16-24 year old - Our Future Stars! Or not?

R

Ricardodaforce

Self requested ban
Suspended / Banned
Messages
18,340
Edit My Images
No
The OECD has just released a survey of adult skills. This Survey of Adult Skills, implemented in 24 countries, and the Education and Skills Online Assessment for individuals are part of the package of tools available to support countries develop, implement and evaluate policies that foster both the development of skills and the optimal use of existing skills.

I don't know why but the survey didn't feature the UK, but England/Northern Ireland. So what does it indicate?

In England/N. Ireland (UK), the younger adult population (16-24 year-olds) scores significantly below the average in literacy of the OECD countries participating in the Survey.

In numeracy, they score significantly below the average.

Doesn't bode well for our next generation of workers does it?

What's the problem here? Schooling? Bad parenting? Is it somehow symptomatic of our video games and social media society?

What are your views?
 
We have two nieces in their mid twenties, university educated, well spoken, but neither can spell (if Christmas/birthday/invitation cards are anything to go by), and their basic arithmetic is quite dreadful.
I suppose that is what happens if people are totally reliant on "apps", computers, calculators, and see nothing wrong in communicating in "textspeak".
 
A friend who is a university lecturer (or was before she started breeding) was horrified when one of her students turned in an essay in text speak. It's not as though her subject would make any sort of ambiguity allowable - international law is rather more particular! Personally, I don't use it in texts, let alone less relaxed communication, although I can read most of it. Posts that use it tend to be ignored by me.
 
different education system in Scotland which is why it wouldn't be included in the survey
 
A number of things. Much of the blame is down to schools who gave dumbed down over the years. Also parents who don't do reading etched with kids. I also think reliance on computers has not helped with auto correct etc. a friend teaches mechanics and while they are not expected to be geniuses a huge amount are awful at basic skills.
 
Like with most things there are many causes. Certainly doesn't help the children if mum and dad(step-dad, lodger, uncle etc) can hardly read and write. How are they going to install the love of books & reading if they are unable to string a sentence together.

Schools are not allowed to stream now, so how do they cope when half the class has English as a second language.

Then you have the government constantly moving what and how we teach our children.
 
Considering how little I did at primary school for several years it beats me how they can be turning out such ill educated children when they're supposedly learning much more from an earlier age! We were streamed to some degree from age 6 or so. Everyone started in class 1 and the older ones were sent into class 2 along with the brighter ones after a few months. I don't think we realised at the time. Just thought it was random...

A levels used to be difficult. Now they're just glorified GCSEs.

Many other countries of the OECD will have the same access to computers, phones and such like.

The UK has a celebrity culture based around on being thick. Do other countries have the same? The thicker and more pig ignorant you appear to be the better. It's not cool or welcome to be intelligent. Youth of today wants to be famous for being stupid and having an all year tan.
 
Last edited:
ding76uk said:
Evidence?
Click to expand...

Mysteriously increasing pass rates year after year.

Examiners rejecting questions that are too hard even though they've been used in previous years.

Anyone in higher education will tell you the same which is why lots of universities are now using their own assessments and ignoring A levels as they know they're useless.
 
When I sat my exams in school, calculators were just becoming readily available and cheap enough for everyone to buy. We were not allowed to use one at all in the exam room, nowadays I doubt many schoolkids could answer a question without one.

Literacy and numeracy are falling because no-one has to learn to add up or spell any more, the more instant access technology gives us the less we feel we have to 'store' in our heads. There's a film called Idiocracy about a guy waking up 500 years in the future and finding everyone is thick as two short planks because everything is done for them, it's supposed to be a comedy but I think it could well be prophetic.
 
srichards said:
Mysteriously increasing pass rates year after year.

Examiners rejecting questions that are too hard even though they've been used in previous years.

Anyone in higher education will tell you the same which is why lots of universities are now using their own assessments and ignoring A levels as they know they're useless.
Click to expand...

Evidence?
 
cambsno said:
A number of things. Much of the blame is down to schools who gave dumbed down over the years. Also parents who don't do reading etched with kids. I also think reliance on computers has not helped with auto correct etc. a friend teaches mechanics and while they are not expected to be geniuses a huge amount are awful at basic skills.
Click to expand...

Whilst I am guilty of mis-spelling etc I would, if writing as you have, at least ensured that the spelling and sense of what you have written, did not read as bsdly as your contribution has. Especially given the subject of this thread.

