Nov 2008 27

Demolishing the myth of record-breaking performance4

It will be a strange week when someone other than the Government finds that education in Britain is Ist2_6426216-students-in-a-classroom
improving. Report and after report brings researchers to the same conclusions: standards in education are collapsing, today's children are poorly prepared for later life, and that ultimately the British education system is failing an entire generation.

Today's contribution comes from the highly respected Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC). It claims that there has been a "catastrophic slippage" in the standard of science teaching, concluding that "the record breaking results in school exam passes are illusory, with … deficiencies having to be remedied at enormous expense by universities and employers."

The RSC' presented 1,300 pupils (all with a keen interest in science) with chemistry questions selected from O-Level and GCSE papers from the 1960's to today. Only 35 per cent of participants got the toughest GCSE questions right (so those from recent papers), while only 23 per cent managed the 1980's O-Level questions, 18 per cent the 1970's questions and just 15 per cent the 1960's questions.

By contrast, provisional figures for this year show 94 per cent taking GCSE Chemistry got a C or higher. Indeed half of those were awarded an A or A*.

In other words, while only 35 per cent of the keenest (and probably very able) chemistry students got the RSC's GCSE questions right, nearly 50 per cent of all pupils (so including to the less brilliant chemists) got an A or A* in their GCSE chemistry. Ignoring that so few could deal with the 1960's questions, the fact that only 35 per cent could successfully complete recent GCSE questions suggests the deterioration in skill is a very recent development

The Government predictably points to the exam results as proof of unmitigated success: "Look, more A's. Things are going well'.

In what seems an almost sneering response to the RSC's study, the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) claim: "Exam standards are rigorously maintained by independent regulators (for more on these 'independent' regulators, see here) and we would rather listen to the experts whose specific job it is to monitor standards over time. Ofsted say that the quality of teaching has improved. In Pisa 2006, a major international study on science, UK teenagers did well above the OECD average on science …"

The complacency of this response – of the Government in general – is terrifying. For the sake of politics the Government is wilfully incubating a problem which will imperil the economic, political and social future of this country. It may sound melodramatic, but in the face of perhaps the greatest decline in educational standards since state schooling was introduced a policy of smoke and mirrors is criminal. Not only are today's children now set to pay off the debt taken on by this Government, but those same children are being failed by it. Brown and Darling may have borrowed to fix school roofs, but they haven't fixed children's education.

End Note: Worryingly, it seems the educational rot has already begun to affect DCSF. In their response to the RSC (cited above), the DCSF cite a report – the OECD's 2006 Pisa – which actually shows the UK crashing down the international rankings of educational attainment.

Within a sample of the 57 leading economies, UK science attainment has fallen from 4th in 2000 to 14th in 2006.
In reading, the UK is down from 7th to 17th.
In Maths, from 8th to 24th.

The situation must dire indeed if the best defence DCSF can find is a report which catologues the steady collapse of British education.

Related Posts

  • Hardeep Singh

    Labour doesn’t appear to respect the sciences nor maths otherwise Darling’s calculations wouldn’t be all too frequently wrong! Maths and science are difficult bed fellows because they are most unpredictable at helping to furnish convienent government sponsored league tables and as a consequence have been expelled from main stream education with the art based subjects happily replacing them. With this comes the lack of academic education and more of the emotive/aspirational teaching which quite frankly is neither here nor there.
    Just a quick glance at the government’s recent migrant points system announced yesterday shows the kind of key workers required “Physicists, Chemists, oil pipeline engineers, etc….” shouldn’t we have this home grown talent available here? Of course not because with Labour it’s their politcial needs that come before the nation’s long term health and prosperity. The moment universities started to annouce a drop in science graduates (not including the flood of overseas students) there should have been alarm bells ringing. The fact that Labour couldn’t care less that entire Science departments were being closed down was almost cheered by the Labour brigade. Instead we have a long line of celeb wannabes instead of professional aspirants.

  • Jim

    “…the UK crashing down the international rankings of educational attainment…”
    Whoops! Turns out you’re wrong again:
    “English children ‘best at maths in Europe’”
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article5314718.ece
    I look foward to your response.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/benfarrugia Ben Farrugia

    Jim,
    Thank you for the comment.
    For clarity, I myself did not put together the international rankings of educational attainment referred to in my piece. That was the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), one of the most highly regarded think tanks in the world, and the body to which the UK Government turns for most international comparisons. As the OECD’s PISA (which is a report frequently used by the DCSF) is the benchmark for international studies into education, I chose to use this.
    As a note, in 2003 the OECD could not include Britain in the PISA because the data provided by the Department for Education was too poor.
    And as to the study reported by the Times, which you linked to, I was pleased to see some positive news about our school system. Particularly considering the continuous stream of studies which conclude the opposite. I keenly read the study – as I’m sure you did – and have a few issues with the findings.
    (1) The report is organised around assessing US students in relation to peer countries. The study then favours those countries which have curriculums more like those in the US.
    (2) In the Grade 4 sample (9-10 year olds) Belgium, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Malta, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland are not included. This would make the claim that English children are the ‘best at maths in Europe’ a bit of a stretch.
    (3) At Grade 8, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland were not included in the sample, further discrediting any conclusion that says that England is the best at maths in Europe.
    I hope this satisfies as a response. I look forward to yours.

  • David

    I teach 16 year olds and in my opinion the kids from the 1960s would spectacularly fail the GCSES from today.
    I understand the point about giving pupils are more comprehensive education in Chemistry and I have a lot of sympathy for that view. However, it is misleading to claim that failing a previous paper says that standards are slipping – it shows that tests are changing. You show an ability for analysis in your dissection of the study reported by The Times but fail to do the same for studies that support your agenda.
    Groups like this have an important role in reducing the amount of tax money that is being wasted in the education system. You damage your credibility and therefore your power by reporting on a ‘collapse’ that probably doesn’t exist in reality.