[im so academic]

(Original post by madders94)
No more unfair than the current system where having a bad day at 18 and failing a test can have a major impact on the student's life

That's just life.

You may have a bad day and mess up your job interview, your audition for an orchestra, a work presentation, a university interview, a sports event, a performance on the stage.

Tough ****.

[bm127]

(Original post by madders94)
No more unfair than the current system where having a bad day at 18 and failing a test can have a major impact on the student's life

I suppose so, but at 18 after two years of learning material a bad day wouldn't counteract all the hard work that should hopefully have been done, unless it was a bad day for a serious reason (family death etc) which an exam board at A level could take into consideration. And you can always retake A levels or equivalent at 19. In year 9 if you retook the test in year 10 (like doing the 12+) and finally got into the school, then you've lost 1 out of 4 years of education in the better school.

[bm127]

(Original post by cl_steele)
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/...ool/DG_4016312


Youreright it is very hard to find a link to these things this is the closest i could find though, although i did underestimate the amount of for profit schools out there apparently

Haha yeah there's a big argument about whether they should be forced to operate as businesses, as the majority of the "charitable" ones are I think doing it for the tax breaks. Well that's what my brief bit of research showed anyway.

[madders94]

(Original post by im so academic)
That's just life.

You may have a bad day and mess up your job interview, your audition for an orchestra, a work presentation, a university interview, a sports event, a performance on the stage.

Tough ****.

Exactly I think the more schools prepare children and young people for life (within reason, they have to accept that they are children and not just miniature adults sometimes), the better.

[im so academic]

(Original post by madders94)
Exactly I think the more schools prepare children and young people for life (within reason, they have to accept that they are children and not just miniature adults sometimes), the better.

How do you propose that?

[cl_steele]

(Original post by bm127)
Haha yeah there's a big argument about whether they should be forced to operate as businesses, as the majority of the "charitable" ones are I think doing it for the tax breaks. Well that's what my brief bit of research showed anyway.

Yar most do but to be entirely fair most peoples idea of private schools are very jaded along the lines of the elite ones like Harrow, Eton, etc. etc. who have vast sums of money tucked away, the reality is most dont ... i went to a moderatly prestigious one and i remember asking one of the teachers what the schools turn over was and the difference between income and expenditure was tiny, to build any new buildings or buy any new equiptment theyd have to borrow or do a hell of a lot of fund raising. Running one of those schools isnt cheap, i had friends at a couple of smaller local ones which went bust, one of them repeatedly so

[madders94]

(Original post by im so academic)
How do you propose that?

By having a "tough ****" kind of attitude towards most problems. At the moment kids aged eleven are either treated like 3-year-olds and babied constantly or they're treated like little adults, getting to make decisions that they're probably not mature enough to make. I'd discourage appealing against exam results unless there really is something wrong, sending off for remarks is fine but when you get parents who appeal to the exam board, indignant that the board just doesn't recognize little Tarquin's genius when really they can't accept that their son isn't academic, it's not exactly setting the kid up for life very well. When they're thirty and get turned down for a job, Mummy can't appeal the decision anymore. If people are unhappy with their grade after a re-mark, they re-sit, simple as.

Also with more practical lessons such as learning early how to craft a good CV, interview techniques etc in space of lessons like Drama and Music which, although they are good for creativity, will not prepare a 13 year old for the job market like these sessions will.

[im so academic]

(Original post by madders94)
By having a "tough ****" kind of attitude towards most problems. At the moment kids aged eleven are either treated like 3-year-olds and babied constantly or they're treated like little adults, getting to make decisions that they're probably not mature enough to make. I'd discourage appealing against exam results unless there really is something wrong, sending off for remarks is fine but when you get parents who appeal to the exam board, indignant that the board just doesn't recognize little Tarquin's genius when really they can't accept that their son isn't academic, it's not exactly setting the kid up for life very well. When they're thirty and get turned down for a job, Mummy can't appeal the decision anymore. If people are unhappy with their grade after a re-mark, they re-sit, simple as.

Also with more practical lessons such as learning early how to craft a good CV, interview techniques etc in space of lessons like Drama and Music which, although they are good for creativity, will not prepare a 13 year old for the job market like these sessions will.

Oh I must have interpreted your first post - I thought you were arguing against that. .


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[muddywaters51]

Please take more freedoms away from me

thanks

[T.Fleming]

A child should not have his life dictated to him by the economic status of his parents. A wholly state education system would allow every child the chance to succeed, it would give children from all socio-economic backgrounds a more equal starting position in life. Why should one child suffer because his parents earn less than another child's parents? The current system is simply unfair.