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?

This isn't the case, because with O-levels and CSEs you got different qualifications entirely, and despite the supposed equivalence between a top CSE grade and an O-level pass, people didn't see them as the same.

If you get a grade 4 or 5 at GCSE, no one knows whether you got it on the foundation or the higher paper, it doesn't appear on your certificate.

If a student does get a U, a 1, 2 or 3......... it wont make any difference which (as far as Im aware -happy to be told otherwise). Colleges want 4s and higher - particularly in Maths and English.
Another thing to consider, to get a 4 when taking the lower papers a student needs to answer a lot more questions, get a lot more right. But in doing the higher papers they can get a 4 by answering fewer/getting fewer correct.

I get why its frustrating (I took the higher paper in Physics in the 90s - thats why I got a D! I should have admitted I was struggling a bit and opted for the lower paper, if I had I might have got a C!) but GCSEs have always been thus (CSEs vs O levels were even more "separate") but I agree altering the system surely wouldnt be that tricky - certainly imho a much better idea than the new 9-1 grading system! CSEs vs O levels were even more "separate"

This and also what @KnickerlessParsons said.

I was 16 in 1978 and, for each subject, we had to choose O level or CSE based on our teacher's assessment. If you were borderline then you could do double entry, but at our school you were only allowed two double entries. I think you were discouraged from more by having to pay for any additional double entries.

Even then there was a move to try to find a unified exam. In fact, one of the subjects I took(music) we did an experimental syllabus called 16plus which was an early attempt to have one exam.

It does rather sound like the range is too great to be adequately covered by one syllabus.

My son is also Y11 and in his school they only put forward or allow the students that are predicted grade 5 and above to sit the higher papers. He is good at most subjects except sciences which he has no interest in at all and are his lowest grades, but as he’s predicted a 5-6 he still has to sit the higher papers

Not all of them they don't

And be very aware of College requirements. Foundation levels don't always give a high enough grade for some colleges

Also doesn't help when they've still not covered the whole of the sciences syllabus either, yet 😡

What do they want to do post 16? If they are not heading to A levels I would recommend sticking to the foundation papers as your child is in Year 11. They have missed too much teaching on higher tier topics that would have been covered in Year 10, especially if they are in sets. If they intend to do A levels, then higher tier for those subjects would be better.

Science teacher here. Ask her teacher to provide (or signpost) a higher level and foundation level paper from the same exam cycle (ideally all three sciences). She can see where the overlap questions are and have a go at both. She can then be provided with a markscheme (or go through it with her teacher) and see the difference in expectations between the two. I do this a lot with my students and many find it helpful when making a decision (although ultimately it is still up to the head of department and I to act in their best interests).
I have also had borderline 4/5 students have a go at the higher paper in their March mocks to see how they find it and what grade they get. Maybe she can try that? As a PP said we have until April to decide what paper they sit.
Most students do opt for the foundation as the language and questions are simpler (HT for science has a reading age of around 17). There are also more likely to be more multiple choice and gap fill style questions (and less extended answer questions) on a foundation paper which really helps with confidence. If she has a bad day then this can really help with motivation in the exam to answer as many questions as possible.

Hope that helps. :)

I’m not quite sure on the grading and tier system of GCSEs nowadays but, when I was doing mine I was pretty much railroaded by my school into doing Foundation tier maths for my final maths exam (C was the highest grade you could achieve in Foundation).

I’d been getting high Cs and low Bs higher tier, but as I was in top set this was “not acceptable” and they moved me straight into the lowest set. This meant that to achieve a C grade in my final exam (foundation tier) and overall, I had to get almost full marks in the foundation paper.
It was fine, I managed it, but despite it being the “easier” paper, it felt like I had much more pressure on me. Not something a hormonal 15 year old coped very well with!

I believe they used to have an Intermediate tier, which would be ideal for students like me and your DC.

I got moved to the higher maths paper in order to be able to get an A instead I got a C and my friend on the lower paper got a B even though she wasn’t as good at maths. Even years later she mentioned how funny it was - I didn’t find it as funny and wished I had been left on the lower paper!

It’s literally always been the case that you can’t access the highest grade if you take a lower paper. It was the case when I was doing gsce’s 20 years ago when the highest was one A*.
Of course you can’t have someone taking an easier paper and still achieving the highest grade, that would make no sense.

