³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

Home coursework

Comments

1. At 05:28 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Mrs Rowan wrote:

   Where are all these people that are in favour of coursework?
   It is hard to find a teacher, or teenager for that matter, who is in favour.
   I heard with horror that QCA are planning to reintroduce coursework, in whatever format, or are they afraid to call it a test, assessment or exam.

2. At 05:30 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Alison Haylock wrote:

   From 2009, GCE English Literature coursework will increase to 50%. This will be marked by teaching staff, as is currently the case. Will the exam entry fee go down to reflect the reduction of the exam paper? No. Will teaching staff be paid for marking course work? No. As well as teaching, I examine for OCR and AQA. I am paid per paper. Now all A level teachers will have to mark to examination standard, without being paiud for it. In the moderation process, a sample of 20 or more scripts are sent to a moderator. If 3 of these are within a tolerance of plus or minus 2 marks, the centre's marks are confirmed without any of the other papers being read. Money for old rope? As a teacher, I agree with the concept of course work. I just want the whole lot bundled up and sent off to the exam boards who set it, and should mark it for the exam fee.

3. At 05:51 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Big Sister wrote:

   Once upon a time there wasn't an internet. In those days, coursework was a good way of helping a student to learn research skills, essential for further education. Now there is the World Wide Web and plagiarism is rife.

   Coursework is still a good idea, but how plagiarism can be avoided is a challenge.

4. At 05:55 PM on 13 Jun 2007, sandi Dunn wrote:

   Half the story? the doctor's story. why did you not have the health minister on to answer this ridiculous and typical situation? I am fed up with NHS!

5. At 05:58 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Gavin Bateman wrote:

   Isabel Nesbitt from the QCA is obviously following in the best traditions of members of that august institution - she is TOTALLY out of touch with the real world.
   I have worked for 7 yrs as a teacher (first in an inner-city school in Sunderland then at an independent school) and the idea that children "want people to know that it's all their own work" is frankly tosh.
   The one common thread is that children want as many high qualifications as possible and to do as little work as they can get away with in order to achieve them.
   Coursework should be trashed immediately and never revisited.
   I have rarely heard a person in a position of such influence talk such arrant and palpable nonsense.

6. At 06:06 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Elaine Cree wrote:

   If Tesco manages to maintain keep food prices low, in particular milk, which we are told by farmers is driving them out of business. Why can't the NHS treat the drug companies in exactly the same way. They need to learn to squeeze their suppliers and not just hand over our taxes to them.

7. At 06:14 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Karen wrote:

   I was in the first year of GCSE and had 100% English and English Lit qualifications. Playing the system was present even then. We had to write 15 essays for each paper over the course of the two years and select 10. The idea was to show development over the two years. One essay in each had to be in controlled conditions.

   I caught up with about 6 or 7 essays in the Christmas hols of my 5th year but was told by my teacher that I should put the date that the essay was set and not the date it was completed. About 1/5 of the year were in similar positions.

   Essays were swapped on the bus with people in other teaching groups or even other schools who had got reasonable marks. I was never party to this but we were encouraged to "share ideas" and "get feedback from others" before we submitted our finished piece. There were no guidance on how to apply this freedom. There was no penalty for being late. There was no real penalty for poor spelling or grammar because it was the content that was important.

   A friend of mine missed one of the controlled essays through illness (English - Listening once to a ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Radio 4 News Bulletin and writing a factual piece on what had been heard). The teacher let her take the tape home to do the work by herself. She got full marks for that assignment. She usually averaged at about 32/40. This wasn't questioned by anyone.

   My sister was in the second year of GCSEs and had 50% coursework 50% exam qualifications. She earned her GCSE, mine feels a little false when I think of the effort she put in.

   I went to a Grammar school, she went to a comprehensive. All of my year got straight As in English and English Literature. I'm not sure how many of us deserved them. My sister got a B but merited it.

8. At 06:14 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Debbie Stocks wrote:

   Who do these people at QCA think they are?
   I can see the purpose of coursework. Completing it teaches student to research, sift, evaluate and present their work - all useful skills. But QCA vastly underestimate the amount of time students spend on it. Coursework can amount to fifty, sixty, seventy or more pages, all meticulously numbered and arranged. Or practical projects that take an extraordinary amount of time to complete.
   This "super-project" is becoming so unwieldy that it is a disincentive to taking many subjects.
   My child has just taken his last GCSE exam. His coursework represents countless hours of his own work. His school have been supportive, and teaching staff have given up their own time to provide sessions on how to tackle the task or to open workshops in school holiday times. But should they be asked to quadruple this amount of sacrifice, to supervise students completing coursework in school hours?
   The latest ideas on coursework smack of a regime that mistrusts students and expects a massive task completed while tying their hands behind their backs. Not to mention the impact on teaching staff. It's an early insight into the real world, but is it really constructive use of those valuable years?

