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?

[Buxbaum]

Last year the most common grades in endlidh and maths were Ds.

No, they weren't.

These graphs show the distributions of grades for pupils who took the reformed English Language, English Literature and Maths in 2017.

For Maths, the most common grade was a 4, corresponding to a low C in the old system.
For English Language and Literature, the most common grade was a 5, corresponding to a high C or low B.

Grade boundaries were set so that the same proportion of pupils who achieved C+ in previous years achieved 4+ in 2017.

[Dungeondragon15]

I’d like to see something from the exam board rather than the daily mail saying that memorisation of long chunks of text is required...

I didn't get the information from the Daily Mail. I got it from DD who did GCSE English lit last year. She had to spend a lot of time learning long chunks of texts and was very stressed about it. I presume that the teachers told her to do that as she wouldn't have done it otherwise.

[longlostpal]

I wasn’t suggesting you got the info from the dm dungeon, but that’s the only source cited on this thread (apart from personal experience) as far as I can see. I’d be interested in seeing what the exam boards say about quotes etc.

[QuelleChose]

it can be good to learn poetry and text, though.

people used to do that naturally.

part of the oral tradition.

[Biologifemini]

The new exams do look tricky however the old ones were a bit useless.
I employ graduates and the level of English is often extremely poor so the exams needed to be tightened up. Perhaps they have overdone it. But things couldn’t continue as they were.

[Lunde]

Some posters seem to have forgotten that most English children in previous generations did not take O-levels or A-levels. O-levels were designed as a qualification for the top sets only or Grammar schools - they were not a universal school exam.

When I was at comprehensive school in the 1970s only the top maths set (of 8) did O-level, sets 2-4/5 did CSE and the other sets did vocational qualifications and some left without taking any qualifications (you used to be able to leave at Christmas or Easter before exams if you had turned 16.

This Parliamentary answer about school leavers shows that in the 1970s approx:
15% got 1 or more A levels
23% got 5+ O levels or CSE grade 1
50% got 1 O-level/CSE grade 1
15% - no graded results
api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1984/dec/20/school-leavers-examination-statistics

[Biologifemini]

And French gcse had become a joke. Kids who could not speak more than a few sentences were getting A stars. Again the boundaries and expectations had to change.

[Lollypop27]

My son finishes his GCSEs on Friday. They are so much harder than what I can remember them to be. The teachers haven’t had the time to fully teach everything so since January he has done extra revision every night after school, there was no Easter holidays apart from the bank holidays and no May half term. He was in school daily doing extra lessons with teachers who had run out of time. I am so thankful to those teachers who have given up their time and holidays to do this.

As of Friday he will have done 30 exams. He is very stressed about the whole thing. On Saturday I was talking to 3 other parents who’s children are doing GCSEs. Two of them had children who were suffering hugely with anxiety and had been to the drs about it. One of them was so bad he was having suicidal thoughts. I did my exams in 1998 and there was certainly not the pressure in us as there is on today’s children.

OP I don’t understand why you are comparing GCSEs with A levels? Everyone has to sit GCSE English. To do A level English you will of already had a good mark in The GCSE paper and will now the subject well. Also you are studying 3/4 subjects.

[longlostpal]

bio I agree that something had to change- the flip side of harder exams is that students are getting the opportunity to be exposed to more challenging material. I think that’s a good thing, especially as some children will be getting their primary exposure to poetry, drama etc in the classroom. I remember reading that a few years ago about 90% of kids were doing of mice and men for their main gcse

[Dungeondragon15]

I wasn’t suggesting you got the info from the dm dungeon, but that’s the only source cited on this thread (apart from personal experience) as far as I can see. I’d be interested in seeing what the exam boards say about quotes etc.

Then look at what the exam boards say then rather than just disbelieving what everyone is telling you. I am basing my information on what teachers told DD she had to do to get a good grade. Funnily enough, I just took the teachers' word for it rather than reading the exam board information to check they know how to do their jobs. It not as if I am an English teacher and I doubt that you are either. DD got a 9 by the way as did many other children in her class so my guess is that the teachers did know what they are talking about.

[longlostpal]

Posted too soon

For their main gcse text. That’s a sign something had gone wrong imo - that it was being taught universally suggests it was being done by rote. And the main reason it is so accessible is that it is heavily moralising - but teaching kids a moral message (however laudable) is not the same as teaching them literary analysis. I think it’s good for students that things are being shaken up.

[Storminateapot]

Two of my children are in the midst of it right now. We're down to the last 6, but yes they will have endured 30 separate exams by the end over a roughly 4-5 week period. They are shadows of themselves and they weren't even 16 when they began as they are summer babies.

The education they have received has been geared towards the old style GCSE. Two years ago the government decided to change that without considering whether the appropriate foundation was in place and in some cases didn't even have course material published until the courses were a few months in. Teachers have been given no indication of what the children are aiming for - the best example essay available is at a grade 7 level, so those aiming for 8/9 have no clue at all what that might require.

It's an absolute disaster. It's damaged the mental health of one of my children and the other has a language processing disorder which means a bright boy has now been set up to not achieve his potential, when 2 years ago he would have had that chance.

I'm utterly disgusted with it all. I also have an older child sitting A levels right now - again, no coursework, AS's no longer count. It's 2 x 3 hour exams each subject right at the end and the new standard this year is more akin to degree level for 17/18 year olds. I have never seen her so stressed and anxious, we're barely keeping her head above water.

Thanks Mr Gove, you utter prick.

[longlostpal]

dragon no need to be so aggressive, I’m not having a go at your daughter or questioning her abilities.

I have had a look at the aqa website and haven’t seen anything about memorisation, so was wondering if anyone could point me to something. Examiners reports for last years exams seem positive, and at least the Shakespeare seems to have provided passages as a starting point for discussion. I’m just not convinced that there is a huge difference between closed and open book exams - no one hand writes out enormous chunks of quoted text in an exam.

[Verbena37]

It’s 15 poems to memorise and it’s gcses, not A Levels.
I think it’s totally absurd. It shows nothing other than someone’s memory. For children with SEND and processing difficulties, GCSE English lit isn’t even differentiated, as maths is.....but of course, by law, you don’t even have to do English lit. Schools have to teach it but you don’t have to take it.

I believe there should be a general English language and general maths paper....basic skills for everybody to take- to show basic competence.
So even if the children taking the higher maths paper for example, fail it, they would still be able to achieve a pass in a basic paper, rather than having to wait another year to get a pass.

[crunchymint]

storm Totally disagree that the example answer is degree level. And if it really was, that means degrees have dumbed down by an alarming amount.

www.bbc.com/education/guides/zcdbqty/revision/1

[sashh]

I really do not understand why todays youngsters are different from us back then....why is it such a big deal now ?

Because back then not everyone sat GCSEs and GCSEs were basically a mash up of CSE and GCE O Level.

Under O Levels only the top 25% even sat the exam, the next 25% did CSE and only a minority got a grade equivalent to an O Level grade C.

The first few years of GCSE were similar ie top 25% would get an A-C, the next 25% C-E and 50% would get For G grades.

BUT one big change with GCSE was that a certain % or mark gave you a certain grade. So 90% on a GCSE would give you an A (later A*) whereas under O level the grades reflected where you were in your cohort, 50% of O Level candidates got a D-E grade, only 10% got an A grade and theoretically 90% could be a D grade.

Now the content is more similar to O Levels but we are expecting all children to achieve.

[Dungeondragon15]

dragon no need to be so aggressive, I’m not having a go at your daughter or questioning her abilities.

I know that you are not questioning my DDs abilities. You do seem to be questioning her teachers though if you will only believe that a lot of text learning is required for the highest marks if you have read it for yourself.

I have had a look at the aqa website and haven’t seen anything about memorisation, so was wondering if anyone could point me to something. Examiners reports for last years exams seem positive, and at least the Shakespeare seems to have provided passages as a starting point for discussion. I’m just not convinced that there is a huge difference between closed and open book exams - no one hand writes out enormous chunks of quoted text in an exam.

Are you an English teacher yourself though? If not what makes you think you know better than they do. I presume that they have done more than just reading the AQA website and checking whether it mentions anything about memorisation.

[crunchymint]

I don't see the big issue with memorisation.

[Dungeondragon15]

I don't see the big issue with memorisation.

The issue is that you are testing pupils memory and not necessarily if they are good at English Literature. A pupil that is very good at analysing text etc may not get a particularly good mark if they haven't got a good memory.

[Verbena37]

crunchy try getting a child with autism and very poor planning and processing skills to memorise 15 poems.

dungeon DS is currently doing GCSEs and I went through and asked her about each of the 15 poems. Her teacher had told them to memorise 8 in depth and have a firm understanding of the other 7. That’s because they had a good idea of what they needed to know by heart and what they didn’t.

They need to know the poems for understanding, quotations and construction to be able to answer thoroughly enough.

[UrgentScurryfunge]

I left teaching 2 years ago as my colleagues were in a last minute scrabble to pick the finally released GCSE specifications which were well behind schedule, and had weeks to prepare for very different courses with no budget for new materials even if the course led textbooks had been published at that point. My knowledge of the new system is totally out of date!

I did open book GCSEs/ A-levels in the late 90s (pre-AS level). You did have to know the text well, and treated the text as back up for accuracy. So it wasn't a total memory test. The texts could also contain your own annotations, so underlining key points likely to be quoted and key words. There wasn't time to use it for research and hunt for fresh information.

The education system values Bloom's taxonomy where the value of information is ranked from lower level recall and describe, to higher level analysis and synthesis. Different people have different strengths and will seek employment in the adult world based on those. I worry in the current system about those who don't follow typically expected learning pathways. We are a long way off GCSEs in my household, but it looks like DS (7) is dyslexic. He finds rote type memorisation difficult, so for example he can't rattle off his times tables, but he does understand the process of multiplying numbers and what it means which is long term the more useful skill. Going closed book and relying on memory distorts many people's abilities to display the their higher level knowledge because they get hindered by the more superficial memorisation, so their grade is not a true reflection of their skills, whether we're talking about KS1/2 SATs, GCSEs or A-Levels.

I feel so sorry for this guinea pig generation who had the goal posts shifted abruptly with minimal preparation for them or their teachers. As much as I despise the Gove era reforms, the system needs a time of stability to adjust and settle and evaluate what changes have actually occured. Maybe the younger children in the system now will be better "trained" for it... maybe by then there'll be a completely different approach...

What was really broken in education was the punative approach to league tables that caused schools to teach to the test and fudge coursework and massage results in order to survive. Scrapping well understood levels, and changing the assessment systems doesn't solve those fundamental problems. One size doesn't fit all and so many young people are being failed by a prescriptive approach to the curriculum, and a highly pressured exam system where everything rides on exam performance.

[Thehogfather]

lost I'm just going off the exam and the curriculum.

If a grade 9 in English is supposed to separate out the best, it should be doing so on ability in the subject.

I got a for both English in the late 90's. I couldn't do so at A-level, I am just not that ability, and except the rare occasions where I bother to make an effort it would be easy to assume I wasn't ever a, let alone a material.

So in my mind the grade 9 should be separating the genuinely able in the subject from people like me who can get a good result through general intelligence and good short term memory to recall basic rules and what the examiner is looking for. Instead it just offers more opportunity for someone like me to use my short term memory for a better result that doesn't reflect my ability.

[BottleOfJameson]

Why on earth do they not bring the texts in with them? That kind of memorisation is pointless. Who cares whether you did it 30 years ago or not? It serves no purpose! A difficult exam should be testing depth of knowledge and understanding not rote memory. Anyone who is able to write a meaningful essay on a text will naturally know it well, knowing it by heart is unnecessary and tends to be favoured by people of lower ability who can gain an advantage via memorisation.

In reality memorisation is almost never useful, in employment you have access to information, What is important is the understanding and ability to access the pertinent information and be able to interpret it effectively.

[crunchymint]

No the issue is that you still have to analyse what you can remember. I have just completed a qualification which required memorising information. If you simply splurged information you would have got very low marks. You have to interpret.

[BottleOfJameson]

crunchymint but why force memorisation at all. It isn't a useful skill. Test only the actual skills relevant to that qualification. In English you test the ability to analyse the text, form a well articulated argument etc. Memorisation isn't a sought after skill that we need to promote.