ALL BRITISH FORUM MEMBERS....

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Just wondering if anyone saw any way that the countries key elitist institution, the private school system, could be irradicated anytime in the near future?

Clearly, this country cannot claim to have equal oppurtunities for children in education if this system continues to exist. I go to a state school and some pupils from private school transferred to my school to sit the sixth form because the private school didnt have one. I've seen first hand how well these kids do and they all admit that it's an unfair system and that the reason they do so well is because of the advantages they had over us all in their private school.

Can anyone really see it going though?

[deimos]

I've seen some documentations about this school system in the UK. Terrible. I think its the worst in the EU.(I know, PISA does proof it different, but in greece pupils have at least the same chances)

[Pete]

In Ontario each parents sending a kid to private school recieves 3 500 dollars per student for not enrolling them in the public system. Where does this money come from? The 2 bill Harris took out of the public system

Another curious thing in Canada is that Roman Catholic schools are publicly funded. It's bull shit. I can't see it changing unless the NDP and CPC come from nowhere and form a coalition government. Considering the CPC never ever got a seat there is no chance :(

[praxis1966]

I don't think the answer is eradicating the private school system. Here in America we had a similar problem until the monumental Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. It eliminated the "seperate but equal" doctrine formerly held as a tennant for supporting the segregation of our public school system along racial lines.

In Brown, Thurgood Marshall (attourney for Linda Brown and later to become the first African-American Supreme Court Justice) argued successfully that seperate but equal was un-Constitutional on the grounds that seperation of the white & black races was what led to inequality; differences in funding, quality of facilities and personelle, that sort of thing.

It sounds like you guys, taking Brown as a jumping off point, need to file suit in court. Maybe there's something in your constitution or other federal law that you can use as grounds. Some provision like our "equal protection" clause. Just a thought.

[chamo]

Interesting because I am from Northern Ireland, where the 11+ system is still in place, primary school children take an exam at the end of their primary education for a transfer grade. If they get good grades they go to a grammar school, if they do not get in then they go to the local secondary school. I have to tell you that I go to a grammar school in North Belfast, but do not hold it against me until you have more information. The grammar schools here are different from the private ones in England. They are still funded by the government, there is a fee of about £70 a year in my school. The school in no way considers itself higher up, or better if you will that any of the secondary schools, although the education is generally better, they still get the same amount of funding and do not disassociate themeselves from the surrounding area. Students from all social backgrounds can go to either type of school, richer kids will still have to go to comprehensives if they get poor marks, and poor kids will get into grammar schools if they get good marks, although there is the additional fee, but it is quite an insignificant amount.
So it is not really a matter of money here, it is more a matter of how well primary school children do in their transfer tests.
The current crisis is that the transfer test system is proposed to be abolished in this country, and it brought to the same comprehensive system in England. The problem is that the whole education system will go to shit and private schools like the ones in England will be made so that the truely rich kids get a better education.
So the problem is different here than England, but I do support the abolishion of private schools there, because it only allows the bourgeois to get a better education, but the terms are different in Northern Ireland. It is smarter rather than richer that go to the better schools, and by better here I mean better education not funds. It's really like a step-up system where smater students are taught faster and more and sit harder exams, there are three different difficulty levels for GCSE, Beginner, Intermediate and Higher, I am diong Higher for nearly everything, and I have no choice because my grades up to now have shown that I can do it. The not so smart pupils get easier exams so they can do as well as I might.


(Edited by happyguy at 6:54 pm on Mar. 7, 2003)

[socialist2000]

Interesting i go to a grammar school now, i used to go to a private school but can no longer afford it. I would have to disagree in a grammar school (stare run btw) the standard is higher than if you private education, from my experiance. So if you try hard in study you still can achive the best schools. However if your a lazy person then you dont deserve the higher standard of education, so if you are in a comprehensive and doing badly, its entirely your fault.

[socialist2000]

Happyguy i disagree in a grammar school you get the better education as there are more teachers per student.

Also in terms of university i disagree with the thing about universties being forced to take more people from poor backgrounds. It should not be based on Labour gov political correctness but mearly on the grades of the student.

[InnocentCivilian]

i know about 5 people who have come through private school and i don't think it has benefitted them at all. they aren't the brightest of people and they all have a very similar attitude (think they are better than everyone else). i know it might not represent a very large proportion of the outcome of private schools but if it does then i can see it as a waste of time.

