The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
...but GCSE maths has higher and lower tier exam papers for pupils of different abilities, so that (in theory) the GCSE can cater for all students. Right?
So provided the papers are set to the right difficulty, there should be no problems for anyone.
But today it seems the maths GCSE 'demoralises thick kids and doesn't stretch the top 10%'.
So Blair wants to have 2 maths GCSEs - a standard level and a higher level. So that it covers all abilities.
With one GCSE that has 2 tiers of exam papers, you can achieve the same results. If it's not working, you have to redress the nature of the 2 papers - here it's making the lower one easier for those thick kids and including harder stuff for that lucky 10%.
No need for 2 GCSEs. All that does is make it hard to know whether someone getting a high mark on the easy GCSE is smarter or dumber than someone getting a low mark on the hard GCSE. Which does an injustice to all the middle of the road students.
Therefore the proposal for 2 maths GCSEs is nothing more than a hollow labour PR stunt with more spin than Blair could muster on my middle finger.
Fast forward to A-level: Uni tuition fee discounts for people who do maths a-level.
So we're encouraging people to sudy what may not be one of the better subjects, to sacrifice UCAS points and the quality of their uni education, in order to try to escape from oppessive levels of student debt.
We saw that poorer student would be more likely to choose cheaper lower-quality degrees at lame universities because they would charge lower fees.
Now their chances of earning the grades to make it to a good uni are sabotaged too. If you're thinking Oxbridge, giving up an A in some subject for a B/C in maths will probably kill any chance you had of being offered a place.
By the sounds of things there are problems with maths a-levels. But this seems like a *really* bad solution.
So provided the papers are set to the right difficulty, there should be no problems for anyone.
But today it seems the maths GCSE 'demoralises thick kids and doesn't stretch the top 10%'.
So Blair wants to have 2 maths GCSEs - a standard level and a higher level. So that it covers all abilities.
With one GCSE that has 2 tiers of exam papers, you can achieve the same results. If it's not working, you have to redress the nature of the 2 papers - here it's making the lower one easier for those thick kids and including harder stuff for that lucky 10%.
No need for 2 GCSEs. All that does is make it hard to know whether someone getting a high mark on the easy GCSE is smarter or dumber than someone getting a low mark on the hard GCSE. Which does an injustice to all the middle of the road students.
Therefore the proposal for 2 maths GCSEs is nothing more than a hollow labour PR stunt with more spin than Blair could muster on my middle finger.
Fast forward to A-level: Uni tuition fee discounts for people who do maths a-level.
So we're encouraging people to sudy what may not be one of the better subjects, to sacrifice UCAS points and the quality of their uni education, in order to try to escape from oppessive levels of student debt.
We saw that poorer student would be more likely to choose cheaper lower-quality degrees at lame universities because they would charge lower fees.
Now their chances of earning the grades to make it to a good uni are sabotaged too. If you're thinking Oxbridge, giving up an A in some subject for a B/C in maths will probably kill any chance you had of being offered a place.
By the sounds of things there are problems with maths a-levels. But this seems like a *really* bad solution.
Page:
I heard that Oxbridge no longer offer three year courses because the quality of students entering university has dropped and they spend an extra year bringing first year undergraduates up to speed.
I think the key is probably the lack of quality teachers. Right now the government are offering very hefty incentives to do PGCEs and become teachers in all subjects, but especially in maths and sciences. It still doesn't seem to be enough though and you've got to think that if extra teachers are being created through these incentives, rather than actually wanting to teach will these new teachers be of a particularly high standard or not. I put the lack of teachers down to many kids basically being little sh!ts.
I think the key is probably the lack of quality teachers. Right now the government are offering very hefty incentives to do PGCEs and become teachers in all subjects, but especially in maths and sciences. It still doesn't seem to be enough though and you've got to think that if extra teachers are being created through these incentives, rather than actually wanting to teach will these new teachers be of a particularly high standard or not. I put the lack of teachers down to many kids basically being little sh!ts.
...but GCSE maths has higher and lower tier exam papers for pupils of different abilities, so that (in theory) the GCSE can cater for all students. Right?
So provided the papers are set to the right difficulty, there should be no problems for anyone.
But today it seems the maths GCSE 'demoralises thick kids and doesn't stretch the top 10%'.
So Blair wants to have 2 maths GCSEs - a standard level and a higher level. So that it covers all abilities.
With one GCSE that has 2 tiers of exam papers, you can achieve the same results. If it's not working, you have to redress the nature of the 2 papers - here it's making the lower one easier for those thick kids and including harder stuff for that lucky 10%.
No need for 2 GCSEs. All that does is make it hard to know whether someone getting a high mark on the easy GCSE is smarter or dumber than someone getting a low mark on the hard GCSE. Which does an injustice to all the middle of the road students.
Therefore the proposal for 2 maths GCSEs is nothing more than a hollow labour PR stunt with more spin than Blair could muster on my middle finger.
Fast forward to A-level: Uni tuition fee discounts for people who do maths a-level.
So we're encouraging people to sudy what may not be one of the better subjects, to sacrifice UCAS points and the quality of their uni education, in order to try to escape from oppessive levels of student debt.
We saw that poorer student would be more likely to choose cheaper lower-quality degrees at lame universities because they would charge lower fees.
Now their chances of earning the grades to make it to a good uni are sabotaged too. If you're thinking Oxbridge, giving up an A in some subject for a B/C in maths will probably kill any chance you had of being offered a place.
By the sounds of things there are problems with maths a-levels. But this seems like a *really* bad solution.
So provided the papers are set to the right difficulty, there should be no problems for anyone.
But today it seems the maths GCSE 'demoralises thick kids and doesn't stretch the top 10%'.
So Blair wants to have 2 maths GCSEs - a standard level and a higher level. So that it covers all abilities.
With one GCSE that has 2 tiers of exam papers, you can achieve the same results. If it's not working, you have to redress the nature of the 2 papers - here it's making the lower one easier for those thick kids and including harder stuff for that lucky 10%.
No need for 2 GCSEs. All that does is make it hard to know whether someone getting a high mark on the easy GCSE is smarter or dumber than someone getting a low mark on the hard GCSE. Which does an injustice to all the middle of the road students.
Therefore the proposal for 2 maths GCSEs is nothing more than a hollow labour PR stunt with more spin than Blair could muster on my middle finger.
Fast forward to A-level: Uni tuition fee discounts for people who do maths a-level.
So we're encouraging people to sudy what may not be one of the better subjects, to sacrifice UCAS points and the quality of their uni education, in order to try to escape from oppessive levels of student debt.
We saw that poorer student would be more likely to choose cheaper lower-quality degrees at lame universities because they would charge lower fees.
Now their chances of earning the grades to make it to a good uni are sabotaged too. If you're thinking Oxbridge, giving up an A in some subject for a B/C in maths will probably kill any chance you had of being offered a place.
By the sounds of things there are problems with maths a-levels. But this seems like a *really* bad solution.
Page: