To think the 2 tier GCSE system is wrong

[countingdaysuntilretirement]

My dd is in year 11 and will be doing her GCSEs in June. There has been some discussion on whether she would be sitting the higher levels or not - she's borderline on most. I have only just realised that you can't get lower than a grade 4 if you take the higher paper - if you do badly you don't get a grade 1,2 or 3 but are simply ungraded. But if she takes the foundation level she can't access the higher grades.

This means children are having to take a gamble with their papers. I would have thought the higher level would just add an additional paper or layer - not that you risked losing a GCSE altogether if you had a bad day.

Can anyone rationalise this for me?

We were told by the maths teacher that children had to be a solid 6 to be entered for the higher maths paper because around 50% of it was aimed at differentiating the grades 7,8s and 9s. It would mean a child at a grade 6 wouldn't be able to do half the paper which can be absolutely soul destroying turning pages and not knowing how to tackle the question.

If the school has February mocks then a child's performance in that is usually taken into consideration for which paper to enter them for.

It's only maths, science and languages that have foundation and higher tiers. We were told today by our exam secretary that we can make tier level entry changes (for languages anyway) right up until 21 April. You can get a grade 3 on higher tier but the grade boundary is maybe only 3-5 marks wide. So very very narrow. Got my subject, if they are a solid 5/nearly 6 on higher papers they stay on higher. Leave the door open for grade 6 or above. Scraping a 5 or getting a 4 on higher tier - recommend to do foundation to 'guarantee' a 5, rather than run the risk of a U. Hate it. Horrible decisions to make.

But (and maybe this is a school issue) they are being taught the same syllabus in the same classes. My dd is less than 6 months away from her exams and we do not know which she will be taking.

My main issue is not that there are 2 tiers but that if she selects the higher and does badly she will have nothing rather than a low GCSE. This is what we did not realise and what I'm struggling to understand.

The final tiering decisions don’t need to be made until April-ish. Even then, you can change just before the exam, but it costs a lot. I have this conversation a lot with students and parents. The guidance from the exam boards is that there is no point in doing the higher paper unless you have a good chance of getting a 6.

A solid 4/5 student in science will be able to score about 65% on the foundation paper. The same student on the higher paper will score about 25%. That would be a very unpleasant exam to sit. They would stand no chance against the grade 8/9 questions, so it’s much better to sit a paper they can fully access.

This was true in 1994, for maths and sciences at least.

I guess those who are in that cusp need to decide if they are going to really push themselves and work towards a higher grade or coast and do the basic paper.
such is life.

My daughter is doing a mix of some higher and some foundation and to be honest the relief is huge. Some children just aren’t as academic and with no plans to keep the Foundation ones on for A level I will just be delighted if she passes them all- she is doing 10.

I too will be delighted if she passes them all.

I don't think it's wrong at all, though I would like to see 3 tiers rather than 2 so that there's a realistic option for those on the cusp.

There are a lot of pupils for whom a grade 5 would represent amazing success, to be celebrated, and a lot for whom realistically even grade 3 will be a struggle. I think it's brilliant that an exams exists that enables them to show their achievements even if they will need to retake to get a 4. But the questions needed to separate out the grade 3 candidate from the grade 4 candidate are massively inappropriate for the pupils who are aiming for a grade 8 or 9 and vice versa. All the exams should be pitched at the right level to quicky establish firstly whether or not the candidate has thr basic skills for the lowest awardable grade and then have more challenging questions to identify which candidates belong in thr highest grades. The subjects that have tiered papers are the ones where it's simply not practical to have a single paper that adequately sorts candidates across the whole 9 grade point range while having a coherent mark scheme and not wasting time on inappropriate questions. It would be unworkable. The exam would have to be significantly longer to give all candidates time to cover both lower tier and higher tier questions but it would be impossible to fairly judge between the grade 3/4 candidates that spend the whole duration being really paistaking and perfectionist about the basic questions while ignoring the more complex questions, vs one of a similar ability level who attempts some of the harder questions while being less careful with the basic ones.

I do sympathise with your dilemma and I think the choice would be easier if there was a paper A with possible grades 1-4, paper B with possible grades 3-7 or paper C with possible grades 6-9.

However it should be possible if the teacher has been doing their job to know whether a grade 5 represents what they can manage on their best day or represents them letting themselves down as they can achieve so much more. The key question is, if on results day she gets a grade 5 would her reaction be - "that's great, I passed and I don't have to study that any more"?, or would she feel disappointed and likely to want to retake it? Is it a subject she needs 6+ in?

If they had only 1 paper then it would be ridiculously hard for half the kids. Lots would give up and end up completely failing.

It's not like English where less academic kids can have a stab at harder questions and end up still picking up a few marks.

This was a thing when I did mine. Everyone who sat the higher paper got a GCSE. The teachers would discourage your kid from sitting the higher paper if they didn't think she was capable.