Steve
 
ding76uk said:
So, your argument is based on hearsay, then, when asked for evidence we are told to read the papers? Not the most powerful argument.
Click to expand...

It's current coalition policy to put an end to grade inflation for a start.

Where's your proof grades aren't being inflated and standards are increasing when this recent OECD report says the precise reverse in effect?

I'm sure more of you would prefer to find contrary information anyway :D
 
srichards said:
It's current coalition policy to put an end to grade inflation for a start.

Where's your proof grades aren't being inflated and standards are increasing when this recent OECD report says the precise reverse in effect?

I'm sure more of you would prefer to find contrary information anyway :D
Click to expand...

I am not the one making the claims. Surely you would be able to come up with something, you seem so sure of your point of view.
 
Last edited:
Based on the literacy and intelligence I've seen from some users of advancing years on this forum, I'd be amazed if 16-24 year olds could be getting less intelligent/educated :D
 
srichards said:
Read the education sections of the broadsheets. It's all in there.
Click to expand...

I asked for your evidence not a pointer to politically biased media. How have you reduced thousands of pages of empirical data to a bland few lines of opinion.

In passing I mark degree level papers and project work. Standards of writing vary but content and knowledge of subject are still of a standard that are the major requirement for students to demonstrate knowledge of.

Too easy to blah hard working teachers and students.

Steve
 
Last edited:
ding76uk said:
Evidence?
Click to expand...

Conversations with the assistant dean for admissions in a science (that's a pure science, not a social science) department at a university (not a "new university").

They have to teach remedial mathematics to an increasing number of undergraduates coming in with grade A at A level to get them up to the standard required for the course. Either the A level standard has dropped over the last 20 years or, well, that's the only possibility, because the level of mathematics required for the course is unchanged.

If you wish to posit a different theory for the increasing need for remedial mathematics teaching to first year undergraduates, I would be interested to hear it.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Conversations with the assistant dean for admissions in a science (that's a pure science, not a social science) department at a university (not a "new university").

They have to teach remedial mathematics to an increasing number of undergraduates coming in with grade A at A level to get them up to the standard required for the course. Either the A level standard has dropped over the last 20 years or, well, that's the only possibility, because the level of mathematics required for the course is unchanged.

If you wish to posit a different theory for the increasing need for remedial mathematics teaching to first year undergraduates, I would be interested to hear it.
Click to expand...

The technology and engineering papers I mark show a clear high level of applied mathematics in practical use. Perhaps indicating that remedial courses work? As I am not involved with admissions but with exit work I would not know. I do know that British engineers are found globally employed in high technology projects as designers and on the front line.

S
 
onomatopoeia said:
Conversations with the assistant dean for admissions in a science (that's a pure science, not a social science) department at a university (not a "new university").

They have to teach remedial mathematics to an increasing number of undergraduates coming in with grade A at A level to get them up to the standard required for the course. Either the A level standard has dropped over the last 20 years or, well, that's the only possibility, because the level of mathematics required for the course is unchanged.

If you wish to posit a different theory for the increasing need for remedial mathematics teaching to first year undergraduates, I would be interested to hear it.
Click to expand...

Teaching to the test. That is the reason, in my opinion and shared by many. You teach to the test because you are only judged as a teacher on results of said test. The ability to teach breadth has been removed by heads as it is not necessary. In a time of payment by results and a memory test to pass a subject at the end of two years, it is now going to be the norm. The problem will only get worse with the proposed rigour introduced under Gove.

There was an interesting piece in the Economist a while about the supposed ease of A Level results, which I thought was well balanced about the subject.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2012/08/levels-results-4
 
ding76uk said:
Teaching to the test. That is the reason, in my opinion and shared by many. You teach to the test because you are only judged as a teacher on results of said test. The ability to teach breadth has been removed by heads as it is not necessary. In a time of payment by results and a memory test to pass a subject at the end of two years, it is now going to be the norm. The problem will only get worse with the proposed rigour introduced under Gove.

There was an interesting piece in the Economist a while about the supposed ease of A Level results, which I thought was well balanced about the subject.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/blighty/2012/08/levels-results-4
Click to expand...

Balance! Spot on.

