To wish people would stop with the “grades don’t mean anything” shit

[Rapidmama]

Try getting any job without at least English and maths

Of course they don’t define you and there is always the exceptions to the rule but honestly all these people rolling out the “it doesn’t matter it’s just a piece of paper” excuses are talking shit.

Usual exemptions for SN, extenuating circumstances etc.

Where I work, I have an extremely clever, highly qualified colleague (Oxbridge grad etc). His children are at various stages of exam stress (GSCE to university exam age).

What is interesting to me is how these children are likely to be cognitively extremely able, but what is impeding them is that, from what he tells me, their ability to cope with the stress and pressure of the exam process, is pretty poor. There have been resits, and retaken years at uni, and drop outs and all sorts. Bottom line, they can't seem to cope with the pressure.

It puts an interesting spin on things, for me. Should society lessen the pressure of these exams? Obviously we have to prioritize people's health. But then, don't we also want exams to be a filter for resilience? I think we forget that the entire point of exams is to force rank people. The fact that people fail, for whatever reason (intellectually, or by being unable to cope with the pressure), is by design. Or is that too harsh?

They're not EVERYTHING, and the exams are not suitable for many students. As I teacher at mainstream I got sick of seeing non-academic students deciding they were failures by the time they were early teens. School is hell for some, and does nothing but convince them they are thick and there is no point in trying.

While I agree that certain aspects of maths and English are important, does a non-academic student need to be forced to analyse Shakespeare and 17th century romantic poetry? What benefit will it ever be to them other than making them hate the subject? I think the exam novel choices only turn off non-readers from reading anything. I've had students say they'll never read a book again after trudging through Dickens, metaphors and pathetic fallacies for term after term. We seem to have decided there is only one route to success in life and that is the academic route. Anything else is belittled and frowned upon.

Banging a square peg into a round hole because the hole suits the round pegs is wrong and turning off thousands of teenagers from learning anything.

My cousin incidentally has no qualifications at all to his name and now runs a very successful large building business and well known businessman.

We found out he had dyslexia and that was why he failed his GCSEs (it wasn't recognised then as needing extra help, people were just assumed to fail).

On the other hand..

My other cousin achieved high grades in everything and a first in her degree and can't hold a job for more than a couple of months because she cannot cope in the workplace.

I think telling someone who has just come out with disappointing results that "grades don't matter" is not going to be any comfort at all.

And holding up people who are high achievers now, but didn't get the grades at school isn't actually very helpful. The reason why we hear about it is because it's unusual. The chance of anyone becoming the next Richard Branson with or without grades is miniscule and he had put a huge amount of work in.
Plus that was in an earlier society where grades were less common, so not today's world.

Perhaps the message if you haven't got the results you need is along the lines of "put them behind you and work hard at the next stage"

Thank you things exactly!
op you have actually got a fucking nerve posting what you have / on today of all days.
You have no idea of the struggles some students might face!
Many non academic people do better at work then some individuals who indulge themselves in education: way past what is required!

If you asked DH, who makes a huge salary with only a maths CSE to his name, he would agree.

That’s a teeny tiny instance of lack of solid grades not being a hold-back.

You may not need nine 9’s, but you do need at least English and Maths to get you to the next stage of education, and many future jobs.

YABU.

It's really reassuring for people who haven't done as well as they hoped.

Grades aren't the be all and end all. These exams aren't the only way to measure intelligence, they measure your memory more than anything.

I didn't pass my GCSE maths, I didn't finish my A-levels and I've progressed through the company I work for and I'm in a great position with a great salary.

If they don’t mean anything, what a waste of time. Grades aren’t the be all end all, and it’s not the end of the world if you don’t get it right the first time round - as others said you can resit or go down other routes - but that’s a very different message to ‘they don’t mean anything’.