   
   

9. At 06:16 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Gillian wrote:

   In the space of one year, there has been a fundamental difference at GCSE level, between my daughter, who did a huge amount of coursework at home and my son, who has done practically none at home. This difference could in part be attributed to the fact that they chose different subjects, and that they had different teachers for the compulsory subjects. It could also be due to the fact that their school has become more aware of differences in home circumstances, where not all children receive the same level of support or have access to the same resources, such as the internet.
   Whatever the reasons, I am pleased that my son's teachers have taken steps to redress the balance, and to satisfy themselves that his coursework is indeed his own work, without waiting for an instruction from the Government to do so.

10. At 06:31 PM on 13 Jun 2007, wrote:

    I took my GCSEs 5 years ago and I was disgusted with the way coursework was treated, especially in IT. Most pupils' coursework was mostly done by the teacher (or other pupils, myself included, who were more proficient with the relevant software). The idea that these marks may have given people an advantage in life is ridiculous. I can assure everyone that, while most GCSE pupils know how to use a web browser and MSN Messenger, they know little or nothing about things that employers need, such as spreadsheets and databases.

    I also know of several people who wrote no English coursework whatsoever - it was done entirely by their parents. (Yes, I do mean "entirely"!)

    While coursework is valuable, I prefer the term "continual assessment". The difference, to me at least, is that coursework is marked on one final piece of work, such as an essay, report, or piece of software, whereas continual assessment consists of several marks taken throughout the course.

    However, I do accept the point made above - Alison (2) - about teachers finding the workload difficult to manage, especially given the lack of explicit payment for marking coursework. This needs to be changed, or we will end up with 100%-exam courses, which in my opinion are completely pointless.

11. At 06:32 PM on 13 Jun 2007, wrote:

    Elaine Cree (6) I understand your point, but unfortunately the unintended consequence of this might be a decision by the drug companies to concentrate only on products which make them a profit.

    It is a fact of the system that they have to satisfy their shareholders and make profits to distribute among them, as well as covering the very high costs of drug development over the lengthy timescales it takes to get a drug to market . If making a profit one way is denied to them they will seek others.

    Also I believe, though I'm sorry I don't have a way of checking this at present, that the drugs budget is actually a very small proportion of the overall NHS budget - 2% springs to mind. While clearly this news item related to the specific allocation, or not, to particular patients there are of course other questions to be asked about where the rest of the money goes.

    I thought the item about the surgeon whose attempts to make things function more efficiently was interesting in this context, since he seemed to be arguing with you for a more market driven approach.

12. At 06:38 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Pete wrote:

    As a pupil currently sitting my GCSEs, I agree that coursework in some subjects is a waste of time. However, I'm not sure that plagiarism is the main problem.

    In my experience, it is too much guidance from teachers, with all pupils being given sheets instructed them almost entirely how to write their coursework, meaning that nearly all students get a disproportionately high mark, regardless of their ability. I felt annoyed with this as a high-achieving student, as pupils who were up to 3 grades below me were able to get a very similar mark. This results in their grade from their exam being "bumped up" by a high coursework mark which does not reflect their ability.

    So yes, by all means, scrap coursework in some subjects, or at least give much better guidelines, but remember that it forms a vital part of the final grade, and demonstrates ability outside of exam technique.

13. At 06:42 PM on 13 Jun 2007, wrote:

    It won't be long before they bring in what already happens at some universities. "Peer Assessment".

    You ask all the kids in a class to score every other kid in that subject. You take the median mark and award it to the child. Repeat for every child in every subject.

    Almost everyone ends up with a reasonable pass mark very close to what they would have got had they sat exams with a few failing and a few doing exceptionally well. Just less exams/essays and less marking.

    Of course there would be an outcry...

14. At 06:53 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Perky wrote:

    My children aren't at the coursework stage yet - but my daughter, who is in Year 5, has a variety of homework. I am supportive, but I make her do everything herself and I don't always make sure it's perfect, because I think she has to learn about making mistakes and avoiding them in the future. She is a bright child, but many of her class are getting much more help from their parents than I give her and I can only see this increasing as the Year 6 SATS loom and on into the senior school.

    Which approach is right? It's almost impossible to say - do I hold to my prinicples and only help when asked, and check through at the end for catastrophic mistakes, or do I increase her chances by following the crowd and going to any extreme to get her the best results?

    And what happens to the children whose achievements are partly those of their parents and a fast internet connection? In the long run, they will lose out, because they haven't learned the skills they will need later in life - and then you're a parent that's hampered your child when you thought you were helping.

15. At 06:56 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Big Sister wrote:

    Pete: I agree with you that there's a need for something similar to coursework as it does give the student a chance to demonstrate other qualities.

