The most damaging aspect of “all must have prizes” is the massive social dislocation which costs billions, in order to force an outcome which simply is not logical.
The article on the dumbing down of results has been confirmed by so many sources that it is no longer the issue. The issue is the damage. Some comments on the Mail article:
For Louise and others like her who have worked hard to achieve good results, the problem is that, before the fudging of results, you and the other hard working students would have stood out from the rest. Now, under a system which allows so many students to come out with high number of good passes, it is difficult to see WHO the hard working ones are.
It is the same at University. There are too many students going to university, who would perhaps be better served going to a technical college, apprenticeships, “hands-on” jobs. The reason so many of us are quite vocal about the failing Education system, is that we work alongside school leavers/Graduates in weak subjects and we KNOW how poor their basic ability is.
I see it every time I speak with young people and it’s dismaying. My literacy level is perhaps a bit higher than many because it became my profession but basically I was not much better educated than many of my era and the bottom line is that anyone educated back then had at least a chance to be literate, numerate and with some general knowledge of the world.
They seem unable to bear the idea that children have differing talents, so instead of ensuring that every child has the basics – reading, writing and arithmetic, if you like – then streaming according to ability so that the academically gifted do academic subjects and the practically gifted do practical ones, which would allow every pupil to feel – rightly – that they’re good at something, they delude their pupils that every one is equally good at everything. As a preparation for life it’s rubbish; dragging everyone down to the lowest common denominator is a criminal waste of talent.
Yes, it’s entirely the wrong way to go about it. Class and monetary barriers to emerging talent is a no-no and this can even come down, partly, to simple things such as adequate nutrition. The scholarship system is a good one and if the government, national and local, would get out of taxing businesses to death, then some of the disposable revenue could go to nurturing new talent, admittedly for the industry which provides the funding.
There’s no perfect solution and yet allowing supported talent to find its level is the only way to go but most definitely not this artificial inflating of the impossible. We have such a fundamental political difference here, don’t we?
One side says let talent rise naturally and those who don’t make the cut in one direction try another – law of life. The other side says that the whole infrastructure of society in general and education in particular must be so skewed that “no child is left behind”, whatever the cost to that society.
The answer is that no child would be left behind if allowed to find his/her level and that’s what vocational guidance in schools should be all about. No one is saying children should be left to sink or swim – there’s much compassion in the vocational guidance area but compassion does not equal false constructs!
It’s a shock to the system that this even needs to be spelt out.