How cheering to determine Michael Gove’s English Baccalaureate Certificate go up in flames – and never simply because the EBC was hopelessly thought out. Put simply, GCSEs are an excellent thing. i used to be mentioned within the era of O-levels, 16-pluses and CSEs – not a two-tier system because it is generally called, but a 3-tier system.
The 16-plus was just like the GCSE in you can get anything from the top O-level pass to the bottom CSE pass within the one exam. Comprehensive schools, reminiscent of the single I attended (the bright Kersal High, which sadly needed to close) opted for the 16-plus whenever it might since it was fairer. However the great divide was between people that took O-levels and people who took CSEs. You didn’t do CSEs, you were consigned to them. And being consigned to CSEs left you a second-class citizen at 14.
With one stroke, the GCSE removed this. A struggling child might work his or her thanks to an A-C, or a sensible but distracted pupil might drift all the way down to a lower grade. The key was that the result was not predetermined before you started the course.
Gove desired to abolish this, seemingly because he believes by the age of 14 our destiny is sorted; we all know who’s boss class and pleb class, rulers and ruled, and it’s daft to pretend otherwise.
But, in fact, for any society that aspires to being a meritocracy here’s nonsense. Children develop at different ages and in several ways. Who’s to assert there’s any longer merit in excelling in history than computer studies (Actually, the market place would suggest the other.)
Which takes us to his bigoted want to narrow the curriculum. The function of any education system is to organize as lots of people as possible for a successful future. Gove seems to need the other.
I have known many academic children through the years, including my older daughter. Never have I heard them say, “Ah, if only the curriculum were narrower would life be more fulfilling” The undeniable fact that there’s a broad curriculum means there’s every opportunity to excel in traditional academic subjects, should they so wish, while allowing others to reach different subjects.
I have also known many children who struggle academically. My younger daughter is at the autistic spectrum. We were told when she was young that she was unlikely to pass exams. However, she carefully chose her GCSE subjects (including IT, drama, food technology – yes, people who Gove despises), worked extremely hard and passed her GCSEs. a super success. Her overly ambitious comprehensive school weren’t keen for her to head directly to A-levels (they asked for 5 Bs) but we insisted she had the correct to. Again, she carefully chose subjects, worked hard and passed her A-levels. Another brilliant success. She scraped her way into university, where she is now thriving.
Just today I received an email from a chum who said that his son struggled his way into university with hasta hoy and an E in business studies, now works for Apple and jets off to California anytime they do a product launch. My friend concluded: “He wouldn’t get into university now … so would finally end up doing what, i ponder”
The list is endless of these who struggled and went directly to change the arena. Bill Gates, Charles Dickens, Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, all dropped out of faculty and got a second chance (partly because academic achievement wasn’t seen because the be-all).
The system Gove proposed was one who denies second chances. Worse than that, it denied first chances – the plan was that pupils who failed to complete an EBC were to go away school with a “statement of accomplishment” in preference to a real qualification.
Yes, Einstein et al are the freaks. But that is not the purpose. Success is often relative. Whatever my daughter does together with her life now, she has made successful of it. If Gove had had his way she would has been kicked into touch at 14.
