Changes to A-Level Maths and Further Maths Delayed

Maths exams will become more "rigorous".

The UK Government is planning to delay the changes to A-Level mathematics and further mathematics that were to be introduced with first teaching in September 2016. The delay of one year comes amid concerns that pupils will not be sufficiently prepared for the new exam.

Following advice from the exams regulator Ofqual, teaching will now start in 2017, with the first exams for the new A-Level taking place in June 2019. Ofqual said the delay would mean that students on the new courses would have taken the new maths GCSE being introduced in 2015, and would therefore be better prepared for the new A-Level. It will also allow more time for schools to prepare for teaching the new AS- and A-Levels.

At the same time as changes in the content, the structure of A-levels is being overhauled and many schools are struggling with these planned changes. From September 2015 AS-Levels are being separated from A-Levels, which will become two-year courses, with grades decided solely by a final exam.

The changes, devised by the previous education secretary Michael Gove, are one part of a drive to make the exam system more rigorous. However, some universities have said they want schools to continue with AS-levels. Cambridge University has said that AS-Levels are vital to the university selection process and has written to schools asking them to continue with AS-levels.

Teaching unions, including the National Association of Head Teachers, have welcomed the delay, citing the extra time for schools to prepare as a key factor.

The Labour Party have said that if they come to power, they will reverse the decision to decouple the AS from the A-Level. However, the practicalities of this are fraught with difficulty, with the newly decoupled AS-Level due to be taught only 4 months after May's general election.

Michael Gove Out

So Michael Gove is no longer our Secretary of State for Education. He presided over a time of headlong change in our education system. Some would describe him as a visionary; others, such as the teaching unions, would probably say he attempted too much too quickly, and that would be the polite version.

Nicky Morgan is the new Secretary of State
at the Department for Education.
Photo credit: Wikipedia.

As education secretary, Michael Gove was a deeply controversial figure. He brought in free schools, rewrote the National Curriculum and rapidly increased the number of academies in England, so that now around 50% of schools in England have academy status. For academies and free schools he brought in legislation allowing these institutions to employ unqualified teaching staff. He also presided over the dramatic rise in the maximum level a university can charge in tuition fees from £3000 to £9000.

His supporters would say Michael Gove took on an education system unwilling to change. He brought forward difficult but necessary changes despite fierce opposition. His critics would say that he is a deeply divisive figure, a zealot bent on his own view of what an education system should look like, stuck in the past and out of touch with the modern realities of teaching.

It is true he got himself into many arguments: he fell out with Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, with Ofsted Chief Inspector Michael Wilshaw, with his own Conservative colleague, Home Secretary Theresa May over the alleged plot by Islamic extremists to seize control of certain schools in Birmingham.

Did Prime Minister David Cameron think his personal friend Gove was a liability as the general election approaches next year? He has been replaced by Nicky Morgan and time will tell whether her tenure makes for more harmonious relationships with teaching bodies, Ofsted and other interested parties. She takes over at the Department for Education at a time of change, but will not be blamed for the series of reforms that she will have to preside over. We wish her well.

Pisa Results: UK Could Do Better

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test on a school table in Germany (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The UK is ranked 26th out of 65 countries in maths, in the results of the 2012 Pisa tests (Programme for International Student Assessment), which were published today.

The tests in maths, English and science were taken by 500,000 15-year old students around the world. The top 7 places are filled by far eastern countries and cities. Shanghai came top of the league table (Chinese cities are entered individually, rather than the country as a whole). The highest place gained by a European country is 8th place, for Lichtenstein. The US came even further down the league table than the UK, coming 36th in maths. Wales was the poorest performing region of the UK.

Many educationalists have criticised the league table. Prof Alan Smithers from the University of Buckingham pointed out that in many Asian countries, pupils are coached specifically for these tests.

However, Christine Blower, leader of the National Union of Teachers, said the results showed that countries with successful education systems "pay teachers well, respect the profession and encourage collaboration between teachers and schools".

