Thread: School leavers: 'can't read/write/have attitude problem'

IMHO many of the problems derive, not from school and exposure to their peers but the values they do or don’t receive at home. My son (now 30) could read before he was 5 and was held back for years in the classrooms of various service schools so the other pupils could catch up. That’s not a boast on my part, he wasn’t particularly bright and to be honest we didn’t have much of a choice and we were not prepared to send him off to boarding school at an early age. He did eventually go off to DYRMS but that’s another story. He was always brought up by Mrs NB and I to respect others and be happy with what he has. He now has a happy relationship with his wife of 10 years and I have lovely grandkids who I know will be brought up with equal values.
The point I am making is that schooling and learning life values does not start and finish with school terms as many of the parents of today’s school leavers must have thought.

Originally Posted by Norfolknchance

Taking the average year size in those days of around 120, only 2 ended up on the wrong side of the tracks. I wonder what the average is now?

I left school in 98, I think my year was 120 or there abouts, split into groups. I know of maybe 15+ that have been in prison out of my year, and many more went off the rails.


Someone mentioned different levels of ability should not mix. There were 3 sets for each core subject at my school, so they tried their best when it came to sticking the best together, but then the lower classes did not stand a chance.

Originally Posted by amazing__lobster

Originally Posted by Norfolknchance

IMHO, bring back corporal punishment and for the parents who raise these little fukk-wits, attendance on a course to learn about parenthood. If they didn't attend then their benefits would be curtailed.

No doubt one or two do-gooders will say that by restricting the benefits, the children will be penalised. AND?

(Checked for spelling and grammar before submitting!)

I've always wanted to ask of the people who propose we bring back corporal punishment, how they would make it work - so don't take this personally. But...

Many teenagers are built like men. Many teenagers would also probably hit back. So how do you propose we re-introduce corporal punishment without the kids filling in teachers?

Or for that matter - the parents getting involved. I remember when I was at school in the mid-90s. Outside our school, there was an ice-cream van. One day a fight broke out, and the ice-cream van owner (in his late fifties broke it up). Ten minutes later the family of one of the kids came down, and half killed the elderly man, and smashed up his van. Police advised him to not take it any further.

So the other problem is, how would we also stop the parents from filling in the teachers, too. This family wasn't on benefit, and were well known to the police (and everyone in the area) as one of the local crime families.

It's all very well saying bring back corporal punishment, but I don't think it's as simple as that.



Edited for Freudian slip!

I think that you are quite right in the problem of re-introducing corporal punishment. I would hazard a guess that the older kids would not take too kindly to it, so perhaps some form of capital punishment would be in order.

If one is not able to function as a potentially responsible member of society (this rather broad statement encompasses the parents of the troubled youth), then one should be disposed of, either by a) forced relocation to a barren island somewhere off the coast of British Antarctica, or b) Please board the next train East, and leave your bags on the platform, they will be sent on at a later date.

We must not forget the pool of educators and their handlers that are unable to subscribe to Draconian measures, and insist on holding fast on their course of "touchy feely human rights if you do not want to read that is fine, yes feel free to behave like a Visigoth. I would rather you did not do that but if it makes you feel validated please continue to prevent the kids that want to learn from learning, yes I understand your home life is crap so continue behaving like some sort of retarded mongoose I feel your pain and encourage..........blah blah blah and so on ad nauseum", thes people should be packed of for special treatment.

We can then at this point strike off the flawed generation (I use the term broadly, I realise that there does exist a large population of kids, parents and teachers that do get it) and start again, and hopefully instill in this brave new future some of the mortar that held us together as a strong, altruistic, forward seeking, hardworking, (somewhat) ethical and moral people that have been able to overcome thousands of years of adversity and conflict, rising to become one of the leading lights of civilization in the modern world.

We that in the past endured and overcame the sepoy uprising, that bred the sons that made up the brave six hundred, held fast the thin red line, formed the square at Gandamack, that shared our time, our hopes, our dreams, and fears, and our last ration coupons while taking shelter in the Underground from the terror that was the Hun! (Please start whistling Elgar's Pomp and Circumstance) We can overcome this, for in the chest of every true Britain beats a Cour d'Lion, we can rise again (after all we are not the French)!



God save the Queen!

Three cheers and tiger!

Originally Posted by Format09

I
The fact is for young people these days there is far greater competition for jobs and for jobs where you enter on a higher level (eg a fast track system or a graduate system).

There certainly is - from China, India, Poland etc. In fact , from all nations that deliver excellent teaching, and set rigorous examinations that deliver worthwhile qualifications. All, sadly, attributes that are largely absent in the UK.