One thing

It is the targets set by governments and tssted by Ofsted and not thd Heads that set the range of teaching. Heads are paid by results. That even top schools are being viewed as Outstanding by Ofsted Inspectors are now being sedn ss cruising shows the level of interference from government. An outstanding rated school had their inspections extended to 5 year intervals whilst lesser schools had 2 year intervals, even that is changing. Politics in education is wrecking many schools as the rate of change is unsustainable.

I stood down as a Chair of Governors due to the ridiculous moving feast of government initiatives. Being an outstanding rated school was still not enough.

S
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Balance! Spot on.

One thing

It is the targets set by governments and tssted by Ofsted and not thd Heads that set the range of teaching. Heads are paid by results. That even top schools are being viewed as Outstanding by Ofsted Inspectors are now being sedn ss cruising shows the level of interference from government. An outstanding rated school had their inspections extended to 5 year intervals whilst lesser schools had 2 year intervals, even that is changing. Politics in education is wrecking many schools as the rate of change is unsustainable.

I stood down as a Chair of Governors due to the ridiculous moving feast of government initiatives. Being an outstanding rated school was still not enough.

S
Click to expand...

You are right, but heads in many cases also have something to answer for. I know of schools local to me where heads have instructed teachers to not encourage (allow) students who are below the C-D borderline to attend extra study classes.

It is all to easy to blame teachers, but they only do what they are told.
 
ding76uk said:
Teaching to the test. That is the reason, in my opinion and shared by many. You teach to the test because you are only judged as a teacher on results of said test. The ability to teach breadth has been removed by heads as it is not necessary. In a time of payment by results and a memory test to pass a subject at the end of two years, it is now going to be the norm. The problem will only get worse with the proposed rigour introduced under Gove.
Click to expand...

However, in mathematics and in physics, you cannot pass A levels by remembering stuff, you must be able to understand underlying principles of the subject an apply those principles to solve the problems presented. There is no essay writing, it's pretty much all equations.

I do not see how you can teach mathematics to a test, you either know how to solve a class of problem or you don't.
 
ding76uk said:
Evidence?
Click to expand...

Relatives who have "A" passes at English and Maths, yet are significantly worse than myself when it comes to spelling, grammar and basic arithmetic - how much more evidence do you need?

I should add, that I am in my mid fifties and only achieved five "O" level passes - Eng Lang, Eng Lit, French, History and Geography - I failed Maths.

From what I have seen in the workplace over the past twenty years, newly qualified employees seem to lack a good command of English, have very little "general knowledge", and do not seem able to problem solve or use lateral thinking.
 
Is it their fault or the fault of ever changing goalposts in the education system?
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Whilst I am guilty of mis-spelling etc I would, if writing as you have, at least ensured that the spelling and sense of what you have written, did not read as bsdly as your contribution has. Especially given the subject of this thread.

Steve
Click to expand...

If you are going to lecture others, then it may be a good idea to check your reply;)

Of course, everyone makes the odd "typo", but that is not really the point of this thread.
 
I think the problem has been that the whole education system has overlooked for years the fact that we are not all the same and there is a natural variation in peoples ability to learn/solve/recall anything you care to test.

So if we keep "fiddling" the books to make a large proportion of the population seem better than they actually are we have no clear idea what the actual performance is and everyone lives in a "Emperors new clothes" situation where no one will point out what's going on.

Of course years ago when everyone was not quite so concerned about the little darlings "feelings" then it was OK for someone to be told that they were not at the top of the pile. I think this was called LIFE.

But now, well everyone has to be given a "chance to succeed" - but they achieve this by cooking the books :nono:

Discuss :D

David
 
I'm not sure about how much tests are dumbed down. I'm 31. During the time I sat A-level physics, I used an old book from the library full of Physics questions. They were from the 70s, whereas it was 1999/2000 when I was doing my A-levels. Even then, there was a huge discrepancy in the standard of the questions which the older ones being almost purely mathematical eg calculate the moment about a point, compared to the more modern one of "name five things you can do to increase the rate of heating some water". Not sure what things are like now.

How many kids now read for fun? As a kid, during school holidays we would go to the library and take out books to read. There were no computers at home, only four channels on TV (often boring), no phones or other gadgets. We either played physical games outdoors, played indoors, or read.