Naturally, Education Secretary Michael Gove blamed the last Labour government for the UK's poor performance. For Labour, Tristram Hunt said that the coalition government's policies were taking the UK towards a poorer education system, not a better one.

What do you think about the results of the Pisa tests? Is the UK lagging behind in these key subject areas? Are the Pisa tests an accurate measure of performance?

You can take the Pisa test here.

GCSEs Set For 2015 Revamp

Glenys Stacey from Ofqual
(Image from TES)

This week Ofqual have released more details about the new curricula for maths and English, when the GCSEs are revamped for first teaching in the year 2015 at the insistence of Education Secretary Michael Gove. Other subjects will be given the same treatment the following year. These will be the biggest changes to GCSE since their inception in the late 1980s. Pupils now in their second year will be the first to take the new GCSE.

Glenys Stacey from Ofqual pointed out that the most important changes in the new GCSE will be the new content in each subject. In addition to this:

- There will be only one exam, which will take place at the end of the two years of study;
- Grades will be awarded from 1 to 9 (with 9 the highest). With one more grade available than in the current system, this allows for more differentiation at the top end.
- There will be less coursework in most subjects (and probably none in maths);
- There will be a complete end to modular GCSEs.

Stacey says that the new GCSE will allow pupils to gain a real confidence and competence in each subject. She also expressed confidence that these would be the last big changes to the GCSE for a significant number of years, giving more certainty and stability to the exam system for both schools and pupils.

In the maths GCSE, pupils will be expected to memorise many more formulae, such as the quadratic formula, the sine and cosine rules. Until now, these have been provided on the formula sheet.

These changes only apply to the set of GCSEs offered by the English exam boards. The exam boards in Wales and Northern Ireland are not obliged to follow suit. If the GCSE in these parts of the UK remain as they stand, the divergence from England will become significant, with the qualifications having little in common but the name.

Are you a teacher or a pupil? What do you think of the proposed changes to the maths GCSE? Let us know by email or comment on this post.

Post-16 Education Revolution Begins Here

Teenagers in England will have to stay at school or in training longer from today. The "participation age" has risen from 16 to 17, although in the rest of the UK, it will remain at 16. From 2015 this rises again to 18.

However, unlike previous increases in the school leaving age, it does not mean that teenagers will have to remain in school. As an alternative, they could enter some form of work that includes an element of training, such as an apprenticeship.

This change has been introduced on the same day that pupils who do not get a grade C or higher in GCSE maths will be required to continue studying the subject during their subsequent schooling.

Schools and teaching unions are already talking about the increased pressure on already-stretched teaching staff and/or the need to employ more staff.

The government says that employers are complaining about a lack of basic numeracy and literacy skills among those applying for their first jobs and this has motivated both changes. However, there will not be sanctions imposed on any teenagers who fail to get some kind of training. The government says that the changes are aimed at increasing educational standards, not about introducing penalties. In reality, the new law would be difficult to enforce: how do you prove whether or not an employer is providing adequate training for a young employee.

Let us know what you think about these two changes. Will they provide valuable skills to those who have missed out in previous years? Or is this just another unnecessary change brought in by a tinkering education secretary?

Is Gove's GCSE U-Turn Enough?

Another week, another controversy in the Department for Education.

After criticism from teaching unions, academics and fellow MPs, Michael Gove has withdrawn his plans to replace the GCSE with English Baccalaureate certificates in key subjects from 2015. The Commons Education committee had said that Mr Gove had been trying to implement "too much too soon". In his Commons speech reversing his plans, Gove did, however, say that he has asked Ofqual to ensure new GCSEs would be in place by 2015 in seven subject areas: English, maths, the sciences, history and geography. GCSEs for all remaining subjects would be reformed by the following year.

Now, the head of England's exam regulator Ofqual has warned that these changes may be too rapid. Glenys Stacey has replied to Mr Gove, saying that she will delay the education secretary's GCSE changes if there are problems with the timetable. She continued "The timetable for qualifications development that you have set out is challenging." She expressed concerns about maintaining the quality of qualifications if drafting new curricula within such a short timeframe and pointed out that she would be conducting her own consultation with the exam boards.

