I tend to steer away from writing about political and topical issues because I prefer to keep this blog easy-reading, but today I am absolutely disgusted to hear the recent rumours, and a supposed leak, that our useless government are considering scrapping GCSE's in favour of O'Levels. I am quite sure several people will be writing about this today because once again the powers-that-be are making a mockery of their chance to better this country. One post in particular that I have read is by the lovely and very talented journalist, Liz Jarvis. This news could have the potential to destroy the next generation of our work force. Sounds a bit extreme doesn't it, but look at it from my point of view, a mother to a special needs child.
When I was at school I admit I was somewhat academically challenged in most subjects, and wasn't even given the option to take O'Levels. High school for me was a dead loss, I'd have been much happier finishing school at 11 and being home-schooled, but of course that wasn't to be and I was packaged off to what was dubbed as a good church of England secondary comprehensive. In year 3 (age 14), we had to choose our options, in other words, we had a very brief discussion with a careers adviser, and I mean brief, where we were given the chance to decide our future. At 14, I didn't know what day it was never mind what my future held. Nonetheless, I knew I wasn't clever enough to be a vet, my dream occupation, and living as a townie I was realistic enough to know my ambition to be a farmer was pretty far-fetched. So I chose what most other girls in my year chose, to be a secretary or office clerk. But I had one quality at school (apart from that of being able to blow smoke rings in the girl's toilets), and that was music. I was quite talented in that one subject; played the piano, the violin, sung in the choir, was always chosen as a backing singer in the school plays, yes, that was the one subject I could have excelled in. If I'd been given the chance. As it happens, I wasn't given the chance. There were only two pupils in the whole year, out of about 130, that chose music. I was one and the other was a friend of mine who I'd known from primary school and whom I had violin lessons with. The problem was, our music teacher didn't think my friend was capable of doing O'Level music and because to him it seemed pointless doing two different levels of exams when there were only two pupils in the class, I was forced to step down and take CSE music instead. I got a grade 1, I think my friend got a 3, but the point was I could have got a high grade O'Level.
I took seven CSE's altogether; Science, Music, Maths, English, French, RE and History. I messed about at school and on one exam paper, I think it was Science, I hardly answered any questions. I was deemed stupid and a waste of space by some teachers, but I was never encouraged to do well and I was never given the chance to shine. When GCSE's came into force, schools spent quite some time complaining about changing the system. But it meant an exam that could be beneficial to pupils across the board. When Amy started in special school last year, one of the first questions I asked was "do you think Amy will be able to take a couple of GCSE's?" The school's answer was a "maybe, we will certainly encourage her to."
And now we are faced with the prospect of our children once again being put into two categories; the clever ones who will be encouraged to take O'Levels, and the less able ones who can opt for a CSE, seeing they aren't clever enough to take O'Levels. Does our government realise how this will make children feel? Do they realise that the majority of special needs children will never in a million years be able to sit an O'Level, therefore their job prospects will be even less than they would have been otherwise? And when you have a condition such as autism, believe me, your job prospects are pretty shit to start off with. My daughter, and your children, deserve a better future than this. The whole system may need an overhaul, but our children need to feel equal, and with these proposals they will once more be made to feel inferior to the better educated children.
What? They want to change the system? And I thought I'd just begun to understand it, ahhhh....
ReplyDeleteAs a foreigner, the English system is all a bit Chinese to me. Different level exams for different abilities is the norm I grew up with. As long as there is a chance for children to choose which road they want to go down, I'd be fine with this. But depriving able children (such as in your case) of their chances, not because of their lacking abilities but because of external circumstances, is cruel. And yes, I think you'd been smart enough to become a vet...
The rate things change, I think it's difficult for anyone to understand it! It just hasn't been thought out properly as always.
DeleteI'm reading all this posts with interest as I'm not from the British schooling system and don't fully understand the difference between GCSEs and the way it was. I had a similar experience in my South African education - I wanted to study French but there weren't enough kids who wanted to do it so I had to choose something else instead. I've always regretted that.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any experience with GCSE's, Melissa, but I do believe they are done in different levels, though this sounds like a better system than the old one with O'Levels and CSE's.
DeleteHello we are sponsoring the BiBs Inspire category that you are in and we just wanted to say good luck.
