JCQ and ofqual gcse grade warnings...

It is true this Yr 11 students have had a rough deal - just comparing the exam timetables of DC1 who sat last year and DC2 who did exams this year - DC1 hardest week contained 4 exams with plenty of days to revise in between. DC2 easiest week contained 4 exams with few days off in between and no time to revise effectively. Coupled with changes to CAs, increased weighting for exams, plenty of timetable clashes with exams having to be taken back to back. I empathise completely with all who have DCs who have worked so hard not to be rewarded as well as students in previous years. It is the first time I can remember a Government who`s aims to reduce the number of students passing exams and heralding it as a success.

I think it sounds like a total fuck up from start to finish.

I think that the papers have been marked and those high up have suddenly realised what a huge fuck up there's been and are desperately backtracking and trying to stop it being a massive shock on the 21st.

And WTF do they mean by ' This year's Geography has been strengthened?'

I understand for future cohorts that they have made it harder by making them have to study the entire curriculum ( quite rightly) and I know the Edexcel exam was unlike any other previous exam. Does this statement about geography mean the grade boundaries will be higher then?

Like DD who moved from a solid B, to a barely scraped C because of the speech bit & had to spend hours after school re-doing work to improve her grade

tobysmum clearly does not have a year 11 child who has had the rug pulled out from under them at every term

those who are in favour of the changes conveniently forget the utter HELL they are putting the transition kids through

• funny that

Tobysmum makes a very good point, although I daresay employers will look for a minimum C grade in Maths and English. It is clear this years cohort had a much harder exam cycle than last year if my DCs experience is anything to go by. Possibly other MNs have had similar or different experiences. It will interesting to see what the fallout will be after results day if schools, parents and most importantly students feel they had been treated unfairly. In answer to the comment about changes to exams in the past Ofqual has given some leeway for student sitting a new exam. Those rules do not apply this time. My understanding of Mr Goves reforms was his insistence GCSEs were too easy with too many students achieving top grades. The reforms it seems were aimed at changing this. It would politically embarrassing if a large number of students failed to get a C grade suggesting the impact of the changes will be in the top 20%

The change if any will be slight. Schools/ colleges now have to ensure young people carry on with maths/ English if they don't get a c. Therefore this cohort is in that way at an advantage.

In terms of getting a job GCSEs are being overegged in the extreme. The key to sustainable employment is having a skill that someone wants to buy.

If you are worried about this, rather than stressing about gcses go online find out what the skills gaps are in the economy. Look at apprenticeships. There is not a reliable relationship between exam results and earning power.

I do think the problems for students will come further down the line, rather than say, at the university application stage. Also, problems will be greater for those who miss out on C grades, rather than A* grades (although this could be equally personally upsetting).

I've dealt with admissions at a fairly average university. For the school I worked in, certain GCSEs were required- at least a C grade in maths and English and a C or a B grade in biology or double science depending on the course. Beyond this, actual GCSEs weren't looked at too much (although we did have access to AS grades). When most of this cohort apply, it will be remembered that they had a more difficult year WRT GCSEs than others, and they will be mainly competing with each other for places. However, the C grades for maths and English won't be an area where compromise is made, as it's likely the courses could easily be filled without bending this requirement.

The issue will come in 5 or 6 years time, when people might consider returning to education, but the particular issues this year will have been forgotten. For example in 2008 (?) the A-level syllabus for many subjects changed in order to phase out cw- the students who took the first exams in the new syllabus were probably at a disadvantage. At the time, this might have been known to people in admissions and maybe taken into account, but now it has mostly been forgotten about.

Universities and colleges at least pay attention to exam changes, but most employers won't. When filtering job applications, it's easy just to reject those CVs without 5 A-C grades or whatever the minimum you want is. The year the applicant took the exams may not even be noted, let alone taken into account. Most employers won't remember that 2014 was a bad year to take your GCSEs in a few years time. They'll just compare grades as if they are like for like.

