Jump to content


Photo

Why I'm changing from AQA to OCR


  • Please log in to reply
132 replies to this topic

#106 johnwayne

johnwayne

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

Posted 26 September 2010 - 05:37 PM

Thanks Roy - Ihave PMd you

#107 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 26 September 2010 - 08:48 PM

Cheers John,

I've developed content for international relations 1918 to 1939 & the British Depth Study 1890 - 1918

Kind Regards

Roy :jester:
"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#108 neil mcdonald

neil mcdonald

    Neil McDonald

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,589 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 01:48 PM

Hi Folks,

Just a quick note to let folks know that I have now finished creating AFL booklets for the whole OCR course, including the British Depth Study. If anyone is interested then I'll email them a copy, but I should warn you that they are big downloads! From what I can gather several major publishing companies are producing similar resources, if anyone wishes to adapt my ideas for publishing then I think that it is only fair that they give me fair accreditation for my ideas.

On the exam front, we continue to do both OCR MWH and the OCR Pilot. Since switching to OCR MWH our results have been significantly better than in the bad old days of AQA, who now seem to have mirrored what OCR have done. I was recently asked to create some exam based AFL resources for Edexcel MWH and several members of my team noted that the mark schemes appeared to suggest that they were significantly easier than OCR MWH. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the topic? We are going to look very carefully, later in the year at the possibility of switching.

On the OCR GCSE Pilot front, things are very positive. Both Year 9s and Year 10s have achieved there Year 11 targets which underpins one of two things. That the assessment suits the learning styles of the students or that it is significantly easier. I had several students who significantly achieved positive residuals and went from a target of an E to an A. I would encourage everyone to consider moving their E to D students to the OCR GCSE Pilot if you want to significantly improve your residuals for the school league tables. However, it’s a shame that there isn't an appropriate A Level or Sixth Form qualification for them to go onto as even the A* students wouldn't be able to cope with AS or A2 History.

For the record, I would like to state that I hate the current situation where we have a 'free market' amongst exam boards. We shouldn't have to constantly reviewing exam board syllabuses try to find the 'best option' for our students in order to improve our residuals, but Ofsted and the school league tables have created a diseased system. I'm always amazed at how an Ofsted inspector can walk through the door one day and put a school into special measures and then a few months later come back as an advisor who then coaches the school on how to improve their performance. Once they have conducted their force field analysis, what great plans do they come up with for improving standards? Transforming teaching and learning? No - switch exam boards, change qualifications, don't do GCSEs, do BETECs in other words cheat.

The fact of the matter is that in the 'new educational world' is that some are more equal than others. What do I mean by that, not every kid is destined to be academic, yet when they miss their target and achieve the grade that they deserved everyone blames the teacher. So who is to blame for the declining standards? The teacher who is pressurised by the government, Ofsted and the school, to do 'something' to improve results or a system or a society that refused to accept that the students who don't achieve their academic targets did so because they were not academically bright enough. What is wrong with that? Why is every student expected to pass? Why are teachers careers made and destroyed by the exam results that they did not sit themselves? As educationalists we all know that there is a world of difference between students from an affluent area and those from a poor deprived community. A teachers job is to give everyone an equal opportunity to achieve, to unlock the potential of their students, but we can't change society on our own. Parents have a responsibility to listen to their kids read, help them with their homework and bring then up to be motivated to succeed.

Ultimately, I blame the varying standards between the exam boards, subjects, qualifications and the tyranny of the League tables for the current mess. So long as the fools in Parliament believe that a free market amongst the exam boards and that a Betec or similar qualification is in the same league as a GCSE then, the school league tables will be distorted. You don't raise standards and educational achievement by lowering standards in the exam system. Common sense dictates that the reverse is true. You create a benchmark, a gold standard that students can aspire to and if some students fail to reach it, then society needs to accept that some kids are brighter than others instead of blaming teachers. The current system gives the false impression that certain schools in deprived areas have managed to change water into wine, when all they have done is change exam boards and qualifications. This then puts pressure on the other schools in the area to do the same as Ofsted then uses these improved residuals / statistics to force them down the same route. Ofsted by its very nature has to be seen to be 'improving standards' in order to justify its overated and expensive existance. In the end we end up with an education system that promotes mediocrity whilst the the meritocracy that our democracy was founded on is undermined. It’s the emperor’s new clothes all over again but no one dare say anything because we live in a climate of fear. One day we should erect a monument to those teachers whose careers have been destroyed by League Tables, residuals and Ofsted. However, what politician is brave enough to reverse the failed policies of the past 20 years when they have become a new orthodoxy? Meanwhile, I intend to play the game so that I can survive for another day. I love my job, but I hate the climate of fear and the sham that the education system has become!

