New GSCEs too difficult?

[Trishtrash]

"In GCSE English it's all exams – there is no coursework – and pupils are not allowed to bring in any of the texts. They effectively have to memorise three texts and 18 poems. The expectation is killing them.'

The above is a quote from today's Daily Mail - sorry!

Am I being unreasonable to think that that is not an unreasonable thing to require of an A-Level Student? I did my A-Levels over 30 years ago in a bog-standard comprehensive and we couldn't do any coursework ahead of the game and we certainly couldn't take any of the texts into the exam (that would have made it so much easier!!).

I remember having to memorise vast swathes of poetry (Keats, Wordsworth, Somerset Maugham etc...) and chunks of text (Doris Lessing, Return of the Native, A Winter's Tale are ones that I vaguely remember) in the expectation that we would need to quote from the poetry/texts to support a variety of themes/ideas that we might be asked questions on.

I have no idea about the rest of the curriculum as I did Art, English and History. I definitely had to memorise tons for the History element (I did modern History so stuff about Russian Revolution, WW1 & 2 and the EEC). I know that kids are under enormous pressure now and I got an A for my English Literature but there was no A* around then from what I remember (it WAS a long time ago!)

Is the problem that the teachers haven't been adequately prepared or supported to teach for this style of exam? If the kids are going in after two years of expecting another style of exam then I really feel for them but is this the case?

I think that the problem with having to memorise text is that you may be testing pupils memory rather their actual ability to do English literature. DD is very good at English but she was very annoyed and stressed at having to do this last year as her memory is not all that brilliant.

I think the breadth of topic with these new GCSEs is huge. My DDs school really struggled to get the curriculum finished in good time in some subjects. They do seem harder than they did a few years ago.

The same with A levels. DS is doing his (what fun we are having in our house!) and in all 3 subjects the curriculum only just got finished by the May half term. The teachers all said that previously they'd have finished by Easter latest no sweat. The depth covered in some areas seems beyond A level IMO, but maybe the marking will reflect that she says hopefully.

The amount of subjects and amount of exams makes it really tough for them. My son has had 28 exams. He finishes on Friday, but others will still have another week to go. The English Lit in particular has just been turned into a hugely difficult memory test. My son used to love English, but now hates it so much that as soon as his Lit exams finished he burnt all of his course materials (not books) in our fire basket. They also have sheets of formulae to memorise for maths and science, and he has been studying things in Biology that I did at A-Level 25 years ago. He is bright and has worked hard, but is massively disillusioned and disheartened by the whole thing.

I sat my GCSE english in the late 90s. I think we were the generation who had it easiest. Even then, taking the book into an English exam with you, you still needed an intimate knowledge of the text, you couldn't go delving in randomly and read half a chapter whilst you were looking for the right part! We had to be prepared.
Still, I fail to see that the ability to memorise great swaths of texts really examines a pupil's ability at English literature. It will however, serve to put off huge numbers from continuing the subject at a higher level.

I didn't have to memorize 18 whole poems for O level.

I think a problem with current GCSEs that they are shorter but more numerous. For example triple science is 9 exams of just over an hour each where as I sat 6 exams back in the day.

DD has her last exam on Friday thank god. She has found them fairly tough. English used to be her best subject, not anymore I don't think.

We have memorised all them bloody poems off by heart. It does feel like a memory test.

Be interested to see the results in August to see how the nation got on as a whole.

The content is huge in the new GCSEs and the number of exams is exhausting. I have never know a cohort of students be so tired and demoralised.

It is testing memory rather than the ability to answer a question thoughtfully and analytically
And it’s even worse than that because in a couple of years max good teachers/depts will be working out what is likely to crop up based on what’s been included/excluded the previous few times and concentrate the on that. Just like they used to in O’Levels. Not rigorous.at.all.

YABU

For a start, you’re going on about a-levels rather than GCSEs, huge difference between the two!

A good GCSE grade in English lit should be for someone who understands the text and can analyse it well. Ability to memorise large portions of text is largely irrelevant. It’s a totally different skill, and not what English lit should be testing.

