| Submit your comments on this article |
| Britain |
| UK govt dept: Islamic schools are threat to national identity |
| 2005-01-18 |
| Posted by:Howard UK |
| #4 Substantial comment on the calibre of British schools in today's Wall Street Journal. Here's the whole thing, because its only available to subscribers. Apples and Candyfloss School league tables were introduced to the U.K. in 1992 to offer an easy comparison between schools. But the latest tables, released last week, make the task more complicated if anything. That is unless you're a parent who believes vocational courses such as hairdressing and bakery can be compared with -- and indeed be worth more than -- academic subjects such as English and math. The government's examination watchdog, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, used a complex new system this year to compare results -- valuing some vocational courses higher than academic ones. For example, the top mark, an A*, in the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) -- a national test taken at age 16 -- in an academic subject is worth 58 points to a school, and an A, 52 points. Compare this to a D grade in a vocational GCSE -- such as health and beauty -- worth 68 points, and a Level 2 certificate in cake decoration, which earns 55 points. The Independent Schools Council, representing 1,300 private schools, described the new system as "absurd." "This is not even a case of trying to compare apples and pears: it is comparing apples with candy-floss." Quite. This isn't to denigrate vocational courses. Such comparisons are of little use to parents whether they are searching for a school with the best academic or best vocational degrees for their children. Pretending the new system is actually useful to anyone except a government minister trying to meet performance targets seems a stretch. In response to criticisms like these, the government accused critics of "old-fashioned educational snobbery" and argued the new system benefits pupils who would otherwise leave with no vocational skills by encouraging schools to offer more vocational courses. Even if it were to do that, more dangerously it also offers an incentive for schools wanting to improve their league performance to strongly encourage pupils to switch into vocational degrees from academic ones. Stretching even further, government officials trumpeted the "increase in standards" the results showed. The figures did reveal an increase of eight-tenths of a percentage point, to 53.7%, in pupils gaining 5 or more A*-C GCSE grades or equivalent. The government highlighted that the inclusion of vocational degrees only amounted to 0.1 percentage points of the increase -- but this is only year one, schools are just discovering how to play the system. What the government failed to mention, however, is that this was well below their target of a two-percentage-point gain, and that the number of pupils who passed actually fell by 0.2 percentage points. The real news was that despite the huge increase in spending of taxpayers' money on education over the last year -- £4.6billion ($8.7 billion) -- standards are barely rising, if not falling. The irony of the league tables is that even if parents were to make sense of it, they could do nothing with their findings. Unlike countries such as Sweden where parents can choose which government funded school their child attends -- and so schools compete for pupils resulting in higher standards -- in the U.K. only those children with parents willing and able to pay for a private education have a choice. All other children must attend a local school. State schools in Britain only compete for more government funding -- and increases in standards occur largely through government manipulation of figures. Perhaps this is why the government has complicated the league table system. A clear table would only serve as a cruel reminder for parents of the education their children could be getting if school choice was introduced. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-01-18 12:23:54 PM |
| #3 Substantial comment on the calibre of British schools in today's Wall Street Journal. Here's the whole thing, because its only available to subscribers. Apples and Candyfloss School league tables were introduced to the U.K. in 1992 to offer an easy comparison between schools. But the latest tables, released last week, make the task more complicated if anything. That is unless you're a parent who believes vocational courses such as hairdressing and bakery can be compared with -- and indeed be worth more than -- academic subjects such as English and math. The government's examination watchdog, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, used a complex new system this year to compare results -- valuing some vocational courses higher than academic ones. For example, the top mark, an A*, in the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) -- a national test taken at age 16 -- in an academic subject is worth 58 points to a school, and an A, 52 points. Compare this to a D grade in a vocational GCSE -- such as health and beauty -- worth 68 points, and a Level 2 certificate in cake decoration, which earns 55 points. The Independent Schools Council, representing 1,300 private schools, described the new system as "absurd." "This is not even a case of trying to compare apples and pears: it is comparing apples with candy-floss." Quite. This isn't to denigrate vocational courses. Such comparisons are of little use to parents whether they are searching for a school with the best academic or best vocational degrees for their children. Pretending the new system is actually useful to anyone except a government minister trying to meet performance targets seems a stretch. In response to criticisms like these, the government accused critics of "old-fashioned educational snobbery" and argued the new system benefits pupils who would otherwise leave with no vocational skills by encouraging schools to offer more vocational courses. Even if it were to do that, more dangerously it also offers an incentive for schools wanting to improve their league performance to strongly encourage pupils to switch into vocational degrees from academic ones. Stretching even further, government officials trumpeted the "increase in standards" the results showed. The figures did reveal an increase of eight-tenths of a percentage point, to 53.7%, in pupils gaining 5 or more A*-C GCSE grades or equivalent. The government highlighted that the inclusion of vocational degrees only amounted to 0.1 percentage points of the increase -- but this is only year one, schools are just discovering how to play the system. What the government failed to mention, however, is that this was well below their target of a two-percentage-point gain, and that the number of pupils who passed actually fell by 0.2 percentage points. The real news was that despite the huge increase in spending of taxpayers' money on education over the last year -- £4.6billion ($8.7 billion) -- standards are barely rising, if not falling. The irony of the league tables is that even if parents were to make sense of it, they could do nothing with their findings. Unlike countries such as Sweden where parents can choose which government funded school their child attends -- and so schools compete for pupils resulting in higher standards -- in the U.K. only those children with parents willing and able to pay for a private education have a choice. All other children must attend a local school. State schools in Britain only compete for more government funding -- and increases in standards occur largely through government manipulation of figures. Perhaps this is why the government has complicated the league table system. A clear table would only serve as a cruel reminder for parents of the education their children could be getting if school choice was introduced. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-01-18 12:23:54 PM |
| #2 What took them so long to arrive at a simple conclusion? How many times can the Brits police foil the boomers? Are they waiting for that superfluous yet deadly development as a catalyst? The ostrich's head is still half stuck in the hole. |
| Posted by: Wo 2005-01-18 9:29:37 PM |
| #1 Substitute Security for Identity and we have a Winner! This will be interesting to follow. Will Bell be forced to retract? Will the UK education system lower its standards so far that Fundo Madrassahs will be accredited? Tired of importing your jihadis and ready for home-grown, are you? This will go nicely with your Islamic Banks and a dole system looted by HookBoys. Will Shari'a be far behind? This really is a big deal, IMHO, a pivot point of history in the UK. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-01-18 8:15:48 AM |