What is the answer for kids that just can’t learn : can’t study?
Then what?
Are they written off now?
What if they can’t even manage a manual apprenticeship?
Huh?
There is nothing in place for those kids!
Absolutely zero.
The bodies and individuals, put in charge of fixing things for kids with minor additional needs, are taught the box ticking- just like any other government recommended service!

at 30 I’m considering redoing my maths GCSE to study it at A level

I'm 29 and next week I start a National 5 maths (Scottish equivalent of GCSE) class one evening a week. I have an HNC, a degree and I'm doing an MSc but I did poorly in maths at school and I'd like to have more options.

If I decided to train to be a teacher, for example, my current grade wouldn't get me on to the course.

The fact that people fail, for whatever reason (intellectually, or by being unable to cope with the pressure), is by design. Or is that too harsh?

Well, the GCSEs are not 'norm referenced' - so AIUI there is no theoretical bar to everyone getting the magic grade '4/5'. But in practice I think the level they are set at does mean that a number of students umber of students people are likely to get 1s and 2s. (Ofqual say on their blog "while we would not normally expect results to be out of line with predictions, there is no fixed quota of each grade.")

And I think that is the ethical question that other mners have raised in the past - yes the GCSEs are envisaged to result in a number of students failing - say, getting 1s and 2s. In practice it is fairly easy to identify which students those are likely to be - in which case should they really be 'required' to take them? (Obviously I realise they can just not turn up to the exam, but I don't think that's encouraged!)

I'd trade my straight A exam results and MA with distinction from a top university for decent mental health. Academia came very easy to me and I sailed through every exam without revising, whilst all the while wanting to not exist. Trying to carve out a good career when you have chronic depression and anxiety which is pretty resistent to threapy and medication isn't exactly easy. It's hard to consistently sell yourself in interviews and network and get on in the workplace when you find yourself battling thoughts of suicide.

Good grades aren't always a guarantee you will have a well paying career ahead of you. My DP was very lazy at school and did badly in his GCSEs but has gone on to build a very successful business for himself. His mum raised him to believe he should strive to be successful and want the best for himself. Even if your child isn't academic in school as a child, you can strive to instill ambition in them in other ways. They may not be a high flyer as a young adult but find their niche later on in life. It's sad that society places so much pressure on children to achieve straight A's (or however they grade them these days) or have their future written off. Not every well paid career stems from graduate schemes. Entrepreneur's and those who pursue more vocational careers can earn decent salaries. Plus a lot of people may be happier working for themselves, there's a lot to be said for that.

@SoonerthanIthought

Yes, I think I'd distinguish between early exams designed to ensure a basic level of understanding, that ultimately we want everyone to pass (e.g. early maths, english exams, driving tests etc), and then exams which are designed to produce a performance gradient of some kind.

There is room for both kinds of exam, and in fact, both are necessary. If A-levels ever get to the point where there is not an obvious ranking (say, via grade inflation), then the logical next step is universities enforcing an entrance exam that allows them to distinguish between candidates.

Glad you could understand my mangled post dissim! Yes I agree - and there must be at least some doubt as to whether the individual student benefits from taking an exam and getting a 1/2, as most people in practice regard that as a fail. (Obviously harder if there's a chance they might do better - but I imagine in some cases there is not.) They might be better off doing a functional exam.

If A-levels ever get to the point where there is not an obvious ranking (say, via grade inflation), then the logical next step is universities enforcing an entrance exam that allows them to distinguish between candidates.

Interesting - I have been musing on another thread whether universities do really need to distinguish between candidates as much as they currently do (eg "so you got 3 As instead of 2As and an A star, sorry not good enough for us!"). I can see that you have to set a threshold at which the student can meet the course requirements, but I'm not sure of the evidence that a 3A candidate won't do that. It may be relatively easy to find out - go back 10 yrs, and compare degree results with the actual marks achieved at A level).

That is a bit of a digression, but not really.

Grades do matter, unfortunately not every child is academic. Doctors, lawyers and engineers can tell you that. My GCSE results were absolutely crap and I had to do re-sits. Though I am no professor, I was destined for far better grades than I received.

Many years later and I still feel secretly embarrassed I do not have an A-C in maths. Though in management now my poor grades hindered me from applying for any professional type job. I attended university via GNVQ rather than A levels (another embarrassment as friends/family were happy to inform me this was a low grade qualification).