    Not sure how the plagiarism issue can be addressed. Copying from other students is usually obvious to the teacher concerned, and if the same stuff is being spouted by a bunch of students, rats can be sniffed - but dealing with it is another matter.

    Perhaps there's a need for coursework to be done under controlled conditions. At my Uni, we had papers called 'take aways', which gave you the opportunity to answer more extensively on topics. but where the time restriction (2 to 3 days) and this seems to get round some of the problems. But research is research, and you do need time for that. Hence the need, perhaps, for 'controlled conditions', e.g. in the school library, with papers kept under lock and key in between research sessions.

    Just a thought.

16. At 07:02 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Wonko wrote:

    Did I hear the bit about parents and teacher snot being sure how far to go or how much help to give correctly?

    I took the first GCSEs. I got no help whatsoever from my parents or teachers. We were set work to do and that was it. The teachers knew their pupils, how they wrote, spoke, acted and learnt, so cases of copying or cheating were spotted straight away and given correspondingly low marks. As a result, after the first few were caught no-one bothered because they knew the likely result.

    Mark coursework by all means, but it's a lot harder to cheat in a formal exam.

17. At 09:03 PM on 13 Jun 2007, Piper wrote:

    Sandi Dunn @ 4

    ...half the story, if the public would listen and act upon it would, actually, produce a reasonable result.

    Maybe even, a great result!

    The Doctor we heard from on the programme this evening is only one of several excellent specialists (by reputation) who recognise the appalling and perilous state the NHS is presently in, and are leaving, to work abroad, primarily because their own proven efforts at cost-saving improvements are being overidden and ignored by the "system".

    We heard this evening, from a treatment funding commitee. They have a very difficult task. Made, unfortunately, more difficult by the medical profession. No application for treatment approval, should be submitted by a Consultant/Doctor minus the supporting medical evidence of anticipated success and supporting statistical data and arguments. To do otherwise is a waste of the Commitee's time and the Doctor's time and, time is money. Let's not even discuss the patient's well-being... this is all basic management.

    Yet, the situations we briefly heard about are, regretably, common and recurrent. Nationwide.

    Unless NHS users are prepared to become pro-active on behalf of THEIR/OUR National Health Service, frankly, I doubt that there'll be much of a service left within 10 years. The signs already are that the UK Government will adopt an "Insurance Industry" based service.

    Look at the US and decide if you'll like it...

    The NHS as presently structured is not viable. It really is that simple.

    The NHS, GMC, and all Nursing and ancilliary services require substantial restructuring and reorganising to enable highly professional in-depth monitoring, peer review and accountability. The process will be painful for many in the profession.

    The money presently being "squandered" within the NHS is unbelievably high. And so it goes on... at the moment.

    
    

18. At 09:03 PM on 13 Jun 2007, T Wright wrote:

    I have been teaching for 16 years in comprehensives and the independent sector. Everytime I hear somebody from the QCA say something like "we have worked very hard to ..." my heart sinks because it means more pointless 'initiatives' are on the way. Science teachers have been complaining about cheating for that last 10 years - why is it only now that they have decided to do something about it ...?

    I dont think I have actually met a teacher who thinks that coursework has educative value - we just use it to boost pupils' GCSE grade. Usually it will up their final mark by a grade or two.

    
    I wonder who will be behind these new controlled assessments - do I detect the familiar whiff of Pearson Publishing - who do of course control the GCSE syllabuses - provide textbooks GCSE papers etc etc etc and in exchange earn pots and pots of cash.

    Teachers will find a way to 'improve' the performance of pupils in these 'controlled tests'. There are for example only so many experiments etc that could be asked about - how long before a web-page appears with them listed out?

    A few months ago somebody was selling his AS Level physics coursework for about £10 on eBay. Personally, I though that it would have gone for more...

19. At 10:40 PM on 13 Jun 2007, wrote:

    As a pupil taking GCSE exams right now, I can confirm that most coursework, especially science, is a real waste of time.
    For our science coursework, we were handed sheets of paper outlining what each and every mark would be awarded for, effectively making it a tick-the-boxes procedure.
    To make matters worse, there was one mark that specified we had to "identify and exclude anomalous results from our data". All very well, except we didn't have any (believe it or not, year 11 students can accurately measure chemicals!). So we actually ended up modifying our results, to add in errors, simply to score full marks.
    Yes, this is only one little gripe, but the whole coursework system is full of problems like these, and the cumulative effect is that coursework is not representative of a student's true ability.

    And this new system being proposed? Even worse. Surely it should be accepted as part of life that we can look things up on wikipedia, rather than shutting us in a room, which will be totally unrepresentative of any situation we are likely to encounter in our lives.

    Thanks, TheMinister

    PS. are there really that many 16 year olds who listen to PM, or is it just me and Pete?