I’m 33 and this was the case 17 years ago when it was still graded by letters

if you did foundation you couldn’t get higher than a C

@MintSass

The intermediate paper was closer to foundation now. Top mark was a C. The lowest level was below that.
Bottom G to E
Intermediate E to C
Higher C to A

There was a system that if you got nearly full marks on then you could score the level up.

The exam boards have past papers on their websites (except those from the last 12 months). Have a look at the papers, the questions are very different. Schools have until 20 April to make their final decision on tiers and most will do so after mocks in these coming weeks. The higher tier questions verge into A Level syllabus and would be very disheartening for a border line child.

Bear in mind about 40% of pupils don’t get as high as a grade 4 in maths. It would be cruel to make all pupils attempt the higher paper content. Tricky for borderline pupils though.

You shouldn't have to decide, the science teacher should be advising you. My DS is in the same position and despite being a secondary teacher I haven't the faintest idea how the science papers work so I'm asking what they advise. Grades 1-3 are generally not regarded by many as a "pass" so not getting one of those isn't a huge issue. If she is borderline for a 4 she's not going to get much about that anyway so not being able to access the higher grades isn't an issue. Ask for advice from school.

They had this over 30 years ago when I did maths. It's the students on the cusp that potentially lose out.
I was in set 4 of 6 for maths.
A few of us in set 4 were given the option to move up to set 3 and take the higher paper. I chose to move up a group

I am so glad I did. Got an A. I was just a late bloomer with maths.

Having said that, most people in the lower sets really didn't enjoy the subject

Me too.

We had the same dilemma - my Dd was also “patchy” in her performance, particularly in science. It wasn’t necessarily the “easier” foundation questions she actually found easier - some complex concepts she was great with, some simpler ones she struggled with.
Particularly with science, she was a solid six+ on some papers (eg biology), but struggling to get a 3 with physics. And with combined science they average them out.
Her science teacher said that if she was doing triple instead, he would have put her in for foundation for physics and higher for the other two, but unfortunately that isn’t possible.
She got a U in her science mocks. But her science teachers pushed really hard for her to take the higher papers. She was in the higher set and keeping up, but just had these areas (mainly mathematical) where she really struggled. We were unsure but ended up going with the teacher’s recommendation.
Maths on the other hand she was bottom set, foundation was the only option.

She ended up taking foundation maths, and actually got a 5, the only person in her maths set to get above a 3. We were over the moon.
She took higher combined science and got 4-5, so the gamble didn’t necessarily pay off, but maybe she would have got the same on the foundation.

In hindsight, she might have been better taking triple science - but that is a lot of content for someone who hates 1/3 of the subject!

Takes me back to sitting my own GCSEs. School made me take the foundational science paper as I’d come from overseas and had missed a lot. Had a tutor for a couple of months and caught up, but couldn’t achieve more than a B, which I did. Felt like being punished!

Not a big fan of this system.

This 👆, it is easier to get a 5 on the foundation papers then the higher. So if they are board line the foundation paper can be a better option as getting 5's rather then 4's or no grades is always better.

I work in SEND in a secondary school and I do a lot of work around language and reading. Exam papers especially the higher papers in subjects that do them have a high reading age. This in itself is something to consider, a high reading age doesn't guarantee success but a low one makes getting a higher grade 6 and above very hard indeed.
I was borderline back in the old days so I did a billion exams because I had to do O level and CSEs. And no one has ever questioned my maths CSE grade 1, some people even seem to find it exotic and interesting!

It’s tricky
my daughter was entered for the foundation science paper last year and got nearly full marks but highest grade she could get was a 5.
She should have done the higher paper

The way they run the mocks at my yr11s school, they started with foundation papers, if the students results came back as more than a certain %/grade they would try them on a higher paper at the next mock. They have done a lot of rounds of mocks (and still have one more to go) which particularly for this cohort - who didn't do their yr6 SATs - has been invaluable and given them a lot of information about each child and how they perform in exams.

For one subject my child has been a bit borderline, but I have faith in the teachers that they have thought have really considered which level is right for each student and am happy to go with their recommendation.

We were discussing this yesterday. In the 1990's I did the foundation paper and got a B. At DCs school they don't make the decision until March of Y11. My issue is that I think a 5 is lower than a B so isn't equivalent (but I may be wrong).