A level results

Originally Posted by Jayneflakes

Coincidentally, I noticed a young lady offering O and A levels on a business card in a telephone box, when I visited London last. I was shocked that teachers have to advertise in such a way in the capital...

So you rang her then

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

Science students get paid pitiful salaries with little prospects only to be 'managed' by halfwits with media studies degrees on double their salaries.

See, this is a typical response from someone with a science/maths/engineering background. Can't see the wood from the trees (which is somewhat ironic given their increased intelligence based on having completed a 'proper' degree)

Originally Posted by lukemillar

See, this is a typical response from someone with a science/maths/engineering background. Can't see the wood from the trees (which is somewhat ironic given their increased intelligence based on having completed a 'proper' degree)

Very stereotypical. But why can't i see the wood, so to speak?

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

Very stereotypical. But why can't i see the wood, so to speak?

One common misconception of degree's (in my opinion ) is that their purpose is to get you a job. This is incorrect. Yes, is is a common progression from finishing a degree is into work (though many move on to Masters, pHD etc), but the actual purpose is to further your knowledge and understanding in that subject/field. So from that point of view, no degree is 'worthless'.

Since you are viewing a degree as your ticket into the working world, (and by using 'yoghurt weaving' degree rational), then the smart money would surely be on taking a halfwitt media studies degree and getting a job being paid twice as much to manage those losers who spent their 3/4 years studying science!

Originally Posted by lukemillar

...but the actual purpose is to further your knowledge and understanding in that subject/field. So from that point of view, no degree is 'worthless'.

Although it could be argued that some degrees don't even do that.

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

Although it could be argued that some degrees don't even do that.

But is that the fault of the degree or the attitude of the student doing it? I'm pretty sure universities are happy to lower entry standards to get bums on seats as it were (except maybe the more elite places) as there is a financial incentive to keep the numbers up. If someone decides to spend their 3 years p!ssing it up against the wall, then it's not really the degree that failed them (unless you count letting them on the course in the first place)

I have no idea. As far as I'm concerned, anyone that leaves school with any grade A level have done a damn site better than I ever did.

I left with no qualifications worthy of a mention.

I do think the populous is getting more clever though. The divide between the clever and the thick (me) is getting bigger also. It seems you either excel at school or you don't do well at all. The middle ground seems to be vanishing.

I remember when at school I was in a class that was split between CSE and O level. The teacher was primarily an O level teacher. He just didn't have the patience or the will to bother with us CSE members of the class. As a consequence the whole class did pitiful come exams time. How well pupils/students do at school can be massively influenced by the person teaching. Maybe we now have a better standard of A level teachers?

Call me old fashioned, but I think you should have linear (rather than modular) exams, stick all the results in order from highest to lowest, top 8% get As, next 12% get Bs and so on. This way there is no scope for accusations of easier/harder exams and questions than other years and the grade is a fairly true indication of the best students. Regardless of the exam's difficulty, you know that if they got an 'A' they are one of the best. Even if the exam is ludicrously hard and the top students only get 70%, this system still works. So long as it's not so simple that more than the top '8%' don't get 100% it's fool proof.

My other bugbear is coursework. Makes sense in subject like art or DT where you can't spend 30 hours on something in an exam, but for English/Maths it has no place IMO. Coursework is also supposed to be a contributory factor to girls doing better than boys (girls are better at working at a consistent low level all year round, boys are better at a last minute full on cram). If universities whose lecturers are supposed to be the best specialists in this one field and abrest of publications aren't able to spot plaigarism (which they aren't in many cases) there is no chance schools and the associated exam boards will spot most of it. The number of kids who cheated at coursework in school was ludicrous and with no requirement of a Viva, they don't even need to be able to understand the work their elder brother has done for them.

My nephew got his reults yesterday. He got 3 Bs. He feels that he failed because he didn't get As - he thinks that people will consider Bs as second class and so is thinking of doing resits.

Have we really got to this level...

Originally Posted by Ed

My nephew got his reults yesterday. He got 3 Bs. He feels that he failed because he didn't get As - he thinks that people will consider Bs as second class and so is thinking of doing resits.

Have we really got to this level...

A lot of my mates seem to think this. It's an A or nothing in their minds.

Alex