Calling teachers, head teachers, education people - do you think GCSEs and A-level exams will have to be adapted for 2021 because some students have effectively missed a term?

[wonderwhatnext]

Hi, I’ve heard this idea mooted by someone you could say is “in the know”, so wondering what others think?

To address the obvious inequalities caused by the fact that, this term, some students are receiving a full curriculum online whereas others are receiving next to nothing, next summer”s exams may need to reflect this by offering one less module (or topic) on the papers?

I realise this may be difficult as schools don’t teach the syllabus in the same order, but it could be something similar to when my DC sat history IGCSE, for instance. As IGCSE is international, not all students would have taken say, WW2 in Europe as a topic. So out of 20 options, they chose the ones they had studied. Papers could be set out like this and students would answer questions on the topics they had covered?

What do people think may happen and when do we think schools will go back?

Logic - not liiic!

I’m not sure what they can do to make it fair, or if they even can. I tutor maths and have a lot of panicking Y10 parents who have been very willing to pay for more tuition this term. Every time the pupils are stuck I’m running through it with them, teaching them, explaining, supporting them. Those children are going to go back with a huge advantage over the ones with no home support who have been months not properly understanding their work.

The gap between students is going to increase a lot, I think.

wonderwhatnext I am not getting your logic either. You seem to be saying give each school x number of grades (based on previous performance) and tell them to share them out as they see fit.

We are a 'little' bit in the dark at the moment because we dont know how much moderation the exam boards will do and if they will actually ask for any evidence to back their claims up.

Or are you saying teachers should try and predict grades based upon what the student would have got had they sat it, 2 years ago, prior to the Corona Virus?

Zombie have you read how they plan to moderate grades this year?

Next year can't be just teacher assessment in the same format as this year. That would be unfair on staff and students. Mainly from a statistical point of view, we can't say a school would have the same number of grades for 3 years in a row. The only reason ofqual are using last year's grades is because there won't be many schools that improve by a huge percentage each year.

I forsee a system that possibly combines teacher assessment and an exam grade. Or a system that takes the best from the two? (though what stops schools giving all students a 9 in this scenario?) Or will some content be cut (unlikely).

Hercwasonaroll, I can imagine that as a possibility. So a moderated exam system!

I know two parents who work at private schools and have kids at state. The private schools kicked into gear immediately- Year 12 - we still don’t have much teaching - work set is go through the text book, we’ve been told the teachers can’t always answer questions as they might have their own kids to teach...no one we deal with in our business has been given this out - I was quite surprised the HT supported this. But it is what it is.

I took both IGCSEs and GCSEs (in different subjects!). The GCSEs were definitely easier in general. It's possible that's now changed if the new GCSEs are harder of course.

@patte

IGCSES no longer count in state school progress measures. Make of that what you will.

I'm sure the quality of teaching will vary but all schools should be still be following the curriculum, online learning is very possible, I did an MSc this way. I understand with practical subjects or those requiring special equipment it is harder, but even there can the theory bits not be taught with then more practical stuff when they go back?

I do fail to see why schools are making so many excuses as to why lessons aren't happening and why pupils will be so behind.

Teachers shouldn't be teaching their own kids, they're keyworkers so their kids should be at school.

I work in a state selective school in a middle class area.

Our students haven’t missed out on much from the specification. We’ve taught lessons right from the start of lockdown. We’ve been able to rely on the fact that our students have access to good food, exercise, supportive parents and devices. They register every morning at 8:30 and are “seen” by every one of their subject teachers once a week.
Individuals in my form with SEN/anxiety I am messaging separately to keep an eye on them. Sending funny videos etc to keep them engaged with me even if not their work.

I personally believe the exams will go ahead as normal next year. This will be yet another thing that widens the gap between rich and poor. The rich will believe that it’s their “wonderful” care and hard work that make their kids amazing. The disadvantaged children will become more angry and disaffected.

It’s shit to be honest. I can only do the best for my students and my own children but I really feel that a huge number of children and areas of society will be affected long term by this. Personally I think more effort should have been put in to get disadvantaged kids into school but I don’t know exactly how this would have happened.

