Category: Relating to University


‘Select’ Universities

Filed Under: Assessment, Education, Relating to University by Rod Grant — Leave a comment
28 July, 2011

Published, Edinburgh Evening News, August 6, 2011

So, only three Edinburgh secondaries have made it into a UK poll revealing the state schools which send the most pupils to the country’s best universities – despite Scottish schools dominating almost half the list. The Capital falls behind other Scottish local authorities, including Glasgow, East Dunbartonshire and East Renfrewshire, taking just three of the top slots. A total of 49 Scottish schools make the top 100. There are seven schools from Glasgow in the top 100, six schools from East Dunbartonshire and six schools from East Renfrewshire.

This news created a little media flurry with concerns being aired over the quality of secondary education here in Edinburgh but, I, for one, do not equate the proportion of students attending ‘select’ universities with high quality secondary education. This would be to suggest that only those students attending universities like Oxford, Cambridge and St. Andrews are achieving full potential. That is absurd nonsense.

Clearly, as the Head of an Independent school, I am often criticized for providing opinion on matters regarding state–maintained schools but that is because I can say precisely what I like and what I believe. My colleagues in the state sector are not afforded that opportunity which is lamentable. So, I hope I speak for many when I say that students select universities on many criteria. And we should not forget that it is actually the student who initially selects the university they wish to attend rather than the other way about. If one of my students is considering a career in sports’ science, for example, I may steer them in the direction of Stirling University; for those considering a degree in fashion or textiles, I may direct them to Heriot-Watt. In other words, the selection of a university should be based on the quality of course offered and not on some notion of generic superiority.

A recent student of my school was accepted to Oxford to study Law and, of course, I was delighted for him. The College he had chosen provided an exceptionally well-rounded degree course in his subject choice. Personally, I do not believe he chose Oxford because it was Oxford, he chose it because it had the best reputation for his particular area of study.

It is quite alarming to read that a councilor suggested that it ‘would be a good idea to look at the other local authorities who have done better to see where we can make improvements’ because this is based on a false premise.

Edinburgh has a high proportion of its students going on to Higher education and that is what really matters, not the particular institutions the students attend. Many of the ‘select’ universities offer a high number of academic degrees which are, quite frankly, not suited to a 21st century global market place. My own degree began its life as English Language and Literature at Edinburgh University, which qualified me for absolutely nothing. Indeed, I was turned down for a job in a well-known bookshop for being over-qualified (at least, that’s what they told me!) but was unable to find a job for which I was qualified. And there’s the rub. Do we not want students to receive an education that prepares them for the world in which we live? And if the answer to that is ‘yes’, then the name of the higher education institution they attend is neither here nor there. Of course, it would be too simplistic to believe that a degree from Cambridge does not appear, at first sight, as highly impressive. However, once that initial good impression is made then it is down to the individuals to sell themselves to potential employers. I have interviewed first class honours graduates from select universities that are eminently unemployable, so there is more to success than the name of the institution on a degree transcript.

We should actually be far more concerned about raising our expectations for our students in terms of driving them to further their education. Too often, we fall into the trap of dismissing a pupil’s ability because that ability is not immediately apparent. Scotland is still highly regarded in terms of its education but we are resting on our historic laurels. Our current education system is in danger of educating creativity out of our pupils. We like conformity, we like right answers, we like hearing the answer we want to hear but we are not so good at allowing mistakes, creating the environment for free expression and for ensuring that our youngsters are given the opportunity to think for themselves.

An essay question that appeared in a University General Paper in the 1970s was set up to create a philosophical debate. Students were expected to write an essay of some 500 words using the title for inspiration. The question was: ‘Is this a question?’

The student who was immediately accepted on the basis of his answer had written, quite simply, ‘Yes, if this is an answer.’

That answer demonstrates the ability to critically engage with a topic and this is the type of thinking to which we should and could be aspiring to for all of our pupils.

We must absolutely stop concerning ourselves with the Universities to which our students are accepted and start concerning ourselves with developing pupils who can think, create and succeed in the face of adversity. And that will require critical engagement of those who teach by those who have the power to make changes. What chance?

Comment

University Entry Requirements

Filed Under: Assessment, Education, Relating to University, Scotsman Articles by Rod Grant — 1 Comment
9 June, 2010

Published, The Scotsman, 31st May 2010

Am I alone in questioning the importance our Universities attach to the subject of Mathematics? I can understand the need to be numerate, the need to be arithmetically confident and assured, but I am less convinced that we need to aspire to all students achieving success at Maths. I find it incomprehensible that you need Standard Grade Mathematics to study Acting at the University of Central Lancashire, or to study Fashion Design at the University of Glamorgan, Cardiff and Pontypridd.

These examples are not unusual; indeed, you can hardly find a degree course at a British University that does not make Mathematics at Standard Grade an entry requirement. Now, on a personal level, I love Maths and I love teaching Maths but I cannot understand why a student wishing to study drama has to prove competence in ‘the interpretation and use of proportionality between the size of the sector and the angle at the centre of pie-charts’ to be allowed to follow their chosen acting career path.

And perhaps, Maths is not the only subject that needs to be looked at. What about the pupil with a specific language difficulty who fails to achieve Standard Grade English and as a result can then not be considered for a Foundation Degree at the University of Derby in Motorsport Technology. Again, I completely see the need for a level of competence in literacy but I am also heartbroken for those kids who struggle with those required competences but who display a real talent or a real gift for creative or practical subjects.

