Rishi Sunak proposes the Advanced British Standard
Scroll to see replies
So I see most in this thread aim with bias towards one perspective, so I will try and balance the debate somewhat.
First, before I begin. Teenagers don't have their life planned and decided at the age of 14. Our brains learn and develop as we age from being a teenager. Whatever aspirations and ideas we have at 14, will be massively different at 18 or 21. The justification of a student not having to do English or Maths because it is not relevant to what they want to do as a teenager is an insufficient argument, given their plans and ideas will change as they get older. Very often, people change, ideas change, and our careers change. When that change happens, they should have the Maths and English skills necessary to pursue whichever field they want.
While I agree that the IB qualification is a viable alternative to the proposed qualification, it's important to recognise that introducing a local qualification system like the Advanced British Standard, might be an attempt to address specific local educational needs that IB might not address. For instance, the curriculum for English and Maths will be more tailored and specific to addressing specific skills within those subjects, and can have a syllabus that targets skills that will be directly useful and viable - which would not be feasible under the IB system.
Furthermore, there could be logistical and pedagogical reasons to develop a new qualification over IB.
You are absolutely right that some students do have sufficiently advanced skills in Maths and English upon leaving school, but there might be a portion of students who do not, and ensuring a baseline, minimum level of proficiency in these foundational subjects could be beneficial to those who don't.
The point about it being potentially discriminatory I disagree. One could argue that ensuring foundational skills in key areas like Maths and English is equipping students for varied opportunities and preventing potential discrimination in future prospects. Maths and English is a massive barrier in many industries; ensuring everyone has the skills necessary will have more opportunities remain open to them in the future.
From my perspective, increasing the subjects to five is likely to produce more well-rounded individuals who have more exposure to Maths and English, which might also enhance their ability in various professional and academic environments.
Maintaining a continued focus on Maths and English could serve as a continual reinforcement and prevent skill atrophy, especially for students who may not naturally gravitate towards these subjects. So, those who aren't literate and numerate at the age of 16, those extra two years will extend the time before atrophy affects their Maths and English skills before embracing employment or an academic environment.
First, before I begin. Teenagers don't have their life planned and decided at the age of 14. Our brains learn and develop as we age from being a teenager. Whatever aspirations and ideas we have at 14, will be massively different at 18 or 21. The justification of a student not having to do English or Maths because it is not relevant to what they want to do as a teenager is an insufficient argument, given their plans and ideas will change as they get older. Very often, people change, ideas change, and our careers change. When that change happens, they should have the Maths and English skills necessary to pursue whichever field they want.
Original post by Admit-One
Lots of stuff needs addressing with education, (teacher shortfalls, pay & conditions, physical infrastructure, HE funding policy etc etc), upending Level 3 qualifications ain't one of them. Why not just move to everyone doing IB? Similarly broad, widely accepted and wouldn't be starting from scratch.
While I agree that the IB qualification is a viable alternative to the proposed qualification, it's important to recognise that introducing a local qualification system like the Advanced British Standard, might be an attempt to address specific local educational needs that IB might not address. For instance, the curriculum for English and Maths will be more tailored and specific to addressing specific skills within those subjects, and can have a syllabus that targets skills that will be directly useful and viable - which would not be feasible under the IB system.
Furthermore, there could be logistical and pedagogical reasons to develop a new qualification over IB.
Original post by {Moss}
- In my opinion, Mathematical and English skills are sufficiently advanced by the time you leave secondary school. Even then quite a lot is pointless: for example, skills with operators are obviously required, as is a knowledge of things like interest. For English, having good skills in writing and such is important, but quite a lot of the time this only goes so far, and is wasted on Shakespeare (while I love it) that won't really help in real life. Now I love both English and Maths, but I feel like this is very discriminatory to those who struggle with it.
You are absolutely right that some students do have sufficiently advanced skills in Maths and English upon leaving school, but there might be a portion of students who do not, and ensuring a baseline, minimum level of proficiency in these foundational subjects could be beneficial to those who don't.
The point about it being potentially discriminatory I disagree. One could argue that ensuring foundational skills in key areas like Maths and English is equipping students for varied opportunities and preventing potential discrimination in future prospects. Maths and English is a massive barrier in many industries; ensuring everyone has the skills necessary will have more opportunities remain open to them in the future.
