2014 GCSE league tables

helksbells that's not strictly true.

On the most competitive courses at the most selective universities, an applicant's GCSEs are given scrutiny.

And where academics were grumbling about the lack of transparency in a modular GCSE, the linear GCSEs and IGCSEs were easier to weigh up.

Whilst other factors were obviously at play ( not least the increase in sheer numbers ) I think the lack if faith in modular GCSEs played a part in the inflation of offers from universities. A standard ABB offer became AAA etc

It is funny how this thread has progressed! It really doesn't matter for university admissions whether it is iGsce or Gcse, and after that point nobody will ever care which style of exam a person took!
For what it's worth, my friend teaches a science at a very good private school. They switched to iGcse to get away from doing Isas. They 'wasted' a lot of time and effort on them at Gcse and the pupils tended to do worse in that part of the course.
I have 2 DDs at state school. DD1 would have suited iGcse maths much better as she hated the style of questions she had to do as Gcse. She still went on and got a very high ums at AS level. DD2 did some practise IGcse past papers for maths and found they were just as easy as Gcse - except she hadn't been taught calculus at that stage but had covered other topics not examined in the iGcse instead.

Spell checkers are only any use to those who can spell
there / their .... here / hear .... wear / where

Calculators are great so long as you remember that garbage in = garbage out.
When I was marking ICAEW Coursework the lack of logic testing was shocking - answers out by a factor of a million in one memorable case.

Core GCSE work is about building logic and basic analysis in an inclusive manner. It was getting better and better at that.
Until Gove and his mini-me trashed it all
have you noticed that Cameroon trusts la Morgan so little that HE is doing Education announcements now

Talkinpeace. I thought the whole point of "education and schooling" was to get children ready for employment. (or higher education not relevant here) Therefore surely the whole idea or mission of schooling is to get lower ability pupils numerate or literate enough for employment. The jobs they will be doing will no doubt use calculators, computers ,cash machines spell checkers etc.

Why then do the "authorities" make low ability pupils lives terrible with worry. This is a pointless obsession about getting an arbitrary 5 A-C Maths/English when in reality all "lower ability" students need in their work life is Calculator and a Spell Checker !.

I think there is more than one way of having little or no understanding how bloody hard in every hour of available school time some kids have to work.

I think it's a shame the modular option won't be available for those kids for whom it gave a fairer crack of the whip. I'm very glad that I never had to do modular exams because modular exams are, I suspect, not for the nervy.

Modular worked better for lower ability : they took their GCSEs in the same way they would find employment : with the information to hand.

Its abolition has been driven by those who have little or no understanding of how blerdy hard in every hour of available school time some kids have to work just to get 5 x C at GCSE (or IGCSE)

I agree that it was a horrid system.

I used to do a lift share with some girls who were in the last cohort to do proper modular ( 2013) and they seemed to be endlessly taking exams that 'mattered'. Or resists. Endless.

But the chunks of info to be learned were very manageable IYSWIM.

Actually, I think modular would be harder than linear. I realise I'm probably the only person in the world who thinks this but the thought of never being more than a few months away from an exam that properly mattered - my dear the STRESS! (Bit like that never being more than a few feet away from a rat thing...)

Word the girls do. My DS doesn't though and his school does linear too and has done for a while (not sure if for as long as the girls' school).

And gentlys DC go to the same school no?

It really was very unusual.

They didn't you know molio.

Your DCs school was very unusual in its choice of linear GCSE. Which is why it's reputation is so strong.

The majority of state schools chose modular with resits even for their top sets.

Horsemad

The point is that DCs need to be able to analyse facts and you can't do that if you haven't learned facts.

Yes you can. You can't analyse information if you haven't been given it, part of the analysis may or may not include evaluating the likelihood that the information is accurate/relevant/not in conflict with other info/legal/decent/honest/truthful etc

As I said, I do this. Not my DH. Me.

They have done all terminal GCSEs at my DDs' school for many years. All GCSEs will be terminal soon. They don't do loads of resits either.

Your comments indicate that not only do you not know much about what city recruiters are looking for but you also don't know much (other than the DM version) about GCSEs.

off, not of.

horsemadmom my seven DC to have taken GCSEs so far have all been at a state school where all exams have always been taken as linear and all in one go with no opportunity for re-sits at all. Plenty of state schools did that in recent years, only one tends not to hear about them. Not all schools opted to take modules and some schools, such as ours, didn't even do the cheaty thing of taking three or four subjects early to take the pressure of the second time round.

IGCSEs in many State schools (including the one of which I have the most direct knowledge) were used for students on the C/D Boundary.

I would kindly invite those of you with kids at private selective schools to go and understand the implications of that before you drivel on about "City jobs" and the date of the Magna Carta and hiring "analyists".

The C/D Boundary in Maths is about functional numeracy.
The C/D Boundary in English is about the ability to competently apply for a job or read a contract.

Both my children's selective independent schools do IGCSEs. They sure as hell don't need to do 'easier' qualifications, judging by the A level results and the university acceptances (Oxbridge, medical school, Ivy League, etc) and judging from the entry academic profile of the pupils at 12, according to the inspection reports, which is above average.

Of course, it's worth pointing out that there is more than one IGCSE examination board. I believe there are at least two, possibly three.

realITY nor real. Soz.

In my general field the role of memory is far less important than it once was. In my specific area of toil being marvo the memory woman still gets me extra brownie points (not for knowing everything but for always having more time to work out solutions given that I don't need to check up on stuff as much as non strange people would have to, and thus having more elegantly realised solutions) but for the profession in general - memory has plummeted down the league table of desirable traits.

It's all about application, responding to circumstance and communication these days.

I suppose that's why I like the idea of the EPQ (even though I'm not so sure about the real it of it when I look at DD1's workload).

Hi GB and Molio,
DH interviews for a City firm too. I think I made my point badly so I'll try again....
Analytical skills are uber important (DH hires graduate ANALYSTS) and he also prizes general knowledge. He looks for rounded and educated people because they are much more interesting to have around.
The point is that DCs need to be able to analyse facts and you can't do that if you haven't learned facts.
If you want your DC to take exams which are susceptible to having grade boundaries changed (this has happened) and is being marked erratically and often incorrectly (this happens every year) and can be made easier or harder depending on what image of pupil achievement the government wants to portray (ditto) and schools can shop around for boards with the easiest exams (hidden camera footage of teachers being told what would be on the exams) or have DCs who can't cope with terminal exams (modular exams don't leave much teaching time between revision periods and don't demand that DCs have a built-up body of knowledge just bits in isolation) or you would prefer that they sit a few early and then re-sit ad nauseum ( re-sits may not count in league tables but soon many state schools have DCs sitting 13 or 14 GCSEs so the points per pupil score goes up even if they are in useless subjects) .....Then GCSEs are for you!

Sure gently but you'll be expected to pick up information/methodology etc very quickly, remember it and apply it.

It really depends what you're applying for. Some graduate roles, you aren't expected to rock up with a detailed knowledge of the many and varied fields in which you may end up working - what people are looking for is the ability to understand and apply complex stuff (information, regulations, formulae, procedures, techniques) to complex situations and a generally spiffing way.

TBH I don't think GCSEs or IGCSEs teach much of anything in any great depth.

The facts to be learned are basic. The skills to be mastered,fairly flimsy.

They're just the starting point.

As for graduate recruitment, most successful applicants, and people who go on to have very successful careers, have to both know their stuff and how to use it.