Utterly ridiculous government league tables. Watch

This discussion is closed.
RieLouise
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#21
Report 14 years ago
#21
(Original post by an Siarach)
I dont doubt this will happen but its not happening now because state schools have yet to overtake private institutions (unless you count the grammars) and these tables are about as reliable as russian democracy.
Indeed. Lies, damned lies and league tables. I would hope that most people would recognise that....
Or maybe not.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#22
Report 14 years ago
#22
(Original post by an Siarach)
A distinction award in cake decoration > A in GCSE Physics? A GNVQ in Info Technology which requires the same teaching time as a GCSE subject is worth FOUR GCSEs? Come on these tables are a load of nonsense and it stuns me the government thinks they can get away with this.
well dunno on that. my single award GNVQ in ICT, the lowest type you can do as far as im aware, was 6 units and 8 hours per week. most GCSEs arent taught for that long if i recall.
0
AT82
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 14 years ago
#23
You can do GNVQ Foundation, an utterly pointless qualification which one can assume only exists to boost the self esteem of people with learning difficulties or other problems. It is a level one qualification which means its less than GCSE standard. GNVQ IT will also be much easier than doing 4 seperate GCSEs. I don't mean to be nasty when talking about this course, its just I have had experience with some of them kids and GNVQ Foundation is extremely easy. However if you have severe learning difficulties then achieving somthing like GNVQ Foundation can really boost your confidence, I think thats why these courses exist.

When I did my GCSEs I choose hardcore subjects, it may have meant I didn't quite get some really good grades but most my GCSEs have come in use, I use knowledge gained in GCSE Geography, Science and Electronics every day.
0
yawn
Badges: 13
#24
Report 14 years ago
#24
(Original post by an Siarach)
A distinction award in cake decoration > A in GCSE Physics? A GNVQ in Info Technology which requires the same teaching time as a GCSE subject is worth FOUR GCSEs? Come on these tables are a load of nonsense and it stuns me the government thinks they can get away with this.
That is the half-truth being bandied about by those who have not shown up well in the new league tables.

Cake decoration and the like are not available to 15 year olds at GCSE. These subjects are for further education colleges and adult learning, therefore they do not figure in the league tables.
yawn
Badges: 13
#25
Report 14 years ago
#25
(Original post by technik)
although it would be a fairer picture if you used logic.
:confused:
yawn
Badges: 13
#26
Report 14 years ago
#26
(Original post by an Siarach)
Oh come on the complaints are perfectly well founded and anyone who cares about the integrity of our school education should be outraged at the way in which these tables have been fiddled to make poorly performing schools look like theyve become uber overnight - praise be to labour of course.
Did you know that for the first time last summer examiners did not have the details of the type of school submitting the papers? That is, they did not know whether the school was an independent, grammar or non-selective.

There was a belief that examiners were influenced by the type of school when it came to marking - preferring to assume that the level was much higher if the school was more prestigious and marking thus.

When they no longer have this information the difference in the positioning in the league tables is remarkable.

It's the same thing as examiners no longer being able to see the marking done by another examiner previously when a paper is submitted for appeal against grade awarded. Formerly there was little variance in the marks because the second examiner was subconciously influenced by the first examiners marks. Eradicate the marks and hey presto - disparity widens measureably!
yawn
Badges: 13
#27
Report 14 years ago
#27
(Original post by an Siarach)
Which is neither here nor there. Are single GNVQs really the equivalent of 4 GCSEs?
GNVQ's are more suited to those with different learning styles.

We do not all achieve our best by the same teaching methods - teachers are being asked to look at their methods of teaching and adapt them to the individual rather than use the same methods for whole-class teaching.

GNVQ's have a much larger content than the normal GCSE therefore require more teaching/learning timel. In fact four times the normal amount. We must accept the decisions of educationists who determine they are equivalent to 2/4 GCSE's as they are the experts.
LH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#28
Report 14 years ago
#28
(Original post by wiwarin_mir)
Interesting how you have neglected to mention where this GNVQ system has been used, such as my dad's school where GCSEs are not a viable option for the children due to their various special needs (I had to be a reader and writer for one of the students in an exam yesterday).

They have tried doing GCSE maths and english, but these students just cannot cope with them. GNVQs have helped all of the students at my dad's school get into college so they can do other courses, whether ICT oriented or not.
There's nothing wrong with GNVQs if they're right for the student, what I object to is this deliberate attempt to climb the league tables and jump through the government's hoops.
0
LH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#29
Report 14 years ago
#29
(Original post by yawn)
GNVQ's have a much larger content than the normal GCSE therefore require more teaching/learning timel. In fact four times the normal amount. We must accept the decisions of educationists who determine they are equivalent to 2/4 GCSE's as they are the experts.
The educationalists may decide that they're worth 4 GCSEs or whatever, but a lot of schools give only two hours teaching time to the subject and several members of TSR have already said how they spent half the lessons not doing any work and still came out with a decent grade.

This is engineering league tables, not improving educational standards.
0
yawn
Badges: 13
#30
Report 14 years ago
#30
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
There's nothing wrong with GNVQs if they're right for the student, what I object to is this deliberate attempt to climb the league tables and jump through the government's hoops.
Goodmorning LH!

Can you clarify your post please as I don't want the misinterpret your meaning?
yawn
Badges: 13
#31
Report 14 years ago
#31
(Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
The educationalists may decide that they're worth 4 GCSEs or whatever, but a lot of schools give only two hours teaching time to the subject and several members of TSR have already said how they spent half the lessons not doing any work and still came out with a decent grade.