ReplyDeleteThank you, I really appreciate that. Thanks for stopping by today :)
DeleteReally good post, and interesting reading. I'm afraid I disagree, however, as life is not equal: there will always be somebody who can run faster, read more fluently, has more money, a "better" job, is better at maths, can draw more artistically, drives a flashier car, lives in a bigger house etc etc. In my experience, children are very aware that some of their peers are more academic and some of their peers are less academic than they are - surely a system which tailors qualifications to children's academic ability is better than one which bungs them all in for the same exam regardless is actually better for our kids?
ReplyDeleteGood post, though, I enjoyed reading it.
Despite what I say above in the post, I do also agree with you and really value your differing opinion. My views really come from a mum's perspective to a child who won't be given the same opportunities as a child who is more able. Children work at different levels but to me, this change in the system seems a little too "them and us" orientated.
DeleteThanks for your reply, and totally understand where you're coming from, from a parental perspective. Completely concur that all children should have completely equal access to educational opportunities. I guess the O Level / CSE versus GCSE thing is a little like the comprehensive/Grammar school argument - where I live now we have this two tier system, and the lengths some parents go to to get their children into Grammar (hours and hours of private tuition on top of normal school, spending the school holidays forcing their kids to do practice exam papers) is madness. I always feel a bit sorry for the kids, who potentially may get into Grammar by the skin of their teeth because of all this extra coaching, but spend the next five years feeling inadequate and struggling to keep up with everybody around them. Anyway, I digress ....
DeleteOh I so agree and even for the not special needs if they get streamed ealy before grasping a subject then any opportunity is blown. Why are this government o keen on dividing society? Them and us will always cause problems. All pigs are equal but some are more equal than others. *sigh*
ReplyDeleteExactly, which is what happened to me. I'm not special needs but was probably what you might call lazy. I hated school and never tried to better myself, but if I'd been given some encouragement then I just might have stood a chance at getting some O'Levels under my belt.
DeleteTotally agree with you.I went to a grammar school which merged with the secondary modern to become a comprehensive the year before we had to start our exam courses. It was wonderful to see many kids from the other school given the chance to sit O Levels with us and in many cases do well. But GCSEs gave everyone the chance to shine in their best subjects. What many people also don't realise is that there are two levels of GCSE and kids put in for the lower level can only get a maximum C grade, which is exactly how it was with an O Level grade C and a CSE grade 1! I'm not sure if that applies to all subjects, but it certainly does to key subjects so the discrimination never totally went away. It is up to schools to ensure kids are taught in suitable ability groups, so that those for whom a subject is a challenge don't become disruptive and hold others back, because high schools are a minefield nowadays.
ReplyDeleteYou're right, Cathy, the discrimination has always been there, perhaps not in quite so bold a way as it was, but it's never gone away. At Amy's school, the children are put into groups at which level they are at, rather than age appropriate skills like mainstream school.
DeleteIf the UK Education System needs a shake up, this is not it! Surely education should be about helping all children to fulfil their potential, including those with special needs, whether they are social, emotional, behavoural, intellectual, educational or gifted. Well said Kathryn x
ReplyDeleteDefinitely; once again the children take the brunt of the shake ups, and again, it's a policy that doesn't seem to have been thought through properly, especially where special needs and the less able children are concerned.
DeleteI have to disagree with you, I'm afraid.
ReplyDeleteEvery child has their own ability. Many are academically right in the middle, whilst some are at other end of the spectrum. All children at both ends of that spectrum (as well as those in the middle) deserve the right to shine.
With one exam only - and everyone clumped together - special needs children are likely to achieve grades at the lower end of the scale whilst high achievers will be in the A* group. What that means is that children actually capable of achieving a higher grade than an A* won't be able to, and children who have a limited chance of achieving an A* will always (on paper) be at the bottom of that list.
Would it be fair to make me run a race against 200 olympic athletes? I'd come last, obviously. Why would I even bother entering if I wasn't in with a chance? But if you put me up against people at my own level, and gave me something achievable, I'd work my socks off to get to the top.
I would much rather have a CSE grade one than a GCSE grade 3 or 4.