If you are a parent of a Yr10/12 the best you can do for them if their school isn’t “on it” is to keep them going on the skills. Practice questions, reading, podcasts, TED talks - anything to keep their brains going. Get them up every morning, make sure they’re talking to their friends and exercising.

I personally believe the exams will go ahead as normal next year. This will be yet another thing that widens the gap between rich and poor. The rich will believe that it’s their “wonderful” care and hard work that make their kids amazing. The disadvantaged children will become more angry and disaffected

I agree with this. It’s even more pronounced in schools where you have both groups of children- some who have been well supported, some who switched off on March 23rd and will (hopefully) come back when schools are in.

The only thing that may stop exams going forward as normal is the potential for many students to claim the interruption in teaching is a “mitigating circumstance”.

Herc - I’m not sure why people seem to want to pedal this notion that all independent schools are doing easier GCSEs that don’t count.

Take schools such as Westminster, or St Paul’s Girls or Latymer Upper and many other independents that regularly feature in the top 20 independent schools and where the odds of gaining a place at 11 plus are something like 12 applicants for every place.... If you think that they take pupils after all this stress and rigmarole and then don’t bother stretching them; give them “easier exams” and let them cruise along towards exam results that don’t count, then you couldn’t be further off the mark, tbh.

Again, it is Absolutely not the case that all independents use IGCSE. I have kids in three different independents. One uses AQA. The other two use IGCSE. The ones that use IGCSE are much more selective schools and academic schools than the one that uses AQA, so they’re working at a different pace and level regardless, but this kind of schools is not for everyone obviously.

IGCSEs were originally used by SOME independent schools (usually the very academic ones) precisely because they were broader and more rigorous. Since Gove etc reformed the GCSEs to make them more in line with rising world standards, there is now little difference, if any. You might as well say that AQA is easier than Edexcel, or Cambridge is harder than AQA. It’s not true and if if was, something would be done via moderation.

The only difference between a Cambridge IGCSE and a Cambridge GCSE these days is that the IGCSE might have wider module options in some subjects - eg Cambridge IGCSE students in China will be taking the Chinese history modules, while those in the UK will be studying pretty much the same as anyone else in the UK - World Wars etc. Same with the Edexcel board who offer GCSE or IGCSE. As if they’d make an easier exam for students in schools like Westminster

If IGCSEs were “easier” or “didn’t count” for uni, schools like St Paul’s etc would drop them like hot bricks. I can tell you that for nothing. If they were allowed to put them through A-levels at 16, they probably would.

Anyway, aside from all this, the reason I started this thread is because I have a friend who is a head teacher and he was saying that if schools remain closed for a whole term, some content will have to be dropped for A-level and GCSE exams. So I was wondering what other people thought.

Nowehere have I said IGCSES don't count for individuals. However it is a fact that IGCSES don't count for progress 8 so state schools tend not to sit them.

But of course IGCSEs don’t count for “Progress 8” because this is simply a data tracking system to assess standards in state education and independent schools are outside of this system and so do not supply data for “Progress 8” or Progress anything.

Independent schools don’t do SATs either. They are not required to hold SAT tests or release data for SATs - but this doesn’t mean the education going on year to year in independent schools is lesser or doesn’t count. It’s a mistake to confuse data tracking systems with standards in education.

There are 3 so-called “top 10” independent schools within a mile of where I live in London and they all do IGCSE. The pace and standards in these schools is ridiculous. If IGCSEs are regarded as lesser, how is it that these schools get about 30-40% of their students into Oxbridge every year? A further 40% will get into top medical schools or Ivy League. And how do these exact same schools who did the “easy” IGCSEs, go on to achieve 85% of students getting A*-A at A-level? Clearly, not being counted in the SATs or Progress 8 statistics isn’t really holding them back. In fact, some of these schools go on offer Pre-U or the IB as an alternative to A-levels for the simple reason that these may be regarded by some as more rigorous. None of these schools are about taking the easiest options, put it that way,

No I GCSEs aren't on the list of qualifications state schools can use towards progress 8. Nothing to do with private schools.

Prior to this, IGCSEs did count in government progress measures for state schools. So some state schools did use IGCSES.

