Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robbie242)
    I'd say edexcel is a bit more challenging than perhaps OCR and AQA (in some cases) but the difference is however, is that for edexcel there are soo much resources to help, which definitely makes it much easier
    (Original post by BioGeek)
    In terms of Science AQA does seem very easy to other boards such as OCR and Edexcel.
    Interesting - AQA is also apparently the most popular with roughly 50% of GCSE Breakdown. If anyone could confirm/deny this it would be great..

    Ultimately it is the free market which has caused this problem - so if you think it's an inherent Rightist belief, it isn't. I dislike all political parties equally...

    Also - in my experience, AQA or OCR are the boards that offer the most one or two mark questions, whereas Edexcel tend to be larger marks which are inevitably more difficult...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thriftworks)
    Edit out that massive gap please..
    It was an accident and have edited it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by christanmu)
    During the time of Maggie there were 4 exam boards, one for each representative area of the country, with then one in Scotland and one in Wales. Not the 8 we have today.

    Yes Uni's accept International students and usually they are very capable once through the language barrier, and often better educated than those who have come through the English system.

    And I don't blame everything on New Labour, Churchill was essentially the worst Chancellor we have ever had, although I would have said that was Keynes if he ever had the position (he was only financial adviser to Attlee).

    And that is quite possibly the worst idea I have ever heard - that would make the country even worse than it is by throwing away bright kids and giving money to those who are indefinitely more susceptible to doss and not work hard. Here's an idea that will go with what you just said, how about we make the poor poorer, but make the rich poorer by a bigger margin. I have no time for bull**** socialist ideas so please leave.




    A school can pull you from any exam they want!

    And Grammar schools essentially cherry picked the best students and put them in a school with those of similar capabilities, this drove up standards as parents wanted their kids to be in these good schools. Labour scrapped them because poor kids couldn't get in and brought in the Comprehensive system and shock horror that England is now free falling down most education charts.

    I don't understand why it is acceptable to have sets based on talent in schools, but not schools based on talent? It's a complete joke. For example, I am awful at hockey, I would not turn up to a great hockey team and then get angry when they did not use all of their coaches to try and make me better - as it is not in my potential.. Yet if they ignored me and focused on the best players then I would expect that.

    Yeah we do need more apprenticeships and the like, maybe if the government rose the minimum wage for them from £2.65 we might get somewhere.. And on that note, it is absolutely ridiculous that there is a minimum wage differing for what age you are - I'm surprised the Socialist Leftists that ruin pretty much everything in this Nation haven't jumped onto that. I don't understand why someone ages 18-21 is worth nearly £2 an hour less than someone ages 21 or over? Under 18 I can understand - but after that it is ridiculous.
    it's a debate forum, you can't just order people out if you disagree with them.

    To spell it out, The issue with international students is that lecturers will still have to deal with students with a variety of examination systems whether or not we have a single exam board... As far as deciding between having a single board or several it's a total non issue. If you think the whole rest of the world is already more uniform than the minor differences between our boards, you're bonkers.

    The implicit assumption behind sporting metaphors is that the objective of education policy should be to focus on cherrypicking and developing a minority of high performers... This isn't obviously right at all, we've got a large number of people coming out of school with poor literacy and numeracy. This is also bad for the country.
    We don't pick a team to educate we get given a mixed cohort and we've got to try do something with all of them. We aren't going to shoot up the international education chart by bringing back a system which dreadfully under resourced the schools attended by the majority.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    The implicit assumption behind sporting metaphors is that the objective of education policy should be to focus on cherrypicking and developing a minority of high performers... This isn't obviously right at all, we've got a large number of people coming out of school with poor literacy and numeracy. This is also bad for the country.
    We don't pick a team to educate we get given a mixed cohort and we've got to try do something with all of them. We aren't going to shoot up the international education chart by bringing back a system which dreadfully under resourced the schools attended by the majority.
    I was tired and stressed last night, I had 3 exams today so I was stressing and wasn't really feeling having a fair debate, sorry - my bad

    I agree that the levels leaving school with bad literacy and numeracy is a key problem - but that isn't a problem with senior school that goes down to parenting and primary school - studies have found that 39% of students behind at 7 years old never catch up.

    Surely this supports the argument that people that underachieve throughout school tend to not get better, and could in a sense hold back those that get straight level 5s in their y6 SATS.

    Another worrying figure is that only 58.6% achieve 5 a*-c grades when Maths and English are included... Something obviously needs to be done about that, bear in mind this includes the ridiculous foundation exams which have been described as that of a level 2 years below the higher GCSE papers..

