[Closed] Where is the "teachers are shite/GCSEs are easy" thread?

Nice idea. 😉

My 15 year old is doing French and Spanish GCSEs next year, is predicted to get A or B in both, and has done well in the modules he has done so far...

And when I asked him yesterday he could not tell me the word for Left, or Right, in either language. 🙁

All rosy up here in Scotland mate.

when I asked him yesterday he could not tell me the word for Left, or Right, in either language.

So, did you look it up with him or just shake your head and look disappointed?

we're on holiday.
come back when we give a ...........
fyi we teach what we're told to a mixture of human beings and creatures who have humanoid features. love the job, not a proper job, but i love it none the less.

I think teachers are very good - at ensuring kids with no chance of a passing grade are registered for exams they can't pass.

If 70% of the kids are getting A - C results, either:

- They are getting brighter (*cough*)

- The exams are getting easier

- The schools are ensuring only the brightest are actually entered

- The kids are being taught to pass the exams

From what I've seen leaving education recently, kids seem to have a far narrower view of the subjects taught. Therefore, it might appear they are being taught to pass exams rather than being taught a wide body and examined on some of it. As my geography lecturer would say "there is no substitute for a good foundation of knowledge" - and I fear we are losing that.

I think teachers are very good - at ensuring kids with no chance of a passing grade are registered for exams they can't pass.

[b]Coyote[/b] I knew the words myself but gave him the dictionary etc etc etc And yes I blame the parents too... For not asking the school why they expect so little.

Kids are more serious about their studies but the exams aren't getting any harder for sure.

I think tootall has the list of reasons right and I suspect he's right on which ones are key.

Irrespective, I can only talk of my own experience - A levels in '93 - Maths, Further Maths, Physics, Chemistry - eg all very sciency subjects.

We used to do a lot of older (like 20+ years older) A level papers as tests and they were significantly harder than the ones we did. Obviously it all depends on how you compare grades and I don't know if the percentages for A/B/C were the same but I do reckon that the harder questions made it harder for those who were just reasonably capable to get into the questions and actually get marks for the right answers.

Further, based on talking to a couple of my old teachers a few years back when I went to visit at the school, they reckoned that the trend had continued and papers were getting much more 'inclusive' which basically meant less complex.

Good or bad thing? Good from allowing kids a chance to feel that they're achieving something (rather than just being stumped at the first) but less good for actually using exams as a practical grounding for the real world.

I blame the politicians. On both sides.

Indeedy..

I'm rather surprised this thread has taken sooooo long to appear. I mean threads like this one are normally started as soon as someone opens that days edition of the Failing Dail..
But two days later..? tutty tut, tut.

You’re right though, my lil’ sis (headmistress) is sunning herself in Thailand and is probably supping something alcoholic whilst dipping her toes in the briny.. I get the impression she doesn’t give a hoot either.

We used to do a lot of older (like 20+ years older) A level papers as tests and they were significantly harder than the ones we did

Cant speak for your subjects but in biology the sysllabus would have almost totally changed, which would explain why you found them harder. In my own subject I think the exams are harder but the modular nature of the course and the ability to retake make it easier to do well.
GCSE are another matter, some are very easy. The fault lies with the fact that exam boards are competing to get schools to sign up for their exam. Your not going to do AQA Biology rather than OCR if its harder are you (unless the head of dept is an idiot of course.....).

Also the fact that some 15% of kids at my school do BTec science and pass to get the equivalent of 2 C's @ GCSE's when they would be very unlikely to get a C at GCSE inflates the figures, GCSE are not that much easier but the "equivalent" courses are included in the data.

For the maths ones, the questions were simply harder/more complex.

For physics and chemistry, it was clear that the expectation was to have broader but equally in depth knowledge.

I see the current A* as an O level/early GCSE A grade, top grade is top grade, work out how much it means by looking at the percentile that achieve it.

Pupils are supposed to get better year on year as each generation of teachers receive a better eductaion. If you gave a GCSE paper to 16year olds from 100 years ago their average grades would have been diabolical compared to currently. Give the same paper in 100 years time and I would hope that standards have moved on much further with newer teaching techniques and equipment leading to even better teachers, human or not, meaning most pupils should get an A/A* grade with the current grading system.

Agree about the inclusive papers at GCSE, whilst in mandatory education all pupils including the less advanced should be allowed to show what they have learnt, otherwise whats the point of submitting them to the exam, even if that means a paper that is less challenging to the brightest pupils. A-level and beyond is where more advanced pupils will continue to learn and show they can apply that knowledge in an intelligent way rather than being walked through an exam.

[url= http://www.mel-lambert.com/Ruskin/Images/JRGS11E_KB_Images.htm ]Exam papers from the 1960s[/url]

I can only judge the Geography paper, but that isn't any harder than the more recent past papers i have seen, it is probably easier.

We put on extra exam sessions before the exams. An honestly I believe we could take the term off before the exams and just teach them two days before and pass them.

I a school in the North East did just this and showed that they could get their kids to pass without any previous work other than two days using some method they devised.

Teachers are getting better. 30 years ago there were plenty of right useless pillocks bumbling about the system. It's a lot harder to be a really bad teacher nowadays.

Plus I get the impression that there is more work on including as many kids as possible, rather than letting the thick ones rot.

Also the focus has shifted from knowing facts to learning about how to think and do research and how to relate things to the wider world. So less academic arguably.

I'm not sure the teachers I meet are gettig any smarter. Pretty sure that I read something saying that their own A level grades were falling. I hope to be proved wrong.

But better training can compensate for that. Not sure about there being fewer poor teachers either. If you look at the tiny number of teachers UK wide who are banned from teaching the number is tiny. And ask my eldest at a relatively good comp and he will tell you who is a poor teacher. The kids all know.

Also the focus has shifted from knowing facts to learning about how to think and do research and how to relate things to the wider world. So less academic arguably.

Or so you are led to believe, but in reality.........

Do yo not agree Quirrel?

Competely agree with the view that teachers are getting better. Assessment for learning, structured lessons, better questioning, effective use of ICT to engage etc. - the list goes on.

That this was not even suggested in a list of possible reasons for an increase in attainment seems genuinely odd to me.

In some UK schools as few as 5% of pupils achieve 5 x GCSE's A* to C.

Some subjects are harder than in the past. Teachers continually come in for a lot of shit, which is a shame, since they earn a pittance compared to other 'professionals', and yet likely work a lot harder with more stress.

If any of you are parents, you should be more concerned that teaching is being greatly undermined as a profession in the same way policing is being undermined by community support officers. I increasingly meet trainee teachers without degrees and I am aware that a number of schools use teaching assistants (who may just have GCSE's or CSE's/O levels) fronting classes for extended periods. Virtually all supply teaching is now done by cover supers/teaching assistants and not teachers.

when i was a lad i used to work in a carpet shop to fund racing my bike i was about seventeen. i remember that we used to get a few summer staff in during the holidays all of em students and without fail i would have to spend time showing every one of them (including folks on real degrees) how to work out the square yardage of a job. honestly mind.

I'm going to stick up for my "lil Sis" (headmistress)

She studied Maths with the OU, got a distinction in her first year, got taken on at Newham Collage Cambridge for the remaining degree, got distinctions (top 1% in the country) in Pure Maths, then a Masters (top 2% in the country) , then went through PGCE, spent her time teaching underprivileged kids in London during her “holidays” between school term time, still does this BTW, had 4 kids during this period.. I think she deserves to do whatever she likes, to say I’m a proud brother to her is an understatement. She is the embodiment of all teachers in my eyes, shame some of her colleagues barely passed an A level and don’t give a sh*te about what they teach..
Shes turned around 2 failing schools in her area and has attendance records far outweighing the national average.. Not bad for a kid who ran away from home at 16.

And when I asked him yesterday he could not tell me the word for Left, or Right, in either language

Also the focus has shifted from knowing facts to learning about how to think and do research and how to relate things to the wider world.

Unfortunately, ninja Google skillz are no substitute for real knowledge. As far as relating things - the young apprentices and grads we've had through recently seem to have a lot of trouble relating to things they haven't been directly taught about. Their communication skills are also terrible - people seem to forget that emails are the modern written word and because their peers are OK with txtspk, they view complete sentences as unimportant.

In some UK schools as few as 5% of pupils achieve 5 x GCSE's A* to C

Really?

Our school had 95 to 100% year on year 5 A* to C and although a great school I can imagine most others would be in the 50% range at least. I did mine in 2005 and did f-all work and did comparatively 'alright' grades and that was 5 A* to A. Most kids know that they don't really matter compared to A levels seeing as most will stay on. And yes, they are easy. But if you're doing 7-11 subjects you can't expect them to all be that hard.

I really support the Ebac proposal as long as it doesn't have too much Tory social engineering. The consensus of people at university was that they are significantly harder and require you to take maths (we are really, really falling behind with maths), science and at least one language.

I increasingly meet trainee teachers without degrees

For GCSE and under the quality of subject delivery is far more important than having an encyclopaedic knowledge of topic areas only a handful of students study at degree or even masters level.

i think its clear the kids are getting a much better deal from the teachers where in the 70's we did course work from day 1 till the day of the exam with no mention of an exam what it might involve how to do it etc today that is very much a focus as is the curriculem very focussed on specifics that will appear in the final exam plus add in the course work that counts toward an exam and your comparing chalk and cheese to the two 3 hour exams we did in the days of black and white telly. ( clearly spelling was nt my highpoint)

the reality of GCSE's is they get you into further education, once your 30, you can write whatever GCSE grade you like on your CV, nobody cares 😈

today that is very much a focus as is the curriculem very focussed on specifics that will appear in the final exam

Teaching to pass an exam does not give anyone a good rounded knowledge of anything. Like driving - you learn to pass an exam, not be a good driver.

I really support the Ebac proposal as long as it doesn't have too much Tory social engineering.

Oh no the ebac isnt at all designed to ensure that the academically gifted, Grammar schools and Private schools dont look better!!

In some UK schools as few as 5% of pupils achieve 5 x GCSE's A* to C

If thats true its going to be about 10 schools max I would imagine. I used to work at what was the worst performing school in England at the time and it was doing better than that.

I increasingly meet trainee teachers without degrees

I thought you had to have a degree? I've got 3 and that doesnt include a PGCE!!

Unfortunately, ninja Google skillz are no substitute for real knowledge.

I think the point has gone over your head but your in good company Gove thinks kids should know more science facts too. Can someone tell me a science fact?

education is bolx, it's who you know not what you know, trust me, I am educated up to the eye balls, waste of my time,

Teaching to pass an exam does not give anyone a good rounded knowledge of anything.

true, but then it is how I'm judged, would you prefer schools not to try and get kids the best qualifications they can?

Everyone has an opinion on education.

Most of these opinions are shite.

In some UK schools as few as 5% of pupils achieve 5 x GCSE's A* to C

If thats true its going to be about 10 schools max I would imagine. I used to work at what was the worst performing school in England at the time and it was doing better than that.

You're being pedantic. Plus, it's relatively easy to ascertain the percentage of UK schools who achieve such. Pedantic because 5%, 10%, less than 30% i.e. under the UK average is not uncommon.

Worst performing school? Really? What was its 5 A* to C?

My other concern is how many schools are now ridding the curriculum of Art and Design Technology... truly we live in lean, mean, and very sad times.. the bankers stuffed up and the state school kids are suffering.

When I used to teach art I would pay for pencils, brushes and paints out of my own salary. I'd get them from the pound shop. Either that or the kids had nothing to work with. Mean stingy (or just ignorant) parents and tosser politicians begrudge our kids anything. Oooh but aren't the schools stuffed full of computers (albeit hindered by security filters so they can't look up images of tits, very little IT support, and congested networks). Sometimes you can even book one of the computer rooms when you need it!

Ah...... Great Shitain!

Not GCSE's , but on a recent interview I heard, some A-level students who had just got there results, were all doing Media Studies, Music and Drama, and Art amongst other non brain cell utilising subjects. They were going to uni to do Drama and the other two were going to do a degree in Event Managment FFS!

Thats why grades are going up, because the days of kids studying Physics and chemistry are over! All kids want to do nowadays is become a DJ or a reality TV star, and you dont need Maths with chemistry for that.

In some UK schools as few as 5% of pupils achieve 5 x GCSE's A* to C

Really?

Our school had 95 to 100% year on year 5 A* to C and although a great school I can imagine most others would be in the 50% range at least. I did mine in 2005 and did f-all work and did comparatively 'alright' grades and that was 5 A* to A.

I really support the Ebac proposal as long as it doesn't have too much Tory social engineering. The consensus of people at university was that they are significantly harder and require you to take maths (we are really, really falling behind with maths), science and at least one language.

**** Ebac. It's nonsense.

95% 5 A* to C. A grammar school then? Only grammar schools achieve such. Very few state schools achieve much above 75%, and those achieving 60% or more are usually in nice areas.

You can guage the behaviour from the 5A* to C. More than 60%, good kids mostly. Less than 60%, bit of bad behaviour at times, but mostly ok. Less than 50% and we start to see tired teachers over using their voices and loads of detentions (which can take a couple of hours to set each week), less than 40% and we see depressed teachers, and kids who will attempt to ruin every lesson.. less than 30% and you are in a hell hole, where 3 to 6 kids in every class will be allowed free reign for 5 years to ruin lessons and the education of others in the class. Unless they kill someone or assault a senior member of staff that is. Otherwise anything goes. The kids are king. Long live the king.

You're being pedantic.

no your making stuff up

No schools last year got less than 5 %
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12168122

The school I was at got about 12% as I recall.

I heard, some A-level students who had just got there results, were all doing Media Studies, Music and Drama, and Art

The difference between different subjects is shocking, Biology is statistically the hardest A level. I have been thinking of trying to start Env Sci as an A-level as its much easier. Thing is Uni's know this and base their offers on what your doing. You wont get into a good uni with A* in Film studies, Sociology and Env Sci, but you would with B's or C's in English, maths, Sciences, History etc.

Do yo not agree Quirrel?

Not at all.

Maybe at some of the 'better' schools they are taught thinking skills, but I also know that a lot of teach to the test is the aim of the game. Get the students a minimum of a C and if that means teaching the tests then that is what is done.

It would take years to sort out. Especially when we must keep showing improvement, keep working making higher grades and aim for higher percentages of students passing.

What is more likely to happen - students are taught to think, a few years of them fail as they learn how to apply their knowledge, school CVA is hammered, Offsted come in, etc etc
or
Students are taught to pass test, students keep passing, CVA improves, Offsted are kept at bay until the next inspection and everybody is happy.

I don't agree with it. I would love to try and develop their thinking skills, but around here they are stuffed from primary school.

The data that the primary schools supply is crap. They make it up to not get in bother, I see students who are L6 at KS3 coming in who can barely read or write, yet they have L6 in English and Maths.

Causes no end of problems.

Unless they kill someone or assault a senior member of staff that is.

Generally they are given a hug when that happens and the teacher is blamed for it

Quirrel, I have to respectfully disagree with the learning to learn point. I'm in the spanish private education system, which I agree is a different world but the principles are the same. You can't just implement a system and hope it works, it has to be a coordinated project starting in primary school and continuing through so when the kids have to pass external exams they're already well trained in applying their knowledge. It's not an overnight thing and it's something the teachers are pushing for in our school.

Going back to work on thursday after two month holiday :sadface:

EDIT: Just reread your post and it turns out I DO agree with you. Shocking reading skills, i'd hammer a kid for that!

Stoatsbrother - Member

And when I asked him yesterday he could not tell me the word for Left, or Right, in either language.

That was exceedingly gauche of you.

ETA: Bugger, beaten to it by aracer 🙄

no your making stuff up

No schools last year got less than 5 %
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12168122

The school I was at got about 12% as I recall.

I heard, some A-level students who had just got there results, were all doing Media Studies, Music and Drama, and Art

The difference between different subjects is shocking, Biology is statistically the hardest A level. I have been thinking of trying to start Env Sci as an A-level as its much easier. Thing is Uni's know this and base their offers on what your doing. You wont get into a good uni with A* in Film studies, Sociology and Env Sci, but you would with B's or C's in English, maths, Sciences, History etc.

Obviously you have never heard of time Mr Pedantic. It's that abstract thing that sort of syncs with the appearance of the sun and the moon.

Before last year, certainly within the last 4 years, there were schools achieving less than 10% 5A* to C. One in Reading comes to mind, now an Academy. So you must be making stuff up when you say you were at the worst perfoming school in the UK. Unless you meant for the period you worked there. That time thing again. And there are loads around the 20-35% mark, which takes them into special measures. If there weren't any last year scoring that low, then that's likely because of the inflated (perhaps) worth of BTEC's and such. Though that will likely change.

Yes you are pedantic.

Unless they kill someone or assault a senior member of staff that is.

Generally they are given a hug when that happens and the teacher is blamed for it

A regular rank and file teacher sure, that would happen. A regular teacher will also be arrested at their home (any time of day or night) have their fingerprints and DNA taken if they are subject to a malicious false allegation by a student. This happens.

A senior member of staff like a head or deputy head will enjoy greater protection.

Results around the 30 - 35% mark do not put schools into special measures - this is a category that can result from a very poor OFSTED inspection.

The schools that fall below the so-called 'floor targets' are called National Challenge schools.

Just to be pedantic...

And if you end up on National Challenge, Special Measures almost ALWAYS follows.. so yes, you are being pedantic. Still, you are in the right profession for pedanticism. Only a matter of time before you start wearing huge knickers, laugh like a Tory, and read Enid Blyton books.

And if you end up on National Challenge, Special Measures almost ALWAYS follows

VCC, what on earth are you talking about? Do you know my profession? And what profession ends up as you describe? I genuinely don't understand your post...

And you're wrong about special measures anyway. Oh, and it's pedantry, not 'pedanticism.'

A senior member of staff like a head or deputy head will enjoy greater protection.

Student will be exculed for a few days and then the teacher will be blamed.

So you must be making stuff up when you say you were at the worst perfoming school in the UK. Unless you meant for the period you worked there

bingo,named after that bloke who owns the local football club.