Other criticism has come from the head of the Mathematical Association, Peter Ransom. He pointed out that "The 2015 schedule for implementation is so ambitious that no time will be available for piloting, reflection and refinement."

Dr Kevin Stannard from the Girls' Day School Trust expressed concerns that many aspects of Michael Gove's Baccalaureate plans may still be pushed through in the GCSE reform "on the mistaken assumption that the DfE has done a U-turn."

The Department for Education maintains that it will act quickly in order to address a loss of rigour in GCSEs.

All of this comes on top of stories about bullying by Michael Gove's special advisers and controversial plans for the privatisation of academies.

Gove Lays Out Plans to Overhaul A-Levels

Michael Gove plans to reform A-Levels
and scrap GCSEs. Photo: commons.wikimedia.org

Education Secretary Michael Gove today lays out his long-awaited plans to overhaul the A-Level system in England.

He says that his ideas will make A-Levels more rigorous and reduce the number of exams taken.

The major changes under Gove's reforms will be these:
- AS levels will no longer count towards a full A-level but will become stand-alone qualifications;
- It will no longer be possible to take individual modules; the course will be examined with one final examination;
- There will be a bigger role for universities in monitoring the content of each A-level.

Mr Gove has outlined his plans in a letter to the examination regulator Ofqual. He says A-levels do not provide the solid foundation students need. Mr Gove claims that pupils spend too much time sitting examinations and too little time thinking deeply about their subject. He has previously described the modular system as comprising "bite-sized" units of learning.

The Russell Group of top universities will have a role in supervising the content of A-levels, ensuring they are sufficiently challenging. This is a compromise position that the universities are happy with; Mr Gove had previously consulted with the universities about their being involved in setting the exams.

The new structure will be introduced in England from 2015. Labour's education secretary Stephen Twigg has already accused Mr Gove of "turning the clock back" and narrowing people's options.

Teaching unions have also been quick to express their doubts. Brian Lightman, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said his union was "not convinced" that AS-levels should be separated in this way.

AS-levels, as a stepping-stone qualification to an A-Level, were introduced by the last Labour government under reforms known as Curriculum 2000. The new proposals effectively move the A-level system back to where it was before Curriculum 2000.

Mr Gove's reform of A-Levels come alongside his plans to scrap GCSEs and replace them with English Baccalaureate Certificates (EBCs) from 2015.

As with GCSEs, Northern Ireland and Wales will have to decide whether to stick with their existing A-Level structures, or to follow the new model to be introduced in England. Scotland's schools do not use A-Levels at all.

Post-16 Maths for Non A-Level Takers

In a report commissioned by the Government last year on the state of maths teaching in British schools, one recommendation was for maths education to be made compulsory up to the age of 18 for all pupils.

Michael Gove, the Education Secretary for England, appears to have decided to run with this recommendation. The MEI charity (Maths in Education and Industry) has been given the remit of devising a curriculum suitable for such pupils, who would otherwise not have taken maths beyond GCSE. You can read the MEI press release.

Prof Tim Gowers at Cambridge University has been blogging extensively on this subject and his blog has been accepted by MEI as the starting point for the proposed new curriculum. Some of his ideas for problems seem a little advanced for non-A-Level takers.

Your opinions are very welcome, as always. Let us know what you think about the idea for the new qualification and about the ideas being mooted for inclusion.

Teacher Training Skills Test Toughened Up

The government has announced that the QTS skills tests in Maths, English and IT will be made tougher from next year. Passing these tests is a requirement for all teachers wishing to gain Qualified Teacher Status, which is in turn a requirement for teaching in any UK school.

The new tests have been developed by a panel of head teachers and teaching experts, following complaints that the current tests were too easy.

Every trainee teacher is required to pass the tests, even those wishing to teach unrelated subjects, such as Art and PE.

The government says that making the entry tests more rigorous will raise the quality and standing of the teaching profession. Education Secretary Michael Gove said "These changes will mean that parents can be confident that we have the best teachers coming into our classrooms. Above all, it will help ensure we raise standards in our schools and close the attainment gap between the rich and poor."

More complex mathematical problems and longer written exercises will become part of the tests. There will also be new questions on verbal, numerical and abstract reasoning. The pass mark will been raised.

Another aspect of this change is that fewer resits will be allowed, in line with Michael Gove's other education reforms. If the test has been failed three times, the candidate will not be allowed to take it again for 2 years.

They will be non-calculator tests and will require the trainee teacher to gain a score equivalent to a grade B at GCSE. They will also be taken before starting on the teacher training course, so becoming a pre-requisite to gaining a place on a course.

The teaching unions are unsure about the plans. Julia Neal, president of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers said: "If you're going to raise standards it's not just about recruiting teachers in the first place, it is actually keeping them and retaining them. I do think that sometimes there's a message going out which is really just undermining the profession. Are we saying that teachers at the moment aren't good enough because they haven't passed these tests? I do worry about the message that's going out about the profession."

Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, made the point that this reform does not appear to align itself well with another of Gove’s ideas, allowing academies to hire unqualified teachers.

At MathsBank, we would give this particular reform a tentative thumbs-up. It is important to recruit teachers who have a certain level of academic ability. But teaching is about many things, not just academic excellence. A teacher must be a many-skilled individual, being able to engage and keep young people interested, to control a class and to handle the many stresses and pressures that being a teacher brings. And as Christine Blower pointed out: "The real issue is the training and support that teachers are given once they have entered into teaching training."

Let us know what you think. info@mathsbank.co.uk .

The GCSE is Dead - Long Live the EBacc

Michael Gove, the Education Secretary in England, has a well-known dislike for the GCSE. Yesterday, he announced plans for its abolition.

Michael Gove, Education Secretary in England
announced plans for the English Baccalaureate yesterday.

If the name English Baccalaureate rings a bell, it's because it already exists. The EBacc is currently a system used to measure the performance of schools, using the results of pupils in key subjects. Now the EBacc is to become a formal qualification.

The EBacc will be introduced for core subjects (Maths, English and Science) from 2015, with a staged introduction for other subjects. It will be based on a final exam at the end of two years' study. There will be fewer resits, no modules and no controlled assessments. All marking will be external.

There will be one exam board per EBacc subject. Exam boards will bid for the right to run an EBacc in a particular subject for a five year term.

The Liberal Democrats appear to have had a minor success by persuading the Education Secretary to drop his plans for a two-tier system, which would have been a throwback to the days of O-Levels and CSEs.

The Welsh and Northern Irish devolved governments now have a big decision to make. They may decide to follow the English lead and create new Baccalaureate exams of their own. Alternatively, they could stick with GCSEs. This approach would risk giving pupils a qualification that has been deemed to be lacking in rigour in England. One head teacher in Northern Ireland I have spoken to has already said they would consider using qualifications offered by English exam boards.

GCSE Results Fall for the First Time

Over a million students in England, Wales and Northern Ireland receive their GCSE results today and for the first time ever, overall results have fallen.

Since replacing the old O-Level and CSE exams in 1988, the percentage of GCSE papers awarded an A*-C grade has been rising inexorably, year on year.

Today's GCSE results show that 69.4% of entries earned grades A*-C, compared with 69.8% last year.

The proportion of pupils receiving the top grades (A and A*) has also fallen for the first time, down from 23.2% to 22.4%.

As with the A-Level exams, England's exams regulator, Ofqual, has told exam boards they would have to justify the overall pass rate if it were significantly different from previous years. This has happened in an attempt to address concerns of "dumbing down" and to ensure results were comparable,

However, this system, known as "comparable outcomes", has created a furore in itself. There have been accusations that the exam boards had been asked by the Department for Education to fix the results.

Teaching unions are not particularly happy about any drop in apparent standards. They claim that any rise in grades is the result of better teaching and better-prepared students.

In most subjects, including maths, there was a fall in the overall proportion of A*-C grades, but the fall was particularly marked in English. Many teachers claim that students have been marked down by an entire grade in English compared with the results that teachers had predicted.

Countering this, the Joint Council for Qualifications, which publishes the annual results, said that the fall in A*-C English results was partly down to more candidates sitting the exam during the winter exam season.

This set of results is set against the backdrop of considerable changes being planned for GCSEs. As of September, the GCSE exams set by the English exam boards will no longer be modular. Instead, students will sit a single final exam. In addition, GCSE exams in English literature, geography, history and religious education will be assessed for spelling, punctuation and grammar. These new strictures will affect those sitting their GCSEs in the summer of 2014.

Schools in Wales and Northern Ireland will continue to be able to opt for modular GCSEs.

Eventually, Michael Gove has expressed an interest in returning to an exam more similar to the old O-Level. Some in education are even questioning whether it is necessary to take formal exams at all at the age of 16.

Gove Allows Unqualified Teachers into the Classroom

Michael Gove outside the Palace of Westminster (Photo: Wikipedia)

In another move that has angered the teaching profession and its unions, Education Secretary Michael Gove has given the green light for academies to recruit unqualified teachers into teaching positions.

All new academies sign an agreement with the Department for Education. From now on, this agreement will state that the school has the right to recruit whoever it believes to be qualified for a teaching role, removing the condition that the recruit must have QTS (Qualified Teacher Status). Existing academies may apply to have the new clause inserted into their agreements with the Department.

Academies now account for more than a half of all secondary schools in England, although they are much less prevalent in other parts of the UK. The move brings new academies into line with private schools and the government's free schools.

The Department says it expects the vast majority of recruited teachers still to have QTS status, and that it is allowing more flexibility, by allowing schools to hire people from a broader range of backgrounds.

In contrast, the feeling among the teaching profession is that Michael Gove is trying to de-professionalise teaching. The general secretary of the NUT, Christine Blower, has described it as a cost-cutting measure and a clear dereliction of duty.

Unions point to the fact that Mr Gove has in the past praised the education system of Finland, where teachers are respected and paid accordingly. In other countries where the required level of teaching qualifications is being watered down, such as Sweden, educational standards now appear to be falling.

Teachers know how rigorous and valuable their training is. They know that pupils do not respond as well to untrained teaching and that this applies both to the academic rigour required and to classroom management.

Many teachers also suspect that this is one step of a plan for further privatisation of the education sector, eventually allowing private companies to run the academies for a profit and offering a cut-price education, to compete with neighbouring schools.

This is another move that the Education Secretary has attempted to introduce by stealth, as a part of his creeping revolution of the UK's education system. But proposals such as this, with such far-reaching consequences, will not go unnoticed by the teaching profession. There will be trouble ahead.

GCSEs to be Scrapped? The Latest Episode in the Education Revolution of Michael Gove

So, what are we to make of the week's news, that the GCSE is to be revamped. According to the Daily Mail's scoop on Thursday, for key subjects such as maths, English and science, there will be two separate qualifications, similar to the previous structure of GCE O-Levels and CSE exams.

The Mail's story appears to be a leak from somewhere within government, this time one that the government really didn't seem to want out in the open.

The plans appear to be set out with a very rapid timetable. First teaching of the new syllabus would be in September 2014, with the first exams taking place in 2016.

The changes would only affect England in the first instance, with Wales and Northern Ireland having a choice whether or not to follow suit.

There were a few other bombshells in the story. Firstly, the six exam boards of the UK would be amalgamated, or abolished and replaced with a single body. The thinking behind this is that competition between the boards has led to a general reduction in standards, with boards creating easier exams in a bid to attract more schools. This part of the proposals appears to have received the widest support within teaching and within Westminster.

Secondly, the National Curriculum would be scrapped, and head teachers given the power to decide what should be taught in their schools.

Of course,  Michael Gove's ideas should come as no great surprise. He has shown with his plans for post-16 learning that he is a traditionalist, in that he wants to return to a model more similar to that of the pre-1990s.

The previous system was scrapped (by the Conservative government of the 1980s, it should be remembered) because it was deemed to have failed. The O-Level/CSE split was considered to have created a rift between those studying the two exams, which affects the student for the rest of their lives. This hampered any kind of social mobility.