A great comment, as always, Elaine. Like I said to Caroline above, I do agree with the different opinion but for many special needs children this will only make things so much harder for their future. Many employers these days (and probably in the past too) will only look at O'Level grades and skip past the CSE's. I have no idea how that stands with GCSE's as I don't have experience of them. I completely understand where you're coming from (nodding here). I used to play squash at county level when I was much younger and there was nothing worse than competing against grown men who were quite obviously going to beat me! Waste of time, but, good experience and an encouragement to do better.
DeleteThe colleges / employers that will only look at O level grades and disregard CSEs will be the same employers who, if there is just one examination, will completely disregard those who don't achieve the top three grades.
DeleteI did GCSE's and my husband did GCE/CSE... He had no encouragement at school and was only put in for CSE's and that has limited his career choices as employers have disregarded CSE's almost in their entirety. He has spent years bettering himself and putting himself through courses right up to degree level on his own.
ReplyDeleteGCSE's at least offer those different levels for different achievers, like Cathy said. And it's up to the school to get them into the right groups. I entered GCSE's in the levels I would get the best results with, therefore my career options have been a darn sight better than my husbands.
Where all systems fail is when the school doesn't put the child in the right academic group and they achieve less where they could achieve more in a higher group, or the get put in too high a group and their results show that.
All employers pretty much know that a A-C grade at GCSE is the equivalent to an O-Level, and anything less is a CSE...Why change the system and confuse things further?
That's more or less what I was saying to Elaine above. My 7 CSE's didn't count for much on a CV; employers wanted experience and that was why I went to do a business course at college aged 16-18. I didn't go to University, just got a job at 18 and never looked back. The lack of encouragement made me feel I wasn't capable of getting better grades.
DeleteThe fact remains that we are falling behind the rest of the world. What changes should we make?
ReplyDeleteIf I knew the answer to that I suspect I would have been elected as PM. Then again...
DeleteAn interesting post but I have to disagree with your views because like it or not, people are not equal and in my opinion it is wrong to make everybody equal. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses and each child deserves to have their strengths encouraged and their weaknesses improved. I am old enough to have taken the O level exams and I think they were very good indeed. The only way to test for some subjects, like maths and science is to give the child a test to see what they've learned in the time they've been studying. Other subjects like English may be more subjective and open to the project system.
ReplyDeleteI think where the GCSE's have gone a bit off track is the overuse of multiple choice questions, which give everybody a one in four (or whatever it is) chance of getting the answer right. I believe it is wrong to spoon feed the children. They should be given a blank sheet of paper and that way it will soon be obvious what they know and what they don't know.
I think it is brave of Mr. Gove to bring back the GCE's. They will not be the same as they were in my day but they will be better than the current system I'm sure.
Of course we have to remember that there are more subjects to learn now e.g. I.T. and sociology and these will have to be fitted in somehow.
Those children who have special needs should be given as much help as possible but equally so, the brighter ones should not be held back by the majority of children who are average.
I suspect it did make it easier on the papers to have multiple choice questions and I do agree that the child should know the answer, rather than just guess which one it is, if that should be the case. And yes, the brighter children should never be held back, in any circumstances. Perhaps there is an easier solution and somehow it will benefit all children.
Deletenot quite sure what olevels are but i understand the frustration behind this...and how some decisions are made without thinking of the ramifications and who will be left behind in the process...
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, Brian, you've captured my whole point of this post; decisions about our children's futures are being made without a general consultation or referendum which is in itself particularly frustrating. Children with special needs have varying levels of abilities but I still feel changing the system yet again is not helping them achieve in the long run. SEN children need routine and stability, just like NT children, but on a whole different scale, and I personally don't know where this will leave our special schools in so far as putting children through exams.
DeleteI'm not sure I follow all the olevel stuff but homeschooling is the Only way to go for the little ones! Our school system has been dumbed down so badly! It's what's happening in most of the democratic countries...Dumb people + dumb television keeps the populations content to not achieve a darn thing!
ReplyDeletehughugs
Well judging by the fabulous comments on here today, Donna, I'm not sure I follow them either. It's wonderful to read many different opinions on this subject because it is, quite naturally, a subject all parents will be interested in. I did think about homeschooling for Amy before she started special school but I would have had to hire a tutor - expensive and will Amy's social skills difficulties, it wouldn't have been the best idea. She's thrived since being at Special school so I know it was the better decision.