This isn't meant to be doom mongering, but I do think it's a serious issue and children's futures shouldn't be used as political football.

Needmoresleep thanks. I certainly get the impression that economics is one of if not the most internationally competitive undergraduate subjects at present (possibly for some with an eye on lucrative financial jobs). I have also heard that mathematicians are the strongest candidates at places like Cambridge. Your DS has done extremely well to get an offer.
I still think real academic differences between these high calibre candidates (particularly without interview) may be almost non existent and a lottery.

Shooting - I don't know. Perhaps cultivate some empathy? Perhaps stop trying to claim that your success and privilege hasn't obtained better allowances for your DD than those available to state educated DCs with similar conditions? A lot of what you post is very helpful and bang on the nose but it is always interspersed with extrapolations of private school privilege to state school DCs which are not valid. And the comment about proactive parents was particularly self serving I thought. And not a little cruel. Your DD has had superb treatment because you have money,not because you are a better parent than others. Despite what you clearly think.

Just some acknowledgement that the sort of treatment your DD has had is very very far from the norm would be helpful.

And fewer personal attacks would be nice. Although I'm not holding my breath.

Needmoresleep - nowhere have I suggested that I think French education is superior. Indeed, I post very regularly about its many failings idiosyncrasies. Some bits of it are fine, some very good but generally speaking the whole system is creaking at the seams under the weight of heritage. Le Musee de l'ecole francaise is daily reality for pupils in 2014. However, French families do a lot of adding on - hence the statistically strong correlation in France between affluence and educational success.

rabbit what am I supposed to do, fall on my sword, just because in spite of my own dyslexia I managed to climb the greasy pole and make enough money, and by dint of a bout of Cancer, then have my time freed up for me (via a constructive dismissal case) to enable me to give my DDs those privileges. I do know we are lucky (well sort of, I could have done without the Cancer and managing to be on the right side of having 60% chance of surviving) . I have every sympathy for everyone who struggled in the face of what I acknowledge are massive difficulties and discrimination but really would you like to go back to a world where a Head could tell my mother, a teacher, when my brother was diagnosed dyslexic even in the 70s that "the trouble with you middle class parents is that you cannot admit your children are stupid" and could send him into the world with a CSE in woodwork and no confidence? Part of the reason I post here, and I stopped for a while because I got fed up with the sniping, and will again, is that I can see all that has been achieved in levelling the playing field for those with SpLDs and indeed other difficulties like autism, being eroded by this current government and I want that to be more widely appreciated. I honestly think we have more in common in that sense than sets us apart so I really don't see why you feel the need to rant at me, or what you are aiming to achieve. Not for the first time I am going to hide a thread you are on because I really don't need to be a target........

Lizs Saying no child with SpLD should be capable of A* is ludicrous

It's not ludicrous, it's obscene. But it was said. Although what the person actually said was 'they shouldn't be getting' not 'shouldn't be capable of'. The whole point is, they are capable of, with and without special considerations (as DD1 proved) - but there are people in positions of influence who don't want them to. Because they don't think 'shicldren like that' should be getting A*. This is what I was told by the person who did the pre GCSE evaluation of the DD1, who heard it said at a meeting explaining the new regs when people were up in arms specifically about the impact this would have on very bright kids with SpLDs and their prospects of fulfilling their potential.

Summerends. It was just weight of numbers. International demand for quantitative "vocational" subjects like economics, engineering and computing at world ranked institutions has gone off the scale in recent years.

Advice we got was that DS was capable of studying at any of the top five, but that weight of numbers would mean he might get four offers (you can't apply for both Cambridge economics and Oxford economics and management) or none.

Each will have ways of sifting so others we know got only Warwick or UCL. There is lots of rationalising about whether Warwick like languages, or that LSE dont like private schools but now favour those who offer a humanity along with double maths and economics. But who knows. DS got one less than top grade at both GCSE and AS which may have made a difference. They have to filter somehow.