Our system disenfranchises these young people and discards them from Higher education and it seems to me an entirely illogical way of assessing someone’s ability in their chosen field, particularly when the chosen field is far removed from the enforced entry requirements in English and Maths. Perhaps then there is value in the new Numeracy and Literacy qualifications we are anticipating in the Curriculum for Excellence, but their true value will only be demonstrated if Universities accept these qualifications, thereby opening up Higher education to a wider yet equally deserving audience.

Comment

Paying price for a shameful failure to get the sums right

Filed Under: Education, Relating to University, Scotsman Articles by Rod Grant — Leave a comment
9 June, 2010

Published, The Scotsman, 9th February, 2010

The announcement of a 40% cut in student teacher places is a crushing indictment of the failure of the people responsible for working out how many teachers are required. Somebody, somewhere is really shockingly poor at basic arithmetic. Correct me if I’m wrong, should the equation not be thus: Write down the number of teachers who are due to reach their retirement age, add the average number of teachers who leave the service annually, factor in known demographic changes, and work out the number of teachers you will therefore require in the coming academic year. You would think that we might have got the hang of this by now. Indeed, a great deal of time and effort does go into these calculations and yet they appear, almost always, to be reactive. Too many teachers qualified in the last two years so the powers that be now cut student teacher places by a staggering 40% (and higher in some parts of the country). The reality is that in 2014, as a direct result of this announced cut, The Scotsman will be reporting on the fact that there is a chronic shortage of qualified teachers.

A recently qualified teacher had previously covered a class in my school on a short-term basis and proved herself to be exceptionally good. On my recent request to her to return for further supply days, she apologised and informed me that she was unavailable because she had taken up a full-time, permanent post at a bank. How sad that having spent 4 years in training, followed by a Probationer placement for a year, that this young teacher has been forced into alternative employment because there was simply not enough work.

If you are going to allow young people to spend 5 years of their lives qualifying for a really worthy and important profession should you not be a little more rigorous in  working out the number of teachers your country actually requires. It is simply not good enough to be getting this so wrong, so often. My Head’s report would read: Must do better; numeracy a real weakness…

Comment

Education must be about more than achieving the right grades

Filed Under: Assessment, Curriculum for Excellence, Education, Relating to University, Scotsman Articles by Rod Grant — 1 Comment
9 June, 2010

Interview Published, The Scotsman, 13 January, 2010, and in ‘Independent Schools Magazine’ , July 2010

I get the feeling that we do not ask ourselves this question often enough. What is the purpose of a school? What is it actually for? If you follow our current thinking it would appear that it is fundamentally founded on the belief that schools are doing well if their pupils achieve a set of excellent examination results. The logical conclusion, therefore, is that, above all, we should ensure our pupils’ heads are filled with the required knowledge to allow them to pass a series of examinations. Oh dear, oh dear…

At the moment, our secondary education system is a protracted application process for tertiary education and we are the poorer for it. I have met many people with first class honours degrees who are, in my opinion, eminently unemployable and many people who leave school at sixteen with few qualifications who are hugely successful and eminently employable. Now we must not see these cases as the rule, but they are not merely a small number of ‘exceptions’ to that rule.

Education is being damaged by the need to jump through academic hoops that actually curtail an individual’s imagination and, in many ways, damage their originality of thought. Universities now complain that students arrive lacking fundamental skills. In my opinion, they arrive lacking these skills because of our need to assess learning in a very uncreative manner. This is the current process: teach the content of the curriculum, learn the content of the curriculum, regurgitate the content of the curriculum under examination conditions and do this well to receive an A grade. My contention is that this approach is fundamentally flawed and actually quite dangerous.

The independent sector does not get away scot-free from these criticisms. Too often we spoon-feed our students to the extent that we take away their capacity to ‘think’ and, indeed, to think outside the box. Too many of our pupils enter University without the tools to achieve success in a less structured and less formal environment. We need to do more to prepare our pupils for the realities of life in the real world. More work experience placements, more work with disadvantaged sections of society, more hands-on, practical application of knowledge, more freedom to make mistakes and a greater sense of responsibility and independence.

Our students need to start being allowed to develop their creativity and their critical thinking. We need to look at the education systems of other countries and learn from their successes. Scandinavian countries, in particular Finland, have been out-performing us for more than a decade. If you look at their systems of public education, you see one vital component which is different to our own. Examinations or tests, of any kind, do not kick in before the age of 16. This means that education from 6-15 is allowed to develop without the worry of “passing the tests”.

Universities should not be allowed to wag the dog (i.e. our schools). We should leave it up to individual Universities to work out how they attract potential students and how they assess them. Schools should concentrate on educating their pupils rather than schooling them. We need a period of ‘educational enlightenment’ in the United Kingdom, driven by ensuring our young people have skills and knowledge, not knowledge alone. It is my contention that if we worry less about league tables and more about individual development, then we can become a nation of invention and industry once again. Currently, we are not achieving those dreams and those aspirations and I, for one, am fed up with the notion that a good education equals a series of As in examinations. Why? Because it just isn’t so.

So, what is a good education? Well, it should be about developing individuals into people who are tolerant, cultured, have high self-esteem but with humility at their core, who have a set of skills that allow them to create, problem-solve, analyse, reflect and consider. This is not ‘pie in the sky’. This is absolutely achievable for all of Britain’s children, but we need to radically alter our view of what education is actually for and we need to do it now.

Comment
Powered by WordPress | Theme: Motion by 85ideas.