    On top of this, there is the fact that subjects have been moving away from the classic, respected subjects (Maths, English, the Sciences, Languages, History, Geography) and pushing an emphasis onto easier subjects as I have stated such as MFLs in people's mother tongue, or travel and tourism. Sure some more vocational GCSEs are great like PE and HE are great, but the absolute mickey mouse courses like Horse Care or Fish Husbandry are ridiculous.

    I believe (may be wrong) that there are now somewhere around 50 subjects still accepted on GCSE league tables, which is far too high an amount. Especially when people compete for the best 6th forms, who simply require say 6 bs. One person gets 5 as including maths and english, but then he gets cs. Then another person gets maths, geography and then 4 vocationals at a level b - who is the better student? And who would get the place.. Sadly, from experience (friends), the latter.

    I guess I just believe that the education system we have needs a serious serious reform, and I'm yet to really go further than that as I have ideas but have no real overall view!

    (Original post by Thriftworks)
    Edit out that massive gap please..
    Erm, please could you now edit the massive gap out of your quote? Thaaanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by christanmu)
    I was tired and stressed last night, I had 3 exams today so I was stressing and wasn't really feeling having a fair debate, sorry - my bad

    I agree that the levels leaving school with bad literacy and numeracy is a key problem - but that isn't a problem with senior school that goes down to parenting and primary school - studies have found that 39% of students behind at 7 years old never catch up.

    Surely this supports the argument that people that underachieve throughout school tend to not get better, and could in a sense hold back those that get straight level 5s in their y6 SATS.

    Another worrying figure is that only 58.6% achieve 5 a*-c grades when Maths and English are included... Something obviously needs to be done about that, bear in mind this includes the ridiculous foundation exams which have been described as that of a level 2 years below the higher GCSE papers..

    On top of this, there is the fact that subjects have been moving away from the classic, respected subjects (Maths, English, the Sciences, Languages, History, Geography) and pushing an emphasis onto easier subjects as I have stated such as MFLs in people's mother tongue, or travel and tourism. Sure some more vocational GCSEs are great like PE and HE are great, but the absolute mickey mouse courses like Horse Care or Fish Husbandry are ridiculous.

    I believe (may be wrong) that there are now somewhere around 50 subjects still accepted on GCSE league tables, which is far too high an amount. Especially when people compete for the best 6th forms, who simply require say 6 bs. One person gets 5 as including maths and english, but then he gets cs. Then another person gets maths, geography and then 4 vocationals at a level b - who is the better student? And who would get the place.. Sadly, from experience (friends), the latter.

    I guess I just believe that the education system we have needs a serious serious reform, and I'm yet to really go further than that as I have ideas but have no real overall view!



    Erm, please could you now edit the massive gap out of your quote? Thaaanks
    There are 32 MFLs,5 Classical forign languages, English Language, English Lit, History, Geography, Double Science, Biology, Chemistry, Physics,Maths,PE,RE, HE, DT,Music, Art.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kpusa1981)
    There are 32 MFLs,5 Classical forign languages, English Language, English Lit, History, Geography, Double Science, Biology, Chemistry, Physics,Maths,PE,RE, HE, DT,Music, Art.
    Thanks, was near enough! ;p
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    As a Scot, the notion of having more than one exam board just seems a bit strange. In Scotland we have the Scottish Qualifications Authority(SQA) that make up every exam for every subject and every level that is taught in Scottish high schools. I admit that I don't know much about it, but I just can't see the benefits of having multiple exam boards competing against each other?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikec47)
    As a Scot, the notion of having more than one exam board just seems a bit strange. In Scotland we have the Scottish Qualifications Authority(SQA) that make up every exam for every subject and every level that is taught in Scottish high schools. I admit that I don't know much about it, but I just can't see the benefits of having multiple exam boards competing against each other?
    Sorry I'm slow to reply I was on football manager 8)

    Oo this is interesting I don't really actually have much of an idea about the Scottish education system other then from friends at Fettes and Gordonstoun, but of course they are public anyway! Do the boards offer different levels within courses, for example a lower or higher maths paper for people of differing abilities in the same year?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by christanmu)
    Sorry I'm slow to reply I was on football manager 8)

    Oo this is interesting I don't really actually have much of an idea about the Scottish education system other then from friends at Fettes and Gordonstoun, but of course they are public anyway! Do the boards offer different levels within courses, for example a lower or higher maths paper for people of differing abilities in the same year?
    I'm playing Football Manager right now! :cool:

    I'd imagine that those schools follow the English curriculum anyway as most independent schools seem to do up here. And yeah they do. The SQA will have exams made for Standard Grades(essentially our GCSEs) at Credit, General and Foundation level. People either sit Credit/General or General/Foundation depending on level of ability. Credit is the hardest whilst Foundation is the easiest. We do 8 of these over two years in S3 & S4(Year 10 and Year 11 in England!)

