by James Grantham
Another claim appeared recently regarding Labour’s educational achievements. The claim this time – that GCSE passes were improving for every child irrespective of class (how poncey a job one’s parents have to you and I). It’s fairly true and provable that GCSE passes are improving, what is only starting to come to the fore of mainstream attention is that this means very little about intelligence.
As someone starting to edge into a new generation to those taking GCSE’s I do not understand or relate to how it now feels to be in that part of one’s life. But teachers and the national curriculum are still failing students. Passes in Maths and Science may have improved year on year, but the number proceeding onto these subjects at A Level has not improved, numbers of students gaining a good pass in these subjects shows no significant general improvement. In other words - leaving secondary education and entering further education is in no way easier just yet, this has obvious knock-on effects for higher education.
The government’s desire for there to be 20 new university towns in Britain, either added on or created independently to existing universities will supposedly increase the numbers of people entering higher education. Tony Blair’s 1999 claim that he wanted 40% of under 30’s to have received HE is still being pursued. But will it matter? Will the governments decades long ambition to increase people into certain types of education matter to those desiring applied, vocational education beyond apprenticeships and will this be available for the public – who do not all want to study the traditional degree subjects. If the answer is no then it will not make much difference, GCSE’s are not easier but the training to get students to pass by any means necessary including dumbing down and simplifying explanations so they will never truly understand but as long as they get the marks to pass, in order to meet the assessment criteria institutions face by Ofsted nullifies any understanding that will enable the average builder to understand the physics of the structures they are designing, for example. So one might think this whole system has a broken link.
This broken link is the spin and the inaccurate portrayal of the effectiveness (not the economy or efficiency but the effectiveness) of British education. If social mobility is based or lorded over us by or around spin then we ignore the fact that not everyone wants to study traditional subjects and they should be able to grow as far as any university student in their specific way. This hasn’t changed and that’s a big reason why – despite spin – social mobility has not changed in any meaningful way for the people who have really needed it for over 30 years.
Another claim appeared recently regarding Labour’s educational achievements. The claim this time – that GCSE passes were improving for every child irrespective of class (how poncey a job one’s parents have to you and I). It’s fairly true and provable that GCSE passes are improving, what is only starting to come to the fore of mainstream attention is that this means very little about intelligence.
As someone starting to edge into a new generation to those taking GCSE’s I do not understand or relate to how it now feels to be in that part of one’s life. But teachers and the national curriculum are still failing students. Passes in Maths and Science may have improved year on year, but the number proceeding onto these subjects at A Level has not improved, numbers of students gaining a good pass in these subjects shows no significant general improvement. In other words - leaving secondary education and entering further education is in no way easier just yet, this has obvious knock-on effects for higher education.
The government’s desire for there to be 20 new university towns in Britain, either added on or created independently to existing universities will supposedly increase the numbers of people entering higher education. Tony Blair’s 1999 claim that he wanted 40% of under 30’s to have received HE is still being pursued. But will it matter? Will the governments decades long ambition to increase people into certain types of education matter to those desiring applied, vocational education beyond apprenticeships and will this be available for the public – who do not all want to study the traditional degree subjects. If the answer is no then it will not make much difference, GCSE’s are not easier but the training to get students to pass by any means necessary including dumbing down and simplifying explanations so they will never truly understand but as long as they get the marks to pass, in order to meet the assessment criteria institutions face by Ofsted nullifies any understanding that will enable the average builder to understand the physics of the structures they are designing, for example. So one might think this whole system has a broken link.
This broken link is the spin and the inaccurate portrayal of the effectiveness (not the economy or efficiency but the effectiveness) of British education. If social mobility is based or lorded over us by or around spin then we ignore the fact that not everyone wants to study traditional subjects and they should be able to grow as far as any university student in their specific way. This hasn’t changed and that’s a big reason why – despite spin – social mobility has not changed in any meaningful way for the people who have really needed it for over 30 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment