It does seem quite extraordinary that this year’s outstanding GCSE results were greeted as being symptomatic of exams that are too easy and which need to be reformed.
Kevin Courtney is the Deputy General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), the largest teachers union
It does seem quite extraordinary that this year’s outstanding GCSE results (see graph 1) were greeted not as a result of hard work by both teachers and pupils but as being symptomatic of exams that are too easy and which need to be reformed. Especially when many of those same commentators are very happy to lambast schools at the bottom of the school league tables creating huge pressures to teach to the test.
Graph 1:
The NUT is not opposed to reviewing our qualifications system, especially with an expectation that most young people in future will remain in education or training to the age of 18. Rather than introducing ill considered, ad hoc and piecemeal changes seemingly at the whim of individual ministers and their personal prejudices about learning and achievement we need a considered and planned review.
This should be agreed with education professionals, universities, employers and the wider public. The government intends to discontinue modular examinations and return to a system where exams must be sat at the same time at the end of a two-year course.
Modular courses and qualifications, provided they are well designed, help ensure all young people are able to demonstrate their full knowledge and abilities. Spelling and grammar are clearly important, and qualifications in English should assess and accredit abilities in those areas.
Examinations in other subjects should assess abilities in those subjects specifically, rather than attempting also to assess ability in English. This is particularly important for young people who have English as an additional language or those who have learning difficulties such as dyslexia.
While the governmnet expends much energy on attempts to raise standards, while completely ignoring the undoubted present success rate, they are remarkably silent on one of the main barriers to many young people continuing in education. For many students the issue of being financially solvent enough to continue studying is a huge problem.
The reduction and confusion surrounding the education maintenance allowance will cast a shadow over these results as many students will find it difficult to continue in education despite having the grades and potential to do so.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
19 Responses to “Yet again the detractors seek to undermine GCSE results”
Ed's Talking Balls
IQ will broadly increase over time due to various factors, such as improved diet, improvements in technology, etc. It’s a gradual progression. It is inconceivable that a graph charting educational achievement could be flat across the 50s, 60s, 70s and mid-80s and then rise exponentially. I’m not aware of any theory that could explain such a sharp, comsistent rise (unless government started putting something in the water then?)
What you mention in no way makes a mockery of my argument. You say many facile things, but that perhaps takes the biscuit.
AdamPa
Leon Wolfson,
Extrapolation of the Flynn Effect backwards suggests that Victorians and those living in the early 20th Century were virtually subhuman.
A more sensible explanation is that although IQ tests do correlate with what most consider intelligence it is not an exact correlation – not surprising as there is no definitive all encompassing definition of intelligence
Leon Wolfson
AdamPa – That’s plain and simple revisionism. No need to comment further…
Ed’s Talking Balls – For someone who didn’t know about the effect, do read more than the wikipedia article. Hint: Exams marking has changed. You’ve just managed to show that you don’t understand the topic. Please keep mocking yourself…
Ed's Talking Balls
Pretty simple really: no credible person would believe that, absent something truly extraordinary happening, 17-18 year olds became dramatically cleverer in such a short space of time (and that they did so, every single year).
Exam marking’s changed? Why should I be surprised by that? That’s part of the point I’m making. It’s clearly become more lenient.
Incidentally, none of what I said came from Wikipedia. Broad trends in IQ should be easy to anticipate, whatever name is given to the theory/effect. What I said was common sense; what you appear to be arguing, i.e. that some time in the 80s everyone became really clever and kept getting cleverer year after year, beggars belief. No need for me to mock further.