[socialist2000]

we are above every one selse :) just kidding. No really you seem to know a bad selection of people. Most of my old friends are not like that at all.

[InnocentCivilian]

lol they aren't friends. i just know them

[chamo]

Quote: from socialist2000 on 6:05 pm on Mar. 7, 2003
Happyguy i disagree in a grammar school you get the better education as there are more teachers per student.

Also in terms of university i disagree with the thing about universties being forced to take more people from poor backgrounds. It should not be based on Labour gov political correctness but mearly on the grades of the student.


There are 40 teachers in my school for 1600 pupils. I don't know comprehensive figures. Although I do not agree with this system in theory, if the comprehensive system were to come in absolute my school would be gone.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

I wasn't aware that the tri-partite system still existed in N. Ireland. You mentioned a few things which may be better in your system, but that system too has it flaws. What about late developers? It's been proven that some pupils, especialy boys, develop at a later level. 11 is too early for that exam.

socialist2000 mentioned the decision of some Uni's to take a wide range of people based on background or whatever. Yes, you are right that this is wrong. Positive discrimination never ever works, just as in parliament where there have to be a certain number of females. How can you positivley discriminate in institutions so crucial as parliament and university, it is ridicuolous.

praxis mentioned the Brown case. Groundbreaking though it was, I think the answer here remains to abolish the private system. Making all children go through state education will make it equal. More schools will be needed, yes, and more funding. But hey, it's the governments choice....A motiveless war or educating the youth of it's country a lot better....

Allow them to take their pick.

[mentalbunny]

This looks like my field. For those of yoru who don't know I go to one of the most expensive schools in the UK BUT I have a scholarship which pays for 20% of my fees and my grnadfather left a lot of money for my education, because my family bvalue education very highly, hell if they didn't I probably wouldn't post on this site. I think it also helps that I come from a very intelligent family who don't share the same values as most of the country (eg money and stuff).

At the moment universities aren't great fans of the private (aka public) school system because the government, rightfully, wants to give pupils in state schools a better chance, but the rich twats don't like it, because their "investments" are going to waste (because that's what education in a "public" school is).

I'd write more but my computer is fucking up (bloody school charges 20k a year and we get shoddy computers!!!!!). I'll return tomorrow to fill you in on life here. Also, read my article in the last issue of International Leftist, it's not my best work but it gives some reasons for why I don't like the public system, no matter how shit the state system is right now.

[mentalbunny]

Ok, I'm hoping that my computer is behaving now.

The main difference I find with state schools and private institutions, is that in private places you don't need a PGCE to each, but you do in state schools. Also the fees mean that class sizes are smaller so discipline is better. I am in favour of government funded grammar school, that get the same funding as comprehensives, because this means it's up to the kid. It should also be possible to transfer if a kid shows promise later. I know it's tough on the ones that get landed in comprehensives but maybe the could focus on other stuff so students can develop other skills than just taking exams while at school.

You hear about the big fuss over Bristol uni recently? The Daily Mail is painting it as "anti-public school" but in fact it doesn't like being second to best to Oxbridge, it wants people who want to go to Bristol first and foremost. I hate all these people complaning that they got refused by Bristol when they got places at Cambridge. A place is a place, just appreciate it and stop whining. What really gets me is oxford turning down a lot of very intelligent people at my school. Ok, it's fee-paying, among the top 3 most expensive schools in the country apparently but that doesn't mean they get it easy. These people are multi-talented, determined and worth a place at Oxford, but Oxford's going for the grammar schools this year, and I have no idea why.

There is one postive thing about public schools, but it doesn't cover all pupils. A large proportion of us are here because our parents are making sacrifices and we know this, so we work hard. We have lots of opportunities, we know this and we try to use them, but public boarding schools are tough places, we have sport at least 3 times a week, a million things we have to do outside lessons and a huge workload because our teachers push us hard. That is why we do better at exams, we get loads of practice and do loads of preparation. if you don't work hard there's a chance you'll get chucked out, you'll get punishments anyway. I don't know exactly what it's like in state places if you don't do your work but it's tough here, I need at least 7 B's at GCSE to get into 6th form, and 7 A*s to justify my position as a scholar.

However public schools breed capis. The more intelligent people tend to lean to the left, or at least they are left of right, but there are loads of conservatives and even more apoliticals who are right leaning because they don't want change although they don't like the current system.