    Then in S5 we generally do Highers or Intermediate 2(some will do Intermediate 1) with Highers being the hardest and the ones required for University entry. Generally in S6 pupils who did Intermediate 2's in S5 will take those subjects at Higher the following year whilst those who did Highers in S5 will usually either take some different subjects at Higher level the following year or take Advanced Highers in the same subject(which are equivalent to A-levels).


    I hope that your question was answered somewhere in all of that!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikec47)
    I'm playing Football Manager right now! :cool:

    I'd imagine that those schools follow the English curriculum anyway as most independent schools seem to do up here. And yeah they do. The SQA will have exams made for Standard Grades(essentially our GCSEs) at Credit, General and Foundation level. People either sit Credit/General or General/Foundation depending on level of ability. Credit is the hardest whilst Foundation is the easiest. We do 8 of these over two years in S3 & S4(Year 10 and Year 11 in England!)

    Then in S5 we generally do Highers or Intermediate 2(some will do Intermediate 1) with Highers being the hardest and the ones required for University entry. Generally in S6 pupils who did Intermediate 2's in S5 will take those subjects at Higher the following year whilst those who did Highers in S5 will usually either take some different subjects at Higher level the following year or take Advanced Highers in the same subject(which are equivalent to A-levels).


    I hope that your question was answered somewhere in all of that!
    Cheers that actually makes a lot of sense, it has always baffled me before Although as I don't really know what I'm looking for it is hard to find figures!

    May you win every game 4-0, like a boss.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'd have to agree that here in Scotland, the SQA really works for us at high school level.

    The situation that mikec47 described is like the education system I went trough when they were transitioning between Standard Grades and Intermediates. But it's different now.

    You do a broad range of classes in S1 and S2 (11-14 different subjects)

    In S3, you choose 8 or 9 of these and are placed into either Intermediate 2(A bit like credit), Intermediate 1(general) or Access 3(Foundation) - really stupid people may do Access 1 or Access 2 but these are almost unheard of.

    In S4, you continue studying your S3 subjects and take exams at the end of the year.

    In S5, you pick 4-6 of your passed subjects and move up one level, you take exams in these subjects at the end of the year. Those who did Int2 will do Highers this year

    In S6, you do any of your Int2s at Higher or Highers at Advanced Higher. You may also pick up any of your S4 subjects. You can also, with the school's permission, take a completely random subject that you've never took before("crashing" it).

    Instead of S6, you may choose to go to uni if you did well enough in Highers at S5. Advanced Higher students can often go straight into second year at uni.



    The most common route is Int1/Int2 in S4 > Int2/Higher in S5 > Higher/AH mix in S6
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CalDem)
    I'd have to agree that here in Scotland, the SQA really works for us at high school level.

    The situation that mikec47 described is like the education system I went trough when they were transitioning between Standard Grades and Intermediates. But it's different now.

    You do a broad range of classes in S1 and S2 (11-14 different subjects)

    In S3, you choose 8 or 9 of these and are placed into either Intermediate 2(A bit like credit), Intermediate 1(general) or Access 3(Foundation) - really stupid people may do Access 1 or Access 2 but these are almost unheard of.

    In S4, you continue studying your S3 subjects and take exams at the end of the year.

    In S5, you pick 4-6 of your passed subjects and move up one level, you take exams in these subjects at the end of the year. Those who did Int2 will do Highers this year

    In S6, you do any of your Int2s at Higher or Highers at Advanced Higher. You may also pick up any of your S4 subjects. You can also, with the school's permission, take a completely random subject that you've never took before("crashing" it).

    Instead of S6, you may choose to go to uni if you did well enough in Highers at S5. Advanced Higher students can often go straight into second year at uni.



    The most common route is Int1/Int2 in S4 > Int2/Higher in S5 > Higher/AH mix in S6
    This is far better explained than mines was! I am currently in S5 and was the second last year to takes Standard Grade and so the Standard Grade exams that are being completed at the moment are the last ever.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    With the greatest of respect Travel and Tourism is one of the biggest sectors in the world employing millions of people globally and it is and will remain the fastest growing industry in the world covering a wide range of different areas.

    The Travel and Tourism BTECs are very much like taking a business course, however it is slightly harder as you must relate everything towards the tourism sector and then you do more specific courses in which you do all of the facts and figures of companies, develop ideas for tourism, in depth discussions/presentations and assignments on various parts of the sector. It is infact a VERY hard subject to grasp and to be fair, it's hard work.

    Ofcourse it wouldn't be accepted by Oxbridge but anybody in the right mind would relate their A Levels/BTECs to those they would be doing at University so more than likely those doing Tourism would then go to do that at University, or perhaps Events/Hospitality or Business.