Yes you are pedantic.

no you were just wrong in what you said

And there are loads around the 20-35% mark

which is at least 100% higher than what you were talking about, its not pedantry its a huge difference.

Anyone know what proportion of kids still do 9+ gcse's and 3 or 4 full fat A-levels? And whether the stats include people retaking just one or 2 subjects and not doing a lot else that year? I am sure if i had done fewer i could have got 'better' grades!

At work (children's mental health) I have encountered many cases where pupils felt pressurised to drop gcse's following illness/hospitalisation, sometimes for their own benefit by having something realistic to focus on rather than being swamped with stuff they couldn't possibly have had time to learn, but our own hospital school would frequently 'wonder out loud' what the failing child was going to do for the schools stats. 😕

Anyone know what proportion of kids still do 9+ gcse's

No idea, bu the way CVA is worked out seems to encourage people to get kids to do as many as possible, I believe I did 7 back in the day, now almost everyone seems to do at least 8 or 9.

I didn't realise I was so strange. 😕 I'm doing 10 GCSEs, Maths, English lang, English lit, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, German, Geography, History and DT. I'm expected to get mostly A*s. Then, at A level, I'll be doing 5 of them, definitely including Maths and Physics as I hope to end up with a job as an engineer. 😀

VCC, what on earth are you talking about? Do you know my profession? And what profession ends up as you describe? I genuinely don't understand your post...

And you're wrong about special measures anyway. Oh, and it's pedantry, not 'pedanticism.'

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/pedanticism

Give me strength. Silly billy.

Scottish school system = Slightly f*cked up

English school system = Totally f*cked up

This is well worth a watch.

Ken Robinson is indeed well worth a watch but I'm always left thinking that he's good at telling us what's wrong but not how to fix it.

Perhaps his books are better on that front than a 10 minute talk.

Those RSA animate things are awesome.

That video is excellent but silly at times and misses the mark. Within the first few seconds it launches into nonsense about the economy not being predictable or indeed controllable... tell that to Goldman Sachs.

I should have said the video is 10 mins of an hour long talk.

Within the first few seconds it launches into nonsense about the economy not being predictable or indeed controllable...

Thats just a bit of rhetoric to get him started.

His point about schools being made in the image of universities is an apposite one.

No idea, bu the way CVA is worked out seems to encourage people to get kids to do as many as possible,

Can't remember how it is worked out overall, but different students have higher or lower cva's depending on their race, socio-economic class, postcode, fsm and other factors.

You don't want a chinese or polish female in your class of numpties, because if she fails you will get hammered. HOwever if you have a black, male, on fsm, with unemployed parents, you are onto a winner if you can get him to pass or get higher marks.

getonyourbike - good luck young man, can I recommend control systems engineering as something with a nice blend of the practical and cerebral?

oliverd1981 - Member

getonyourbike - good luck young man, can I recommend control systems engineering as something with a nice blend of the practical and cerebral?

Cheers, Oliver. I might even have to work the next 2 years rather than just cruising. 🙁 🙂

Can't remember how it is worked out overall, but different students have higher or lower cva's depending on their race, socio-economic class, postcode, fsm and other factors.

You don't want a chinese or polish female in your class of numpties, because if she fails you will get hammered. HOwever if you have a black, male, on fsm, with unemployed parents, you are onto a winner if you can get him to pass or get higher marks.

I've been teaching for 6 years. Polish females have consistently been some of my best behaved and highest scoring students, and when you consider how they rarely make up more than 5% of my student population, they score higher disproportionately. Polish boys have more or less the same attitude to learning as British boys IME. That's not to say bad on the whole. Just normal, average, neither better or worse IME.

With students I don't look at their home environment, they are either scoring or not scoring. There always has to be E and Fails, to make the A to D's have more value, and there will always be students who despite your best efforts score the latter. In good schools you meet less, and in the so-called 'bad' schools you meet more who will achieve. Of course nearby Grammar and private independent schools and socio-economic environment and 'catchment area' explains all this.

I have always found having eal kids, you couldn't speak English at primary school but have since learnt in your gcse classes best. They have really low target grades.great for your value added.worst is a set of triple sciences kids with a* targets. No chance of a positive value added with them.

I can tell you that catchment area plays a large part in social division and is almost entirely responsible for that all important metric - the percentage of students who score A* to C in five of their GCSE's.

In poor areas less score this. In richer areas more score this. In towns with great social divides with grammar and/or independent private schools the state schools disproportionately service the poor. For all sorts of reasons this group face significant hurdles. Financial stability equals emotional stability as well as a nicer home. This in turn equals a higher 5 A* to C.