Obviously I don't have a general view, this is an expensive school, so you don't send rich dunces here when they'll just get chucked out. Those schools definitely aren't as good. This place isn't perfect, the physics and amths departments are pretty shit but it's in nice surroundings with a bloody good languages and english department. Loads of people don't like it because the rules are tough and the people are twats in general, but it could be worse and it's setting me up nicely for the rest of my life when I will be fighting against the people who I say "hi" to when I pass them on the way to lessons or sit next to them sometimes, you knwo those aquaintences who you don't really know and you don't discuss politics. They're nice and all but terribly conservative!

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Interesting.

But I'm not sure I getyour whole point...sum up?

[mentalbunny]

Ok, well sorry it was a bit rambling.

Essentially I want to get rid of public schools but it would be really ahrd. they do offer a lot, it's not impossible to get into one if you don't have much money, they're really generous if you're intelligent and you'll work hard, hell they even let GR in for a few years! (jokes!).

Anyway, the teaching is good, there are enough lefty teachers to offer a balanced view, and the rest of the system is in shit so we can't get rid of public schools until the grammars are sorted out. Not all public school pupils are stuck up twats, ok?!!!

[Conghaileach]

from happyguy:
The current crisis is that the transfer test system is proposed to be abolished in this country, and it brought to the same comprehensive system in England. The problem is that the whole education system will go to shit and private schools like the ones in England will be made so that the truely rich kids get a better education.

I'm in a grammar school in west Belfast. I support the scrapping of the 11+. In this exam, only one-third of those who do it will pass. That means that automatically two-thirds have failed. Those 10/11 year olds who fail are basically told that they're failures, and that they're not as good as those who pass. This sets off a dangerous spiral where these kids may not be motivated to do anything at school, considering they were called failures at such a young age.

Coursework exists in secondary and grammar schools because there are people who are very good students but who get stressed when it comes to tests and they can't perform. No such system exists for those leaving primary school. It's not fair that a two-test decides a person's educational future.

The 11+ should be scrapped, and it should be replaced by a better system.

[chamo]

Yes, I think the 11+ is basically an unfair system as it puts alot of pressure on kids who are too young to maybe realise how important it is for them to do well. I would like to see it go, but I fear for what would happen to my school, the Academy. Where are you at?

[Uhuru na Umoja]

I agree that there is generally a problem with the private versus state sector. However, I do know of many notable execptions to the rule that public schools are better than state schools. I met someone while interviewing at Cambridge who attended a comprehensive until 6th form, at which point he transferred to Marlborough (his father got a job in Switzerland and wanted his son to remain in England). He didn't feel that he was any better or wose prepared for sixth form than those who had always attended Marlborough. Similarly a friend of mine has always attended state schools and has not felt at all disadvantaged (I guess one wouldn't with 4 A's at AS level and an offer from Queen's College Cambridge).

I agree that in general public schools do provide a better education; however, there are some execellent schools in the state sector.

By the way, mentalbunny, which school do you attend? Just interested as I have a number of friends in public schools (though I live overseas).

[Uhuru na Umoja]

A bit of a postscript to what I just wrote. I completely agree with mentalbunny that many deserving people are turned down from Oxbridge. The guy (Nick) who I met while interviewing was by FAR the most intelligent person I met at Camrbridge and had an excellent academic record (11A*'s and 1 A at GCSE along with 4 A's at AS), yet he was turned down. I can only assume that being a Marlborough student was held against him.

[deimos]

I think the best school system is in the netherlands. The state pays for state schools and for private schools. Everyone can go to a private school and the differences aren't that big. Both types of pupils have the same chances.

[socialist2000]

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:25 pm on Mar. 7, 2003
Ok, I'm hoping that my computer is behaving now.

The main difference I find with state schools and private institutions, is that in private places you don't need a PGCE to each, but you do in state schools. Also the fees mean that class sizes are smaller so discipline is better. I am in favour of government funded grammar school, that get the same funding as comprehensives, because this means it's up to the kid. It should also be possible to transfer if a kid shows promise later. I know it's tough on the ones that get landed in comprehensives but maybe the could focus on other stuff so students can develop other skills than just taking exams while at school.