Original post by EVRoosevelt
Isn't the whole point of taking three or four A-Levels - of your own choosing - to specialise a bit, in preparation for deciding what to do at university? Taking five seems too broad.
And the whole English and maths till 18 - I can't help but feel that if you get to 16 aren't "literate and numerate", two extra years aren't going to help much!!
Just ensure the early school years, say Years 1 through to 5, are better managed!
Also, weren't T-Levels supposed to be a bit of a departure from A-Levels? So combining them just seems illogical. I hope this government is gone before they can pour further petrol onto the fire that is our education system...
And the whole English and maths till 18 - I can't help but feel that if you get to 16 aren't "literate and numerate", two extra years aren't going to help much!!
Just ensure the early school years, say Years 1 through to 5, are better managed!Also, weren't T-Levels supposed to be a bit of a departure from A-Levels? So combining them just seems illogical. I hope this government is gone before they can pour further petrol onto the fire that is our education system...
From my perspective, increasing the subjects to five is likely to produce more well-rounded individuals who have more exposure to Maths and English, which might also enhance their ability in various professional and academic environments.
Maintaining a continued focus on Maths and English could serve as a continual reinforcement and prevent skill atrophy, especially for students who may not naturally gravitate towards these subjects. So, those who aren't literate and numerate at the age of 16, those extra two years will extend the time before atrophy affects their Maths and English skills before embracing employment or an academic environment.
Original post by Sorcerer of Old
Don’t worry, the tories will be out of power before this nonsense even gets a chance to be pushed through and established.
I'm nowhere near counting those eggs, or even admitting they exist, there is a core of dull wicked in the UK that votes stubbornly for the worst
So does this mean in a few years time the people who want to do A Levels separately or T Levels separately can't do them?
Original post by StriderHort
I'm nowhere near counting those eggs, or even admitting they exist, there is a core of dull wicked in the UK that votes stubbornly for the worst
It's the only way I can stay sane, even imagining the tories can come into power again, which will bring their presence here to near 2 decades is enough to drive anyone over the edge.
Original post by Anony345533
So does this mean in a few years time the people who want to do A Levels separately or T Levels separately can't do them?
Yes. I think that’s the plan.
Original post by Wired_1800
In an ever-changing world, i have been of the opinion that forcing students to make life choices at 16 or 17 was wrong. There are many students who limited their chances by being too focused at A levels and University only to end up without jobs, then blamed the Government for not providing the jobs.
I admit that i am not an educator to understand the intricacies of different qualifications. However, i think a more diverse set of subjects should be the aim.
I admit that i am not an educator to understand the intricacies of different qualifications. However, i think a more diverse set of subjects should be the aim.
I do agree with that; I do despise the rigidity of our education system, and the intense burden placed upon our young people. I don't know whether it's still true, but only a few years ago when I was at school, British children held the title (according to my teacher!) of being the most frequently tested in the world! But perhaps his title was a few years out of date even then.
I would definitely prefer a broader-based, more vocational educational system - but I think removing the option of specialisation and rigidity for those that want it is a step too far. I did very well in maths at GCSE, but I also completely despised it: if I'd had to carry on with it till 18 I'd've gone mad!
Original post by Baleroc
From my perspective, increasing the subjects to five is likely to produce more well-rounded individuals who have more exposure to Maths and English, which might also enhance their ability in various professional and academic environments.
Maintaining a continued focus on Maths and English could serve as a continual reinforcement and prevent skill atrophy, especially for students who may not naturally gravitate towards these subjects. So, those who aren't literate and numerate at the age of 16, those extra two years will extend the time before atrophy affects their Maths and English skills before embracing employment or an academic environment.
Maintaining a continued focus on Maths and English could serve as a continual reinforcement and prevent skill atrophy, especially for students who may not naturally gravitate towards these subjects. So, those who aren't literate and numerate at the age of 16, those extra two years will extend the time before atrophy affects their Maths and English skills before embracing employment or an academic environment.
I agree with your first point!