Critics of the current GCSE system say that it is too challenging for the weaker students and not challenging enough for the more able and that this is the cause of grade inflation.

The GCSE was created as a multi-tier exam, in which less able pupils can study a foundation syllabus, in which they can gain grades C-G. The higher tier provides the opportunity for the more able students to gain the higher grades A*-C.

So, although it has its faults, the GCSE was designed to improve the prospects of a wider range of pupils. Many teachers will tell you that the foundation tier is very appropriate for their less able students and the higher tier is challenging enough for the more able.


But with the clear majority of pupils now continuing to some form of post-16 education, it would be worth asking the question: why examine at 16 at all?

Politically, there is the possibility of serious damage to the coalition government. The Lib Dems are said not to have been informed about the proposals before the leak, even Sarah Teather, Lib Dem minister in the Education Department.

It has even been suggested that Michael Gove is setting out radical ideas with, eventually, a view towards the leadership of his party.

Apparently, no change of law is required to bring this revolution into being, which explains the rapid timetable. So if the secretary of state gets his way, be prepared for further huge upheaval in the classroom.

A-Levels are Changing

A-Levels are changing, there is no doubt about that.

Education Secretary Michael Gove began the process by consulting universities earlier this year, asking how they could become more involved in setting of the exams and the curriculum. Those consultations received a mixed reaction from teachers and teaching unions.

The Russell Group of leading universities has provided some more food for thought today. With a particular emphasis on maths A-Level, they say that some of the modules are simply not challenging enough and do not prepare students for a university degree in maths, physics or engineering.

Indeed, the Russell Group thinks that A-Level studies should be less dependent on the current modular system and more focused on a final examination. They describe A-Level modules as 'bite-sized chunks' which are too easily forgotten.

Another recommendation is that the number of times a candidate can resit any module should be limited, perhaps to one resit. Currently, a candidate can resit a module indefinitely.

Finally, the future of the AS is to be considered. The Russell Group did not express any clear views on its future, but the options are for it to be scrapped completely, given its own status as a stand-alone qualification (i.e. not a stepping stone to an A-Level) or the status quo.

All of these points will be considered by Ofqual, the exams regulator, as it begins drafting a report to be released later on this year. By then, we will know how radically different our A-Levels will look in the next few years.

Gove Wants Universities to Set A-Level Exams

A-Level logo by University of Cambridge International Examinations (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Education secretary Michael Gove is talking again.

He has made pronouncements on the A-Level system before, alluding to his dislike of modular examinations and stating that the overall standard was not high enough.

Now, there appears to be some flesh on the bones. In a letter to Ofqual, Mr Gove has outlined his plans that the universities should have a greater role in setting the A-Level exams.

It should be noted that these changes will only apply in England in the first instance; it will affect Northern Ireland and Wales insofar as some pupils study towards the exams of the English boards. Scotland will be largely unaffected.

Currently all A-Level curricula are designed carefully, with knowledge of what came before. Any topic studied at A-Level, without the correct groundwork at GCSE, is going to present problems. Without the correct pre-requisite understanding, such teaching could damage confidence and reduce learning, not improve it. Universities will need to employ a whole new cohort of specialists who understand the school curriculum, as well as what is required in a variety of university courses.

This would not simply be a change to our A-Levels. If Gove's plans come through, more demanding A-Levels will require better prepared pupils as they make that transition from GCSE. And this means, in turn, that those pupils will need to be better prepared for GCSEs. Such a shake-up will have implications for the whole of secondary education.

Allowing universities to have a greater input in post-16 exams is a good idea in principle, since the universities can see that a lot of their students are arriving without the necessary skills and understanding. The universities understand what is required.

But this is an enormous change and it will be painful. There will be jobs lost, new jobs created; there will be some pupils caught in the transition who will, no doubt, suffer. There will be changes to teaching methods (perhaps universities will want to have a say in these as well?) and disquiet in the teaching profession. There will be upheaval on a grand scale. And if put in motion, the changes will be too large to be rolled back by any future government. If you are due to sit A-Levels in 2016, life suddenly looks rather different.

