Do we really need to measure education? Why do we have these statistics anyways?(Original post by DarkWhite)
If the statistics increased to 100% 5+ A*-C inc. Maths and English, it doesn't necessarily mean that education is improving, nor does an increase in Nobel Prize winners. How do you measure education exactly?
Fair enough we need grades as a way of discriminating between pupils, but for it to be the sole focus of the education system? Definitely not.
The education system gets what it pays for - statistics 1995-2007 Watch
- Thread Starter
- 28-12-2010 23:53
(Original post by im so academic)
- 28-12-2010 23:54
I'm not doing a full statistical analysis on this, merely using statistics to back up what I say.
I have mentioned the child's home in my second post on this thread.
With regards to cuts - I mean general cuts to education (however not EMA as obviously you get EMA post-GCSE).
"Evidently, despite increases in spending and even if spending per pupil were to increase, it does not change the fact that educational inequality starts from birth. Really, government spending is irrelevant in a child's education practically and what matters most is what a child is exposed to at home."
I agree with the latter part of the bold statement, but Government spending is far from irrelevant - and, in line with my first statement, you simply haven't provided evidence to support such a sweeping and devastating claim. A more fruitful avenue of discussion is looking at the detail of how expenditure is distributed, and looking at the evolving organisational structures of the educational system over the past decade.
Overall, I agree with the general bent of what you say; that the marginal efficiency of Government spending is somewhat low; however, I would be interested in seeing how the UK compares with other developed nations, in order to see whether this is a localised phenomenon as opposed to a more general example of diminishing returns that occurs at high levels of education. However, as I stated in my first post, the manner in which you made your claim is somewhat anaemic.
- 28-12-2010 23:58
The "TL;DR" version is that the UK education system is mortally wounded and bleeding out, despite more investment in education.
Grade inflation and dumbing down are not the way to go. Scotland's education system is a lot better than the English one but is still flawed.
(Original post by Wasnerello)
- 25-08-2011 21:28
I couldn't agree more with this. I took GCSE science a couple of years ago and got an A*, despite having no particular flair for science. I compared my paper with an old O level science paper that my mum did (equivalent to GCSE) and was staggered by how much more advanced the content was. Back then an A grade really was something that only the best students could get.
Now state schools are driven to maximise their league table standing, and pick the easiest exam boards as a result. One of my local secondary schools near sends some of their weakest/special needs pupils to other exam centres to take their exams, so their league position isn't dragged down.