
Kind of like some people needing to use computers in exams I suppose. Some agree, some disagree...but if you're on the receiving end of course you'd be fine with it, like myself.
Original post by xylas
I agree with this and your view on extra time in exams.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying regarding "processing what a maths question is asking".
My argument in logical form:
X finds processing a maths question more difficult => X is less able at (this kind of) maths
This is not the same thing as (affirming the consequent fallacy):
X is less able at (this kind of) maths => X finds processing a maths question more difficult
Therefore your argument that maths (problem solving) ability does not rely totally on speed actually supports what I'm saying since processing speed is only the pre-requisite to maths ability, but there are other reasons (e.g. lack of quality or originality of ideas) why they might still be less able at maths.
Hope we're on the same page
I think you misunderstood what I was saying regarding "processing what a maths question is asking".
My argument in logical form:
X finds processing a maths question more difficult => X is less able at (this kind of) maths
This is not the same thing as (affirming the consequent fallacy):
X is less able at (this kind of) maths => X finds processing a maths question more difficult
Therefore your argument that maths (problem solving) ability does not rely totally on speed actually supports what I'm saying since processing speed is only the pre-requisite to maths ability, but there are other reasons (e.g. lack of quality or originality of ideas) why they might still be less able at maths.
Hope we're on the same page
I'm saying:
X is slow to process maths questions of a particular kind X is less able at (this kind of) maths.
This is slightly different from the negation of your above statement.
I've pluralised to 'questions' because everyone will struggle on some question or another so you can't use single case in isolation to make logical conclusions.
The other difference is "slow" vs "finds difficult". This is because in your original post you were talking about people being slow at processing questions. I'm arguing against that, rather than people finding it difficult to process questions.
Being slow to process a question and finding it difficult to process a question are two quite different things.
Finding it difficult is much more complex to argue about.
Your statement above (with added pluralisation) is true if the questions are reasonably clear in my opinion. The terms aren't well defined enough to state it as a true logical statement though.
Original post by TheMcSame
If nothing is wrong then the root cause is just a lack of skill, or idleness... The way to improve? The same way you improve any other skill... Practice.
How many hours per day would you need to do to improve? Some people need a few hours of sleep.
Original post by xylas
I agree with this and your view on extra time in exams.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying regarding "processing what a maths question is asking".
My argument in logical form:
X finds processing a maths question more difficult => X is less able at (this kind of) maths
This is not the same thing as (affirming the consequent fallacy):
X is less able at (this kind of) maths => X finds processing a maths question more difficult
Therefore your argument that maths (problem solving) ability does not rely totally on speed actually supports what I'm saying since processing speed is only the pre-requisite to maths ability, but there are other reasons (e.g. lack of quality or originality of ideas) why they might still be less able at maths.
Hope we're on the same page
I think you misunderstood what I was saying regarding "processing what a maths question is asking".
My argument in logical form:
X finds processing a maths question more difficult => X is less able at (this kind of) maths
This is not the same thing as (affirming the consequent fallacy):
X is less able at (this kind of) maths => X finds processing a maths question more difficult
Therefore your argument that maths (problem solving) ability does not rely totally on speed actually supports what I'm saying since processing speed is only the pre-requisite to maths ability, but there are other reasons (e.g. lack of quality or originality of ideas) why they might still be less able at maths.
Hope we're on the same page
Just because it takes you longer to process a maths question it does not make you less able at maths at all, it makes it more difficult for you to complete a maths exam in the given time.
Just because you have to read a question that tells you to differentiate some function and find the stationary points a couple of times in order to understand it, it doesn't mean that you are any less able when it comes to differentiating etc.
Even at university level, what you have claimed is not the case. I am a student with "slow processing speed" due to my disabilities and I receive extra time, however I am also one of the most able mathematicians in my year (I have even been offered the chance to do a research internship and the chance to create my own projects to study as part of the degree as a result of this). I don't us coursework extensions at all, however I am the only person to gain full marks in each piece of Number Theory coursework this year and I am top of the year in several of the modules.
I never dropped a mark in one piece of school work or homework throughout the whole of my time in school, so I wasn't bad at GCSE or A-level mathematics at all, I even self-taught myself my further-maths A-level and most of my maths A-level (achieving full-marks in nearly every module).