You hear about the big fuss over Bristol uni recently? The Daily Mail is painting it as "anti-public school" but in fact it doesn't like being second to best to Oxbridge, it wants people who want to go to Bristol first and foremost. I hate all these people complaning that they got refused by Bristol when they got places at Cambridge. A place is a place, just appreciate it and stop whining. What really gets me is oxford turning down a lot of very intelligent people at my school. Ok, it's fee-paying, among the top 3 most expensive schools in the country apparently but that doesn't mean they get it easy. These people are multi-talented, determined and worth a place at Oxford, but Oxford's going for the grammar schools this year, and I have no idea why.

There is one postive thing about public schools, but it doesn't cover all pupils. A large proportion of us are here because our parents are making sacrifices and we know this, so we work hard. We have lots of opportunities, we know this and we try to use them, but public boarding schools are tough places, we have sport at least 3 times a week, a million things we have to do outside lessons and a huge workload because our teachers push us hard. That is why we do better at exams, we get loads of practice and do loads of preparation. if you don't work hard there's a chance you'll get chucked out, you'll get punishments anyway. I don't know exactly what it's like in state places if you don't do your work but it's tough here, I need at least 7 B's at GCSE to get into 6th form, and 7 A*s to justify my position as a scholar.

However public schools breed capis. The more intelligent people tend to lean to the left, or at least they are left of right, but there are loads of conservatives and even more apoliticals who are right leaning because they don't want change although they don't like the current system.

Obviously I don't have a general view, this is an expensive school, so you don't send rich dunces here when they'll just get chucked out. Those schools definitely aren't as good. This place isn't perfect, the physics and amths departments are pretty shit but it's in nice surroundings with a bloody good languages and english department. Loads of people don't like it because the rules are tough and the people are twats in general, but it could be worse and it's setting me up nicely for the rest of my life when I will be fighting against the people who I say "hi" to when I pass them on the way to lessons or sit next to them sometimes, you knwo those aquaintences who you don't really know and you don't discuss politics. They're nice and all but terribly conservative!


I do not envy you because next year the AS's are expacted to collaps because of the lack of examiners ect. Shame it will also affect my year...

[mentalbunny]

I have a friend or two at Marlborough, I'm at King's Canterbury. i've also got a really good mate at canford. Which schools do your friends go to?

[Uhuru na Umoja]

I have a coule of friends who just finished upper sixth at Haileybury last year. Another who is in upper sixth at Marlborough this year.

[chamo]

Quote: from socialist2000 on 6:35 pm on Mar. 8, 2003

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:25 pm on Mar. 7, 2003
Ok, I'm hoping that my computer is behaving now.

The main difference I find with state schools and private institutions, is that in private places you don't need a PGCE to each, but you do in state schools. Also the fees mean that class sizes are smaller so discipline is better. I am in favour of government funded grammar school, that get the same funding as comprehensives, because this means it's up to the kid. It should also be possible to transfer if a kid shows promise later. I know it's tough on the ones that get landed in comprehensives but maybe the could focus on other stuff so students can develop other skills than just taking exams while at school.

You hear about the big fuss over Bristol uni recently? The Daily Mail is painting it as "anti-public school" but in fact it doesn't like being second to best to Oxbridge, it wants people who want to go to Bristol first and foremost. I hate all these people complaning that they got refused by Bristol when they got places at Cambridge. A place is a place, just appreciate it and stop whining. What really gets me is oxford turning down a lot of very intelligent people at my school. Ok, it's fee-paying, among the top 3 most expensive schools in the country apparently but that doesn't mean they get it easy. These people are multi-talented, determined and worth a place at Oxford, but Oxford's going for the grammar schools this year, and I have no idea why.

There is one postive thing about public schools, but it doesn't cover all pupils. A large proportion of us are here because our parents are making sacrifices and we know this, so we work hard. We have lots of opportunities, we know this and we try to use them, but public boarding schools are tough places, we have sport at least 3 times a week, a million things we have to do outside lessons and a huge workload because our teachers push us hard. That is why we do better at exams, we get loads of practice and do loads of preparation. if you don't work hard there's a chance you'll get chucked out, you'll get punishments anyway. I don't know exactly what it's like in state places if you don't do your work but it's tough here, I need at least 7 B's at GCSE to get into 6th form, and 7 A*s to justify my position as a scholar.

However public schools breed capis. The more intelligent people tend to lean to the left, or at least they are left of right, but there are loads of conservatives and even more apoliticals who are right leaning because they don't want change although they don't like the current system.

