Ditch lessons, schools are told
State secondary schools are being told to ditch lessons in academic subjects and replace them with month-long projects on themes such as global warming.
The pressure to scrap the traditional timetable in favour of cross-curricular topics is coming from the government’s teaching advisers, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA).
Ah!!!!!!
Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckingham University, said: “This will narrow what children learn. People come with up these ideas for the less academic but they wouldn’t dream of letting their own children be taught in this way.”
There is a ray of hope.
About 130 science teachers have signed the petition, which calls for the course to be scrapped because it requires pupils to discuss issues such as pollution but not to learn “hard science”, such as the periodic table in chemistry.
The petition reads: “Many anticipated it as ‘science fit only for the pub’. Now, at the end of its first year . . . science teachers (particularly physics teachers) are indeed judging it to be overly simplistic, devoid of any real physics and inadequate preparation for further study. This GCSE will remove Britain’s technological base within a decade.”
This excerpt from another article gives a good overview of the changes.
New science A-levels are being "dumbed down" to such an extent that some courses will demand no prior knowledge of the subject.
Draft syllabuses for chemistry and biology published by one exam board state that the first part of the qualification, the AS-level, can be tackled without the candidate having studied the subject before.
I had to do a little research since I'm not familiar with the school system in England. There are three "levels" of course work. GCSEs (General Certificate of Secondary Education), AS (Advanced Supplementary), and A (Advanced). I'm still a bit fuzzy on what it all means but I'm assuming that the A level classes are similar to our AP classes.
So, they are making the Advanced classes easy enough that anyone can take them. It will be interesting to see if the public responsed with an increase in homeschooling and private school enrollment.
------------------------------
Related Tags: GCSEs, A level science, Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, private school, homeschool
9 comments:
I do know that in the UK they decide at an fairly early age if you are college material based on a test you take. Based on your test score you either get to take courses that would prepare you for university or you get shuffled into easier courses and never get the chance to go to university.
That is very sad.
I read an article about the education system in the UK that said that the school you attended at age 11 determined which university and ultimately what career you could pursue.
In America, nobody cares where you went to school when you were a kid. Most don't even care which high school you attended. I have an aunt who to went to Harvard after attending her neighborhood public school.
Another nice thing here in the States is that you can change course at almost any point along the way.
America is still the land of opportunity.
"replace them with month-long projects on themes"
Isn't that just another way of saying they will be doing unit studies?
What's wrong with unit studies? My kids love them and learn the material easier when it is interelated. I have found that by using unit studies we (myself included)have been able to make interesting connections between "subjects". I have also found unit studies to be more compatible with "real life" than the sometimes artificial segregation of subjects.
I don't think the problem is unit studies, but that they have dumbed down the content.
The second article I linked to in the post had some good examples of the changes. For instances, they no longer studied the periodic table of elements
Just to clarify the system - please visit - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCSE
Attendance to University is based on a 'points' system - dependent on what grades one gets at 'A-Level'.
Both my husband and I attended our local state schools and attended one of England's 'red-brick' traditional Universities. I also know of plenty of others who got into Oxford and Cambridge on academic success, not on 'who you know or where you went to school'.
Re. the post on 'new science' I think that learning the core essentials, such as the periodic table, is vital, but I also think that month long projects give children a great opportunity for research and understanding the cross-disciplines of subjects and their affect in 'real terms' (global warming, pollution etc.).
When I did science at G.C.S.E. it was all the core essentials, but we did do project work in Geography and much of our science learning crossed into that subject.
Sarah Lee,
Thanks for your comment. It's nice to hear from someone who knows the UK system from personal experience.
A lot of the comments are 30-40 years out of date. Nowadays most schools are no longer selective and (in theory) all schools offer roughly the same qualifications until age 16.
Schooling in Britain is divided into Key Stages. The first actual Qualifications are GCSEs and their vocational alternatives taken in Key Stage 4 (ages 14-16) which are usually taken in a secondary school that covers ages 11-16. Key Stage 5 (ages 16-18) are where the qualifications for University entrance are taken. These are either taught in the "sixth form" of a secondary school or in college. The qualifications are called A-levels but are split into AS (taken at the half way point) and A2. The intention is that students will take more subjects at AS-level.
Janine,
Nice post!
In India, our education system is a colonial legacy and lots of what happens in the classroom found its way here from Britain. Ive also studied (at high school for a brief period) in London. I found the material, like in India, dead boring. Lots of theory, little application.
I agree that the 'project' system is a good idea- in this case maybe its just misdirected. I dont see why projects can't be tied in with a knowledge of the periodic table or any other 'hard science' stuff.
I would rather have schoolchildren learn what to do with the periodic table even if they cant memorise it, rather than have it at their fingertips but not be able to use it.
Warm regards,
Vivek
theredpencil.wordpress.com
Thanks for the input from people familiar with the UK system.
I'm not against projects, but I predict they will offer only politicized and sanitized topics, but will exclude anything that contradicts the party line or requires intensive study.
In essence, they will teach children what to think, but not how to think. Without a strong foundation of scientific discussion and hard sciences, children will not have enough information to analyze the strengths or weaknesses of any theory or principle.
Great new technologies aren't created by people who were taught what to think.
Post a Comment