<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thoughts on the Sykes review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.educationbynumbers.org.uk/2010/03/29/thoughts-on-the-sykes-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.educationbynumbers.org.uk/2010/03/29/thoughts-on-the-sykes-review/</link>
	<description>The Tyranny of Testing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:35:10 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: AS</title>
		<link>http://www.educationbynumbers.org.uk/2010/03/29/thoughts-on-the-sykes-review/comment-page-1/#comment-1544</link>
		<dc:creator>AS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2010 19:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.educationbynumbers.org.uk/?p=364#comment-1544</guid>
		<description>Insightful comments.

But like many you have slightly misread one of the recommendations. The report suggested unbundling the GCSE 5 A-C measure into English, Maths, AND such other measures as the government might determine: it stopped short of making specific recommendations as to what those measures should be. For example, the report recommendation is entirely compatible with your suggestion of publication of full subject-by-subject results. But somehow everyone seems to have failed to spot the second half of this recommendation and interpreted it as saying that the review group recommended an accountability system based on English and mathematics only.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Insightful comments.</p>
<p>But like many you have slightly misread one of the recommendations. The report suggested unbundling the GCSE 5 A-C measure into English, Maths, AND such other measures as the government might determine: it stopped short of making specific recommendations as to what those measures should be. For example, the report recommendation is entirely compatible with your suggestion of publication of full subject-by-subject results. But somehow everyone seems to have failed to spot the second half of this recommendation and interpreted it as saying that the review group recommended an accountability system based on English and mathematics only.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