Obviously I don't have a general view, this is an expensive school, so you don't send rich dunces here when they'll just get chucked out. Those schools definitely aren't as good. This place isn't perfect, the physics and amths departments are pretty shit but it's in nice surroundings with a bloody good languages and english department. Loads of people don't like it because the rules are tough and the people are twats in general, but it could be worse and it's setting me up nicely for the rest of my life when I will be fighting against the people who I say "hi" to when I pass them on the way to lessons or sit next to them sometimes, you knwo those aquaintences who you don't really know and you don't discuss politics. They're nice and all but terribly conservative!


I do not envy you because next year the AS's are expacted to collaps because of the lack of examiners ect. Shame it will also affect my year...


Will that affect me? I'm doing GCSEs in May.

I've made my choices for AS: History, Politics, Economics and Physics/English Literature.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Quote: from happyguy on 7:50 pm on Mar. 11, 2003

Will that affect me? I'm doing GCSEs in May.

I've made my choices for AS: History, Politics, Economics and Physics/English Literature.

Fraid not my friend. You're gonna have to go through the same system as I am just about to finish. Be prepared for massive strain and an overhaul of pathetic exams.

[Moskitto]

Also in terms of university i disagree with the thing about universties being forced to take more people from poor backgrounds. It should not be based on Labour gov political correctness but mearly on the grades of the student.

they do that because it's seen as the "equal oppertunities" thing to do, but in reality, basing it all on grades is the most equal opertunities thing to do.

I think students who clearly don't want to work should get chucked out of school and put into jobs in factories to allow those who do want to learn to learn much more effectively.

[Uhuru na Umoja]

But don't you think that if all other things are completely equal (academic record, inteview, etc.) - which is very rarely the case - students from less privledged backgrounds should be favoured. I think universities should choosed the most able students, and where it is unclear who is stronger academically the benefit of the doubt should go to those from state schools. If after years of public school education a student is no better than his/her counterpart from a state school then it does generally indicate that he/she had not achieved as much (as a student from most - though not all - state schools has would have had to overcome many more obstacles just to receive equivalent results).

[Saint-Just]

Quote: from Uhuru na Umoja on 3:25 pm on Mar. 12, 2003
But don't you think that if all other things are completely equal (academic record, inteview, etc.) - which is very rarely the case - students from less privledged backgrounds should be favoured. I think universities should choosed the most able students, and where it is unclear who is stronger academically the benefit of the doubt should go to those from state schools. If after years of public school education a student is no better than his/her counterpart from a state school then it does generally indicate that he/she had not achieved as much (as a student from most - though not all - state schools has would have had to overcome many more obstacles just to receive equivalent results).

This is generally the case, Uhuro na Umoja. And soon it may become precisely the case, with new selection committees for university.

State school students are often given preference above private as they often have targets to meet and so forth. In our neo-liberal new Labour system I do not care whether they want to favour state school students or not.... since private schools should not exist in any sense.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from happyguy on 7:50 pm on Mar. 11, 2003

Quote: from socialist2000 on 6:35 pm on Mar. 8, 2003

Quote: from mentalbunny on 10:25 pm on Mar. 7, 2003
Ok, I'm hoping that my computer is behaving now.

The main difference I find with state schools and private institutions, is that in private places you don't need a PGCE to each, but you do in state schools. Also the fees mean that class sizes are smaller so discipline is better. I am in favour of government funded grammar school, that get the same funding as comprehensives, because this means it's up to the kid. It should also be possible to transfer if a kid shows promise later. I know it's tough on the ones that get landed in comprehensives but maybe the could focus on other stuff so students can develop other skills than just taking exams while at school.

You hear about the big fuss over Bristol uni recently? The Daily Mail is painting it as "anti-public school" but in fact it doesn't like being second to best to Oxbridge, it wants people who want to go to Bristol first and foremost. I hate all these people complaning that they got refused by Bristol when they got places at Cambridge. A place is a place, just appreciate it and stop whining. What really gets me is oxford turning down a lot of very intelligent people at my school. Ok, it's fee-paying, among the top 3 most expensive schools in the country apparently but that doesn't mean they get it easy. These people are multi-talented, determined and worth a place at Oxford, but Oxford's going for the grammar schools this year, and I have no idea why.