I feel like part of the problem comes from you not completely understanding what people mean when they talk about "processing the question", and to be fair it is difficult to explain. It takes a few reads for the words to kind of connect fully if that makes sense, for my brain to just kind of register the sentence fully. So I am not wondering "What is differentiation? How do I find stationary points again?", it just takes it a bit longer for it to go from being letters on a page to a sentence with any kind of meaning in my head.
I really don't like commenting on these threads at all, and I have been trying to avoid it, but I felt like I could maybe try a better explanation. While it is not dyslexia, if it helps you to understand more then maybe think about it like dyslexia. It feels like this slower processing speed thing is being misunderstood somewhat, and your maths comments maybe struck a nerve a little.
I really shouldn't have commented, I am sorry.
Original post by TheMcSame
Why isn't it your own fault if you can't write quickly, again, if you have nothing wrong with you? The vast majority of people are capable of writing quickly, and again, if you have nothing wrong with you, you should be more than capable of writing quickly.
Yeah my brain doesn't work like most people's do. I learned to read in less than 6 weeks but my 8 year old brother's handwriting is better than mine.
I have nothing physically wrong with me, my brain is just wired differently.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by morgan8002
How many hours per day would you need to do to improve? Some people need a few hours of sleep.
Does it matter how many hours a day you would need? It could be an hour or just 10 mins... The point is, practice is there.
You also seem to think people can't take even an hour out of their time to do something. Very few people are in a position where they honestly can't give up as little as an hour of their time.
Original post by Katty3
Yeah my brain doesn't work like most people's do. I learned to read in less than 6 weeks but my 8 year old brother's handwriting is better than mine.
I have nothing physically wrong with me, my brain is just wired differently.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I have nothing physically wrong with me, my brain is just wired differently.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Cool story... I'm talking about the speed of writing... Maybe you didn't learn to read as well as you thought you did...
Original post by TheMcSame
Does it matter how many hours a day you would need? It could be an hour or just 10 mins... The point is, practice is there.
You also seem to think people can't take even an hour out of their time to do something. Very few people are in a position where they honestly can't give up as little as an hour of their time.
Cool story... I'm talking about the speed of writing... Maybe you didn't learn to read as well as you thought you did...
You also seem to think people can't take even an hour out of their time to do something. Very few people are in a position where they honestly can't give up as little as an hour of their time.
Cool story... I'm talking about the speed of writing... Maybe you didn't learn to read as well as you thought you did...
Yes I did learn to read very effectively. I have dyspraxia which means that I have issues surrounding: coordination, balance, organisation, following processes, concentration, fine motor skills, structuring my thoughts when I speak, notetaking and not reading!
Imagine a spider walking across a page whilst covered in ink. That's basically my writing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Katty3
Yes I did learn to read very effectively. I have dyspraxia which means that I have issues surrounding: coordination, balance, organisation, following processes, concentration, fine motor skills, structuring my thoughts when I speak, notetaking and not reading!
Imagine a spider walking across a page whilst covered in ink. That's basically my writing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Imagine a spider walking across a page whilst covered in ink. That's basically my writing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Again... I really don't think you can read as well as you think you can. I've mentioned, several times, that people who have something wrong with themselves have a reason for poor writing skills.
Original post by TheMcSame
Again... I really don't think you can read as well as you think you can. I've mentioned, several times, that people who have something wrong with themselves have a reason for poor writing skills.
Yes I can read perfectly well. I had a reading age off the charts consistently from the age of 7. I was reading the likes of Charlotte Brontë and Charles Dickens when I was still in primary school. I think I can read.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by TheMcSame
Does it matter how many hours a day you would need? It could be an hour or just 10 mins... The point is, practice is there.
You also seem to think people can't take even an hour out of their time to do something. Very few people are in a position where they honestly can't give up as little as an hour of their time.
You also seem to think people can't take even an hour out of their time to do something. Very few people are in a position where they honestly can't give up as little as an hour of their time.
It does matter, since it has to be viable to do that amount of practice. I'm just saying anecdotally that it doesn't matter whether I write for 18 hours a day or 5 min a day for a large number of consecutive days; it's not going to change my writing speed. If you're correct then there must be some highly non-linear relationship between practice per day and writing speed and you need to do more than 18 hours each day to receive any benefit. It's obviously not feasible to spend weeks/months before each exam extremely sleep deprived so this isn't really an option for most/all people.