DeleteI didn't get many *O* Levels and I would have done so much better taking the GCSEs. For those of us who don't like exams I think that there would have been a better chance with GCSEs as the course work is taken into consideration.
ReplyDeleteDon't change things just for the sake of it. I feel that is what Governments do best. Eventually, everything comes round full circle.
Maggie X
Nuts in May
I find it interesting how some of us feel we would have done better doing GCSE's while others prefer to have done O'Levels. I'm not really sure what would have helped me, apart from a kick up the backside and some encouragement from teachers!
DeleteLike some of the other comments, I disagree. I was unlucky enough to just miss out on O-levels and had to do GCSEs. I did pretty well, but should have really done better (being top set for everything that was set). Realistically looking back I didn't have to work that hard for them, and if I'd been pushed by the teachers to achieve more I'd have probably got straight As. If I'd done O levels I think I'd have done better as I'm better on exams than coursework.
ReplyDeleteMy OH didn't care about school, only wanted to do farming, passed about 5 CSEs at various levels, but again wasn't really encouraged to do as best as he could.
Spookily we were both at the same comprehensive which has a good reputation in the area. Ultimately, I don't really care what the exams are but I think they should be able to stretch and prove everyone's capabilities whatever they are (and I think that needs to go back to the old way of having 'academic' vs 'vocational'). Realistically with GSCEs nowadays there's too many people getting top grades including people who probably aren't in the same elite level as others who have to get the same grade.
Really it should be about everyone being encouraged to do as well as they can rather than aiming to get everyone through on the middle ground and that middle ground being led to believe that they can do anything with those middling exams. IMO that means streaming more subjects as I know I did better in the subjects that were set than the ones that weren't.
Your comment proves that we are indeed all different. Just one thing, farming is a very skilled occupation, I am a sheep and arable farmer and wouldn't want to do anything else. I wasn't encouraged enough at school but I didn't go into farming because I wasn't capable of doing anything else.
DeleteYou're right, it is important that everyone is encouraged, even though we all work at different levels.
I call him Saint Michael of Gove! Thank goodness the discredited policies of the last 30 years are being reversed just in time for my 11 year old to take some decent exams like I did.
ReplyDeleteA stranger to the camp! I suspected you might disagree with me somehow, Troy! How you doing anyway?!
DeleteI've read through the comments and find it all very interesting. I don't know a huge amount about the UK system, but I do think it's better to have the academic and vocational split, as Bubbablue says.
ReplyDeleteI think some marketing needs to be done too. Society percieves vocational as being of lesser value than academic, yet when you see how much an electrician or plumber earns, they make far more than many teachers. And I don't agree either with valuing careers on earnings!
I think the most important thing is for each child to be able to shine within their own capability, and to be happy in their own skin, and that is what we should all value. Everyone deserves to achieve, be they bright, average, special needs...whatever.
As you know, I teach in a special school. We follow traditional "academic" programmes, "vocational" programmes and mixed programmes. Our LCA (Leaving Cert Applied) is very popular, and has been marketed well by our government, using prominent business people. It also can lead to college courses, by doing one more year on a Fetac programme. Therefore, nobody is limited by the system, but can continue to whatever level they reach. It's not perfect, but it's quite good.
And finally, I totally agree with Star re multiple choice. Governments use multiple choice because it's quicker, and hence cheaper, to correct. That's a bad choice. It doesn't allow students to be individuals and it encourages rote learning.
(sorry for long comment...education is a hobby horse of mine..)
With you there, Mimi. I think a lot of jobs are achieved by experience rather than academic ability, it certainly was when I left school. It makes difficult for the younger people with no experience to get into the career they want to. Perhaps creating a vicious circle in a way. Good to hear your point of view on this, esp as you work in a special school.
DeleteI think changes must be made but not sure that the present proposals are the right ones! Sorry to sit on the fence on this one but a rethink is required, I feel...
ReplyDeleteAt the time of writing this post, Pat, I honestly didn't think changes needed to be made at all, but many opinions on this have made me think somewhat differently. Of course, my experience lies in that of special needs education but perhaps those changes can be adapted to benefit all children in the long term.