Roy :jester:


Many of these feelings I am sure could be said throughout the staffrooms of England. A while back I thought of this issue. We had those leaflets from Edexcel advertising their new specs for History with many teachers of the belief that the basic premise was choose us we are easier to get results with. Market forces are at play and it is not just in the qualification but also the cost. Modular units, the ability to resit and the 'made for' course materials all allow exam boards to take a significant portion of the schools budget from what it was before this exam factory system came into place. We are in an exam factory system. I hear of staff being directed towards Btecs rather than GCSE because they get 2 or 4 GCSEs compared to the more academic GCSE gaining 1. My History students last year told me that they work harder for History than they would see their counterparts in other subjects knowing they'd get a good grade in History, whereas their peers would get 4 in an 'equivalent'. I have but one recommendation - scrap the exam boards and have a national exam board with multiple options. Having just one national system would stop the ability of people to say that the system is getting easier because the only way that could happen would be if the DfE would let it. Education is in a mess for the following points

1) Our school year is dictated by a system of economy we have not had for over 50 years of kids working in the fields in the summer holidays - it hits on lower income kids not having the access to the alternatives more affluent kids have.
2) The exam factory system which is a direct result of the league tables (not against them as such) has meant that there is little comparable focus on qualifications. We are left with an alphabet of qualifications which some having little merit other than as points on a student's CVA score
3) There is not enough holding to account of what happens between subjects. A report a couple of years ago showed that History was harder than another subject but said oddly that overall it was the same - the logic did not fit.

Roy has hit on many good points but my solution would be to start fresh -

1)National boards for qualifications to make sure standards are acceptable and that equivalents are exactly that.
2)Scrap the outdated academic year and look towards a root and branch re-assessment of the school year.
3)Re-assess the policy of moving kids on through the education system come what may and instead examine what holistic support can be given to students who are not up to scratch on literacy, numeracy, science and even a humanities based subject.
4)Have a DfE that will say yes - we know some subjects are harder to achieve than others - maybe develop a weighting of academic rigour within the course to show this.

Edited by neil mcdonald, 02 October 2010 - 03:48 PM.

Bernard Woolley: Have the countries in alphabetical order? Oh no, we can't do that, we'd put Iraq next to Iran.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Woolley: That's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I give confidential security briefings. You leak. He has been charged under section 2a of the Official Secrets Act.

#109 Richard Fitzsimmons

Richard Fitzsimmons

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 79 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 04:24 PM

Hi Folks,

Just a quick note to let folks know that I have now finished creating AFL booklets for the whole OCR course, including the British Depth Study. If anyone is interested then I'll email them a copy, but I should warn you that they are big downloads! From what I can gather several major publishing companies are producing similar resources, if anyone wishes to adapt my ideas for publishing then I think that it is only fair that they give me fair accreditation for my ideas.

On the exam front, we continue to do both OCR MWH and the OCR Pilot. Since switching to OCR MWH our results have been significantly better than in the bad old days of AQA, who now seem to have mirrored what OCR have done. I was recently asked to create some exam based AFL resources for Edexcel MWH and several members of my team noted that the mark schemes appeared to suggest that they were significantly easier than OCR MWH. I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the topic? We are going to look very carefully, later in the year at the possibility of switching.

On the OCR GCSE Pilot front, things are very positive. Both Year 9s and Year 10s have achieved there Year 11 targets which underpins one of two things. That the assessment suits the learning styles of the students or that it is significantly easier. I had several students who significantly achieved positive residuals and went from a target of an E to an A. I would encourage everyone to consider moving their E to D students to the OCR GCSE Pilot if you want to significantly improve your residuals for the school league tables. However, its a shame that there isn't an appropriate A Level or Sixth Form qualification for them to go onto as even the A* students wouldn't be able to cope with AS or A2 History.

For the record, I would like to state that I hate the current situation where we have a 'free market' amongst exam boards. We shouldn't have to constantly reviewing exam board syllabuses try to find the 'best option' for our students in order to improve our residuals, but Ofsted and the school league tables have created a diseased system. I'm always amazed at how an Ofsted inspector can walk through the door one day and put a school into special measures and then a few months later come back as an advisor who then coaches the school on how to improve their performance. Once they have conducted their force field analysis, what great plans do they come up with for improving standards? Transforming teaching and learning? No - switch exam boards, change qualifications, don't do GCSEs, do BETECs in other words cheat.