However, in my own recent experience, all those in my school year who by the age of 16 could not attain a passing grade in their Foundation GCSE maths course were... less than enthusiastic about education as a whole. No amount of teaching, intervention, additional homework, tutoring, et cetera, was of use to the small group who despised school for the sake of its being school - and it was exclusively these (with the exception of those who had other personal challenges, who I don't mean to slight in the least) who couldn't pass the simplest GCSE maths exam. They just had no desire to learn, or to practice, or to do better - and two extra years will only strengthen their antipathy to education, I feel.
Original post by EVRoosevelt
I do agree with that; I do despise the rigidity of our education system, and the intense burden placed upon our young people. I don't know whether it's still true, but only a few years ago when I was at school, British children held the title (according to my teacher!) of being the most frequently tested in the world! But perhaps his title was a few years out of date even then.
I would definitely prefer a broader-based, more vocational educational system - but I think removing the option of specialisation and rigidity for those that want it is a step too far. I did very well in maths at GCSE, but I also completely despised it: if I'd had to carry on with it till 18 I'd've gone mad!
I would definitely prefer a broader-based, more vocational educational system - but I think removing the option of specialisation and rigidity for those that want it is a step too far. I did very well in maths at GCSE, but I also completely despised it: if I'd had to carry on with it till 18 I'd've gone mad!
Your points are reasonable but I still disagree with the idea of specialisation for young people at such ages. Nobody would want to be held accountable for their actions at the age of 16 or 17 but we are asking them to make life choices at that age.
To me, a broader set of subjects should be encouraged. I would also suggest the inclusion of reasonable and relevant subjects like Financial Education and Politics & Government for all students.
(edited 2 months ago)
Original post by Wired_1800
Your points are reasonable but I still disagree with the idea of specialisation for young people at such ages. Nobody would want to be held accountable for their actions at the age of 16 or 17 but we are asking them to make life choices at that age.
To me, a broader set of subjects should be encouraged. I would also suggest the inclusion of reasonable and relevant subjects like Financial Education and Politics & Government for all students.
To me, a broader set of subjects should be encouraged. I would also suggest the inclusion of reasonable and relevant subjects like Financial Education and Politics & Government for all students.
In an ideal world, education - at all levels - would be entirely free, and so there'd be no problem of a young person later changing their mind: they could simply go back and study what they wanted to.
I think young people shouldn't be forced to make life choices then, but that they ought to have the option to specialise if they want to. I wanted to, and I was glad to.
Original post by Supermature
A-levels were introduced in 1951 when less than 4% of young people entered university. They were designed to cater for a small academic élite and are long overdue for replacement. A new system of secondary education qualifications fit for the modern world is to be welcomed in principle. But much debate and careful planning will be needed if we are to avoid an educational equivalent of HS2.
When the old Higher School Certificate that preceded A-levels was replaced, one of the main justifications was to allow sixth-form pupils to study, in greater depth, subjects in which they had a natural interest and aptitude. Today's proposals would appear to reverse this. It is not entirely clear whether that is a good idea; there are arguments both ways. However, any new qualification must avoid the fiasco of predicted grades and admission to higher education must be based on qualifications that have already been achieved.
When the old Higher School Certificate that preceded A-levels was replaced, one of the main justifications was to allow sixth-form pupils to study, in greater depth, subjects in which they had a natural interest and aptitude. Today's proposals would appear to reverse this. It is not entirely clear whether that is a good idea; there are arguments both ways. However, any new qualification must avoid the fiasco of predicted grades and admission to higher education must be based on qualifications that have already been achieved.
Agreed, predicted grades have got to go.
Original post by random_matt
It does not matter what he says as he will not be the PM after the next GE.
Who’s going to be PM then? That human weather vane “flip-flop” Starmer?
Original post by Sorcerer of Old
Don’t worry, the tories will be out of power before this nonsense even gets a chance to be pushed through and established.
Bear in mind that there is widespread support for an overhaul of post-16 qualifications and university admissions within the education service and across the political spectrum. Virtually all other advanced countries have a broader curriculum at that level and a post-qualification system of entry to higher education. For example, Sir Peter Lampl, Founder and Chairman of the Sutton Trust and Chairman of the Education Endowment Foundation, has said:
“The proposed English baccalaureate is a major step which will significantly improve social mobility. Under the current A Levels system, young people are forced to specialise far too early. This impacts disadvantaged youngsters the most, as they are less likely to have access to good careers guidance or advice from family members."