IMO there are too many distractions in the modern world and education is sidelined by kids in order to accommodate other trivial stuff like facebook, video games, reality tv shows etc. I will freely admit that since I've had an iphone and laptop, I spend so much time flicking through things that it has affected my attention span to the point where I can no longer watch a TV programme for an hour with full concentration, let alone watch an entire film. I imagine it's worse for kids (unless they've managed to adapt).
 
andy700 said:
Relatives who have "A" passes at English and Maths, yet are significantly worse than myself when it comes to spelling, grammar and basic arithmetic - how much more evidence do you need?

I should add, that I am in my mid fifties and only achieved five "O" level passes - Eng Lang, Eng Lit, French, History and Geography - I failed Maths.

From what I have seen in the workplace over the past twenty years, newly qualified employees seem to lack a good command of English, have very little "general knowledge", and do not seem able to problem solve or use lateral thinking.
Click to expand...

More than anecdotal evidence would be good. I see pupils with excellent verbal and literacy skills day to day. Yes there are bad ones, but they are generally outnumbered.

Also applying your learning for 30 years is an important factor here. I am much better at written English now than I ever was when I passed my GCSE. Purely because of my application of it on a daily basis.

Time has moved on. We no longer need to recall vast amounts of information, which has to be reflected in modern learning. How many jobs do we have on test at the end of 2 years, in fact how many university courses have this? Application through project work is the way of the modern world. I am not saying coursework is not open to cheating, it is, but one exam will allow those with a great short term memory to do well, even if they messed about for two years, whereas someone who worked hard, but has trouble with nerves on the day of the exam, will be judged a failure.
 
Last edited:
omens said:
How many kids now read for fun? As a kid, during school holidays we would go to the library and take out books to read. There were no computers at home, only four channels on TV (often boring), no phones or other gadgets. We either played physical games outdoors, played indoors, or read.
Click to expand...

Many of them still do.

BTW, when I got my first computer as a child and taught myself to program it (by reading books), there were only three TV channels ;) . Programming was (and is) much more fun than playing outdoors.
 
ding76uk said:
More than anecdotal evidence would be good. I see pupils with excellent verbal and literacy skills day to day. Yes there are bad ones, but they are generally outnumbered.
Click to expand...

I thought it relevant to provide "anecdotal evidence", because that is what I have experienced. It would also seem to be the same overall view of employers, who find many young employees with inadequate basic skills.
You ask for evidence, but do not seem at all happy when people provide it, based on real events.

I also believe that the year on year improvements in exam results, are possibly down to teachers not putting pupils in for exams, if they feel that there is the slightest chance of them failing. This is how to massage the statistics in a World where schools are being driven by targets. Simply remove a whole load of duff pupils from even sitting exams, and the pass rate is bound to rise, IF the pass rate is calculated on the pupils who take exams.
 
When you think that at the time I left school (1952) only 5% of students took any sort of exam at O level. It still produced enough engineers, scientists and administrators to supply the needs of the country. Even less went on to take A level, then took diplomas or degrees.
Even to day people are under educated by any standard, but that does not mean they are stupid.

Many of the poorly educated will go on to become successful millionaires.
And many of the brightest and best educated will end up unemployed even unemployable.
I am far from convinced that the academic education advocated by Gove is the magic wand he thinks it is.
 
andy700 said:
I thought it relevant to provide "anecdotal evidence", because that is what I have experienced. It would also seem to be the same overall view of employers, who find many young employees with inadequate basic skills. You ask for evidence, but do not seem at all happy when people provide it, based on real events. I also believe that the year on year improvements in exam results, are possibly down to teachers not putting pupils in for exams, if they feel that there is the slightest chance of them failing. This is how to massage the statistics in a World where schools are being driven by targets. Simply remove a whole load of duff pupils from even sitting exams, and the pass rate is bound to rise, IF the pass rate is calculated on the pupils who take exams.
Click to expand...

I am fine with anecdotal evidence, but as I said most of the young people I come across are well woken and literate. It is my experience, but not necessarily fact.

You are totally correct about the exams though, that is how it can work in some cases.
 
Well woken? Most of the young people I see are 3/4 asleep...
 
I blame the baby-boomers. They had it easy, everything was given to them and even if you were an idiot you would get by just fine - there were so many jobs, so much 'free' money flying around. Now they've stuffed the world and are blaming it on their kids who have to suffer the mess they made.

Kids today aren't any more stupid, quite possibly the opposite in fact. But, they do have a much harsher and more biased world to survive in. That, or they're just lazy freeloaders who expect everything handed to them on a platter... or was that the baby-boomers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top