There has always be a part of me that feels like a "thicko" and I am easily intimidated when around highly intelligent people.

The system supports the academic which is great when you fall into this category. Not so great when you do not.

Grades should only mean anything for the next thing you want to do. It irritates the shit out of me that anyone would care about my O-Level grades 30+ years after the fact. Why? Look at my experience and my work history.

You need GCSE grades to progress, be it to an apprenticeship or to A-Levels or indeed to re-sits, that’s it. That’s all there is to it really. Once you’ve done the next thing, they aren’t important any more (or they shouldn’t be anyway).

@withlotsoflove are they just written off? basically yes

I was in this situation with my daughter 2 years ago. There was literally no help available at all.

@SoonerthanIthought

Yes, the issue is that there are more able candidates than there are university places, so a (potentially arbitrary) filter has to be applied.

Course criteria are set, not just to reflect the difficulty of the course, but also the demand for the course.

The undergrad courses with the highest average IQs for students are maths and physics. They are probably amongst the most difficult courses. But the entry requirements for those courses are lower than things like Law and Medicine.

This is all a long way of saying that forced ranking by a somewhat arbitrary challenge (e.g. exam), is not going anywhere. We need selection criteria where there is high demand for a finite resource (e.g. university places).

What people mean is that if you fail your GCSE's now, then it's not the end of world as you can take them again. It's a right pain inm the backside but it can be done.

Most employers require at least GCSE Maths and English at ' O' level pass standard, or whatever the equivalent is now. I had to go back to college at 34 to do maths GCSE so I could go to university.

If you're starting your own business or doing something that doesn't require the piece of paper to say you've passed ..then it doesn't matter.

So, technically grades do mean something - to employers and to universities

Practically, with exam results ,it just means you can remember stuff under pressure.

I know why people are saying it but to those who think we should scrap exams, what the hell would we put in their place?

Interviews where they just see if they like the person? Which disadvantages those with fewer interpersonal skills.

Those who have more extracurricular? Favours the rich.

Those who do more work experience? Favours those in London and large cities.

If we didn't have exam grades, applications for everything would just be like throwing pins at a wall and hoping they stick - no real ability to quantify the persons abilities. No advantage for anyone.

Sorry I disagree, and there are equivalents to Maths and English GCSE if they are unable to pass.
Of course grades don't matter, are you suggesting that those without a string of GCSE's can't work.

Yes, great if your kids are able to pass them, not the end of the world if they don't.
Some courses will accept the bare min for entry, it depends on the subject.

There is a academic pyramid effect happening in the UK because of competition for jobs in our rather over-populated cities. Young, recent graduates now go straight into post-graduate courses, in order just to be considered for simple administration jobs. I work for a college which recruits administrators and I see this every day. They are in competition with both UK and EU nationals (where tertiary education is free), so the bar is very high. If you wish to take up a more vocational, practical career, and become a barber, a car mechanic or carpenter, you will still require qualifications (GCSE Maths, English and more) to get on to a further education course. Whilst children should not be beaten down or made to feel distressed, by lack of success at GCSE level, they will still need lots of love and support to pass these subjects. If you have a trust fund, you can stop worrying.

I think the issue here is the increasingly poor mental health of children taking exams and the devastation and subsequent plummet in mental health that accompanies this "failure". All people are trying to say is its not worth getting in a tiz about it things can be sorted.

@Lochlorien makes a good point.

If we had an economy which produced an abundance of well paid jobs across the whole of the education / skill distribution, this intense focus on exams would naturally lessen.

It's the lack of a well balanced economy that is placing huge pressure and competition on the one, semi-predictable route to a decent job.

@Lochlorien I would agree with that. I have an MA from a top 10 and my graduate job was an apprenticeship. A well paid and highly-regarded apprenticeship but when my qualifications should've gotten me a grad scheme/ entry-level I was now competing with school leavers.

Where the school leavers are now to be employed is a mystery when 8/10 apprentices I know have a minimum Bachelors.