What did I say to make you think that? I think people need to be careful about how they use their time but have no objection to them using it if they think it's a good usage.
Extra time is fine for people who actually need it - not for people who have suddenly decided that they're dyslexic because they want more time in the English exams! The amount of people in my school who are faking learning disabilities is alarming. There isn't enough room in the other exam rooms for everyone who wants extra time now, so people who really need the help could miss out, which defeats the point of extra time altogether.
I cannot add anything to that! Yes, all over TSR students are shouting "BUT THE LAW!" and "Go to HR!" No, the company is not on your side. Your experience in recruitment confirmed my suspicions about the systems they use to churn through those thousands of applicants.
Ahhh this reminds me of the time I was made redundant because...I couldn't speak German (this was not asked for when I started the job at all) and I had to sign documentation wherein I promised to never say a negative word about my employer, ever, after having experienced extreme sexual harassment/assault from bosses. Just one of the many anecdotes that I'm sure we both have that should be a warning to anyone yet to enter the world of work thinking you'll be cut any kind of slack.
Also someone mentioned that admin/data entry was a 'skilled' job that require apparently special memory skills! It is defined as unskilled work and will be an element of just about every desk job!!
Yes, coping mechanisms is what people should be teaching themselves and what schools should be helping children to develop.
Ahhh this reminds me of the time I was made redundant because...I couldn't speak German (this was not asked for when I started the job at all) and I had to sign documentation wherein I promised to never say a negative word about my employer, ever, after having experienced extreme sexual harassment/assault from bosses. Just one of the many anecdotes that I'm sure we both have that should be a warning to anyone yet to enter the world of work thinking you'll be cut any kind of slack.
Also someone mentioned that admin/data entry was a 'skilled' job that require apparently special memory skills! It is defined as unskilled work and will be an element of just about every desk job!!
Yes, coping mechanisms is what people should be teaching themselves and what schools should be helping children to develop.
Original post by morgan8002
I'm saying:
X is slow to process maths questions of a particular kind X is less able at (this kind of) maths.
This is slightly different from the negation of your above statement.
I've pluralised to 'questions' because everyone will struggle on some question or another so you can't use single case in isolation to make logical conclusions.
The other difference is "slow" vs "finds difficult". This is because in your original post you were talking about people being slow at processing questions. I'm arguing against that, rather than people finding it difficult to process questions.
Being slow to process a question and finding it difficult to process a question are two quite different things.
Finding it difficult is much more complex to argue about.
Your statement above (with added pluralisation) is true if the questions are reasonably clear in my opinion. The terms aren't well defined enough to state it as a true logical statement though.
X is slow to process maths questions of a particular kind X is less able at (this kind of) maths.
This is slightly different from the negation of your above statement.
I've pluralised to 'questions' because everyone will struggle on some question or another so you can't use single case in isolation to make logical conclusions.
The other difference is "slow" vs "finds difficult". This is because in your original post you were talking about people being slow at processing questions. I'm arguing against that, rather than people finding it difficult to process questions.
Being slow to process a question and finding it difficult to process a question are two quite different things.
Finding it difficult is much more complex to argue about.
Your statement above (with added pluralisation) is true if the questions are reasonably clear in my opinion. The terms aren't well defined enough to state it as a true logical statement though.
I think this is just semantics.
Finding questions difficult to process => slower to process questions => less able at that kind of maths
Just to be clear so no further misunderstanding, I have defined 'process' == finding what the question requires in order to answer it (NOT time to complete answer)
Yes you are correct if you spotted the assumption that maths questions test maths ability. (corollary: slow processing times => lower exam grade)
If you disagree with this assumption then the conversation moves away from real world applications, e.g. extra time, to mere philosophical debate.
Original post by morgan8002
There are many forms of communication. Someone with autism may for example struggle to have a conversation but be amazing at writing essays. It should be considered case by case.
There are many forms of communication. Someone with autism may for example struggle to have a conversation but be amazing at writing essays. It should be considered case by case.
Yes I agree - if you read my other posts you will see that that is what I've been trying to say. Every single person is different, each case is different so people shouldn't judge just because they know someone with the same condition that doesn't need extra time, doesn't mean that automatically others with said condition do/don't need extra time.
