The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

What would you change about the education system

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Smack
The thing is, though, no-one ever complains when they get good results because of good memory and exam technique rather than actually having any knowledge on the subject matter. And of course, memory is a key component of intelligence too.


Of course no one complains. Why would you complain if you get good results? I got the best GCSE results in my county and I never complained but now, on reflection, I know that my results were down to nailing the exam technique and don't exactly demonstrate that I'm "intelligent". Academic, perhaps, but not necessarily intelligent.

Some people are capable of coming up with absolutely brilliant ideas, if they are given the time to think and the resources to do that. But the education system as it stands at the moment doesn't always give those people the opportunity to demonstrate their intelligence. Teachers assume that the most intelligent person is the one who answers quickest and school exams don't help matters much, with the time constraints and the pressure they put a student under.

I'm not saying that the education system is too hard or anything of the sort (I think it's quite soft, in fact) but that it recognises only a very narrow conception of intelligence, and doesn't seem to appreciate those people who are brilliant, but not obviously so. Take your Richard Bransons of the world as an example.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Rascacielos
Of course no one complains. Why would you complain if you get good results? I got the best GCSE results in my county and I never complained but now, on reflection, I know that my results were down to nailing the exam technique and don't exactly demonstrate that I'm "intelligent". Academic, perhaps, but not necessarily intelligent.


Well at least you're intelligent enough to realise that.
Original post by John Stuart Mill
Well at least you're intelligent enough to realise that.


Thanks.

Your username is haunting me as I write my health care law essay. :eek:
Original post by Clip
Reset and rename GCSE. Drastically increase the examination standard to remove stigma for failure.


Okay, so a lot more people would fail them. But then what would happen to them, as a fail is a fail. At least currently, if we assume that anything less than a B or C is practically a fail, we still have a measure of how close they were to passing - a C or a D is still much better than an outright fail, even if it is below the minimum level that many employers require. We'd have a lot more people without any sort of qualifications in maths or English or science and those near misses would be lumped in with the people who didn't even turn up.

I would like to get to the point where the common offer for a popular course at a mid-level university is in the BBC-CCD range.


What benefit would this actually give?

Original post by Rascacielos
Of course no one complains. Why would you complain if you get good results? I got the best GCSE results in my county and I never complained but now, on reflection, I know that my results were down to nailing the exam technique and don't exactly demonstrate that I'm "intelligent". Academic, perhaps, but not necessarily intelligent.


But that's the point of academia: to measure how academic you are. Intelligence is really difficult to define and measure anyway, so for the most part we're not interested in even trying.
Original post by Smack


But that's the point of academia: to measure how academic you are. Intelligence is really difficult to define and measure anyway, so for the most part we're not interested in even trying.


I get that, and that's what I dislike about the education system as it stands. Throughout school and, to some extent, university, you are expected to be academic. But unless you are going to become an academic, then academia is of little use to you in the real world. It is actual intelligence that gets you further: learning to think for yourself rather than conforming to what examiners want you to say; questioning what you're told and challenging precedent, rather than just accepting it, storing it in your grey matter and spurting it out verbatim on an Edexcel answer paper, only to forget everything you "learned" 2 hours later. I don't see the purpose in that.
Reply 45
Avatar for IlexBlue
IlexBlue
2
Original post by Hal.E.Lujah
This would be a travesty, and I think that maybe as you get older you'll appreciate how much those two hours of excersize kept you in shape.


I'm sure I'll fondly look back and remember how weakly pretending to hit a shuttlecock and then sitting down when the teacher had buggered off kept me in peak physical condition. :lol:
Original post by Smack


What benefit would this actually give?



Over the last 30 years we have compressed the "acceptable" grades for school examinations. That has led to the need to add A* grades but even having done so, hey re still incapable of adequately distinguishing between the really talented and the well taught. Moreover, at the opposite end, students are being entered in all manner of odd qualifications to avoid true comparability.
Original post by Rascacielos
I get that, and that's what I dislike about the education system as it stands. Throughout school and, to some extent, university, you are expected to be academic. But unless you are going to become an academic, then academia is of little use to you in the real world. It is actual intelligence that gets you further: learning to think for yourself rather than conforming to what examiners want you to say; questioning what you're told and challenging precedent, rather than just accepting it, storing it in your grey matter and spurting it out verbatim on an Edexcel answer paper, only to forget everything you "learned" 2 hours later. I don't see the purpose in that.