The fact of the matter is that in the 'new educational world' is that some are more equal than others. What do I mean by that, not every kid is destined to be academic, yet when they miss their target and achieve the grade that they deserved everyone blames the teacher. So who is to blame for the declining standards? The teacher who is pressurised by the government, Ofsted and the school, to do 'something' to improve results or a system or a society that refused to accept that the students who don't achieve their academic targets did so because they were not academically bright enough. What is wrong with that? Why is every student expected to pass? Why are teachers careers made and destroyed by the exam results that they did not sit themselves? As educationalists we all know that there is a world of difference between students from an affluent area and those from a poor deprived community. A teachers job is to give everyone an equal opportunity to achieve, to unlock the potential of their students, but we can't change society on our own. Parents have a responsibility to listen to their kids read, help them with their homework and bring then up to be motivated to succeed.

Ultimately, I blame the varying standards between the exam boards, subjects, qualifications and the tyranny of the League tables for the current mess. So long as the fools in Parliament believe that a free market amongst the exam boards and that a Betec or similar qualification is in the same league as a GCSE then, the school league tables will be distorted. You don't raise standards and educational achievement by lowering standards in the exam system. Common sense dictates that the reverse is true. You create a benchmark, a gold standard that students can aspire to and if some students fail to reach it, then society needs to accept that some kids are brighter than others instead of blaming teachers. The current system gives the false impression that certain schools in deprived areas have managed to change water into wine, when all they have done is change exam boards and qualifications. This then puts pressure on the other schools in the area to do the same as Ofsted then uses these improved residuals / statistics to force them down the same route. Ofsted by its very nature has to be seen to be 'improving standards' in order to justify its overated and expensive existance. In the end we end up with an education system that promotes mediocrity whilst the the meritocracy that our democracy was founded on is undermined. Its the emperors new clothes all over again but no one dare say anything because we live in a climate of fear. One day we should erect a monument to those teachers whose careers have been destroyed by League Tables, residuals and Ofsted. However, what politician is brave enough to reverse the failed policies of the past 20 years when they have become a new orthodoxy? Meanwhile, I intend to play the game so that I can survive for another day. I love my job, but I hate the climate of fear and the sham that the education system has become!

Roy :jester:


HI Roy,

I'd be interested in seeing your resources for Britain 1890-1918 if they are available.

cheers

Richard
'The Historians, therefore, are the most useful people and the best teachers' - Martin Luther 1485-1546


#110 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 09:23 PM

Hi Neil,

The only problem that I can see with a national exam board is variety. At least with the different exam boards, you can pick and chose the topics between them. The danger of one board is that you could end up with one just one course on MWH or MTT.

The local exam board system back in the 1980s and early 90s used to work when choice of a board was limited to geographical location. So NEAB was Yorkshire and the NE and MEG was the midlands. What we have now is the worst of all worlds where English departments decide to do the Welsh board because the assumption is that English is a second language, so the pass rate is lower, so all the English departments in England jump to the Welsh board so that they can improve their residuals in the League tables. The world has gone mad!

I blame the League tables which have distorted teh whole system. Scrap the league tables and you will remove the market forces that force schools to cheat. The core problem lies in the assumption that all children regardless of background are equal in terms of educational achievement. You can not compare like for like and thats where the league tables fail.

The only way to make League tables work fairly is to factor in attendance, free school meals and give more credit to academic subjects like physics and history and to reduce the parity given to Betecs which are a joke in terms of educational rigor and standards.

I was would like to add for the record that I'm 41 not 65, despite the fact i must sound like an olde die hard in my postings - I'm just disgusted with the way education has been devalued in recent years. I believe passionately that you do not raise standards by lowering them!


Roy :jester:
"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#111 neil mcdonald

neil mcdonald

    Neil McDonald

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,589 posts

Posted 02 October 2010 - 09:38 PM

Disagree on a national board - there should be no reason why you could not have a greater variety of courses. MTT/SHP vs. MWH has come about partly on the back on publishing companies and the need to sell resources, yet I feel that if this could be redefined to promote a better equality of subjects then, more options open up.
Bernard Woolley: Have the countries in alphabetical order? Oh no, we can't do that, we'd put Iraq next to Iran.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Woolley: That's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I give confidential security briefings. You leak. He has been charged under section 2a of the Official Secrets Act.