My point about autism was to a different poster who claimed that autism alone wasn't a reason good enough for extra time, they were saying they had to have autism alongside another condition e.g. dyslexia in order to be entitled to the extra time. I disagreed as autism has plenty of traits which could mean that they are entitled to extra time.
Some people with dyselxia may need extra time. Some may not. Same with autism, dyspraxia ... a long list of conditions. Everybody is different.
Original post by Nerwen
Just because it takes you longer to process a maths question it does not make you less able at maths at all, it makes it more difficult for you to complete a maths exam in the given time.
Just because you have to read a question that tells you to differentiate some function and find the stationary points a couple of times in order to understand it, it doesn't mean that you are any less able when it comes to differentiating etc.
Even at university level, what you have claimed is not the case. I am a student with "slow processing speed" due to my disabilities and I receive extra time, however I am also one of the most able mathematicians in my year (I have even been offered the chance to do a research internship and the chance to create my own projects to study as part of the degree as a result of this). I don't us coursework extensions at all, however I am the only person to gain full marks in each piece of Number Theory coursework this year and I am top of the year in several of the modules.
I never dropped a mark in one piece of school work or homework throughout the whole of my time in school, so I wasn't bad at GCSE or A-level mathematics at all, I even self-taught myself my further-maths A-level and most of my maths A-level (achieving full-marks in nearly every module).
I feel like part of the problem comes from you not completely understanding what people mean when they talk about "processing the question", and to be fair it is difficult to explain. It takes a few reads for the words to kind of connect fully if that makes sense, for my brain to just kind of register the sentence fully. So I am not wondering "What is differentiation? How do I find stationary points again?", it just takes it a bit longer for it to go from being letters on a page to a sentence with any kind of meaning in my head.
I really don't like commenting on these threads at all, and I have been trying to avoid it, but I felt like I could maybe try a better explanation. While it is not dyslexia, if it helps you to understand more then maybe think about it like dyslexia. It feels like this slower processing speed thing is being misunderstood somewhat, and your maths comments maybe struck a nerve a little.
I really shouldn't have commented, I am sorry.
Just because you have to read a question that tells you to differentiate some function and find the stationary points a couple of times in order to understand it, it doesn't mean that you are any less able when it comes to differentiating etc.
Even at university level, what you have claimed is not the case. I am a student with "slow processing speed" due to my disabilities and I receive extra time, however I am also one of the most able mathematicians in my year (I have even been offered the chance to do a research internship and the chance to create my own projects to study as part of the degree as a result of this). I don't us coursework extensions at all, however I am the only person to gain full marks in each piece of Number Theory coursework this year and I am top of the year in several of the modules.
I never dropped a mark in one piece of school work or homework throughout the whole of my time in school, so I wasn't bad at GCSE or A-level mathematics at all, I even self-taught myself my further-maths A-level and most of my maths A-level (achieving full-marks in nearly every module).
I feel like part of the problem comes from you not completely understanding what people mean when they talk about "processing the question", and to be fair it is difficult to explain. It takes a few reads for the words to kind of connect fully if that makes sense, for my brain to just kind of register the sentence fully. So I am not wondering "What is differentiation? How do I find stationary points again?", it just takes it a bit longer for it to go from being letters on a page to a sentence with any kind of meaning in my head.
I really don't like commenting on these threads at all, and I have been trying to avoid it, but I felt like I could maybe try a better explanation. While it is not dyslexia, if it helps you to understand more then maybe think about it like dyslexia. It feels like this slower processing speed thing is being misunderstood somewhat, and your maths comments maybe struck a nerve a little.
I really shouldn't have commented, I am sorry.
No need to apologise ☺ I think you should have commented because noone has perfect knowledge so the more perspectives on this topic the closer this discussion can get to the truth.
However I have to disagree. I don't see 'ability to differentiate' as being related to 'ability at math'. Anyone can rote learn a method and follow it through when told to do so. The bit that makes you good at maths is using intuition to know which method to use and why you're using it. 'Processing the question' is required for the latter but not the former. To repeat, speed/consistency at differentiation does not involve processing the question.
I don't claim to know if you are good at maths or not but it is completely untrue that you never dropped a mark in a piece of school work. I wish you hadn't said that because I was respecting your point of view until then.
You say you have a disability 'like dyslexia but not dyslexia'. Please provide an accurate name or a source so I understand what you're referring to.