However at the end of the day each may have 13 or more EU applicants for every place, and they will take some and reject others. One perhaps valid observation seems to be that Cambridge are looking for very very good mathematicians. the sort of student who is good enough to be offered a place to study pure maths.

Offer grades thus don't reflect standards required. Very few wont exceed requirements.

Shooting:
One thing I have learnt from my and others experiences is that in state or private schools if you have a child with SpLDs you have to be constantly on the ball, acting as facilitator, investigating options, correcting misapprehensions etc etc etc. it shouldn't be the case because pupils without the advantage of a proactive parent definitely lose out.

And many DCs, including, frankly, my own, don't have that. Despite my own superb olympic standard coping strategies (I wouldn't be able to hold down my job otherwise), there is only so much that I can do and cope with and my actual job usually exceeds that 'so much' point. I do not have the wealth - either in time or money - to provide the sort of full time fixing you describe. Most people don't. Being dyspraxic myself doesn't help. Having 3 kids with varying SpLDs doesn't help either. For one, I could manage, I think. Maybe. People with financial resources hide behind the label of 'proactive' but what they actually mean is, they can afford to do this stuff. It's not that they are better, it's that money makes everything easier. Everything you describe about your DD's experience screams privilege, to be honest. And ROFL at 60 miles outside London being 'the sticks'. Try 200 miles.

But - thanks for the info about post 16 assessment. I specifically asked at DD1's school at a meeting we had with the SENCO about DD2 (who starts there in September) and was told that definitely she didn't need any more assessments. Her last one was done at 14. She is only just 16 now so she will obviously need another one although I have no idea where or by whom that will be performed. As for attending university open days - not really an option for a FT working parent. Especially when everything is so far away - in fact, I strongly doubt that DD1 will attend many open days, the cost will be prohibitive and the travel challenging even for a person without dyspraxia (our trains are very very bad and also extremely unreliable). The thought of having to engage in protracted email discussions with up to 12 institutions (she will be applying to conservatoires as well as universities) makes me literally weep.

You are so right about the constantly having to correct misapprehensions though. DD1 got excellent marks for one of her AS subjects this year (she is in a 3 year 6th form) and the only comments on the report about this subject were essentially that she should stop being dyspraxic (that's not what the teacher said, obviously, he talked about being more organised as though that's a choice she can make). He doesn't help her in this respect at all - he only ever emails me to say a piece of work is late when the deadline has been missed (and on each occasion the work has been done, she just hadn't been able to email it in (the school wifi won't let her access the network, she can only email work in from home for some ridiculous reason and her lack of organisation skills means she sometimes forgets). He has taught her for the last 4 years and we have talked to him ad nauseum about what being dyspraxic means and he still resolutely refuses to regard it as anything more than dodgy handwriting and frequently walking into door frames instead of through doors. I think we are all (DD1, DH and me) on the verge of just giving up, to be honest.

I actually wouldn't mind so much if it was a level playing field for everyone with dyspraxia, as it was in my day (when the condition hadn't even been formally named and recognised). If everyone just had to suck it up and grit their teeth and stand up and get on with it, then that would be, within the group of dyspraxic people, equality. Not with non dyspraxics, sure - but at least among themselves. But it isn't. Some get support and consideration that others can only dream about. And that is just plain wrong. And it really doesn't help when people who have benefitted from rolls royce consideration tell those with morris minor or worse conditions that it's their fault, or their parents fault, or that in fact everything is actually fair and fine and they are imagining a disparity in treatment.

I assume that top Universities, like sought after independent schools, look at the contribution an individual student is likely to make. Grades are important, but diversity and "taking part" also benefit the institution.

American Ivies use this approach to a much greater degree.

By and large I think I am right in assuming that International students tend to be richer than UK students. For example not many kids from France profound look to study overseas, and those that do probably don't have the language skills.