There is one postive thing about public schools, but it doesn't cover all pupils. A large proportion of us are here because our parents are making sacrifices and we know this, so we work hard. We have lots of opportunities, we know this and we try to use them, but public boarding schools are tough places, we have sport at least 3 times a week, a million things we have to do outside lessons and a huge workload because our teachers push us hard. That is why we do better at exams, we get loads of practice and do loads of preparation. if you don't work hard there's a chance you'll get chucked out, you'll get punishments anyway. I don't know exactly what it's like in state places if you don't do your work but it's tough here, I need at least 7 B's at GCSE to get into 6th form, and 7 A*s to justify my position as a scholar.

However public schools breed capis. The more intelligent people tend to lean to the left, or at least they are left of right, but there are loads of conservatives and even more apoliticals who are right leaning because they don't want change although they don't like the current system.

Obviously I don't have a general view, this is an expensive school, so you don't send rich dunces here when they'll just get chucked out. Those schools definitely aren't as good. This place isn't perfect, the physics and amths departments are pretty shit but it's in nice surroundings with a bloody good languages and english department. Loads of people don't like it because the rules are tough and the people are twats in general, but it could be worse and it's setting me up nicely for the rest of my life when I will be fighting against the people who I say "hi" to when I pass them on the way to lessons or sit next to them sometimes, you knwo those aquaintences who you don't really know and you don't discuss politics. They're nice and all but terribly conservative!


I do not envy you because next year the AS's are expacted to collaps because of the lack of examiners ect. Shame it will also affect my year...


Will that affect me? I'm doing GCSEs in May.

I've made my choices for AS: History, Politics, Economics and Physics/English Literature.


I am about to do my AS's and apparently your year will be the worst. Because my year is going to be such a disaster that all the examiners are expected to leave and there wont be enough so less examiners more students. Not good.

I do geography, history, computing and GStudies.

History is a great subject at AS good choise, its really interesting if you do Peel and the chartists.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Quote: from AK47 on 6:25 pm on Mar. 12, 2003history, computing and GStudies.

History is a great subject at AS good choise, its really interesting if you do Peel and the chartists.

Im sitting my A2's in May. We've been told to prepare for the worst in terms of the marking fiasco. We've been told that we could be on the receiving end of it. I hope for yours and everyone else's sake that this is sorted out in time for next year

[Reuben]

Quote- from Moskitto they do that because it's seen as the "equal oppertunities" thing to do, but in reality, basing it all on grades is the most equal opertunities thing to do.

I think students who clearly don't want to work should get chucked out of school and put into jobs in factories to allow those who do want to learn to learn much more effectively.

This is just one example of the ignornt statements that are littering this thread. The fact is that universites have a responsibility not only to look at exam grades, but also need to use those exam grades to make as accurate as possible an assessment of the student in front of them. When interpretting these grades they should of course factor in the type of education the individual has recieved. Generally achieving 3 Bs at an inner-city comprehensive will be indicative of greater ability than achieving similar grades on the back of a priveleged education in a private school with small classes. It is not a matter of punishing students who go to prvate schools, it is simply a mater of taking into account their educational experiences when evaluating their grades it what their grades suggest about their abilities. Moskitto/socialist200s suggestions would no bring about equality of educational opportunity. Instead it would result in students being expected to achieve the grades through hugely unequal means.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Anyone feel they were done over by the markers again after results published today?

Mine seemed fine.

[mentalbunny]

The press exxagerates all the marking problems, sure there are going to be problems but there are very few casualties in the long term.

My result for my Maths S1 module came out today, a nice fat A! Althouhg i'm not doing maths next year, haven't even taken all my GCSE's yet, only french. That's the thing with private schools like mine, they push you really hard and you have to sit a tonne of exams.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Yeh. My results didn't seem to be faulty. A in my remaining AS module for History. A in my first A2 Sociology module. 2 A's and a B in my 3 Media Studies AS modules.

Roll on A2 History!! Poor Law To Welfare State...WOOHOO!!

[Conghaileach]

At AS I got an A in Irish, an A in Computers, a B in Psychology, and a C in Physics.

So I decided to repeat a module in Psychology and a module in Physics. I got my results yesterday and got three marks more in the Psychology, and two marks more in the Physics module. No change in the overall grade whatsoever. It pissed me off.

[socialist2000]

Quote: from Reuben on 7:16 pm on Mar. 13, 2003

Quote- from Moskitto they do that because it's seen as the "equal oppertunities" thing to do, but in reality, basing it all on grades is the most equal opertunities thing to do.

