This discussion is locked.

You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

How many GCSEs?

At a meeting of parents it was mentioned that back when they were at secondary school it was common to take only 8 or 9 subjects for GCSE whereas in more recent years students often take 12 or 13 GCSEs.

How many GCSEs do you think is sufficient and appropriate for a career in engineering and how many is overkill?

Parents

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

For a historical context in the 1970s most major employers of 16 year old school leavers for training as a prospective “professional engineer” would expect 4 GCE O level grade C or grade 1 CSE (the qualifications were later combined). Mathematics, Science and English Language were usually required. The typical training pathway would be four years of ONC and HNC or in some sectors the C&G Technician courses, much of which later became combined by BTEC. Example sectors would be Electricity Generation and Distribution, Telecommunications, Water, Mining, Steel, Chemicals, Manufacturing, MOD and Armed Forces , Merchant Navy etc. In my Midlands Comprehensive School (a former Secondary Modern), few stayed into 6th form or aspired to university and to this day its most distinguished alma mater remains England’s greatest football captain (no bias from me there).

Fast forward to this century, when I was responsible for recruiting Engineers (and others) for what is now a “Degree Apprenticeship”. Following a carefully validated study by occupation psychologists we would place greater reliance on objective psychological test scores than examination results, although good exam results would obviously impress. We would ideally be looking for a balanced individual with some determination and self-discipline which exam success might help to indicate, but comparing in a competitive sense different grades was of little value. Obviously some schools are better “exam factories” than others.

Many aspects of engineering require initiative, artistry and perspiration as much as scientific analysis. I regret that many of the messages put out on behalf of the profession, by those of an academic persuasion or “hair shirt” followers, focus mostly on mathematics and that recognition within of our profession has come to largely be determined by academic proficiency in that subject at an early age. I also regret the “lazy” approach of many employers who either adopt wholesale or mimic academic selection processes. This may whittle down a pile of CVs usefully, but will not identify the person with the greatest potential to succeed in many engineering roles. For example, which examinations illustrate an ability to negotiate or even independent thinking?

To return to Arran’s question, Sociology doesn’t get a mention (I got an O level) or Geography (I got one of them too) or Art (you guessed) I didn’t like history but love it now, etc etc. But on the whole I wonder what is the point of all this sub-division and specialisation at such an early age, for example if I study “economics” do I get an economist to teach me or a mathematics teacher doubling up? Perhaps we should give more thought to what benefits the young person (customer), most rather than the provider, but I suppose that this is the nature of “monopolistic industries”.

I actually think that standards on the whole have risen, but so much more knowledge is readily available. For example, I learnt more from sneaking off to watch Crown Court on TV and listening to radio 4 over breakfast than from many a boring school lesson. I also appeared on The World This Weekend to help discuss how some trash novels of the time encouraged youngsters to read more, rather than being “force fed classic novels”. Although unfortunately I wasn’t very successful in the English Literature exam having only skim read the required books. In the same vein, mathematics applied to a useful purpose can be interesting and not too difficult. How many people’s potential enthusiasm for numeracy has been ground to dust in the classroom? I also learned a great deal behind the bike sheds and from being thrashed with a cane, but let’s not get into that.

I highlighted in another thread how many young people are being harmed because of the exam factory competitive mentality and fear of failure that has developed. Many others finding all this not to their taste, slip into bad company often also suffering terrible consequences as a result. Engineers have made a great contribution to greatly reducing many of the harms that people suffer in workplaces and elsewhere. Analysis of evidence heard at inquests shows that 63 (43%) of the 145 suicides among those aged under 20 in 2014-15 were experiencing academic pressures of different sorts before their death. Almost one in three – 46 (32%) – had exams at the time, or coming up soon, or were waiting for exam results. There is also an epidemic of violence stoked by those disaffected from the education system. A blame culture takes us nowhere, but can we do anything to help to reduce some of these harms. At the same time as we seek to address issues like gender inequality, what about class and the lack of opportunity for many who might in the past have found advancement through an engineering (incl construction) apprenticeship.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