I think in England it is accepted that Universities will make contextual offers to enable a diverse student body and to pick up disadvantaged students with potential. I dont know too much about the French system (other than to know that once you go Bienvenue Chez les Chi'itis French education is far from the world leading excellence that Bonsoir suggests) but assume such an approach is then seen as discrimination.

The college I attended, which might have been perceived as quintessentially British, even back then had a significant number of o/s students , mainly doing subjects such as Maths, various sciences, Computer Science and Economics. A few years ago a colleague's dc applied and had a place there but soon became very unhappy and dropped out as it felt overwhelmingly o/s orientated and he was placed in a hall with few native English speakers so felt isolated. There is an issue that in the quest to supplement funding and meet demand from aboard UK or even EU students may be deterred from applying if a balance is not maintained.

Needmoresleep it would be interesting to know what sort of criteria might have been applied to reject your DS (discounting applications involving interviews). I assume he had as stellar GCSEs as predicted A levels? Do you think it was based on the PS combined with other 'quotas'.
Personal Statements are a very 'soft' measure to base such decisions for the pool of outstanding candidates in the UK or elsewhere.

Yes, it does depend how a university sees itself.

I teach at a university which also has its eyes on its international standing.

However, it also highly values the college life that it provides. That sense of being part of a college community that goes back hundreds of years, and which is very British in flavour, is something it will not compromise. Of course this very thing does bring in foreign applicants by the boatload, but it can it be retained in the long run if the majority of students are not British?

I am not failing to understand, just struggling to recognise the course. I am aware of the UCL course which combines economics with a year's study abroad and which is very popular with UK students, or at least London ones. I am also aware of the opportunities offered at Warwick through the Erasmus programme, which again has appeal to UK students.

I agree with Word Factory that Universities face a dilemma in terms of their remit. Do they have a duty to educate UK students? My impression is that in the LSEs case they feel that that their primary duty is to remain a top ranked research institution and so simply want the best. They have a second dilemma in that economics is not just a quantitative vocational subject but also a social science with policy responsibilities. Top grades don't necessarily translate to social awareness. A bit of diversity in terms of social background would probably do the cohort no harm.

I think there are absolutely some courses at some universities that could fill up their places with the brightest students from around the globe.

This isn't a critisism of the UK system, more an acceptance that the global reach of these courses makes them absurdly competitive. Tis a numbers game.

I think on certain courses at the most selective universities they probably could fill up with the brightest students from around the world.

Applicants for say, Economics at LSE will be coming from every corner of the globe as it has such a high reputation. You're simply not gonna get that pressure on places in one of the GEs in France, or the universities of the Far East.

The only country attracting the sort of global reach that the UK has, is the USA.

There will always be some UK students who can hold their own and are deserving of a place, but these beome less and less as more overseas applicants flood in. This isn't a critisism of the UK educational system, more an observation that it is a numbers game.

That many universites wish to remain a place of education primarily for UK students, rather than international hubbs, is another matter...

But even those courses would require a good set of Level 2 qualifications (or their equivalent) for entry as well as A levels/IB etc.

You are failing to understand, needmoresleep, that not everyone has the same selection criteria as you do!

There are courses at London universities that are very attractive to EU students because they eg combine Social Sciences with languages/study in prestigious EU HE institutions. Top EU students are much more attracted to those courses than to Oxbridge. That is not true of A-level students.

Which courses then? Genuinely I find it hard to believe that there are courses that even the very best UK student would not be qualified for.

Its a bit like TiPs comment earlier about rich but dim Chinese students. A different reality. DS has had the advantage of being at a very academic and very international sixth form, including some transferees from Lycee CDG. There are some stunningly bright kids from a variety of backgrounds. There may be some cultural differences regarding approach to work and grades, but no evidence to suggest any race or nationality has a monoploy on cleverness, or that the Brits lag behind.