By: Dave Scott

Dave Scott — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:32:12 +0000

Yep, interesting points. The major missed opportunity is to try and differentiate between things we wish to have competency in, such as numeracy and literacy (this was the thrust of Jeremy Hardy’s comments on the news quiz) and things we need people to be graded in so we can see how good they are at it (English, Maths, Science, Humanities, Music, etc). All in all, these appear to be a backwards step from the Coalition.

By: Alex Kendall

Alex Kendall — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:36:18 +0000

Nice piece. I think you can take this one step back and ask, before why we have exams, why we want formal education for all in the first place. From this I hope we could agree that although finding a job is important, surely a more important primary objective is to develop minds who can think about and have an understanding of the world around them. By this I mean that it’s not purely about facts. Far too much of education has been cramming for exams with little thought as to the real meaning of the knowledge we’re asked to learn. The new system doesn’t seem to get rid of any of this. How I think you solve this is by looking at process more than end result, basically we need to think how education itself needs to be changed, not just the system of examination. Getting rid of coursework (which these changes do) seems a step in the wrong direction. Having separate exam board for each subject will, I hope, lead to greater flexibility for teachers and a wider choice of curriculum, which I think is good. It may not. Fundamentally though, pupils need more time to learn in a way that is about teaching you how to think, not just what to learn.

Comments on: Why is he doing this?

By: Dave Scott

By: Alex Kendall