Again, it is a case of: be careful what you wish for.

Results Up, Places Down

The A-Level results are out.

Students sitting a maths exam
Image from Wikipedia

First the statistics.

Once again the results have improved; this is the 29th year in a row that the overall number of passes has increased.

The percentage of A-level grades A*-E awarded has gone up very slightly, from 97.6% to 97.8%

But for the first time in 15 years there has been no increase in the total proportion getting A or A* grades. Just over 27% of entries scored these grades, with a small rise in the proportion awarded A*.

The gap seems to be closing between boys and girls. The number of A* grades for boys has gone up from 7.9% to 8.2%. For girls, the number of A* grades has fallen slightly from 8.3% to 8.2%.

More people took A-levels this year - the number of A-level grades issued is up 1.6% to 867,317.

There is good news for mathematics. Maths and the sciences have all seen significant increases in the number of entries. Maths (including Further Maths) has gone up by 7.4%. There has been a 40% increase in students taking maths over the past 5 years.

And in these subjects, the rate of improvement for boys is bigger than that for girls. The gap between boys and girls at grade A in these subjects has fallen from 0.9% to 0.3%.

Sadly, although maths and the sciences are faring well, modern foreign languages continue to decline. French and German continue their downward trend, with the number of entrants down 4.7% and 6.9% respectively

All these facts and figures do not help those who are now facing the very real scramble for places in the increasingly competitive race for university places. The increase in tuition fees, scheduled for September 2012, has been the biggest factor pushing up the number of students applying this year. Whereas many students would have previously opted for a year out while they ponder their futures, this does not make financial sense for those taking on a student loan.

A student beginning university this year will pay a maximum of £3000 per year for the duration of their course. A student beginning next September will pay up to £9000 per year.

The fact that there are few jobs available is another factor driving people towards university.

The UCAS tracking website crashed this morning due to the sheer number of visits

Michael Gove, the education secretary, has promised a through review of the A-Level system. He is reportedly interested in moving away from the current modular structure, and towards a system whereby more emphasis is placed on a single final examination.

So congratulations if you have achieved the grades you wanted. And good luck if you are still looking for a uni place.

Want a decent education? Don't do A-Levels.

Image via Wikipedia
The Royal Society, one of Britain's leading scientific institutions, has declared A-Levels "not fit for purpose".

This conclusion stems from the fact that relatively few pupils deciding on the usual 3 A-Level subjects will choose to do a science or maths. Across the UK in 2009, 17% of 16 to 18-year-olds took one or more science A-level, or equivalent qualification, the report says. This compares unfavourably with Scotland, where pupils generally take 5 Highers and often spread their choice between the sciences and the arts.

The report says this difference indicated problems with the structure of post-16 qualifications provision and demonstrates an "underlying cultural indifference" towards the sciences and maths.

Other findings included a need for more specialist maths and science teachers and a broadening of the diversity of A-Level subjects.

The Royal Society is calling for the rapid introduction of an English Baccalaureate at A-Level, which would require students to take a spread of subjects, including maths and a science subject. A similar qualification has already been announced for GCSE level by education secretary Michael Gove. The government thinks this new qualification will drive up the take-up of maths and science at both pre- and post-16 levels.

A review of the A-Level system has already been promised, although so far there are few details of the shake-up. Gove previously announced a desire to return to more emphasis on a final examination, moving away from a modular system.

The Chair of the Royal Society's Education Committee, Professor Dame Athene Donald, said in the report that, at a time of economic uncertainty, it was deeply worrying to find maths and science numbers so low, when these specialities have such potential to revitalise the country's financial outlook.

Legal Challenge to Gove's Cuts

Image via WikipediaThe coalition government looks set to face yet another problem over education.

After the fiasco with the increases in tuition fees and scrapping of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), the Education Secretary Michael Gove now faces a legal challenge. This revolves around his decision to abolish the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) scheme. The scheme, devised by Labour, was scrapped last July after the coalition government came to power.