#112 Andrew Field

Andrew Field

    Andrew

  • Admin
  • 6,945 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 09:13 AM

It is very difficult to disagree with what Roy is saying - league tables have clearly not worked at all, creating artifical incentives to distort the system, supported by exam boards owned by publishing companies, devaluing traditional subjects as schools are forced to try and chase subjects that provide better opportunities in terms of league table performance. That said, there is a great deal of fantastic work done in schools - across all subjects - I've seen the improvements in my own school in the last eleven years. Those subjects supporting some of the lowest ability students to push G grades to D grades and suchlike. The league tables don't even take notice of those. There has to be a role for residuals too.

There is a need to ensure high quality teaching and learning - but I'm not confident that the OFSTED requirements when they come to visit, nor the expectations that the league table system puts across everything do much to ensure this. I think most schools strive to support their students and teachers despite league tables and OFSTED, rather than because of them.


Generate your own versions of my games, quizzes and eLearning activities: ContentGenerator.net

#113 DaveStacey

DaveStacey

    Long-term Member

  • Admin
  • 957 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 09:38 AM

On the OCR GCSE Pilot front, things are very positive. Both Year 9s and Year 10s have achieved there Year 11 targets which underpins one of two things. That the assessment suits the learning styles of the students or that it is significantly easier. I had several students who significantly achieved positive residuals and went from a target of an E to an A. I would encourage everyone to consider moving their E to D students to the OCR GCSE Pilot if you want to significantly improve your residuals for the school league tables. However, its a shame that there isn't an appropriate A Level or Sixth Form qualification for them to go onto as even the A* students wouldn't be able to cope with AS or A2 History.


That's interesting Roy, 'cause our experience has almost been the opposite - the pilot has appealed to those students who are at the top of the ability range and who are turning in some excellent work. On the other hand we're still getting our heads around the best way to support the weaker students.

I'm also hopeful that when our first cohort go though to A Levels the extended nature of the work they've been producing, as opposed to the very atomised answers expected at 'normal' GCSE will actually prove to be a benefit to them.

Which units did you choose?

#114 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 10:25 AM

Hi Andy,

You've raised some interesting points. I agree that in a normal setting most schools do support their students and teachers. Problems arise when you teach in a deprived area and you end up hitting a natural ceiling with achievement at GCSE.

In most schools you can tweak teaching and learning, sometimes over dramatically described by heads wanting a pay rise as 'transforming teaching and learning' or 'beginning a new learning journey', but what happens when due to economic and historical factors your Maths, Science and ICT results drop below 30%? I know of schools where the head teacher has been 'redeployed ‘so that a super head could be parachuted in along with an Ofsted school's improvement advisor. They then wield the bloody axe and remove or marginalise any staff that are seen as 'energy sappers', which is a code word for anyone who has misgivings about the proposed changes and then introduce Betecs and other vocational subjects that are supposedly GCSE equivalents. The school pass rate then shoots up and results appeared to have been magically transformed. For example, I know of a school that went through this process and the pass rate in Science went from 33% at GCSE to 85% at Betec within one year - same kids, same teachers and same school. The only problem was that these kids had then been forced down a pathway that made the school's position in the League tables look good but which narrowed their educational choices because some occupations and courses rightly refuse to recognise these new GCSE equivalents. You can imagine the impossible situation that other schools in the area then face. You either do the same thing or in the 'Panda' or 'raise on line' produced by Ofsted to compare schools, you suddenly look like you are under achieving.

The ultimate result of these changes is that children are forced down educational pathways that narrow their choices in the same way as CSEs and ‘O’ Levels. The difference being that under the League tables and the GCSE system, the CSE Grade 4s are considered to be as a good as an ‘O’ Level grade ‘C’. So subjects like history that require hard work, the ability to analyse, argue, read and write, are disadvantaged against Betec PE which gives them 2/ 3 GCSE equivalents. It’s a sorry state of affairs! The education system is diseased and is failing in its primary purpose of preparing students for the world of work and giving employers a transparent system for judging the ability of their potential employees. It’s also a disaster from a social point of view because the system teaches students that the best option is always to go for the easiest option and that you can achieve exam success without applying hard work and self discipline. QED – the meritocracy that our democracy is founded on is undermined by mediocrity introduced by league tables, Ofsted and the free market between exam boards.

Kind Regards

Roy :jester:

Edited by Roy Huggins, 03 October 2010 - 01:38 PM.

