It's utter madness. This government isn't a Labour government at all it's a soundbite, make it up on a fag packet government. The people who work in education on the 'coal face' are meant to implement each new government directive and give kids a good education.
Head teachers and school principals now rarely if ever teach and they are so busy managing the river of drivel pouring out of the DCSF they need to employ managers to handle it all.
Education in this country is going the same way as the NHS. Think Tanks or more often these days aloof and ridiculously expensive 'consultants' come up with the ideas, politicians adopt and adapt them to make them 'better' civil servants implement the ideas either begrudglingly or enthusiastically depending on what they think of them. School 'managers' then oversee the missives routes through to the teaching staff who are supposed to integrate and upgrade the school day to accommodate the drivel.
Before they get to do this another piece of legislation comes hurtling down the drivel production line and as the teachers cannot cope under the flood more managers get employed to handle the drivel that shouldn't have been there in the first place.
This process is killing the NHS as the frontline doctors and nurses are now outnumbered by managers who do sod all to benefit patient care. It won't be long before teachers are outnumbered by managers. The Academy has 51 managerial posts, some of whom actually still teach but it's only some.
Here's the story and the link
Ministers will pay for schools to enter pupils for the International GCSE in nine subjects, including French, history, geography, art and design, music and business studies.
A decision on other courses will be made later this month.
It follows a lengthy wrangle between Cambridge International Examinations - one of two exam boards offering the IGCSE - and the Government.
Accreditation for the courses follows a decision by examiners to register them under the alternative name of Cambridge International Certificates to avoid confusion with existing GCSEs.
They have previously only been offered in private schools where headmasters claim they are a more rigorous alternative. Courses ditch coursework altogether and are assessed entirely in an end-of-year exam. Unlike existing exams, they are not split into bite-sized chunks and individual parts cannot be retaken to improve grades.
Officials confirmed that nine qualifications could be offered in state schools. They are all in non-compulsory subjects that pupils currently take on a voluntary basis between the age of 14 and 16. The other approved courses are Greek, Hindi and English as a second language.
A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families said many others did "not appear to meet the requirements of the National Curriculum" and the exam board has been asked to make further representations.
"If they do not meet the requirements of the National Curriculum they will not be approved for use in maintained schools," he said.
Ann Puntis, the exam board's chief executive, said: "Almost all of the syllabuses submitted have been approved in principle for funding. For a handful, we were asked at the beginning of summer to provide a little more additional information- it's a very rigorous process. But we're optimistic that we should hear pretty soon and close to the start of schools' Autumn term."
Brilliant, employers will chose an IGCSE candidate over a GCSE candidate. So the school you go to could now determine whether you get employed.
All I can say is, schools will perhaps be wary of an exam that is more likely to produce lower grades. "I came out with a B in IGCSE" does not quite sound as good as "I got an A* at GCSE"
Although it is perhaps nice for those rocket scientists to stand out from the crowd at 16, is it really necessary.
Their worth will be proved when they come out of university with degrees in Astro Physics. GCSE's after all are only a stepping stone and you only need FIVE grades A-C to progress to anything you want to do, be it sixth form or apprenticeships.
The scary thing is that this smacks of the CSE/O-level system. CSE's were never rated by employers, is this where GCSE's are heading?
I have to slightly disagree on the principle diplomas though, if you had a not so bright child, that would struggle with a range of subjects, you would perhaps be thankful for them.
However….
They can only be the equivalent of 3 GCSE's not 7 as claimed. They are taken the same time as the 3 GCSE option subjects and therefore cannot possibly be the equivalent of 7 GCSE's.
If the government starts marketing them at their true value, then maybe they will be more accepted.
I would not however allow my child to do a diploma under the current regulations. You have to pass all sections to get a diploma. If you fail one part you come away with nothing. That is one hell of a risk. If you take 3 GCSE options however, you can fail 2 and still come away with 1 qualification on top of your 4 core subjects therefore allowing you access to sixth form etc.
Diplomas still have a long way to go before they add up and channelling a child into one subject so early is potentially disastrous to their future options.
They certainly should not be targeted at the wide audience they are being.