I think students who clearly don't want to work should get chucked out of school and put into jobs in factories to allow those who do want to learn to learn much more effectively.

This is just one example of the ignornt statements that are littering this thread. The fact is that universites have a responsibility not only to look at exam grades, but also need to use those exam grades to make as accurate as possible an assessment of the student in front of them. When interpretting these grades they should of course factor in the type of education the individual has recieved. Generally achieving 3 Bs at an inner-city comprehensive will be indicative of greater ability than achieving similar grades on the back of a priveleged education in a private school with small classes. It is not a matter of punishing students who go to prvate schools, it is simply a mater of taking into account their educational experiences when evaluating their grades it what their grades suggest about their abilities. Moskitto/socialist200s suggestions would no bring about equality of educational opportunity. Instead it would result in students being expected to achieve the grades through hugely unequal means.

[socialist2000]

Quote: from Reuben on 7:16 pm on Mar. 13, 2003

Quote- from Moskitto they do that because it's seen as the "equal oppertunities" thing to do, but in reality, basing it all on grades is the most equal opertunities thing to do.

I think students who clearly don't want to work should get chucked out of school and put into jobs in factories to allow those who do want to learn to learn much more effectively.

This is just one example of the ignornt statements that are littering this thread. The fact is that universites have a responsibility not only to look at exam grades, but also need to use those exam grades to make as accurate as possible an assessment of the student in front of them. When interpretting these grades they should of course factor in the type of education the individual has recieved. Generally achieving 3 Bs at an inner-city comprehensive will be indicative of greater ability than achieving similar grades on the back of a priveleged education in a private school with small classes. It is not a matter of punishing students who go to prvate schools, it is simply a mater of taking into account their educational experiences when evaluating their grades it what their grades suggest about their abilities. Moskitto/socialist200s suggestions would no bring about equality of educational opportunity. Instead it would result in students being expected to achieve the grades through hugely unequal means.



And in your extensive experiance in both the Private, comprehensive and Grammar schools led you to this conclusion did it. I doubt you have even been to a private school so how would you have any idea of the conditions of learning, exactly? Or is this another ignorent comment littering this board.

[Pete]

This system is disgusting. Barring children from a certain level of educatoin because of one standardized test that is designed to fail 2/3rds of the applicants. If that does not reinforce a class structure I do not know what does. I'll bet the well to do kids almost always pass the exam, wehre the poorer kids do alot worse. Where I am from in Grade 9 (14 yeraolds) the students pick Academic (for university) or Applied (for college, job, apprenticeships) for their Grade 10 courses, and chose their own path. They do the same for grade 9, but the difference is minimal until grade 10. Although the more well-to-do kids pick the higher levels, and the poorer kids pick the lower levels you pick your own path, nobody except your parents can change the level of enrollment you are in. It is a bit more fair, but we still have 2 levels recieving total funding, Public and Catholic (in my opinion the religion school should go to hell and have all of its funding taken away...but this was the land of the Jesuits about 500 years ago) and Private schools where parents are given 3500 tax-rebate per kid they enroll in the private system. I am in Ontario. My year is graduateing with both Grade 12 (17-18 year olds) and OAc (formerly Grade 13 with 18-19 year olds) because the Conservatives pulled 2bill out and one grade. Yahoo for quality of education.

As I said it is sad that standardized tests are used as a measure of where you go, especially at such a young age.

[Reuben]

Quote: from socialist2000 on 6:18 pm on Mar. 14, 2003

Quote: from Reuben on 7:16 pm on Mar. 13, 2003

Quote- from Moskitto they do that because it's seen as the "equal oppertunities" thing to do, but in reality, basing it all on grades is the most equal opertunities thing to do.

I think students who clearly don't want to work should get chucked out of school and put into jobs in factories to allow those who do want to learn to learn much more effectively.

This is just one example of the ignornt statements that are littering this thread. The fact is that universites have a responsibility not only to look at exam grades, but also need to use those exam grades to make as accurate as possible an assessment of the student in front of them. When interpretting these grades they should of course factor in the type of education the individual has recieved. Generally achieving 3 Bs at an inner-city comprehensive will be indicative of greater ability than achieving similar grades on the back of a priveleged education in a private school with small classes. It is not a matter of punishing students who go to prvate schools, it is simply a mater of taking into account their educational experiences when evaluating their grades it what their grades suggest about their abilities. Moskitto/socialist200s suggestions would no bring about equality of educational opportunity. Instead it would result in students being expected to achieve the grades through hugely unequal means.