Format_09 / Northern_Biff,

I can agree with much of what both of you say. My missus met some lovely kids and gained a genuine affection for them and an interest in seeing them succeed. Some of them, in physical appearance at least, fulfil all the hoodie cliches (but as an old skinhead, I can't really comment...).

In many cases it's not the kids. For instance, there's a lot of comment on this site about how the young servicemen and women we have in Afghanistan now are matching their forebears in every way. I don't think that anyone would disagree with that assertion. They more than rise to the challenge.

It's just that the education system as it is doesn't give many kids something to aspire to. Many don't come from nuclear families these days - there is no fallback in the form of guidance at home to offset the lack of structure in the education system. A structure that used to be there.

Originally Posted by Format09

I know there are some crap unis that offer rubbish courses but these people are not going to get the same job as an Oxford postgraduate.

The problem is that the people who are at the institutions which lack rigour often think it is their right to sail into a graduate role as if they did have an Oxbridge degree because they'd been to you-neee even though they had the square root of feck all of the intellectual or personal attributes required by the Firm I was recruiting for.

In the end the London Firm stopped visiting Universities other than Oxbridge & the odd Russell Group place as the quality simply wasn't there.

Originally Posted by carlbcfc

Originally Posted by Norfolknchance

Taking the average year size in those days of around 120, only 2 ended up on the wrong side of the tracks. I wonder what the average is now?

I left school in 98, I think my year was 120 or there abouts, split into groups. I know of maybe 15+ that have been in prison out of my year, and many more went off the rails.


Someone mentioned different levels of ability should not mix. There were 3 sets for each core subject at my school, so they tried their best when it came to sticking the best together, but then the lower classes did not stand a chance.

That was me. Let's just say that class sizes are sometimes an issue, particularly when you're trying to deal with the unruly and lower-ability kids - who do tend to get lumped together.

Edited to add: Especially when kids who'd once have been sent to specialist schools because of learning or behavioural issues are pushed into the mainstream in the name of 'inclusion'. Not only is this sometimes disruptive but it's also sometimes hopelessly naive: having a teaching assistant follow you everywhere you go hardly helps you blend in...

Originally Posted by Format09

Anyway how do people know exams are getting easier? Have people resat exams this year so then can compare them? Doubt it.

Lots of anecdotal evidence.

Tales abound of 'graduates' with basic literacy problems.

I know a lecturer who has been giving the same test to engineering students on day one at uni for the past 20 years to see how clever they are. He reckons the standard has dropped 30% in the past 15 years.

My relative lives near a school in Scotland where a decades old past paper was used for the Higher English prelim. Scottish Highers are like English AS levels. Out of 96 entrants, only one passed. These were clever kids who stayed on at school after 16 in the hope of going to college or university. One C pass out of 96 entrants.

When I was at school, everybody had to do O-level maths. Nationally, only one third obtained a pass A-C. Now, 50% are to have a degree. By definition, some degrees are now at a lower academic level than an old O-level. I've heard lecturers at 'new' universities confirm this. BA Media Studies with Surfing - lectures one afternoon a week. Don't make me laugh, the graduates will hear plenty of laughter when they're applying for jobs.

Britain's standing in the international education league tables has plummeted. Where are we now? 14th?

This is nothing new. About half a century ago a neighbour of mine who happens to be Norwegian and had been a PE teacher was hired on a part-time basis to teach basic Norwegian to bootnecks (to help them when they go to play in the snow I suppose). We must suppose that today's generation of teachers came out of the same system which had dropped teaching formal grammar, for instance, as it dampened the children's creativity, and so now can't teach English even if this were wanted, because they don't know enough about it. I also suspect that schools teach 'general science', not because Physics and Chemistry are too hard for the children but because they are too hard for the teachers who are basically arts people brought up in cloud-cuckoo land.

Even further back a friend of mine who had done his NS in the Scots Guards and the Arab Legion took a temporary teaching job. One boy sought to misbehave but after being thrown the length of the room decided not to. Not sure I'd recommend that but it certainly worked.

Originally Posted by Format09

Anyway how do people know exams are getting easier? Have people resat exams this year so then can compare them? Doubt it.

See here: http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/edStandards.pdf

Originally Posted by Format09

I know this has been a bit of a rant and maybe hasn't got that much in common with the OP but I get fed up when I see all young people get tarnished with same brush.

In a rant about poor educational standards

Originally Posted by Ancient_Mariner

Originally Posted by Format09

Anyway how do people know exams are getting easier? Have people resat exams this year so then can compare them? Doubt it.

Lots of anecdotal evidence.