    You shouldn't just degrade a subject which you don't understand the half of, you could say plenty of subjects are pointless when infact they're not. For example if somebody goes to Cambridge to do Maths, it doesn't mean that they will succeed and become a mathematician therefore making it completely useless and the only Maths they will be doing is giving change to people who just bought a Big Mac from them. You see my point? all subjects are subjects for a reason.

    Learn to understand them before you say anything about them.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KGW)
    Learn to understand them before you say anything about them.
    I do understand these mickey mouse courses quite well I've spoken to tutors about them and they are widely accepted as a joke. Go to any good independent school and you would be laughed out of the place for asking to do something such as T&T. If you want to learn advertising then do it at uni when you have good a-levels backing you up, even though if you need to go to uni to learn how to advertise, then a job in that industry probably isn't for you..

    Also, tourism isn't the fastest growing industry, nor the largest, nor the one with the best prospects. Technology.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by christanmu)
    You make a very good point - I understand your concept that it ensures teachers know the subject and not just the syllabus - but one would hope that as teachers tend to have done at least fairly relevant degrees, then they would know it in the first place? And as they teach several years then they would have a broad level of knowledge?

    I may have been lucky in the sense I went to both a brilliant public school and a state 6th form which is in the top 5 in the country - but from my experience, teachers tend to enjoy what they are teaching and if they don't, they let you know (my politics teachers regularly remind us that they hate teaching us Europe etc); and in fact many had very good degrees from top Uni's (Oxford, Manchester, Camebrigde - several were Drs) and you could ask them on pretty much anything on the subject and they could answer pretty in depth. Though I understand that this will obviously not be the same for all.

    To be fair, I can admit that it is not just exam boards that are the problem - the removal of the Grammar school system was an absolute travesty and schools no longer aim to educate, merely to meet targets and look good on tables.

    Furthermore I think it is an outrage that children to foreign parents such as the Polish can do a GCSE in Polish, which is not like our English exams - it is like a MFL exam - so schools can get easy a*s, it genuinely infuriates me. I also detest how courses such as Travel & Tourism, Horse Care & Management or Health & Social Care (to name a few) are offered at A-Level and schools tell students that they are acceptable and good subjects to take that will be respected by any half decent University.

    There are deep deep flaws in our education system - I find it sad that I have to look to a nutjob like Gove and hope that he will be able to pass his plans...
    MFL GCSE's really aren't easy for me. The problem is, is that we start learning languages in Year 7/8, and we learn it in a formal way, in a classroom, so we never can put it in context and really learn the language.

    The language GCSEs are targeted at people who have no prior experience with the language, but obviously GCSEs like Polish tend to be sat by those already fluent in the language, who therefore will find it trivial. However all MFL GCSEs need to be at the same level, so you can't really make Polish GCSE much harder than French GCSE for example.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    What on Earth is wrong with WJEC? The exams certainly weren't easy.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatPerson)
    So you can't really make Polish GCSE much harder than French GCSE for example.
    No but you could make it so people with lineage from such nations can't do exams in them..

    (Original post by Jophesxi)
    What on Earth is wrong with WJEC? The exams certainly weren't easy.
    WJEC are generally accepted as an easier option by teachers in independent schools!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe we need a national exam board, a single entity that everybody shares and that nobody can question for that matter! Ive always loved the idea of a monopoly.

    The test pass culture in the education system is bad enough imagine how bad it would be if everybody had learn the same thing! A nation of people only knowing the same small part of our history or being able to quote the meaning behind every page of "of mice and men" while being totally lost wen it comes to another book. Its bad enough already.

    It will leave the decisions as to whats worth learning/what isn't to very few people, who will try to make one size fit all.

    nah let the market mechanism weed out weaker exam boards, if people with AQA maths are being rejected from college, then they are going to struggle for money when most schools refuse to use them.

    Oh i can't say that travel and tourism is easy, if i havn't done it. But I don't think my friend with a chemisty degree, who ended up working for sat travel, was behind a be-tech tourism graduate on the short list.

    Plus i Don't know a single Bar tender or Hotel manager who studied Hospitality management. Those kind of frontline jobs have always been dependent on experience. That most normally gain from 16 at a local cafe/shop or any other minimum wage job. Those who don't move on or like the work can climb the ladder. Thats how its always worked.

    I believe in qualifications i just think that some things you definitely learn on the job and i don't need a piece of paper to say i can serve drinks.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by christanmu)
    No but you could make it so people with lineage from such nations can't do exams in them..
    That would be against both UK and EU discrimination laws.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatPerson)
    That would be against both UK and EU discrimination laws.
    Pretty sure it wouldn't, although i'm sure somewhere some little ***** would start crying about it. The MFL should be replaced with an exam such as the English exam for English people...
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.