And in your extensive experiance in both the Private, comprehensive and Grammar schools led you to this conclusion did it. I doubt you have even been to a private school so how would you have any idea of the conditions of learning, exactly? Or is this another ignorent comment littering this board.


Your the ignorant tosser. I havent had personal experiene ut i do not believe that personal experience is the be aall and end all of analysing a situation. In fact quantitative evidence, such as that which supports my argument is probably more significant than the subjective experience of one individual such as yourself.

A study by Wawrick university found that students achieving a given set of grades from a comprehensive school had a greater chance of recieving a 1st class degree than those who had achieved similar grades on the back of a private school education, suggesting that achieving high grades from a comprehensive school is indicative of greater ability.

While i have not personally experienced private/grammar schools (although i achieved sufficient grades to study at the 6th form of Latima) i do know is that thre are a number of generally universal facts about private school education one being smaller class sizes. Furthermore, unlike comprehensive schools as the one i go to, private schools have the luxury of picking and choosing the students they take in through selection. The school i attended from 11 - 16 had to take responsibility for all sections of the community, often to the detiment of the education of myself and others. It is for this reason that achievving high grades in a comprehensive tends to indicate a greater ability than achieving those grades in a private school.


The fact that your parents were able to pay for you to spend a few years in a private school does not give you a monopoly on this debate. I havent experience being taught in a class of under 20 prior to sixth form, i am however sentient enough to understand parents do not pay thousands every year for no reason.

Furthermore, if you wish to attack the right wing blairite government for being too 'politically correct' ( a term publicised by the right wing press to attack legitimate movement towards equality) on account of the fact they are doing something to help those n a low income whose failure by the edcucation system has been demonstrated, i wonder why you are still on che-lives, a socialist egalitarian website.

[mentalbunny]

Well said Reuben. most people at my school don't understand that only 7% of the school going population is in the private sector, and therefore they get all shirty about public school students being refused by universities. I'm lucky because I'm intelligent and therefore more likely to be accepted byu a university, even if it isn't my first choice of Oxford, and quite frankly a place on a coure I want to study is a place I'm happy to take, whether it's at Oxford or somewhere else because I'm sure there's a good reason for me being refused. However, if you're in the private sector you're not generally used to thinking like this because things have mostly been handed to you on a plate (this is of course a generalisation, but it's true that we have more pressure to do well so in a way it's easier to get good grades).

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

Why would you wna to go to Oxford anyway?

My school asked me to apply for Oxford solely to make them look good. Oxford offered me unconditional place btu I rejected it and chose Cardiff.

Don't go to those elitist institutions. The institutionalised prejudices are disgusting

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 11:02 pm on Mar. 15, 2003
Why would you wna to go to Oxford anyway?

My school asked me to apply for Oxford solely to make them look good. Oxford offered me unconditional place btu I rejected it and chose Cardiff.

Don't go to those elitist institutions. The institutionalised prejudices are disgusting

Me and moskitto may go there.

[mentalbunny]

Oxford's not as bad as you may think. My brother went there, it's only elitist in that you have to be intelligent and as long as you don't look down at other people then it's all good. We have to accept that different people are good at different things and thrive in different atmospheres. I expect the university to know whether it would work out well if I went there and if i get turned down then obviously it's not the place for me and it's not a problem, but I would like to go there because I reckon it could work out well and I like the place.

[Socialsmo o Muerte]

A friend of mine is there and we did something about it in Sociology. You may get a good education and good prospects from there, but it breeds prejudice and inequality. Sod that!

Good luck to you both though!

[Uhuru na Umoja]

It all depends on what you want to study and which colleges you apply for. My passion is Anglo-Saxon History and Literature. Cambridge is simply the best university in the world for it, so of course I accepted their conditional offer.

I think those people who are willing to study any subject just to go to Oxbridge are VERY sad. However, if the university has a good course in what you want to study it makes sense.

I'm sure the prejudice is an issue; however, that varies greatly from college to college. I intentionally chose a large college with a high proportion of overseas and state school students. If you apply for some tiny college filled with public school boys, then of course you will encouter that.

(Edited by Uhuru na Umoja at 1:27 pm on Mar. 17, 2003)