Free All in a Don's Day by Mary Beard

significant in their pushing of Science?
    I don’t mind a group of MPs doing a quick raid into higher education. Indeed I am rather pleased that they do. I do mind the rest of the country imagining that this is well researched and well founded. In fact this is precisely the kind of stuff I would warn my students against.
Comments
    Mary B′s quite wrong on this.
    While Cambridge and one or two others may be exceptions to the general UK – and others in Europe – rule, experience on both sides of the Atlantic does indeed indicate to me that US students do about twice as much work as British students. Even in the case of Cambridge and similar, where the work load is higher, comparing like for like, US students at places like Harvard do a whole lot more work – reading, writing, discussion groups etc. – than those at Cambridge.
    MB also notes that in the US system (in many cases) ′the grades for each course are normally given by the lecturer who taught the class, and by no one else.′ The fact is that the burden of administering second gradings and external examining is vastly out of proportion to the gains accruing to students from them. In many UK-style universities weeks are spent on these processes, where it would be much better to, yes, let the lecturer who taught the course just grade the papers and have done with it.
    OTTO
    Otto – I find it slightly incredible that US students work on average twice as hard as UK students. First, I probably spend 7 hours a day working during term time. Now, I′m a history student and thus tend to have a much lighter work load than some of my scientist friends who are in labs 9–5 and then work in the evening to finish tutorial sheets. Let′s say they do 10 hours a day of work in the week and 7 at weekends. So my question is: what physiological difference do US students have which some how allows them to survive on 4 hours a day for sleep and sustenance?
    JOSH
    I think the question of workload is irrelevant. You wouldn′t say it was because he worked many hours that Mozart ended up a good composer. He was because he was. Whatever the demands made on the student, the university must be judged by the effect they have, and not in terms of the demands themselves, such as the number of contact hours and so on.
    MICHAEL BULLEY

Ten things you shouldn’t believe about A levels
    20 August 2009
    It’s the A level season again, and everyone feels they have a right to pontificate on the state of the nation’s youth, the failings/successes of education etc. etc. That includes me.
    Here is my self-opinionated Top Ten of what
not
to believe:
    1. A levels are getting easier .
    No, they are not. They are different from what we used to do, and they don’t test some of the skills that I personally value highly (‘open-ended’ essay writing, for example). But the hard work required is just as it ever was.
    2. More students get A grades because they are now better taught .
    No, I’m not saying teaching isn’t better now. (I honestly don’t know.) But I strongly suspect that more students are getting As because today’s A levels have much clearer criteria, towards which it is easier to work (contrary to open-ended essays).
    3. More students get A grades because they are cleverer than they used to be .
    No, see 2 – but I do suspect that they work harder, partly because it can be easier to work harder towards clear criteria. (Personally I think that this is lousy training for later, but that’s another story.)
    4. Some A levels are easier than others .
    Well, this is a bit of a no and yes. I would tend to rate someone more highly for future academic success if they had As in Latin, Maths and Further Maths … than if they had As in (say) Media Studies, Health and Social Care, and Sport Studies (though I could be wrong). But there isn’t a single spectrum here. The kid who gets a top A in Further Maths