Question 1: What the EBC'S possible has to offer that the current GCSE's do not offer is that is offers

more rigger and perhaps stretches more academic students, which is something that the teachers and the NUT'S want to see happen. Erm it focuses on a small group of subjects so that perhaps means that they can be more in depth study of those subjects and perhaps push students to erm work more independently that they might do currently and this may well prepare students for AS level courses, particularly in the science and maths. Question 2: Erm in response to the comment that the press reporting that the school leavers are less likely to get jobs with GCSE's and more likely to get jobs with the EBC's in terms of it providing a better career path i suppose also it goes back to this point it provides more rigger for particular subjects also there is a group of universities called the Russle Group Of University's who want to know that A level students are been studding a particular small group of subjects that they regard more challenging and facilitating which include maths and sciences, history , geography English literature, modern languages so in that way i would provide a better career path because you would be more likely to be accepted at Russell Group University. Erm obviously the focus of the EBC is over all exam assessment and less coursework, because coursework had a reputation for being a softer option and children have been helped with it too much with it, so in that way the more focus on exam assessment might provide a better career path because you have been through a tougher assessment that certainly are the views of the government anyway. Erm so in that way if you got the EBC you might be on the road to a better career path if you have studied a fewer subjects in a more rigorous way but that not really a view shared by teachers or the NUT that really more the government view. Question 3: So yes the EBC's it was proposed that in 2015 so that's sort of two years on from now students would study English language and literature, maths applied and pure and 3 sciences separately and then in 2016 history, geography languages will be bought in as part of the EBC as well, erm so obviously this narrows down allot of students in terms of their potential and erm an under attainment so i think the idea that some GCSE'S would still be kept on, erm but really the exam option are limited there and alot of students wouldn't achieve very well the government's idea was that if they not sacked the exams they would be provided with detail breakdown of what they have done at school to offer to employers, erm but really the teachers and the NUT's that is isnt really going to convince people and uno that the current range of doing different options offered at schools erm which facilitate a lot of learning and achievement from students would not really be carried on their seen by the government as a soft option erm whereas obviously some teachers and alot of students come to this college see them as offering more opportunities for students so they really wouldn't have other exams options the idea is really that the EBAC is the only thing worth having really. Question 4:

In response to Anthony Sheldon the master of Wellington College his comment is that the GCSE's are packed out and they shouldn't have been allowed to continue, erm and the question would the EBC account/assist students better with learning difficulties i think certainly the view is that no that they wouldn't erm there has been discussion, government Nick Cleg has accused that less able students would be thrown on the scrap heap because the EBC would be too difficult for them and they are not really bothered about what's available for them, erm and that the EBAC is rather like the old GCSE which well alot of teachers my age certainly went through themselves where you did O level or did CSC or then two tear system erm so it wouldn't really help students with learning difficulties erm and again the options which currently run for students with more practical/ vocational skills wouldn't be there so, opposite the NUT the teachers see that as a very bad thing. Question 5: Yeah i mean the next question you asked about the uno how will students who are more vocational/ practical minded how will they achieve, er its going to be difficult as there will be less option for them and erm I think we would be creating a two tear system and alot of the current qualifications that are offered to these students probably wouldn't be available any more they would erm the governments view is that uno know even know there are students who are not up to doing GCSE's so there would be still options available for them but i don't think they will be as valued as they are now erm the EBC the certificate and the concept of the English Baccalaureate with the smaller group of subjects that are studied in depth ist certainly geared more to towards the more academic and the government giving their views that thats the only group of students their interested in really, erm because their obsessed with the idea that the rigger must come back in GCSE, they have been too easy, erm and one thing that's been very important and manifested itself to me particularly an English teacher is hiking the pass rate for GCSE English in summer which has affected lots of students achievement and opportunities to progress so the NUT are opposed to EBAC proposals and to the EBC's erm its not a catering for students for all abilities and the other subjects which are not included in either the initial group of subjects, maths and science and then the history, geography languages the group of subjects will just be pushed to the side and undervalued such things like music erm religious education, design and technology, art erm those have been pushed to the side and there was a sense of this happening erm in the early 1990's the advent of the national curriculum, erm so that why NUT are opposed to the changes.