Decision can be made quite late. Can't remember actual date but you can switch tiers until quite near the exam date.
Most students will be obviously higher or foundation but middle sets can be a bit of both.

If a student has ended up in a lower set they may well have missed some higher work so swapping is not possible. Our set 3 get taught all the higher work but towards the end we will drop some down if they run the risk of falling off the bottom on the higher paper and they just sit the foundation paper.

I'm assuming your daughter is on the cusp otherwise they wouldn't be discussing with her.

Some level 5's do better on higher paper and some on foundation paper - depends on the individual. As a science teacher if good at maths, they might do better at higher paper as this is what can hold back students who don't like maths.
Dyslexics or those with weaker literacy - sit the foundation as the language used is more accessible.
But we often have a chat with the borderline students and take their opinion into account when deciding.

The important thing is that it's the same qualification. If you put a grade 5 on your CV your employer doesn't know whether that was from a higher or lower tier paper. With CSEs there was a snobbish dismissal of the achievements of the pupils who took the lower tier and did well.

@PokerFriedDips
Thank you, that's really helpful in understanding why. DD has one subject she is passionate about and does not put much focus on the rest so would not care too much as long as the grades were high enough for her next steps.

I'm deeply worried about her limiting her options.

But this thread was less about DD in particular, though I've been given a lot to think about in deciding what to do, and more just on my shock on realising how the papers work so this is what I need to accept it.

Omg I didn't know this existed at GCSE.

I have a y8 dc but i am scottish so never thought about it... back in late 90s we sat 2 papers for each standard grade (gcse equiv) subject to maximise our chances so out of three levels foundation, general, credit you did 2 so you were guaranteed the best grade possible.

Yanbu Op - I'm scared now!

This is the best set up available.

The higher level paper doesn't include the questions that are designed to evaluate a 1-3 level of understanding because the vast majority of students sitting the higher paper will only ever be harmed by including those questions... for those students those questions awould simply be an opportunity to lose points to foolish errors, exhaust themselves, and lose focus. The other option is to make the exams significantly longer and cover the entire range of levels-of-understanding. This would mean that students who really needed the foundation paper are faced with question after question they can't answer - it's discouraging, tiring, and likely to make them underperform on the questions that are within their abilities. And the students who need higher level are having to wade through questions that are well below their abilities and basically amount to busy work - it's fatiguing and means students will lose more points to silly mistakes rather than a genuine lack of understanding.

I understand your DD is one of the frustrating border cases (it's the best structure but still an imperfect one) but I'm sure you understand the massive downside of having significantly longer exams where she has to spend time trying to identify out-of-her-level questions and avoid wasting time and focus on them, especially for a student who struggles to focus. If she's patchy then having a longer combined test could actually create the bad day you're worried about.

@TikehauLilly 2 papers out of 3 sounds like a much better system.

My dd did foundation in maths and science. She was really motivated to succeed and got 5s in those subjects. She is dyslexic and it was lots of hard work and revision that got her the grades.
If she had had to sit higher papers, the language, content and feeling she was behind would most likely have meant she wouldn't have passed.
She got 6s in English, Dance and Drama that she is taking for A level. It really is horses for courses op. If your daughter does sit for foundation then I would accept that the teachers see this as the best root to secure a good pass.
Dd needs science and maths if she wants to become a primary teacher, and now she has them in the bag, first go.

Yes I did mine in Late 90s and was higher or foundation paper.

Thanks @GravyBoatWars . Until today I thought if she had any chance at the higher grades she should take the higher papers. I hadn't realised the risks.
Lots to think about!

It's not a gamble. The teachers will give the children many practise and past papers to identify which tier would be best for them. The higher paper is not just harder or more content; the questions and language used is of a higher ability too. A higher paper will enable pupils to achieve levels 8 and 9 and so if a pupil can't get a level 4 on it then the higher tier isn't suitable for them.

It would be too many questions to do it this way. The smartest pupils getting levels 8 and 9 should not have to bother answering lower ability levels 3 and 4 questions.

About 25% of the questions are the same on both papers, so you are either answering the grade 4/5 questions at the end of the foundation paper, or at the start of the higher paper.

By now they should know what sort of grade your DD is getting on mock papers. If she looks like she is in with a shot of getting a 6 (i.e. already getting a 5) then she should enter the higher paper. If she is not, she should be entered for Foundation. There shouldn't be anyone entering for the higher paper with the slightest concern that they will fall off the bottom.

(that's maths, I'm not sure how the other subjects work).

How is it unfair? Teacher will have their best interests at heart.

And before that it was split with some taking GCEs (o level)and lower level CSEs. Grade 1 CSE was equivalent of a GCE pass at C but you couldnt access the higher a, b grades.

Because they won't have answered level 1 and 2 questions as they aren't on the higher paper.