Under the scheme, every secondary school would have been given funding for a rebuild. Now, 700 schools will have this money withdrawn. Seven councils (Waltham Forest, Luton Borough Council, Nottingham City Council, Sandwell, Kent County Council and Newham) have brought a legal challenge to the High Court in London over this volte face, saying that stopping the programme in their areas was arbitrary and legally flawed.

Gove is accused of not consulting properly and failing to give adequate reasons for his decision. His lawyers said in reply that the coalition had inherited the largest ever peacetime deficit and that spending cuts had to be made quickly.

Have you suffered because of the cuts to the BSF programme? Are you teaching or learning in shabby classrooms? Let us know why your school should qualify for a rebuild.

The Government is less than a year old, but is already under considerable pressure, not only in the field of education funding, but in defence, social care, employment, health and just about any area you care to choose. The state of the economy continues to look parlous.

How long can things go on? Will the Coalition Government continue with its controversial cuts? Or will it come up with a Plan B, as shadow chancellor Ed Balls advised yesterday? Will the Conservatives be "out of office for a generation", as Bank of England governor Mervyn King predicted, even before the election.

We live in interesting, if difficult, times.

Free Schools have Fifteen Minutes of Fame

Michael Gove (Photo: Paul Clarke)

Education Secretary Michael Gove is putting a brave face on the numbers of schools applying for "Free School" status. He told Andrew Marr this weekend that of 700 initially expressing an interest, 16 schools have formally applied to adopt this status from September 2011 and that this has "exceeded his expectations". Free Schools will be state-funded, but will remain outside of local authority control. In Gove's vision, it will be parents, teachers and voluntary groups that will be interested in creating Free Schools. He cites similar systems in Sweden and the US; and legislation was passed just two months into the lifetime of this Parliament to allow for their creation.

Supporters of the scheme claim it will create more local competition and drive-up standards.

But there are many critics, even from Michael Gove's own side of the political divide. Some have argued that the scheme will only benefit middle class parents with the time to dedicate to setting up a school and that it will divert money away from existing schools. Moreover, if having Academy or Free School status becomes a symbol of success, schools remaining under local education authority control will be seen as inferior.

Peter Wilby, writing in The Guardian, thinks that such schools will end up being run by private companies rather than parents, teachers and voluntary groups.

Paul Carter, the Conservative leader of Kent County Council, stated that under present funding arrangements: "The more Academies and Free Schools you operate ... the less maintained schools would get."

The National Union of Teachers warns that the policy could "fuel social segregation and undermine local democracy". The union is already talking about strikes to oppose the Free Schools scheme and the expansion of the Academies programme.

Rushed legislation is so often bad legislation. Rather than inventing new types of school to fit in with the Prime Minister's "Big Society", Gove's attentions should instead focus on the buildings programme, whose scaling back he so badly botched after taking office. It has been shown that a good working environment is one of the most important factors in a child's educational development.

Besides, do we not have enough different types of school in this country already?

Ed Balls, the shadow education secretary, described it as "laughable" that Mr Gove considers his expectations to have been exceeded with the numbers declaring an interest.

Our prediction is that the distinction between the Academies and the Free Schools will blur and then disappear. With scant interest from the original audience, the parents and teachers themselves, and private business apparently the only sector of society interested, and in the face of much criticism and the prospect of strikes, the Free Schools programme will be slowly forgotten.

Just as with his plans for reforming A-Levels, it sometimes appears that Gove is shooting from the hip, saying whatever comes into his head without thinking.

Yes, there is room for improvement in our schools, and yes, there may be scope for greater involvement from the world of business, whether it be in the form of sponsorship or in the day-to-day tasks of school management. But there appears to be little appetite among our busy parents and teachers for taking on the responsibilities of running schools, nor so far from the voluntary sector. The Free Schools notion will be brief, will become subsumed into the Academies programme and will die, not with a bang, but with a wimper.

Related articles

• Michael Gove dealt fresh blow as only 20 'free schools' approved (guardian.co.uk)
• First 16 'free schools' revealed (bbc.co.uk)