will GCSEs be harder from 2016?

I wish they would change the name of the exams.

That didn't really work for O-level/CSE to GCSE.

Grade C was the minimum one for O-level and grade C still seems to have that association, however only the top 20% got that or better with O-level and for GCSE it's now the top 60%.

The change to numeric grades for the reformed GCSEs ought to help, but only time will tell.

I agree that they should change the name. They've mucked around with everything else, the GCSEs taken in the future are nothing like the GCSEs taken 10 years ago.

My worry is that the first few years will be a shambles. I remember when GCSEs were introduced and for the first 3 years it was a complete and utter farce. For my first 3 years of secondary school I was at a partially selective girls school and for the GCSE years we moved and I was at an awful school. The teachers were completely clueless and had no idea how to teach, mark or make any sort of predictions when it came to GCSEs. Nobody did very well at all. There were a few subjects where nobody came anywhere near to gaining a C grade. I really hope this time they know what they are doing.

I wish they would change the name of the exams.

Ds sat his GCSEs last year. There was a huge dip in results - tougher marking. Plus his cousin, who sat her GCSEs the year before, re-took practically every module of every exam to get a full house of As. She took History three times to move from a C to an A.

I am doing a GCSE language at the moment so I have first hand experience of the difference between 1980s and today. Flippin' joke. Back in the olden days one had to write a short essay on surprise subject, plus translation back and forth of text. In my GCSE I have spent oodles of class and home time memorising pieces I (Google Translate) have composed (and had corrected) which I then regurgitate in a controlled environment. I could pass Swahili by this method, but be unable to understand a single word or perform any grammatical construction. I wouldn't be able to do the speaking/listening, but I'd still pass by dint of rote learning. I therefore can't possibly understand why every student doesn't pass a GCSE language under the current system.

Most year 9 pupils have already chosen their options for GCSEs which they'll take in 2017. In my youngest daughter's school they were not required to take all of the EBacc subjects. I know of some schools where they make some option choices at the end of year 8.

I have daughters taking GCSEs in 2016 and 2017 - the only thing I can say is that the results are not comparable with other years. This has been the case over the last few years with changes in format/ not as many modules being sat early (and resat if necessary).

long and very wordy questions

I wonder if PISA influenced that. The little I've seen of PISA via their samples the other year can be described as wordy (and multi-step).

Ah, thank you.

No, the manifesto said that all secondary school students will be required to take the Ebacc. It was a bit woolly about when schools would be penalised.

i thought it was just compulsory for schools to offer rather than all children take.
That said, I believe GCSE child care and GCSE health and social care haven't been re-approved for 2017, so I suppose children have to take something.

The compulsory Ebacc thing was in the Conservative election manifesto. Now that they've been elected we'll see if it becomes policy.

beach = EBacc.
My autocorrect will not recognise ebacc

sassy- do you have a link to compulsory beach announcement, please?
FFS. Will any subject other than Hist&Geog count as a humanity.

You know what's in the curriculum though don't you

Yes, but we don't know how it will be examined. If you look at the sample assessment materials put out by the exam boards then you'd understand how important this is. OCR and Edexcel put out quite scary exams, long and very wordy questions which will cause issues for kids with literacy problems, and which kids will need lots of practice of as it's nothing like they currently face. AQA put out something far more like the current GCSE. OCR and Edexcel threatened to sue AQA for stealing their clients by looking like the easy option (I believe) and Ofqual had to step in. They are now investigating exactly what the exams should look like in order to assess the stated objectives. They are finding it a bit more difficult than expected and have already extended their deadline and roped a load of schools in to sit test assessments to see what the kids find difficult. It's a farce. On top of that, we think that the pass grade will be a 5, even though the old grade C will be mapped to a 4. We don't, however, have any idea what the league table measure will be, nor whether it will be the kids who fail to get a 4 or a 5 who will have to resit maths in sixth form.

And this is just maths. God knows how many problems the other subjects will throw up.

Poisoned by pen - compulsory Ebacc was announced over the weekend...

Well being a cautious type I went looking first and the BBC had what appears to be the grand announcement here: news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/20/newsid_2516000/2516847.stm

June 1984, first teaching 1986, first exam 1988. Must have been delayed a year?

"It will stretch the able more and stretch the average more."

You know what's in the curriculum though don't you or is secondary-world consensus about to do a massive U-turn over the flack they throw at primary for teaching to the test?

DD is in Y7 and she's already touched a couple of small topics that are apparently new to the reformed maths GCSE, although perhaps they already taught those as standard.

Pique the transition from O-levels to GCSEs took about 10 years and GCSEs had pilots where students took both GCSEs and O-levels for benchmarking.

These new GCSEs have been rushed in in a couple of years. There have been no pilots. Maths departments around the country have already started teaching the new GCSE to kids for whom this will be their only chance at a maths qualification but we don't know what the exam will look like because Ofqual have had to launch an investigation which has already missed its reporting deadline.

They don't "have" to do ebacc.

They have already changed quite a bit in the past few years.

At least the children on the new exams have number based grades to sow the difference, the ones taking GCSEs now are sitting a harder assessment but most employers won't know it is harder than a couple of years ago.

So how on earth did schools (& children) cope when they changed from O-levels and CSEs to GCSEs?

Its going to be an utter disaster.
I'm very glad my kids are above the age for that.
And feel incredibly sorry for any child caught up in it.
Especially those not in the top 10% of ability or wealth.

Giraffe has it. Fucking shambles.

And don't forget grade "deflation" - current C grade will be equivalent to a grade 4, but you'll need a grade 5 (current C+/B-) to achieve a pass.

DS2, on the other hand, will be sitting most of his GCSEs in 2018, and they sound like a completely different ball-game. Grades from 9-1, closed book rather than open book, and much less coursework.

Many of the actual specifications aren't accredited yet, so I don't have concrete information about some subjects.

Maths and English are changing for first teaching in 2015 with first exams in 2017, other subjects will be first teaching 2016 and first exams 2018.

Judging by how the implementation of the new maths GCSE is going, it's going to be a fucking shambles.

Do you mean GCSEs from summer 2017 onwards? DS1 will be sitting most of his in 2016. They include the same amount of coursework as usual, and hopefully a Modern Texts context question on Of Mice and Men.

For DD1, luckily(?) currently doing GCSEs, the new system would be awful. She has dyspraxia and struggles to organise her thoughts quickly and massively struggles with essay writing. However given a bit of scaffolding she can do really well.

For DD2 who is only y5, I think it could perhaps be beneficial, it might suit her nature better.

The plus side for CAs is you get marks in the bank, especially if you are a hard worker. The negative side is pressure for 2 years, and in some subjects so much teaching for CAs that maybe general teaching and other techniques get side-lined.

Current method for MFLs is, imo crazy and in desperate need of reform.

I disagree with 'everyone to do Ebacc' too. Although I think generally that if people are capable of passing Ebacc range they should probably do them, making people struggle and fail with a subject they have no aptitude for, rather than allowing a different subject they can succeed in is
just plain daft.