Exam Data Nerds step this way

If Ofqual are not regulating iGCSEs then how are the two quals equal?

good question

Initially IGCSEs could only be taken by private schools. When Gove decided that they should be available to all, then the boards submitted IGCSEs to ofqual for accreditation. They sometimes had to make changes to get them accredited but by and large the accredited/non accredited versions of the qualifications were the same standard. As evidenced by lack of teacher uproar and by the fact that in (some? Many, I think?) cases the same exam papers were used for both quals.

Then the gcse system changed to 9-1 and threw everything up in the air again, so now it’s probably more of a debatable question again.

No one wants a race to the bottom. Not even the exam boards selling the quals, because they want to uphold their prestige and have the quals be seen as worth the effort. But exactly the same standard- you can find people to debate it either way!

'Norm' referencing is contingent on the definition of 'norm'.

wurzel There was an article in The Times about pre U a few days ago. It came under a genral headline about private schools 'gaming the system' as pre Us are now seen as easier than A Levels, ironically, in terms of getting the very top grades. These are The Times' views not mine, having no stake at all in pre Us.

I think it is possible for an IGCSE board to get the qualifications 'benchmarked' against GCSEs by NARIC - don't know what the initials stand for, but it gives advice on international qualifications and UK equivalents. I don't know how many exam boards do this.

The more I think about it the more I don't really understand why we do norm referencing. As another pp has said it does raise ethical issues as well as practical ones like the problem of different cohorts for different subjects. What happens with eg Physics/Chemistry A level - is that criteria or norm referenced? I would guess they have higher ability cohorts than many A levels - or is that not right?

Interesting about no mutual recognition after March 2019!

Thank you NobleGiraffe
If Ofqual are not regulating iGCSEs then how are the two quals equal?

It would be interesting to know - do exam systems in other countries have norm referenced rather than criteria referenced grades

I wonder too, how many countries norm reference these exams with a cohort including students with learning difficulties.

It's like they've transferred DWP 'tests' of 'fitness to work' to the exam system on our children.

Of course, British qualifications have no mutual recognition with any of the EU economies from 29.3.19, so arguably they are not only based on hugely dodgy ethical and educational methodology, they're also worthless.

For those of us from olden times, O level results were set to that 10% got an A, 15% got a B and so on, the grade boundaries were moved to follow a standard bell curve. Is there anywhere that shows the equivalence for current GCSE results?

Has anyone seen the pre U results for this year?

Would be very interesting to see how they compare with 2017.

Would be particularly interesting to see results for those schools involved in last year’s cheating scandal.

Don’t know if they regulate IGCSE.

They don’t.

It would be interesting to know - do exam systems in other countries have norm referenced rather than criteria referenced grades?

I think there are some subjects where criteria referencing (rather than fixed caps on the number getting a particular grade) would make more sense, and not be too difficult to examine - mfl for instance. What's the objection to it?

I like the breakdown by county pages!

We did have a number of Us this year : more for Lit than Lang. Not actually SEN students . They tend to do a different qualification in reality. The Us tend to be those we worry most about : pre NEET. Often disadvantaged, certainly disenchanted and disenfranchised. Dis everything in fact...

This new system does nothing for them. No coursework and no contribution from speaking and listening, so they are massively affected by persistent absence, for example, and the need to study hefty texts pretty much ad nauseam -stimulating for many and a trun off for many, too.

Does this data include iGCSEs?
When ascertaining grade boundaries, say for Marhs, are they done for all marhs iGCSE & GCSEs or by individual boards etc. I’ve heard there’s disparity between the boards on difficulty etc so wonder if grade boundaries are determined within each board or all thrown into the pot? Not too sure what the fairest way is either.

Fascinating. This will be very useful.

Ugh. Hit post too soon.

I didn't really get to dig into the GCSE numbers yet this year as I instantly went on holiday come Thursday, but a lot of our students who had Us in both maths and English either were EAL and relatively recent arrivals, had SEN, or were the sort who turned up but slept through the whole exam.

The whole thing where there are no benchmark skills and 40% of students are doomed to failure (per subject with exceptions as above) because of grade boundary malarkey is truly depressing and I weep for this country and its stupid examination system.

I'm a data nerd, and work with my school's data, so good combo?

Well that was fun!

Irma that's bc teachers were unnecessarily scared about this grade 9 thing. A 9 turned out to be 84% this year.

I agree bubbles, it wouldn't be fair to compare

Also agree with the comments about a bell curve graph for ancient languages being unfair. In fact it makes me think any system where the top 3%get a certain grade regardless isn't great. If one year 50% was the highest mark its not fair that the year after that it could be 98% (extreme example but theoretically could happen!) An employer wouldn't be able to tell that candidate A is not as competent in the subject as candidate B as they got the same grade.

It would probably be unfair to have a bell curve or wotnot for Ancient Languages. It could mean that someone on 90% could get a U if everyone else got 91-99%.

Dd got 94% in Maths in her Year 10 mocks and was told that that might be a Level 7 depending on where the 8 and 9 grades were set. I thought that odd

Poor teaching over many years? English is used in essay subjects. (Or when writing a few paragraphs). So gets more practice. Maths is less widely used in other subjects.

Surely some children are not going to be able to do well at these exams? It was ever thus. Not every child has the intelligence to get above a 2 or the staying power to learn. It would be most revealing if we knew where these children go to school. Are they in special schools? There is a good chance they are not in mainstream education or are in a pru or in a unit in a mainstream school. Therefore they may well have learning difficulties. Therefore it’s unfair to compare them with others. They may have done well to get a 1 or 2 grade.

Over 11,000 students got a U in maths. Why does the maths have almost double the fail rate of English?

Just under 6,000 students got a U in English Lang. Most of those got a 1 or U in maths, none got higher than 2. I feel for my students with SEND.