It's true that academia is often of little use outside of academia, but neither is much of the other stuff you wrote, which sounds like idealised nonsense of how the "real world" works.
Original post by nulli tertius
Over the last 30 years we have compressed the "acceptable" grades for school examinations. That has led to the need to add A* grades but even having done so, hey re still incapable of adequately distinguishing between the really talented and the well taught. Moreover, at the opposite end, students are being entered in all manner of odd qualifications to avoid true comparability.


I would suggest that, in the context of school exams, it is inherently extremely difficult to distinguish between the talented and the merely well taught; I don't see how grade inflation taking the acceptable standard up past an A-grade affects this.
Original post by Smack
I would suggest that, in the context of school exams, it is inherently extremely difficult to distinguish between the talented and the merely well taught; I don't see how grade inflation taking the acceptable standard up past an A-grade affects this.


There hasn't only been an inflation but a compression. Obviously with norm referenced exams there would always be a full range of marks. However criteria referenced exams were not supposed to result in all getting prizes.
More grammar schools.
Remove ofstead.

Honestly they are a joke. My school was put in special measures 3 years ago because our exam results had dropped for one year. It really wasn't a bad school. Three years later the school has been unable to recruit any decent teachers because no one wants to teach there. The school is now a disaster and I feel really sorry for the students who are still there.

All ofstead did is come in for two days, give an unfair rating and watch as the school went from reasonable to downright disastrous because of their rating. I hope they are proud


Posted from TSR Mobile
CREATIVE SUBJECTS SHOULD BE GIVEN MORE IMPORTANCE:

as Picasso said: 'all kids are born artists, the problem is to remain one as you grow older'

That said I'm not a very creative person xD
(edited 10 years ago)
I would privatise schools and instigate a voucher system such that people still get a free education, but tax money is more efficiently spent. Independent schools spend a fraction per head on students compared to state schools.

I would also segregate teaching so that boys and girls are taught separately. Boys suffer from mixed schooling, while girls do not. However, I would say that mixed recreation at school is a good thing.
Reply 54
Avatar for SiMan
SiMan
17
A fair chance for all students. No favoritism from teachers to push only those who have the potential to achieve high while leaving who want to succeed but don't have the support.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Sammy Lanka
Remove ofstead.

Honestly they are a joke. My school was put in special measures 3 years ago because our exam results had dropped for one year. It really wasn't a bad school. Three years later the school has been unable to recruit any decent teachers because no one wants to teach there. The school is now a disaster and I feel really sorry for the students who are still there.

All ofstead did is come in for two days, give an unfair rating and watch as the school went from reasonable to downright disastrous because of their rating. I hope they are proud


Posted from TSR Mobile


Yes, removing Ofsted is clearly the answer.
Original post by Smack
It's true that academia is often of little use outside of academia, but neither is much of the other stuff you wrote, which sounds like idealised nonsense of how the "real world" works.


Well, I've never heard of a person who got anywhere by following someone else's ideas without a little of their own imagination.
Reply 57
Avatar for wendigo
wendigo
4
I would change the entire applying to Uni system.

I think it would make more sense to apply once you already have your grades rather than relying on predicted grades. Then also universities would only get applications from students with the required grades. I think people should be reviewed more holistically, as all-rounders, rather than just personal statement and grades grades grades. You should also be able to apply to as many universities as you wish rather than just 5 which I've always thought is a bit strange. I guess it's to stop universities having to deal with an influx of applications, but I guess that could be curved if people only applied with the achieved required grades rather than predicted.
A good education system is in existence, if pupills (and students) learn for their lives, not for examinations. That's why let us think about changes which enable these conditions in shools (and universities).
I would say that schools are far too academic that seems ridiculous but to me they don't represent the real world at all. Most jobs you work in you don't use academic skills that much and in the real world you have to worry about money sort your life out etc loads of things that have no relevance to academic things. So maybe they should spend time to activities like life skills jobs training and have more practical based learning alongside academic pursuits. Also reduce coursework and make A levels and gcse's more difficult as they have become meaningless.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you