20. At 12:03 AM on 14 Jun 2007, wrote:

    How encouraging to hear (or read) that erudite, inteligent teenagers listen and interact with PM - well done you.

    I have to say, I have no idea of the current GCSE situation having finished in education 25 years ago, when course work was unheard of. But, I am a mature full time student at university and as such have been made more than fully aware of the problem of plagiarism.

    Having said all of that, personally, I perform terribly in exams but very well in assignments (and my school exam results reflected this). So far, in my degree, I have achieved firsts mainly through my assignments - which haven't in any way been completed through plagiarism.

    All of which brings me to my final point, which is that people shine in different environments and exams are good for some, assignments (course work) are better for others. It is up to the technologists to get to grips with the plagiarism issue - my tutors suggest there is indeed a program that can detect cut and paste jobs and even language lifted from websites.

    Perhaps I'm being naive, but from my experience, there are a number of ways of assessing peoples ability. Perhaps the money spent on assessing children every year or two (SATS?) could be better spent on the more important years.

    I accept my point of view may be different from others, but there are few opinions expressed of those who have problems, be it medical or psycological experienced during the exam process.

21. At 12:27 AM on 14 Jun 2007, Thankful to be a Retired Teacher wrote:

    Isabel Nesbitt from QCA has clearly never stood in front of a class of Year 11 pupils. "Pupils do not want to cheat", says she. No, they just want the highest possible grades with the least possible effort. Coursework helps them to do just that. Their teachers can do the majority of the work and the rest can be copied from the Internet or from fellow sufferers on the GCSE treadmil. It doesn't even feel like cheating.

    "Teachers don't know when to stop". Rubbish, Isabel, darling. Experienced teachers know exactly how much help/guidance/direction can be offered to pupils in the completeion of their coursework. It is a very great deal, often amounting to teachers doing the pupils' work for them All within the rules, all acceptable to the QCA. Equally acceptable to the school, who sees its percentage passes rising and the Government, who can trumpet about raising standards.

22. At 12:43 AM on 14 Jun 2007, mittfh wrote:

    How coursework has changed over the years...

    1992-3, GCSE English / English Literature.
    100% Coursework - assessed by portfolio. All classwork was marked and stored in a card document folder. The best x pieces (including several "directed writing" tasks - i.e. work done under examination conditions) were submitted for the final assessment. IIRC, although there was a fair degree of homework, almost everything included a significant quantity of classwork. AFAIK, there was no cheating, but I was chuffed at getting a double B because my teacher always down-marked.

    2006-7, CiDA (Edexcel's "Certificate in Digital Applications for IT Users" - the 2 GCSE one, and contender for worst punning subject acronym, as well as a horrendous expansion).
    This time, I'm on the other side of the divide, attempting to teach the subject.

    Edexcel's vision: pupils spend 2/3 of each unit (equivalent to 1 GCSE) learning the skills needed and doing practice projects. The remaining 1/3 of the year is spent working on the SPB (Summative Project Brief) - essentially an IT project they are expected to plan, manage, research, record and produce themselves - with no guidance from the teacher. If they are not capable of doing this, they should not be entered for the course. Oh, and although it's coursework, the vast majority must be completed in a "supervised environment" i.e. the classroom. And it's supposed to be a paperless project - i.e. the completed files are converted to PDF and showcased in an "eportfolio" (i.e. a website).

    The reality: Many schools thought this would be a direct replacement for the old GNVQ Intermediate, which was widely derided as being "too easy". CiDA (and its siblings AiDA (1 Unit = 1 GCSE) and DiDA (4 units = 4 GCSEs)) is "different". Edexcel's suggested method may work with brighter pupils, but the poorer ones shoe-horned into the course?

    In my case, half a term of practice, 1 1/2 terms of SPB (board deadline was Early May) - teaching 'on-the-fly' whilst trying to minimise the amount of instruction/support/guidance in the SPB context. The school where I worked also decided to timetable it into half the recommended amount of curriculum time. Cue issuing endless requests for pupils to come in over lunchtimes and letters home inviting them in during school holidays. Pity the pupils who miss a few lessons...since practically everything done in lesson time counts towards the final grade, they have extra catch-up to do.

    Fine for Year 11, who are studying the Multimedia Unit (developing a simple game in Flash), but for Year 10, who are doing a lot of spreadsheets and databases...
    And whilst I taught it, the IT section of the TES Staffroom bulged with messages along the lines of "I hate DiDA" or "We tried DiDA, hated it, and have switched to OCR Nationals".

23. At 12:40 AM on 20 Sep 2007, Me wrote:

    Yes, Edexcel is pants. They're a laughable exam board, really - I mean, what do you expect from a company that uses admin staff to mark GCSE papers when they've run out of markers? I would never, EVER use them again, if the choice was mine alone to make.