In 2019, a Labour Party policy document stated:
"Under Labour’s plans, students will apply for their university or higher education place after receiving their results in A-Levels or other qualifications, instead of relying on an unreliable system of predicted grades that unfairly penalises disadvantaged students and those from minority backgrounds...A Labour government will deliver the reform that is needed, implementing a new system of post-qualification admissions by the end of our first term in office."
While the timescale may not survive the realities of office, the aspiration is clear.
The following comment on today's announcement from Geoff Barton of The Association of School and College Leaders will reflect the views of many within the education service:
“There is a great deal of merit in the idea of bringing technical and academic qualifications into a single qualification of an Advanced British Standard. We have long called for parity of esteem between technical and academic pathways and we are pleased that this is reflected in this announcement. We also support the principle of greater curriculum breadth in post-16 education as the current system is too narrow – at least partly because of previous government reforms which downgraded the status of AS-levels.
However, while the principles of these proposals are good, the practicalities are daunting because of the severity of the teacher recruitment and retention crisis."
Original post by Wired_1800
Yes. I think that’s the plan.
I hope this does not go ahead because I want to do my A Levels again.
Original post by Anony345533
I hope this does not go ahead because I want to do my A Levels again.
I don't think you have much to worry about! This new qualification (or whatever alternative a potential Labour Government decides upon) will not be in place for at least ten years!
(edited 2 months ago)
Original post by Muttley79
If we have to teach Maths to everyone to age 18 then I will strongly consider leaving teaching - it's a joke! Recruiting well-qualified Mathematics teachers is difficult enough already - where are the staff to deliver this!?
Yes, and that is perhaps the single greatest weakness in the proposals. I imagine that you (and many other teachers) would agree with the following comment from Daniel Kebede, General Secretary of the National Education Union:
"Post-16 curriculum reform is worthy of debate, but simply increasing the number of hours taught would require an additional 5,300 teachers. This year the Government missed their recruitment target for secondary teachers by 48%. School leaders are telling us they are struggling to recruit and retain across all subjects. The recruitment and retention crisis is caused in the main by excessive workload and below inflation pay. This is a root and branch problem not solved by bursaries, ‘golden hellos’ and other Whitehall gimmicks. They cannot have a lasting impact on subject shortages, which have been badly behind year on year, when the fundamental causes of teachers leaving remain in place."
Any reform of post-16 qualifications needs to be set in the context of what is happening in the here and now. Properly funding the system we've got at present has to be the first step.
Original post by Anony345533
I hope this does not go ahead because I want to do my A Levels again.
It wont be changed next year
Although I'm not surprised that many of you oppose this and A levels appear internationally competitive, I think your all forgetting that right now about 50% are headed to university (most doing A levels) and there are far more graduates than skilled jobs that require a degree. Further, every year sees grade inflation and a teaching and student lobby who cry when they try and arrest this.
They need to provide a disincentive to A levels without actually limiting the number that can do them and so adding more work is likely a way to do this, especially if it makes things harder.
It's also a good way to score a win in international league tables. Remember that people whined about the Gove reforms but in the end that was broadly a success statistically.
They need to provide a disincentive to A levels without actually limiting the number that can do them and so adding more work is likely a way to do this, especially if it makes things harder.
It's also a good way to score a win in international league tables. Remember that people whined about the Gove reforms but in the end that was broadly a success statistically.
Original post by EVRoosevelt
In an ideal world, education - at all levels - would be entirely free, and so there'd be no problem of a young person later changing their mind: they could simply go back and study what they wanted to.
I think young people shouldn't be forced to make life choices then, but that they ought to have the option to specialise if they want to. I wanted to, and I was glad to.
I think young people shouldn't be forced to make life choices then, but that they ought to have the option to specialise if they want to. I wanted to, and I was glad to.
Having to return to school or uni could be seen as a waste of time. Specialising too early is simply off imho.
