The big idea: should we abolish exams?
At the moment, we use academic results to assign social worth. That has to change
As we don’t use exams to assign social worth this is nonsense, isn’t it?
To assign academic worth, yes, but that’s not social worth.
For them, it might be the same thing. Credentialism is a thing 🙂
All sixth-forms ask for maths and English GCSE, even if you want to study art or plumbing.
That does seem grossly unfair. Perhaps sixth forms shouldn’t be offering art or plumbing.
About 10 years ago, I had a discussion at a party with a leftist woman where I asked what I thought was a gotcha question: ‘Would you rather your holiday plane be flown by someone who had passed rigorous exams or someone who had been given easy exams to sit?’
She equivocated and I sort of won the argument. But the US federal aviation authorities recently announced that they are indeed going to be opening the cockpit to stupid people, and even the mentally ill.
I know it’s a cliche, but the asylum doors were open sometime ago and the former inmates are now running the world.
I couldn’t care less if the new Hitlers can’t count, but I very much care if a plumber can’t add up!
@Bloke in Wales
Very much so, and I’d also like him to be able to read the installation instructions for anything that might electrocute me or go kaboom!
…and replace the exams with what?
Like Murphy with money, the Left as a whole doesn’t understand what exams or academic qualifications are. Tony Blair famously noted that people with degrees earn more on average than those without, so if everyone had a degree and then everyone would have an above-average income… without ever asking why people with degrees had an above-average income.
It used to be that a degree was a signal to employers that the holder could solve difficult problems in a logical fashion, express their ideas and plans coherently and provide constructive criticism to others’ ideas and plans. These are desirable traits, but the expansion of university provision means that this signal is no longer valid and degree-holders are possibly more likely than the general population to go off on illogical emotional rants when somebody points out a gaping hole in xe’s argument.
A GCSE in English does still more-or-less guarantee that the holder can read; similarly one in Maths at least strongly hints that they have an idea what numbers are. This is useful information for most employers, although maybe not the Guardian.
For Pharmacists the pass mark is 100% (I should hope that the same is true for airline pilots) as any error on his/her part could be fatal or cause life-changing damage. A few kidney failures or strokes rank very low on the list of priorities of a teacher of “creative writing”, it seems.
The exam is there to discover whether the person knows his/her subject well enough.
Only the Grauniad thinks that we assign social worth on the basis of passing exams (I’ve passed dozens and I have never thought it enhanced my social worth nor has anyone ever told me that it did)
Matt: “A GCSE in English does still more-or-less guarantee that the holder can read”
More than that, it’s a guarantee that the holder can read English, and that’s the bit which might socially exclude inhabitants of the country our rulers seek to create.
Projection. The LEFT gleefully assign social worth to exams, demonstrated by the air of superiority of those with a degree over those who have not. And it’s ANY degree, from any uni.
Paul @ 8.25:
“The Equality Act 2010 protects individuals from discrimination on the grounds of their nationality or race. Some examples of race discrimination include:
Insisting that all employees must have English as their first language”.
“The big idea: should we abolish exams?”
Does “big idea” always imply crap idea?
Our kids can’t get into Grammar Schools they oh so deserve to, wah wah, let’s abolish Grammar Schools.
Our kids can’t get the entrance grades for the universities they oh so deserver to get to, let’s abolish university entrance grades.
Our kids can’t get the exam results they oh so deserve to, wah wah, let’s abolish exams.
It’s the standard Left playbook. Tarquin and Granaola are so smart, they clearly deserve the best, how *DARE* objective assessment claim they are stupid?
In the future, everyone will be above average.
Given we have a cabinet minister who boasts a reading age of eight, the future may be closer than we think.
Yes indeed, in certain cases it’s not warranted at all. Personally I’d have addressed her as the Mekon
Cambridge academic says she will not work for university after accusing porters of racist abuse
Priyamvada Gopal says she repeatedly asked porters to address her as ‘Dr Gopal’ instead of ‘madam’
As jgh points out, these luxury beliefs are a way of keeping the working classes in their place. Rob Henderson really is worth listening to on this subject.
It should also be noted that the term meritocracy was also coined as a warning against this sort of behaviour.
For some considerable time it’s been the people who passed exams have been claiming social worth. (Or hadn’t you noticed?) And since it’s been that bunchacunts running this shit show, they’ve got away with it
@Addolff – “‘Insisting that all employees must have English as their first language'”
It’s perfectly possible to get a GCSE in English without English being your first language.
@ bis
Not me, as I just said.
So what self-aggrandising narcissists do you habitually talk to?