I was fascinated to read this:
"Would you like a GCSE in science? Don't worry, you may not need to know much science actually to get one. Last Monday, Graham Stuart, the Tory MP for Beverley and Holderness, read out to the Commons Select Committee for Children, Schools and Families a question from a recent GCSE science paper: "A nuclear power station is to be built. (1) It will provide more employment in the area. But (2) any release of radioactive material would be very dangerous. Which of these two statements argues in favour of siting the nuclear power station in the area?"
Mr Stuart then asked if "the department is really sure that we are providing pupils with a rigorous scientific understanding?" But he was answered by Jim Knight MP, the schools minister, with "Yes. I am absolutely happy that we are, and we have set up Ofqual to provide more public reassurance."
Are you reassured? The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) is not. Last Thursday, it published the results of a naughty experiment. It corralled 1,600 bright 16-year-old children and set them chemistry questions from O-level and GCSE exams of the past 50 years. And the society found that, whereas children scored only an average of 15 per cent on questions set during the 1960s, they scored 35 per cent on questions set today. The questions are now much easier."
Full story at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/30/do3007.xmlAs a secondary school governor, this is an issue which causes me some concern.
What are your views?