I completely completely agree that if words appear jumbled to you and you struggle to connect them into sentences with basic meanings then you should definitely get extra time. I have already defined 'processing a question' and it is not related to that. That sounds more like difficulty with written communication rather than seeing what the question is asking you to do.
Plenty of people with no proven disabilities struggle with the latter but have no problem with written communication. Do you think they should get extra time? This is what I'm arguing against not dyslexia or dyslexia-like disabilities.
Original post by xylas
I think this is just semantics.
Finding questions difficult to process => slower to process questions => less able at that kind of maths
Just to be clear so no further misunderstanding, I have defined 'process' == finding what the question requires in order to answer it (NOT time to complete answer)
Yes you are correct if you spotted the assumption that maths questions test maths ability. (corollary: slow processing times => lower exam grade)
If you disagree with this assumption then the conversation moves away from real world applications, e.g. extra time, to mere philosophical debate.
Finding questions difficult to process => slower to process questions => less able at that kind of maths
Just to be clear so no further misunderstanding, I have defined 'process' == finding what the question requires in order to answer it (NOT time to complete answer)
Yes you are correct if you spotted the assumption that maths questions test maths ability. (corollary: slow processing times => lower exam grade)
If you disagree with this assumption then the conversation moves away from real world applications, e.g. extra time, to mere philosophical debate.
It's not semantics. Your first implication doesn't have a backwards implication, so the first two statements aren't equivalent.
As I've said before, your second implication is incorrect. I'll give a counterexample. Let's say that A and B are people. A takes 3 times as long to process a question as person B. A also knows(or can derive) the quadratic formula, but B doesn't know and doesn't know how to derive it(or how to complete the square). If we give each of them a large number of randomly generated quadratics with integer coefficients as questions, A will take a few seconds extra per question to process it but has the knowledge necessary to answer more questions than B. A is more able than B at this kind of maths.
That's the definition of process I was also using. It's good that we have that more concrete.
I agree with this assumption. Exams aren't prefect in real life, but let's assume for the purposes of the argument a surjective increasing correspondence between ability and exam score. Exam score can't give an exact measurement of ability(here assumed to be continuous) due to the discretised nature of exam scores, but it can give a close approximation, which is all we really need. Of course extra time may be needed to establish this surjection.
The statement you've given is only a corollary if your second implication is true.
Original post by xylas
No need to apologise ☺ I think you should have commented because noone has perfect knowledge so the more perspectives on this topic the closer this discussion can get to the truth.
However I have to disagree. I don't see 'ability to differentiate' as being related to 'ability at math'. Anyone can rote learn a method and follow it through when told to do so. The bit that makes you good at maths is using intuition to know which method to use and why you're using it. 'Processing the question' is required for the latter but not the former. To repeat, speed/consistency at differentiation does not involve processing the question.
I don't claim to know if you are good at maths or not but it is completely untrue that you never dropped a mark in a piece of school work. I wish you hadn't said that because I was respecting your point of view until then.
You say you have a disability 'like dyslexia but not dyslexia'. Please provide an accurate name or a source so I understand what you're referring to.
I completely completely agree that if words appear jumbled to you and you struggle to connect them into sentences with basic meanings then you should definitely get extra time. I have already defined 'processing a question' and it is not related to that. That sounds more like difficulty with written communication rather than seeing what the question is asking you to do.
Plenty of people with no proven disabilities struggle with the latter but have no problem with written communication. Do you think they should get extra time? This is what I'm arguing against not dyslexia or dyslexia-like disabilities.
However I have to disagree. I don't see 'ability to differentiate' as being related to 'ability at math'. Anyone can rote learn a method and follow it through when told to do so. The bit that makes you good at maths is using intuition to know which method to use and why you're using it. 'Processing the question' is required for the latter but not the former. To repeat, speed/consistency at differentiation does not involve processing the question.
I don't claim to know if you are good at maths or not but it is completely untrue that you never dropped a mark in a piece of school work. I wish you hadn't said that because I was respecting your point of view until then.
You say you have a disability 'like dyslexia but not dyslexia'. Please provide an accurate name or a source so I understand what you're referring to.
I completely completely agree that if words appear jumbled to you and you struggle to connect them into sentences with basic meanings then you should definitely get extra time. I have already defined 'processing a question' and it is not related to that. That sounds more like difficulty with written communication rather than seeing what the question is asking you to do.