For a historical context in the 1970s most major employers of 16 year old school leavers for training as a prospective “professional engineer” would expect 4 GCE O level grade C or grade 1 CSE (the qualifications were later combined). Mathematics, Science and English Language were usually required. The typical training pathway would be four years of ONC and HNC or in some sectors the C&G Technician courses, much of which later became combined by BTEC. Example sectors would be Electricity Generation and Distribution, Telecommunications, Water, Mining, Steel, Chemicals, Manufacturing, MOD and Armed Forces , Merchant Navy etc. In my Midlands Comprehensive School (a former Secondary Modern), few stayed into 6th form or aspired to university and to this day its most distinguished alma mater remains England’s greatest football captain (no bias from me there).

Fast forward to this century, when I was responsible for recruiting Engineers (and others) for what is now a “Degree Apprenticeship”. Following a carefully validated study by occupation psychologists we would place greater reliance on objective psychological test scores than examination results, although good exam results would obviously impress. We would ideally be looking for a balanced individual with some determination and self-discipline which exam success might help to indicate, but comparing in a competitive sense different grades was of little value. Obviously some schools are better “exam factories” than others.

Many aspects of engineering require initiative, artistry and perspiration as much as scientific analysis. I regret that many of the messages put out on behalf of the profession, by those of an academic persuasion or “hair shirt” followers, focus mostly on mathematics and that recognition within of our profession has come to largely be determined by academic proficiency in that subject at an early age. I also regret the “lazy” approach of many employers who either adopt wholesale or mimic academic selection processes. This may whittle down a pile of CVs usefully, but will not identify the person with the greatest potential to succeed in many engineering roles. For example, which examinations illustrate an ability to negotiate or even independent thinking?

To return to Arran’s question, Sociology doesn’t get a mention (I got an O level) or Geography (I got one of them too) or Art (you guessed) I didn’t like history but love it now, etc etc. But on the whole I wonder what is the point of all this sub-division and specialisation at such an early age, for example if I study “economics” do I get an economist to teach me or a mathematics teacher doubling up? Perhaps we should give more thought to what benefits the young person (customer), most rather than the provider, but I suppose that this is the nature of “monopolistic industries”.

I actually think that standards on the whole have risen, but so much more knowledge is readily available. For example, I learnt more from sneaking off to watch Crown Court on TV and listening to radio 4 over breakfast than from many a boring school lesson. I also appeared on The World This Weekend to help discuss how some trash novels of the time encouraged youngsters to read more, rather than being “force fed classic novels”. Although unfortunately I wasn’t very successful in the English Literature exam having only skim read the required books. In the same vein, mathematics applied to a useful purpose can be interesting and not too difficult. How many people’s potential enthusiasm for numeracy has been ground to dust in the classroom? I also learned a great deal behind the bike sheds and from being thrashed with a cane, but let’s not get into that.

I highlighted in another thread how many young people are being harmed because of the exam factory competitive mentality and fear of failure that has developed. Many others finding all this not to their taste, slip into bad company often also suffering terrible consequences as a result. Engineers have made a great contribution to greatly reducing many of the harms that people suffer in workplaces and elsewhere. Analysis of evidence heard at inquests shows that 63 (43%) of the 145 suicides among those aged under 20 in 2014-15 were experiencing academic pressures of different sorts before their death. Almost one in three – 46 (32%) – had exams at the time, or coming up soon, or were waiting for exam results. There is also an epidemic of violence stoked by those disaffected from the education system. A blame culture takes us nowhere, but can we do anything to help to reduce some of these harms. At the same time as we seek to address issues like gender inequality, what about class and the lack of opportunity for many who might in the past have found advancement through an engineering (incl construction) apprenticeship.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

How many GCSEs?

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Community Rules & Guidelines