"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#115 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 10:55 AM

Hi Dave,

We only offer the pilot course to our vocational pathway students. I would send you a spread sheet with their targets and residuals, but basically our Year 9s and 10s have achieved their Year 11 targets and achieved an overall '0' or slightly positive residual against FFT Type 'D'.

We do the Anglo, Saxons and Vikings for the controlled assessment and the signifiance of the 1984 Miners' Strike then and now. Our students have responded well to the topics and we have recieved some outstanding support from the community and the NUM. 'The coal pit wheels may have stopped turning, but the coal embers are still burning deep in the hearts of South Yorkshire.' I suppose ultimately, it depends upon the topics that you pick, for our students coming to grips with the economic and social devastation that has taken place in our community, helps them come to terms with lots of personal issues. Getting their Dads and Grandads involved and talking about community spirit, values and comradeship down the pit and on the picket line, gives many of them a code that they can begin to adopt as their own as well as a sense of personal pride. The miners may have lost, but that didn't make them wrong, it was just meant that the forces set against them were stronger. Their fathers fought for their community, jobs and to give their own kids a future. Parts of South Yorkshire may now be an economic waste land of unemployment, drugs, alchol and benefit dependenacy, but the spirit of the people has not been totally crushed and where there is life their is hope!

We are currently deliverying a module on heritage management comparing Mexborough and Conisbrough Castles before moving onto a course on the international significance of 9/11.

We put all our red pathway or accademic students through the MWH course. Its not a perfect system, but its the best that I can devise in the current climate.

Neil - I agree that if it was done properly a national exam board would solve a lot of problems and could offer some variety if it was organised properly, but when has anything that the government and Ofsted done in the past 20 years genuinely resulted in improvements? We need an education system that is free from outside political interference like the Bank of England. Then we can begin to rebuild cobfidence in the exam system and a genuine restoration of standards. Politicians only think about the short term and often lack the imagination to think about the bigger picture or beyond the next sound bite or newspaper headline.

Kind Regards

Roy :jester:

Edited by Roy Huggins, 03 October 2010 - 11:36 AM.

"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#116 neil mcdonald

neil mcdonald

    Neil McDonald

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,589 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 10:58 AM

Hi Andy,

You've raised some interesting points. I agree that in a normal setting most schools do support their students and teachers. Problems arise when you teach in a deprived area and you end up hitting a natural ceiling with achievement at GCSE.

In most schools you can tweak teaching and learning, sometimes over dramatically described by heads wanting a pay rise as 'transforming teaching and learning' or 'beginning a new learning journey', but what happens when due to economic and historical factors your Maths, Science and ICT results drop below 30%? I know of schools where the head teacher has been 'redeployed so that a super head could be parachuted in along with an Ofsted school's improvement advisor. They then wield the bloody axe and remove or marginalise any staff that are seen as 'energy sappers', which is a code word for anyone who has misgivings about the proposed changes and then introduce Betecs and other vocational subjects that are supposedly GCSE eqviliants. The school pass rate then shoots up and results appeared to have been magically transformed. For example, I know of a school that went through this process and the pass rate in Science went from 33% at GCSE to 85% at Betec within one year - same kids, same teachers and same school. The only problem was that these kids had then been forced down a pathway that made the school's position in the League tables look good but which narrowed their educational choices because some occupations and courses rightly refuse to recognise these new GCSE eqviliant. You can imagine the impossible situation that other schools in the area then face. You either do the same thing or in the 'Panda' or 'raise on line' produced by Ofsted to compare schools, you suddenly look like you are under achieving.

The ultimate result of these changes is that children are forced down educational pathways that narrow their choices in the same way as CSEs and O Levels. The difference being that under the League tables and the GCSE system, the CSE Grade 4s are considered to be as a good as an O Level grade C. So subjects like history that require hard work, the ability to analyse, argue, read and write, are disadvantaged against Betec PE which gives them 2/ 3 GCSE eqviliants. Its a sorry state of affairs! The education system is diseased and is failing in its primary purpose of preparing students for the world of work and giving employers a transparent system for judging the ability of their potential employees. Its also a disaster from a social point of view because the system teaches students that the best option is always to go for the easiest option and that you can achieve exam success without applying hard work and self discipline. QED the meritocracy that our democracy is founded on is undermined by mediocrity introduced by league tables, Ofsted and the free market between exam boards.

Kind Regards

Roy :jester:


That is what I mean by the market forces at play - BTEC science - lovely on a schools CVA score and 5 A to C but, does not actually count (I believe) for the science GCSE figures because it is not of the same level.