Plenty of people with no proven disabilities struggle with the latter but have no problem with written communication. Do you think they should get extra time? This is what I'm arguing against not dyslexia or dyslexia-like disabilities.
This topic is in within the GCSE's sub-forum, and at that level math is about rote learning. You are told to complete the square, or rearrange to make x the subject of the formula.
However the whole point of my post was to point out that "slow processing speed" is not a hindrance to maths ability, it just makes maths exams harder. The truth is that throughout school, I never dropped a mark on a piece of maths school work or homework, I was meticulous and very good at maths. Even at A-level, rote learning can easily get you an A*.
I have autism (and related to that I also have anxiety, OCD, and depression), my point about the dyslexia thing is that I believe that you are misinterpreting the whole slow processing thing. It isn't the case that I look at a question and it takes me a long time to come up with a method to solve it (on the contrary, I am very quick when it comes to that), it takes longer to simply understand the words in the question together.
You say that this slow processing speed thing prevents someone being good at maths, but that is simply not true. As a maths student that is at a top university and is actively involved in research, I can tell you that it is simply not true. Many amazing mathematicians that lecture in the department have similar issues, largely because autism is not uncommon within mathematics at all. Your statement is false as there are many counter-examples, and I am one.
As someone that studies maths at university and has "slow processing speed" when it comes to reading things, I would just like to inform you that assertions about what people need to be good at maths are wrong.
This slow process speed thing that you seem to be so hung up on is not about it taking longer to think of how to tackle the question, or come up with a method. It is simply taking longer to understand the words on a page, and that doesn't stop somebody being a great mathematician
Original post by morgan8002
While I agree that GCSEs could be removed with little effect, SATs are required to ensure that primary schools keep some standard of teaching.
I don't think there's any real alternative for A-levels. For university courses coursework could be used more but I think exams are still necessary.
While I agree that GCSEs could be removed with little effect, SATs are required to ensure that primary schools keep some standard of teaching.
I don't think there's any real alternative for A-levels. For university courses coursework could be used more but I think exams are still necessary.
SATs don't benefit the children; they benefit the government. In the context of primary school, especially, SATs prevent real learning from taking place. My nephew recently received his year three report card, with one target stating he needed to "use more fronted adverbials" in his writing. I don't know about you, but I feel that is a completely inappropriate level of complexity for a seven year old to be having to grasp. The focus is on rote learning ill-suited subject matter; then revising it for the tests, which effectively leaves less time for the children to learn new things that directly benefit their growing-up: social skills, co-operative working, hygiene, healthy living - good food, regular exercise, sports and leisure time. There are things that children should be doing at primary school instead of preparing for SATs that would improve their health and well-being: making them happier, more rounded and better prepared for adolescence. They absolutely need to learn academic skills alongside their 'life skills', but the balance is completely ruined by the existence of SATs in primary education.
Edit: Yes, for university admission, I accept that some formal examination is required - afterall, university is supposed to be serious, academic study. Now of course, too many students are going to university directly after compulsory education. Only students who have shown a natural aptitude for academic study should be encouraged to move on to A Levels and then go to university - the majority of secondary school students are not actually suited for university-level study by the time their compulsory education comes to an end. There needs to be a culture shift - schools need to play a bigger part here, in encouraging a few years of work directly after compulsory education. After some work and life experience, young people would be better able to decide if they really need a degree to progress, and if it seems as if they do, perhaps then they should think about university as a mature student.
(edited 8 years ago)
Related discussions
- Do you think it's unfair for students to have extra time + laptops?
- Writing after the end of an exam
- can i get special consideration for my a level?
- Feeling guilty about Extra time in GCSEs
- My friend might be getting extra time and i hate it.
- Laptop battery died mid exam
- Mat 2023
- A Level English Lit - is it worth it?
- 3 or 4 a-levels for maths at Cambridge imperial or Warwick
- Is doing 5 A levels hard?????
- ACA exams
- extra time in exams
- BSC biomedical science 2 years buckingham
- I'm really annoyed.
- self study further maths worth it?
- AS grades
- Contextual offers and predicted grades
- Extra time
- Extra time in a level exams
- uk education system
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 hours ago
went from 3s to 9s with (literally) night before revision - ask me anythingGCSEs
59
Trending
Last reply 3 hours ago
went from 3s to 9s with (literally) night before revision - ask me anythingGCSEs
59