Original post by Rakas21
Although I'm not surprised that many of you oppose this and A levels appear internationally competitive, I think your all forgetting that right now about 50% are headed to university (most doing A levels) and there are far more graduates than skilled jobs that require a degree. Further, every year sees grade inflation and a teaching and student lobby who cry when they try and arrest this.
Not this year ....
Original post by Supermature
I don't think you have much to worry about! This new qualification (or whatever alternative a potential Labour Government decides upon) will not be in place for at least ten years!
I want to do my A Levels at some point in my life, I may not even do them in 10 years, I may have to do them later that's the problem. I hope I can do them within this time though.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Do you think A-levels should be structured differently?
- The G20 Leaders Hurt/Heal Game
- omg besties
- Is classroom AI good news for teachers and teaching assistants?
- Aqa sociology paper 1
- NEA English language
- Name a politician who starts with the last letter of the above name
- Rishi Sunak considering banning cigarettes for the next generation
- target oxbridge phone interview
- Whats the point of A levels?
- what's step and step questions is a lot harder than functional skills?
- ✌️☮️✨ Truss or wheels? VOTE NOW!
- TSR Quiz of the Week #121 (23rd September 2023) - Sunak Special!
- Woman attacked by her own dog, an xl bully
- Rishi Sunak gives Net Zero speech: PM waters down key policy goals
- Rishi Sunak wants all pupils to study maths to 18
- Should government ministers and officials communicate on WhatsApp?
- Cameron-comeback, opinions?
- Politics revision notes
- Never start vaping, says 12-year-old girl with lung damage
Trending
- Top 15 universities
- why TSR needs to get in the bin
- Sixth former has no clue what to do at university :)
- Auditors are a waste of time
- What degree do you have no respect for?
- Why are uni dropouts looked down on?
- Does Uni matter if you go to a top 20 uni?
- How to stop being told that I'm "too good for teaching"?
- University Choices
- If you were the schools minister, what would you do?
- Can you all please sign my petition
- Dodgy p.e. Teachers
- Am I being egotistical
- Is the 11 plus the unfairest of all academic exams?
- What is the point of SATs exams in year 6?
- Which degree has the highest pay and pays the most?
- Picked wrong subject at University, is my life over?
- Anyone regret to go to top university?
- Discrimination against English A level students 2023
- Rishi Sunak proposes the Advanced British Standard
Latest
- widening participation
- Tesco pay dates for 2023
- New Thread Experience Feedback - Official Thread
- Official: Brighton and Sussex (BSMS) A100 2024 Entry Applicants
- Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entry
- Official: University of Plymouth A102 (BMBS with Foundation (Year 0)) 2024 Entry
- Can I cancel my acceptance to an unconditional offer after the 14 days?
- ATAS (Academic, Technology, Approval Scheme) Certificate 2023/2024
- MPhil in Ethics of AI, Data and Algorithms
- The Official Cambridge Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
- What does it mean that the PM is hindu?
- Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant Thread
- Mental Health Support Society XXI
- Tesco payment cutoff days
- Border Force National Campaign September 2023
- possible to complete nursing access course in 6-7 months???
- Why are young men so different than before?
- EY 2024 Graduate Program
- Why am I constipated ?
- EY graduate scheme 2024
- [Official thread] Hamas-Israel Conflict
- Approaching girls at the club
- Is going to the doctors for a cough justified?
- Official: Barts and the London (QMUL) A100 2024 Entry Applicants
- Opinion on Autism diagnosis
- How do I talk to a guy who I have nothing to talk about to?
- Official Cambridge Postgraduate Applicants 2024 Thread
- University of Southampton A101 (BM4) 2024 Entry
- insecure about being short
- Next team assessment day! HELP PLZ
- Glasgow Dentistry 2024 Entry
- I have a crush on my sisters best friends brother
- Official: University of Bristol A100 2024 Entry Applicants
- New Societies at Kingston University
- Rishi Sunak relaunches plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda
- Official: St George's, University of London A100 2024 Entry
- King's College Maths Sixth form 2023 applicants
- Oral health science- University of Essex
- Post an Image you've generated using AI
- Possible interruption of Studies