Other oddities are, Preparation for Working Life, CoPE for mainstream kids, BTEC PE, BTEC Drama BTEC Music, BTEC Science - all the equivalents...oh and the 4 GCSE ones too.
Bernard Woolley: Have the countries in alphabetical order? Oh no, we can't do that, we'd put Iraq next to Iran.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernard Woolley: That's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I give confidential security briefings. You leak. He has been charged under section 2a of the Official Secrets Act.

#117 j hewson

j hewson

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 189 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 05:28 PM

What I found so frustrating this year was that my results for Year 11 (1 full grade above FFT-D on average) were still looked at in a negative way because I did not get 100% A* to C (Unlike the "let's give the kids a sweatshirt and tracksuit and give them 4 so called equivalent to GCSE qualifications" which is what BTEC PE is in our place). I have been with OCR as an exam board for ten years and while there is a temptation to deliver to the mark scheme, I have found that the Assessment Focus for both paper 1 and 2 are such that their skills as much as their knowledge are being examined. On another note, does BTEC stand for Bland Talentless Educational Cretins? Changing exam boards and all that entails should still be no substitute for good teaching, but if the picture is so grim as some are painting, with the dumbing down of examination criteria, then the likes of me in our place will have to continue to fight the corner of an academic subject with rigourous demands on its pupils against an ever-swelling tide of leadership apathy and demands for figures that match the staff who are always first in line in the queue at lunchtime!

#118 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 03 October 2010 - 06:20 PM

The problem with improving your results is that even when you have achieved or exceeded your targets they will still expect more and ever better residuals. We are all caught up in a factory system where we are expected to massproduce results of ever declining quality and standards. Its rather like Stalinist Russia with the five year plans, in the end even the factory managers start submitting false results in order to avoid being shot!

As I said above, whats the point of having a passrate and a gold standard if everyone is expected to pass? In life you have winners and losers, not every child has the ability to pass. Why is that heresy?

Kind Regards

Roy :jester:
PS I'll email you those resources later tonight - back to my marking!
"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#119 Roy Huggins

Roy Huggins

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,428 posts

Posted 05 October 2010 - 08:07 PM

Hi Folks,

I felt that Michael Grove said a few interesting things today whilst being interviewed on Sky News today.

I liked the fact that he is going to review the weighting given to some of the new dodgy qualifications in the League Tables. However, I disagree with his assessment of the impact of disadvantage on academic achievement in deprived areas.

Firstly, his implied assumption is that transformational teaching can remove all the barriers to achievement. This flies in the face of the old saying that 'you can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.' I've been graded excellent ot outstanding many times and no matter how I try with some kids, I can't turn them all into A*s.

Secondly, he has made the cardinal mistake of underestimating the importance of the role of parents and peers. Teachers can not do it on their own. Occasionally, inspirational students from amazingly deprived backgrounds, and I've taught a few, are able to achieve amazing things, but there is often a grandparent or a parent who has played a key role helping to motivate their achievement.

However, I totally agree with him on the importance of discipline in successful schools!

Roy :jester:
"Men are disturbed, not by the things that happen, but by their opinion of the things that happen." - Epictetus

#120 Rebekah S

Rebekah S

    New member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 09 October 2010 - 08:52 AM

Hi,

Having been with OCR MWH for years, I decided to stay with them over the new specification changes. However, I have subsequently moved schools and now facing poor AQA SHP modular results - 56% A*-C compared to their target of 65% :curse: , I am now considering reverting back to OCR and introducing MWH. Why have a small change, when you can completely start afresh! I know the OCR MWH spec inside out, I think it will engage the students more than the current SHP spec. I also feel that the questions are more straightforward than AQA and you can predict what will come up next - though this may just be familiarity. My slight concern is what appears to be a hefty grade boundary rise. Am I correct in thinking that OCR have hiked it up from just over 50% to get a 'C' to 60%?

I am also interested to see if anyone has strong feelings about year 10's suitability for modular exams, I feel that our students massively underperformed because they simply were not ready in the June of year 10 to sit an exam. To put this in perspective, the previous cohort achieved 70% A*-C in the summer of year 11, so something has seriously unravelled. My temptation is to swap from SHP AQA to MWH OCR, stick with the good old fashioned end of year 11 exams - start revising feb 1/2 term onwards in order to prepare thoroughly for exams.

As my sleep is now interrupted with negative residuals, I would be grateful for any thoughts anyone might have!

Many thanks

Rebekah




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users