Apologies for my American-centered knowledge of an education system. Could you provide more background about this issue? A-levels vs IB (Internaltional Baccalaureate I think)?
There have been a number of tweaks to A-levels, once the gold standard of secondary education, to make them easier to pass. For example instead of one exam at the end of two years, it is split into smaller modules, which can be repeated, lower marks can be discarded, there is a consolation prize of an AS level, and pass rates have been going up every year. There is even a whole new grade, A* above A - whereas surely A* is really A and A is really B, but that doesn't look so good on the league tables.
Yet all the time that grades are going up, lecturers are complaining that the quality of freshers is going down, in terms of the level of literacy and numeracy that would be expected in previous years, and that most of the first year must be devoted to remedial teaching, filling in the material that wasn't covered in A-levels.
The International Baccalaureate is operated by an independent non-profit organization in Switzerland whose reputation rests not on conning the voters but on being the real "gold standard". Education is too important to be trusted to politicians.
Schools in the UK have the power to do the IB instead of A-levels but are strongly discouraged from doing so via the central funding mechanism, this is for ideological reasons, the New Labour government felt it was "divisive". Hopefully the current lot, who are all about decentralized decision making, will allow it.
Having recently completed the IB there are some things that are not really great (they may still be better than the A levels).
I can only comment for the subjects I took.
Physics- too much emphasis on theory and step by step problems. I think solving a complete, complex problem shows much more understanding of physics, than the present state, where you can spend a month learning the theory by hard and then solve quite basic problems with lots of guidance, and pass the final exam with a decent grade.
Maths - great, I liked, even if it was hard. Much harder than A levels
Languages B (there a A and B, A meaning that it is intended for native speakers)- they could be a bit harder. It is unnecessary to study to get a decent grade. One can get a 6 or 7 (grades are up to 7) by just attending class.
Languages A- awesome. We didn't lose time learning much about history (there was just enough) like I would have to in the national baccalaureate system in Slovenia, but learned to write and speak. This includes blogs, journal articles, essays, political speeches, presentations...
Geography was nice and greatly taught, but I think its similar to the national system and the A levels.
What is the outcome of the IB for me?
Now I am studying Computing at the public university where I get to meet people from all backgrounds, schools and educational systems. I can tell that I have a much deeper understanding of maths and physics than everyone else who didn't do the IB.
Many students don't even understand calculus, complex numbers and vectors. Not to speak about physics.
Some went to CS high schools before, but apart from some programming knowledge they lag behind by much.
The result is that I am bored in class. We've spent the first month revising what I did in the IB, and we are still gonna do it for quite some time. Plus we learn LESS than in the IB. We don't go as deep.
So yes, I think the first year of university/college is quite a waste of time if you were an IB student and you were quite good.
The first year of university seems to me as a catchup for the 'bad students'. We don't build on what we learned in high school, but instead relearn it with less insight into the principles of the subjects.
It was quite a long time ago that I did my A-levels but I remember that when revising for the final exams, papers from 10 years earlier kicked our asses. Even papers from the old O-levels were tough after studying for A-levels for 2 years - GCSEs are a joke.
The education system, in any country, seems to be particularly vulnerable to capture by bonkers ideologists who prize "equality" and "inclusiveness" above all else, which means dumbing down to the lowest common denominator so everyone can win a prize at the end. It why, no matter what the governments try to do, private education is thriving.
Yet all the time that grades are going up, lecturers are complaining that the quality of freshers is going down, in terms of the level of literacy and numeracy that would be expected in previous years, and that most of the first year must be devoted to remedial teaching, filling in the material that wasn't covered in A-levels.
The International Baccalaureate is operated by an independent non-profit organization in Switzerland whose reputation rests not on conning the voters but on being the real "gold standard". Education is too important to be trusted to politicians.
Schools in the UK have the power to do the IB instead of A-levels but are strongly discouraged from doing so via the central funding mechanism, this is for ideological reasons, the New Labour government felt it was "divisive". Hopefully the current lot, who are all about decentralized decision making, will allow it.