“Every young person should be able to see a route to success, whatever their talents or ambitions.” (Andy Burnham)
This is what so many educators have been saying for years, but successive Ed Secs (Gove in particular) decided that the public has “had enough of experts”. It’s heartening to have (at last) a PM who seems to understand that not everyone is destined for an academic future, and that they are worth no less than those who are.
Until 40 years ago, academic school leavers did O level exams and their less-academic peers did CSEs (Certificate of Secondary Education). It was accepted that the top CSE grade (grade 1) was equivalent to the minimum O level pass (grade C). The lowest grade for CSE was 5, but it was a recognised grade rather than a fail.
From 1988, school leavers took GCSEs. Again, the pass grade was C, but it was still possible to progress on to courses, apprenticeships and training with lower grades.
Gradually, this changed and anything less than a C was considered a fail.
Imagine starting your adult life labelled a failure.
I have worked with so many pupils over the past few years who have looked forward to training as plumbers, carers and hairdressers but who were prevented from pursuing their chosen courses because they were unable to reach the minimum standards of English and/ or maths required to even train. Even though there are more practical routes for helping such pupils, such as Functional Skills courses, these are no longer routinely offered in schools.
To add to this injustice, in more recent years, young people in England have had to continue in education or training (such as an apprenticeship or part-time study) until age 18. For many, that has meant retaking maths and/ or English qualifications – just in case the idea of being a failure hadn’t been reinforced enough when they were 16.
It's not been exactly rosy for those who did get the coveted grades (now a minimum of 4 or 5 since the grading system changed). Many have gone on to university-style courses that have left them in debt but not with the guarantee of the kind of earnings that would make up for this. (And that’s without taking into account how much more difficult it is now to get on the housing ladder.)
Not every fulfilling job requires an academic mind: common sense, a good work ethic and a practical outlook don’t automatically come with being good at English and maths. And most certainly, not every fulfilling career requires a university degree and the level of debt that comes with it.
When I look at my old school friends, I’m reminded of this. Many of the ‘naughty boys’ thrived once out of school, despite not having academic qualifications. They may have started off in fairly menial jobs, but most worked hard and were rewarded with promotions, pay rises and – most importantly – a sense that they have a useful place in the world.
As a teacher, I have witnessed how the most disenfranchised pupils can ruin lessons for those who really want to learn, and I can see how much of this is as a result of their frustrations and feelings of inadequacy. Why not give them opportunities to focus on more practical, real-life activities that make them feel valued? Let them see that there is a future without having to fruitlessly slog away trying to learn Shakespeare quotes and simultaneous equations. Start this when they are 14 so that they can begin to experience personal achievements and so that being in education becomes more meaningful.
Now, thanks to Andy Burnham’s education vision, more young people can look forward to a future where they can be useful members of society.
Imagine starting adult life knowing you are not a failure
I’m aware there’s another dimension to this: opportunity (or lack of) and that there is the potential for those pupils unfairly labelled ‘less academic’ owing to their upbringing to miss out on more academic options and being pushed into the more technical route. This is a much bigger issue that needs to be discussed elsewhere, but Burnham’s vision is the first step in the right direction: raise the self-esteem of a young person and they are more likely to reach their true potential. (I achieved my academic qualifications after leaving school, so I know how true this is.)
********************
As a teacher, I usually view World Book Day (it’s Thursday 5th March this year) as a chance to encourage children and teenagers to engage with reading, but how often do we, as adults, choose books for their literary merit rather than something to help us chill out by the pool on holiday?
Don’t get me wrong: I love a bit of ‘chic lit’. I’m a huge fan of the Bridget Jones’ novels, Marian Keys’ Walsh family sagas and everything written by my current favourite author, Jane Fallon (check out her stuff if you’ve never tried it).
As a teacher of GCSE and A level students, however, I find a lot of my reading time is spent on texts recommended by various exam boards. I know from many parents (and, of course, students) that these are rarely the titles anyone would choose to read for pleasure and, I have to be honest, there are a few I’ve struggled with.
With this in mind, I thought I’d share a few of the exam recommendations I do enjoy – some of which I have read for pleasure rather than out of obligation. I hope that, if nothing else, this will encourage some parents to share in the pleasure (pain?) of their sons’ and daughters’ revision schedules and give you something to discuss (complain about) at the breakfast table. And even if you don’t feel the need to support a struggling teenager, you might just enjoy these books as much as I did.
| GCSE exam texts | What adults/ parents could discuss |
|---|---|
| The Strange Case of Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde | Do all humans have evil within them? |
| Frankenstein | Who is really 'the monster'? |
| Animal Farm | Does all power corrupt, even when it starts with good intentions? |
| An Inspector Calls (a play script, but easy to read) | How do our actions affect others? To what extent are we responsible for others in society? |
| Lord of the Flies | Are we civilised because we have rules? Or do we have rules because we are civilised? Are we even as civilised as we believe? |
| A Level and IB Diploma Texts | |
|---|---|
| The Handmaid's Tale | Are we as free as we think we are? The book is very different form the TV series – and remember it was written in the mid-80s |
| Accidental Death of an Anarchist (adaptation by Tom Basden – a play script, but easy to read and very funny!) | Full of not-so-covert references about recent UK news and topics |
| 1984 | Seems relevant for life today – see if you can spot the parallels |
| A Thousand Splendid Suns | The resilience and strength of Afghan women – definitely topical for today |
You may note that I have not included any of the Shakespeare texts. My favourites are Romeo and Juliet and Macbeth, but they are very difficult to read. The best way to appreciate a Shakespeare play (indeed, any play) is to watch a live performance. But if you’re really keen to understand the plot and relevant themes for discussion, I can highly recommend the CGP or York Notes study guides for ease of understanding.
Happy reading!
********************
It’s easy to assume that something which feels obvious to us will be obvious to everyone else. A recent online puzzle reminded me just how misleading that assumption can be.
The challenge asked: If you multiply every digit on a phone keypad, what is the result? I knew the answer, but curiosity led me to read the comments. Many responses suggested that the answer would depend on which number you started with.
That surprised me.
>The following day, I was chatting with a friend—an experienced business owner—about how we often forget things we learned at school, even in subjects we once enjoyed or excelled in. I mentioned my surprise that so many people seemed unaware that multiplying several numbers together gives the same result regardless of the order.
“I didn’t know that,” she said. “I know you can swap two numbers, like 3 × 4 and 4 × 3, but what about something like 4 × 3 × 9?”
I explained that the result would still be the same, even if the order changed. She tested a few examples on her phone calculator and quickly saw that this was true.
This idea is known as the commutative law of multiplication: when multiplying numbers, the order does not affect the final answer. Interestingly, when I searched for explanations of this law online, most examples showed only two numbers being multiplied. It took more specific searching to find explanations that clearly extended the idea to three or more numbers.
That experience was a useful reminder: if you don’t already know what to look for, it can be hard to find the explanation you need. A bit like searching in a dictionary for a word you can’t spell!
So, how did you get on with the keypad challenge? If you know the answer, you will know the comments regarding the order in which you multiply the numbers don’t apply directly to the main objective of this challenge.
If you haven’t tried it yet, have a go—see if you can work it out without a calculator first. Exploring why the answer is what it is can be just as valuable as finding the answer itself. Videos 1b and 1c on this playlist will help you understand this challenge.
You can comment on this LinkedIn post (and have a nose at what others have put).
********************