How 'hard' are GCSEs compared with 'O' levels?

MintAero, if the children weren't making sufficient progress the school would not have been awarded an Outstanding and their CVA would also be lower than 1000. As it is, the results appear to reflect the school's intake, which according to the league tables has 20% of its students with statements or on School Action Plus. This is exceptionally high.

average is not a string of E to G grades though.

Neither are a string of A*, but there should be a wealth of grades across the board rather than what we are seeing here.

You are probably right about the area, I do not not Harlow and anywhere around it so not able to comment on that.

I really don't think it does attract the most academic of pupils, it is in a very poor area with fairly low expectations. There are other schools in Harlow and over the border in Herts that will attract the more academic of children.
Passmores doesn't have a 6th form and most of the pupils go on to Harlow College.
I know they were putting a lot of student in for english and maths etc a year early but I think that is more of the current year 11 than the 2010.
The other thing is that not all pupils are A/A* unlike MN in the real world most children are average.

A shit upbringing does not always equate to bad exam results. I am sad that so many of those children were quite clearly not reaching their potential. They have been in the education system since they were 5 and to come out with a string of very low grades also begs the question of the teaching.

I also noted the english lit/lang but would think those results were the whole year, whether they were taken in the november or the summer. Not postive but think that would be the case?

The majority of the high grade results came from vocational subjects too. And they only taught one language - spanish, which i am not sure if it is the norm but thought one could learn at least french and german too in a run of the mill secondary school

The children featured from Pasmores are the troublesome pupils. My friends children go there including one in yr 11.
I have heard about some of the back stories and they are very sad.

Kez - you're wrong in stating that those with D-G's have a level 1 qualification and can go onto a level 2 qualification. Many level 2 courses in this area require D-E grades to get onto them. So below an E children are doing level 1 or level entry courses.

It interesting with the Passmore stats that 173 took English Lang, but only 83 were entered for English Lit. I wonder if they did the same as our school were going to do - English Lang sat in the November, children were going to follow the Lit course until the end of the year, but not be entered for the exam.

yes they bloody do!!

I was just taking a closer look at those passmores tables.

1467 exams taken. 42 A* out of that. 8 of those were for maths english or science.

I don't believe that almost an entire school is of a low ability. Doesn't look like many reached their full potential.

I know exactly what you are saying and I do agree about those with lower level ability.

What I am saying is it would appear that there were a great many of those students in particular who have gained foundation level C and must have been capable of more than that. It seems a prime example of schools ensuring they get their place in the league tables.

Didn't know a G was a pass. Surely you must just get out of bed for that!

Yes, but some have low ability so it was all they were capable of.

Obviously, if your children are capable of plenty of A* to C, then you will not be happy with their performance at that level. It's important, though, to remember for some children (children that don't need anymore negativity in their lives in many cases) that is good attainment.

I agree Kez they are not technically 'fails', but they do show a low level of learning.

They are not fails - they are passes at D-G and that is a level 1 qualification. A decent number of A* to C gives a level 2 qualification.

So, with their D-G's they can now apply to do a Level 2 qualification. Whereas the others go onto a level 3 (A levels and the like).

Years ago, a lot of these children would not have sat exams. Not everyone did CSEs. Now they almost all do, so the system has to cater for their ability.

The only ones who get D-G's who 'fail' are those quite capable of gaining A* to C grades and didn;t put the work in to get them.

passmores 2010 results scroll down

I have just looked at the passmores school website and they have the exam results on this link.

They have divided the exams into grades for the 2010 sitting. Interesting reading. There are very few who have clearly taken the higher level because there are not so many results there, but looking on the C level, the numbers are much greater, meaning that they pretty much put alot of the capable kids in for the foundation level to secure the schools results of so many A to C grades. I am pretty sure some of those would have been able to obtain a higher grade if they had been allowed to sit the higher paper. Which is very poor on the school to do this.

oh it would definitely have been a foundation class. It was a very small school so not sure if there were other classes in the year group.

There is absolutely no doubt they are easier!

Intelligence has NOT increased over the last 30 years, but pass rates have, therefore if they are easier to pass they are easier full stop.

Facts:
1988 - just under 30% of children gained 5+ O Levels/CSE Grade 1
1992 - 38% of children gained 5+ GCSEs A* - C
1999 - 49% of children gained 5+ GCSEs A* - C
2010 - 53% etc

A Levels are also easier. A 'C' grade in 1990 would be a 'B' now.

When they talked about the achievements for those students at the end of the programme saying "so and so left with 9 gcse's," did you happen to get that quick glance at the results slip. It waws very fleeting, but predominantly they were d's to e. To me this does not show a child has gained much of a knowledge in the subject. You practically have to right your name to get an E these days.

Just like the girl who was 'top' in the science I think it was. Did really well with one mark off a C. That tells you that although she is top in the class, what did the rest get.

I did 'o' levels as am ancient.

Maybe wrong, but when looking at my dc results, I only look at C to A as passes. The rest IMO are a fail. But that is my own opinion. I know that in order to continue through to A level in any subjects you need B or above so this is where it counts.

If I were an employer I would not just take the fact that they have 10 gcse's I would be looking at how many of them are showing proper knowledge of a subject, particularly maths and english. C shows you are capable. D and below means you have struggled.

That reminds me of another thing. We could double enter - O level and CSE at the same sitting. So, effectively had two chances at a C/Grade 1.

Now, foundation and Higher papers overlap and are taken on the same day and at the same time, so you can only do one. That is a big disadvantage for the borderline student.

I double entered English Language. I got an A in O level and a Grade 2 CSE. I think that shows that exams are 'on the day' and a poor performance is not necessarily an indicator of ability.

I'd have had a very different life without my English Grade (the course I took needed it and led to me being offered a training contract with employment). I am a advocate of 'reasonable' numbers of opportunities

They are different. No you don't have to memorise whole rafts of facts, but you are expected to understand and apply knowledge more than old style O'levels. Also there is a set pass mark, whereas in the olden days the pass mark varied so a select percentage of pupils got each grade. What is taught/learnt is different too. Somethings have moved up (to A'level etc.) but other things are now in GCSE that I didn't touch until degree or actually weren't known about eg. Tetra-waves as in the 3D scanners at Airports were barely known about, or buckyballs - not discovered.

Also the number of resits possible is decreasing (and I resat one exam twice back in the old days, its just you had to do the whole thing, not just one component). Also coursework is going on the whole, or done in school now.

My daughter has just started year 10. She is working hard - she has already sat one controlled assessment, and several mock exams and will sit some exams for real very soon. I would say that she is working far harder than I did. Her targets are all A* and A, and although she is extremely bright there is no way she would achieve them without putting in a reasonable amount of work. Don't forget that GCSEs are not a straight replacement for O-Levels they are sat by the children would would have done CSEs under the old system as well.