I did GCSE english , the first yr they came in and i had to memorise text/quotes etc.
we had no course work in english and were not allowed the txts with us.
we had to learn critical thinking skills and apply them to 'blind' poems in the exam as well.
We had 10 subjects and 30+ exams..
I really do not understand why todays youngsters are different from us back then....why is it such a big deal now ?
I also did long bus and walk to and from school, let myself in as had two working parents, and did sports and hobbies etc...

Its a shame if they're making them so difficult they're putting children off!

But then why did they make them so easy for over a decade so that the world and his wife could get an A with one week's revision?! Lowering standards deliberately meant I've pretty much lost all respect for "educationalists" as a result.

do you all think that current students are demoralised and tired out because the exams have been dumbed down for so many years , that now they have been calibrated back to the standards required years ago when o'levels were still a thing , or the first yr or two of gcses...and the students had no idea what was going to be required of them ?

I had to do this in GSCE's. We memorised poems, quotes from novels and plays and formulas for chemistry and physics. I thought they were simply making GCSE's hard as they used to be? There had been a year on year trend to making them easier.
If it is true that there has not been enough time to introduce these changes, then that is tough on students. But anything I have read, the GCSEs simply seem to be how they used to be before grade inflation.

I did GCE, my children did GCSE in the late eighties and my GCs are doing GCSE now. Believe me; these are by far the hardest.

It is testing memory rather than the ability to answer a question thoughtfully and analytically

^^this

I could memorise swathes of text at GCSE and this helped me pass some of my subjects but as teachers and examiners realise that there would be students like me, they know to examine analytical skills you had to questions set on unseen text.

I think the point some are missing is they might be studying for 8 GCSEs. But the number of exams they sit now to gain them had increased.
I can't recall the actual figures but at the GCSEs parents evening, 8 GCSEs old style was say 14 exams. The exact same GCSEs now involves sitting around 23 exams.
I've not got the correct figures but a teacher will confirm they sit several more exams now for the same outcome.

The same applied to my 'O'-Levels

You are conveniently forgetting about CSE levels, which, on average in the 1970s and 1980s, over 50% of students took (Hansard reports on average, only 25% of students achieved 5 or more higher grades at O Level). The rest had no graded results at all.

You cannot and should not compare the two in its current form.

And it tested memory and critical thinking skills. To those saying this used to only be demanded at A Level, that simply is not true. It was demanded at equivalent of GCSE's. There was no coursework either.
At my degree (Hons), coursework made up 6% of the final grade. The key thing was you had to pass the coursework. Rest was exams and we had to memorise an incredible amount, but were marked on critical thinking.

Rolyrocks Yes because they were much harder then.

Yes and no. From a general PoV, there wasn't anything for the top end, so it did need changing.

But I don't think the way it's been done is acceptable. Not just the way they've been introduced, but the expectations/ content in some subjects.

My dd is typical top set ability in English, rather than highly able. Nevertheless she is likely to get a 9 because she's great at memorising. Whereas a child with far more ability in the subject and a more average memory could easily get a lower grade. Despite the fact they are the one capable of pursuing the subject much further than dd could.

It also seems contrary in some other subjects to say on one hand that there is something for the top most, but on the otherhand put forward the idea all dc should progress at the same speed.

English literature still contains unseen texts.

GinandGingerBeer How long do the exams now last? Ours lasted about 3 hours at GCSE equivalent.

Remember that to compare modern GCSEs with O Levels is to compare apples and oranges. Only about 35% of pupils took O Level Maths in 1979; 65% took the CSE.

Modern GCSEs are taken almost universally. Equivalent Level 2 qualifications have been either abolished or are not widely recognised. Tiers still exist in Maths, MFL and Science, but in my own subject of English we have a ludicrous situation whereby tiers have been totally abolished and the same paper has to apply equally to a gifted student aiming for a 9 and a lower ability student from whom a 1 will represent a good result.

Exams were never dumbed down. Teachers just got better each year at how to teach to the test. I hated coursework personally, as I am blessed with a good memory and would rather rely on that, but the skills used in researching and writing a piece of coursework are far more relevant to the world of work.

As I said upthread, there is bugger all point in doing exams based on memorising huge chunks of information when in today's world such information is available at the touch of a button. The focus should be on how to read information critically.

You didn't have to do O'Levels. You could do CSEs instead. Maybe they should reintroduce a (whisper it) two tier system.