This is engineering league tables, not improving educational standards.
I have just taken the time to browse Edexcel's webiste referring to GNVQ intermediate ICT. Schools are required to confirm how much teaching time has been given to their students when they forward papers for moderation. The fact that some members of TSR say they spent half the lessons not doing any work is neither here nor there. I'm sure most students could identify with that as there is necessarily time spent during the lesson listening to the teacher, answering registration, filing into the classroom, taking their seats, getting relevant books and stationery out of bags, noting homework set, putting books etc. away and filing out of class in time to get to next lesson. All that apart from doing any work! And still they can come out with decent grades in any subjects!

I was very surprised to see the satisfaction with the new league tables from the 'Times' editorial - weren't you?
Luize
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#32
Report 14 years ago
#32
(Original post by yawn)
GNVQ's are more suited to those with different learning styles.

We do not all achieve our best by the same teaching methods - teachers are being asked to look at their methods of teaching and adapt them to the individual rather than use the same methods for whole-class teaching.

GNVQ's have a much larger content than the normal GCSE therefore require more teaching/learning timel. In fact four times the normal amount. We must accept the decisions of educationists who determine they are equivalent to 2/4 GCSE's as they are the experts.
I would have 3 lessons a week of ICT (my GNVQ) Now in all my other lessons I have 4 lessons a week. Except PE (1) and Double science (6).
There was a lot more to learn in my other lessons. There was about half the work load, and less time dedicated to it. It just seems so illogical to say it is worth 4 GCSEs.
And the only difference in the teaching methods that I experienced was the importance of individual learning...or just my teacher putting all the work online and us being expected to do it. There were tutorials on his site, and then describtion of the tasks. He would just sit in the room and play on the computer or leer over the girls. The teaching style wasn't all that difference from any other lesson.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#33
Report 14 years ago
#33
(Original post by yawn)
:confused:
you had said "It is no more disingenuous than saying that the top schools are grammars just because they are rather than because they only admit those from the top quartile."

its obvious those selecting the brightest students will get the better overall grades (the logic i referred to) and this is shown in the a-level results. when the government gets into spin-mode the grammar schools remarkably start falling like flies.

of course this has nothing to do with the labour governments hatred of grammar schools now has it? :rolleyes:
0
amex
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#34
Report Thread starter 14 years ago
#34
(Original post by kingslaw)
However, at some point in this time line the heads of the most expensive public schools are bound to cry 'unfair' as they desperately try to justify why people should pay for an education in the modern age. If this ever happens, the only true 'benefit' for parents in sending their kids to a private school would be the social benefit of keeping their little darlings away from some of the 'bad types' that go to state schools.
Parents who send their children to expensive public schools realise that they offer a hell of a lot more than exam results and "social benefit". You have a very narrow minded view of education if you believe ti can be measured through league tables.
0
Golden Maverick
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#35
Report 14 years ago
#35
Does it not seem a little hypocritical of the government to be making such courses as distinction in level 2 cake decorating worth 55 points and an A in physics GCSE 52, and then complain that university physics departments are closing down and there are not enought students doing Physics and Chemistry at university?

How can they claim that level 2 cake decorating takes the same length of time to master than an A at physics GCSE?
0
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#36
Report 14 years ago
#36
(Original post by Golden Maverick)
How can they claim that level 2 cake decorating takes the same length of time to master than an A at physics GCSE?
I know it boggles the mind. If there was a half decent opposition to labour this government would be absolutely torn apart in the comin election.
0
technik
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#37
Report 14 years ago
#37
(Original post by an Siarach)
I know it boggles the mind. If there was a half decent opposition to labour this government would be absolutely torn apart in the comin election.
i think labour will win the election, but the tories will make good in-roads.
0
wiwarin_mir
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#38
Report 14 years ago
#38
(Original post by an Siarach)
Which is neither here nor there. Are single GNVQs really the equivalent of 4 GCSEs?
Some people cannot handle GCSEs, it is a simple fact, therefore they have GNVQs that are much more time consuming than a single GCSE and require a lot more work. GCSE and A levels might be fine for those that are acedemic enough, but what about all of those people out there that cannot cope with an acedemic course and a vocational course is much more suited to them?

Why should students who can only handle Vocational courses be barred from further education unless they take 5 GNVQ or AVCE courses?
0
LH
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#39
Report 14 years ago
#39
(Original post by technik)
i think labour will win the election, but the tories will make good in-roads.
It's near impossible for Labour to lose. At worst their majority will be cut drastically, at best they'll lose a few seats. I can't see them gaining any.

I don't think we'll see a Tory government now until about 2010. It could be our generation that is the deciding one, in a straw poll of my 19-person Politics class, only three said they'd vote for Labour in May if they could.
0
AT82
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 14 years ago
#40
(Original post by wiwarin_mir)
Some people cannot handle GCSEs, it is a simple fact, therefore they have GNVQs that are much more time consuming than a single GCSE and require a lot more work. GCSE and A levels might be fine for those that are acedemic enough, but what about all of those people out there that cannot cope with an acedemic course and a vocational course is much more suited to them?
Thats true but GNVQ Intermediate is not the worth the same as four GCSES. I really had to work hard for my GCSES. Many lower end jobs specificaly ask for GCSEs anyway and many universities will prefer GCSEs, so in reality a GNVQ Intermeidate is not worth 4 GCSEs.

Its just engineering to make the failing government look good, its kind of thing you expect from the tories.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you think the internet has made political discussion more aggressive?

Yes (55)
98.21%
No (1)
1.79%

Watched Threads

View All