Revision, for me, is a very uncommon thing; the last time I properly revised for something was probably in the run up to my SAT's in Year 6, meaning my revision books had been, for quite a while, left to fester in the corner of my room, becoming nothing more than flypaper for an inch of dust. However, with my GCSE's on the horizon like a bedraggled terminator, I was told to begin revising, being given books from the school, as well as getting my own. After all, this was going to aid my education, and, therefore, my life in general.
Now, I am fully aware of the governmental changes that have taken place over the past few years, especially the such drastic ones in the education, however, I was astounded and appalled by the standard, or rather lack of, in the revision books, as well as workbooks in general. In most of the texts there wasn't just typos or printing errors, there were genuine syllabus-based misnomers.
For instance, this was taken from the CGP Physics Workbook:
Sticking with CGP (or Cock Groping Prats), and the sciences, this little excerpt is taken from a simple question in their Biology Workbook, asking to name the cell:
It gets worse, as we move away from the Cathedral of Green Phalluses and onto Edexcel's very own revision booklets. In their Geography Revision Guide, this came up:
In the complimentary Edexcel Geography Workbook, a question on Drainage Basins was posed, and asked readers simply to label the different letter as what they were in geographical terms:
You would think that, as private companies that make their money servicing the students of our country, they would have the ability to write texts that actually helped and not hindered, especially Edexcel, the people who are responsible for marking the paper that dictates the grade that will stay with you for the rest of your life. Little mistakes like these just chip away at my confidence in the exam boards, and the education system.
Now, there is always the defense that there have been many education 'reforms' in recent years, and the boards and revision experts are struggling to keep up. We must therefore share a little of the blame on the government and Senor Gove, but, if you cannot deliver a high standard of service, do not print these books at all, at least not until someone has proofread them. Oh, wait, the CGP Physics book referred to earlier has 8 authors and 6 editors, and the CGP biology has 8 authors, 2 editors and 6 proofreaders. Collectively, did none of them re-read their work?
DISCLAIMER: This Hampstead Trash article has been written to inform readers, portraying a factual argument over a specific subject or to report objectively on an event that has occurred.