Carrieblue- obviously I'm speaking of the experience of my year 10 and 12. I'm not generalizing ffs. Like other posters on here I write about my experience. I don't need to keep mentioning that in not generalizing every time I post a comment thanks.

My year 12 was the guinea pig year for full 1-9 marking. The current year 10s are still getting used to a new system. And our school has had period 6 since the beginning of 1-9 gcses because they have no other way of getting through the curriculum. It's not unusual in our area.

But this Progress 8 is not something independent schools release data for. How can IGCEs conform to UK govt tracking data for UK schools when IGCSEs are taken by pupils in Korea and China

The point is Progress 8 or no Progress 8, it doesn’t mean IGCSEs are easier.

The private school getting 40% into Oxbridge is amazing. Here we have two top 10 private schools and the local (outstanding) states regularly get more into med, Oxbridge etc. Some super students at private school would have done much better if they’d moved for sixth form. But that is for another thread!

Why did the government remove them from state SCHOOL progress measures then If they are a comparable level of GCSE?

The maths IGCSE was 3 calculator papers with multiple choice Qs at one point. Many schools entered low attaining students in this to get a grade C.

Newgirls - well yes absolutely, Some independent schools are useless. They vary massively, just like state schools. It totally depends in the area you live in.

In this part of London the so-called “super-selective” independents such as St Paul’s Girls (and Boys), Godolphin and Latymer, Kings Wimbledon, Latymer Upper and many more can literally take advantage if the over-population, lack of state provision and general demographic and literally cherry-pick the top couple of percent of ability at 11 plus. So the results are not surprising. For one school not far from here, 1,400 sat the 11 plus for 120 places. It’s absolutely mental. Loads of children (well most of them ) can’t get in to any independent schools for miles around. I have one of these who is probably average academically and this DC has had to go quite far out to get into a school. Even this school is selective, but there’s only maybe 3 or 4 applicants per place, rather than about 10 or 15! This independent school is fairly crap, to be perfectly honest, and I think most of the teachers wouldn’t stand a cat in hell’s chance if a job in the state sector. It’s a joke. But if we had applied for a state school place, it would have been even further away. We’re not Catholic so those options were out. In London, you might as well pay fees if at all possible as the stamp duty to buy a house in the catchment for a reasonable secondary school is more than the fees over the years! So it is what it is. I guess in some users if the country there are independents that you can just pay up and your kids waltz in and maybe people are just paying for the “experience” or whatever, I don’t know. But there’s none if this in certain swathes of London and it’s a major factor who people move out.

Herc - I have no idea why Gove or whoever it was introduced any initiative in relation to this Progress 8. I don’t know - I’d hazard a guess he wanted to standardise and simplify progress measures across all UK state schools and you can’t do this as effectively if a small minority are being moderated against international schools and
some in the private sector that don’t conform to govt tracking systems?

The second paper for the maths IGCSE last year was ridiculous. My DS sat it. He is at school with a boy who got a certificate for the highest score in the UK for maths IGCSE. Even he found it hard and this boy is off the scale with maths. At the assembly they said that nobody in the world, not even in China or Korea, got full marks. So how could it have been easy?

One point to remember for iGCSEs is that they allow for students who don't have the cultural capital required for GCSEs, ie students from abroad, so in that sense they are easier for private students.

I'm at a school with a number of international students who have incredible work ethics etc and some who sit GCSEs two years after arriving speaking no English. They may not know what an "organic vegetable box" is (from a GCSE paper) so don't have this cultural capital to draw upon and are disadvantaged. Even worse, they are unable to progress to A Level because they must pass normal GCSE maths and English and are ineligible to take the less challenging iGCSE as it is no longer recognised for state schools. That, to me, is very unfair when private schools can still use it.

In fairness I've never heard of state schools entering for Higher maths gcse. It was definitely abused as an "easy" way to get a C in some circumstances.

There were comparable performance measures in state schools pre progress 8. These were A*-C percentages across a cohort. Sadly this skewed teaching towards getting students over the C borderline and anything above that was a bonus. Progress 8 is fairer.

I agree re IGCSE being less wordy and not requiring so much "cultural capital". (personally hate that phrase, whose culture etc...!)

GCSE maths grades are closely aligned with students reading ability a recent study showed.