Tales abound of 'graduates' with basic literacy problems.

I know a lecturer who has been giving the same test to engineering students on day one at uni for the past 20 years to see how clever they are. He reckons the standard has dropped 30% in the past 15 years.

My relative lives near a school in Scotland where a decades old past paper was used for the Higher English prelim. Scottish Highers are like English AS levels. Out of 96 entrants, only one passed. These were clever kids who stayed on at school after 16 in the hope of going to college or university. One C pass out of 96 entrants.

When I was at school, everybody had to do O-level maths. Nationally, only one third obtained a pass A-C. Now, 50% are to have a degree. By definition, some degrees are now at a lower academic level than an old O-level. I've heard lecturers at 'new' universities confirm this. BA Media Studies with Surfing - lectures one afternoon a week. Don't make me laugh, the graduates will hear plenty of laughter when they're applying for jobs.

Britain's standing in the international education league tables has plummeted. Where are we now? 14th?

Well on that evidence you would say that they are easier. But I don't think they are. Maybe its the way in which they are structured? I don't know I haven't seen an older exam paper.

Another problem now days is the way in which an A-Level is conducted. It is not simply teach for two years and exam.

In Year 13 geography my assesments went something like:

January- 2 exams
March- Coursework due
May- Received synoptic paper booklet
June- 3 exams

The booklet I received was for a 3 hour exam. The booklet basically contained a load of facts and figures (such as graphs and maps) of an area (in my case the Lake District). It had a section on the nuclear power station in the area and facts concering that. We could do research using that provided material and go through it with our teacher.

We had the booklet in the exam but we weren't allowded the one with our notes in.

In the exam I had 3 questions that I had to answer using the booklet to help.

Now some of my friends thought this made the exam easy. What I know is that it did help me it didn't make the exam easier, I had no idea of the questions so I still had to make sure I used the correct facts to back up my question.

The fact that you can receive material beofrehand and there are more chance for resits ( eg fail in January you can resit in June) make exams easy?

Or does it allow the person to make the most of their education and give them a second chance?

Originally Posted by Format09

Well on that evidence you would say that they are easier. But I don't think they are. Maybe its the way in which they are structured? I don't know I haven't seen an older exam paper.

Then perhaps you should step away from the keyboard for a moment...

What's the problem with Tescos? Not enough Oxbridge First Class with Honours Science Graduates applying to collect the trolleys in the car park for minimum wage (overtime compulsory; please note- no paid overtime)?

Crap jobs = crap applicants.

I caused deep offense with my eldest daughter after her physics higher: one quick look and I answered the first five questions without hesitation. My education never took me past physics o level. I now see the same with my youngest and her chemistry. The level at which they teach is so low that I have had to do extra with both my children on all subjects.

Originally Posted by Format09

In Year 13 geography my assessments went something like:

January- 2 exams
March- Coursework due
May- Received synoptic paper booklet
June- 3 exams

The booklet I received was for a 3 hour exam. The booklet basically contained a load of facts and figures (such as graphs and maps) of an area (in my case the Lake District). It had a section on the nuclear power station in the area and facts concerning that. We could do research using that provided material and go through it with our teacher.

We had the booklet in the exam but we weren't allowed the one with our notes in.

In the exam I had 3 questions that I had to answer using the booklet to help.

Now some of my friends thought this made the exam easy. What I know is that it did help me it didn't make the exam easier, I had no idea of the questions so I still had to make sure I used the correct facts to back up my question.

In my day we had to remember the facts! I would also suspect that the “facts� contained in your booklet included a whole load of polemic about how nuclear power is a bad thing…

Originally Posted by Format09

The fact that you can receive material beforehand and there are more chance for resits ( eg fail in January you can resit in June) make exams easy?

Or does it allow the person to make the most of their education and give them a second chance?

Yes, it’s great to be able to resit little bits of the exams until the desired result is achieved. It’s a bit like an Irish EU referendum ;)

Originally Posted by Format09

So how have many young people responded? By working hard at school, there are far more people attending university that ever before and every year we see record GCSE and A-Level passes (but I suppose its not as hard as when you were at school).

Anyway how do people know exams are getting easier? Have people resat exams this year so then can compare them? Doubt it.

I did a mix of O-Levels & GCSEs. IMHO the former (let’s say in history) required knowledge and interpretation of facts, the latter empathising with how people lived in history. I would suggest that the former has more intellectual rigour.

I’m no expert, though, so I’ll leave it with the opinion of the Universities where, especially in subjects such as Engineering, Undergraduates are arriving unable to study or understand the most basic material despite having a wad of A grades as thick as a whale omlette.