DeleteAn interesting post CJ.What I have realised as my children head towards GCSE's is that they are just as divisive as O Levels.Children are split into groups according to ability and if they sit a lower grade GCSE they cannot do better than a C grade.My sons' school offer 3 choices - the academic triple science route or the less academic double science and then the more 'hands on' practical BTec route.All the children end up with equivalent qualifications but they are tailored to their skills.Their view is that there is no point in someone taking exams which will not only stress them out but they will end up not being useful especially if they fail them because they don't have an academic bent.They take the view that they are preparing the students for life - whether that be 10 A* at GCSE and the potential to go on to A levels and Oxbridge or a course in mechanics or beauty therapy.Every child is different and it must be hard to do the right thing for every child.I think the really important thing is that they fulfill their potential, whatever that is, and don't feel trapped by their choices at such a young age.To me its not about getting exams per se, its about leading the best life you can and being guided by your school towards the right career which will lead to a happy life doing a job you enjoy.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sarah. Through writing this post it has made me understand a lot more about the GCSE system and how, perhaps, it does need an overhaul. My argument is that I worry about SEN children and the fact they will be even more segregated into groups than they would have been otherwise. I do think every child deserves the right to a good education and that should be encouraged as a paramount exercise. But it isn't. Maybe I'm a little out of touch with current educational issues, but I want Amy to at least have a chance at doing exams, even if she does fail. It's the experience that matters too.
DeleteDon't worry about it. It was Michael Gove. Every couple of weeks a bizarre idea pops into his head and he can't stop his mouth from letting it out. It'll be gone in a week or so when another one enters his head. I'm thinking of keep a blog of "Gove's Gaffs" - he really keeps us teachers amused!
ReplyDeleteVery bizarre, much like most things the government do!They're a joke.
DeleteHi CJ, as you know from my own blog post I am very against the return of the O level/CSE. I've lived through this system and I've seen the damage it has caused. I went to a comprehensive, the old secondary modern, where most kids did CSE's. Unfortunately CSEs were ridiculed back then (the 1980s) and kids were made to feel a failure if they got grades below a 1 (which equated to an O level). Even for the minority of kids who sat O levels we were such a minority that we were picked on for being the brainy ones. Not surprisingly it was easier for us to conformm to peer pressure and clown around and not work towards O levels. In the end, most of my year group left school feeling a failure; something that blighted my own life until I returned to education as a mature student.
ReplyDeleteI understand the argument that GCSEs are not working for the most able and certainly my daughter has complained that GCSEs haven't stretched her enough or prepared her for her A levels. I do think this aspect needs improving but I don't think a return to the O level is the answer.
I understand also that if the current examinations aren't working properly then something needs to be done; I think you'll be seeing this from point of view in so far as our special needs kids will no doubt miss out on having a decent qualification, maybe the only positive thing to show to a potential employer, because most employers won't entertain disabled people unless they have absolutely no choice.
DeleteVery interesting post but I totally disagree. I think we need to realise that academia isn't everything and embrace the fact people are different and good at different things, and our education system should reflect that. Having not sat O-levels I can't speak of them specifically but I do think there should be a split of academically strong children from children who are strong in other areas, none better or worse, just different.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately successive governments have decided that (to save money) it is better for SEN children to be integrated into mainstream and be taught with their respective age groups. Many SEN children are behind their age group in learning because of their probelms and particularly by secondary age cannot cope in mainstream schools any more. Some have special needs units I know and some have special needs teachers but it is not enough. It is getting progressively harder to get a child into a special needs school becuse the LEA don't want to fund it and in the case of the school I work in most end up going to tribunal to get the funding for a place. Working with 16-19 year olds some of our students are doing BTECH courses in various subjects and some of them go on to do courses in local colleges where they live (we are mainly a residential school with some day pupils and students). I agree with you Crystal about the Government not thinking about SEN children and at the rate it is going they will not be benfiting from a good education at all let alone being able to study for exams. A child's education is a worry for any caring parent but even more so if the child has an problems.
ReplyDeleteI will put my soap box away bwfore I bore everyone to tears cos I could go on forever about education for Special needs.