A pass is a pass? GCSE

[Rumplestiltz]

At GCSE, a 4 is a pass. When employers/apprenticeships/further and higher education institutes ask for a pass in maths and English, it’s a 4.

So why the fuss about “strong” passes, which is a 5? Why does the Government organise its data on the proportion who get “strong” passes in English and Maths? Bridget Phillipson saying it’s a travesty that white, working class boys aren’t getting “strong” passes in English and Maths and their life chances are affected as a result. It kind of undermines those who work very hard to get to that pass line of a 4 (teachers and students) to be told it’s not good enough.

I am sure I will be told it’s very easy to get a 4 etc etc, but for some kids in these subjects, it isn’t.

So my AIBU is - a pass is a pass.

4 - C pass
5 - high C
6 - B
7 - high B
8 - A
9- A*

‘Grade 1 is also a pass.
It's a low pass but is a pass.
I hate that so many 16 year olds are told they have "failed" their GCSEs because they got Grade 1, 2, 3 or even 4.
They have not.
They have not failed.’

I think that this is unrealistic.

Children aren’t stupid. They know when they understand a subject or haven’t got a clue.

In most tests, 50% is considered a ‘pass’. In higher (I don’t know much about foundation) that will be a 5 in most subjects (occasionally even a 6). You can tell a student that their grades 1-4 are passes, but that is just condescending and you won’t fool them.

If a child is getting low passes, then maybe they are not cut out for uni education? Our DD got the 4s she needed today to get onto her chosen Level 3 BTech. We know, because we know our child, that she is going to thrive studying a vocational qualification as she struggles with exam anxiety. Uni will not be the right environment for her and that's fine. There are plenty of post BTech apprenticeships she can try for in her chosen field rather than uni.

No that is wrong.
A 7 is an A.
Why post misinformation?

@Voerendaal ,

‘4 - C pass
5 - high C
6 - B
7 - high B
8 - A
9- A*’

Incorrect, a 7 is definitely an A. I posted the correct mappings to the old grades upthread.

Maybe, but only if the low pass is in the subject you want to study at university and even then the uni would be more interested in what you've done since.

GCSEs are just a stepping stone.

I think the older system was better - it was more straightforward. I think the main thing is that they pass. Whilst, some student are academic and achieve stellar - this not a realistic goal for every student. They shouldn't be made to feels like failures for not passing.

I have qualifications up to degree level & some other qualifications obtained during my working life

I have had to show my original certificates at job interviews

Nobody has ever queried any of my grades

They were only interested in a pass or fail

It's not just about the skill itself, the exam demonstrates a level of intellectual ability in that subject, which translates to an ability to be able to follow a higher level course, whether thats A levels, BTEC, apptenticeship etc. I agree that more practical skills should be taught - budgetting, taxes interest rates, mortgages etc could all be integrated into the maths curriculum.

The skills learnt in English and history around analysis and interpretation of sources can easily be applied to modern day life - when you read a newspaper article or post online, or see an advert for a new product, those skills enable you to judge how reliable it is, which is more important now than ever - young people have so much information available to them online, that the ability to seperate what is valid and true from what is false and misleading is essential. Writing a report for work requires ability to write factually and concisely, a personal statement for a job application requires the ability to write persuasively, those going I to the arts may need to write creatively etc, so exploring different authors and contrasting their styles helps young people to understand the differences and nuances within commuinication.

"Worthwhile pass" is very much not an improvement on "standard pass".

30% of students get "non-worthwhile" passes. Not because they haven't worked. Either we need to make sure there are "worthwhile" qualifications available and ensure schools are not penalised for offering them, or we need to reframe our thinking on level 1 and level 2 qualifications.

And also ensure that there are enough meaningful post 16 progression routes for those 30%, because that is a real postcode lottery at the moment. I work in a MAT in 4 different LAs, and the difference in what is available is eye opening.

F (and later G) were passes.
I have a GCSE in Religious Studies.
A Grade F one. It's still a GCSE.

But a grade four is a pass it's not up to you and other posters to decide it isn't,.

I’ve never understood - if a 4 is a pass, why have grades 1-3? Why not 1-6 instead of 4-9? Why would it be necessary to understand how much if a fail a fail is? Surely any grade is a pass and a fail would be unclassified?

The 4/5 debacle is a fudge. Grade 4 maths/English you don’t have to resit - but it’s not enough for lots of jobs and courses - huge numbers ask for a 5, so at 16 when you are just glad you have finished and move on, you may be better off resitting your 4 to get a 5 - but you don’t “have” to, idk if it’s funded or not, so you don’t and may come up against barriers later.

Because 1-3 are level 1 passes.
Because there is a massive difference between just missed a 4 and just scraped a 3, let alone just scraped a 1.
Because what you do next is impacted.

‘Most tests’ - apart from being bollocks, how is a marking scheme from a different exam type remotely relevant? 40% gets you an honours degree. Relevant - no. Different percentages in different subjects get different results. Different percentages on different paper gets different results. 50% being what YOU think is a mark of achievement means absolutely zero. And most people don’t know what their individual percentage scores were.

But a grade four is enough for many level 3 courses.

Quite 40% was a pass when I was doing my nurse training many years ago it didn't make somone any less qualified than their 90% pass collegue.

What coursee and jobs is it not enough for?

A grade 1 is a pass and it is a qualification. 4 is standard pass.

The ableism on this thread is really depressing.

It's not ableism to accept that GCSEs are an academic qualification that doesn't suit everybody.

There need to be vocational alternatives to celebrate different areas of success. I don't especially give a fuck if someone has a 4/5 in maths if they are a good plumber. We need more focus on skilled trades. In my area the only tradies are blokes in their 50s who've realised there are only about 6 of them, and thus that they can charge whatever they want. They've all had to VAT register becahse they're bringing in over £80k a year and thats with getting you to buy materials and pay day labourers directly.

If a 5 is the old C then that is an “acceptable pass”.

A 5 is a high C and a four is a low C If posters can't understand that maybe their own comprehension skills are lacking ....

Except as has been said numerous times on this thread if you bothered to read it, that a 4 is the old C.

Honestly, today of all days and grown adults, most of whom are parents, are pissing on the chips of children - some of who will have really struggled, and for whom a 4 is a brilliant result - a pass at Level 2, which enables them to go onto the next stage of their life.

For a good few, achieving a handful of 1s and 2s will be as equally a brilliant achievement, enabling them to also progress onto the next stage of their life.

Why this constant need for grown women to sneer at the achievement of children? Does it make them feel better I wonder?

I think it comes from orginal GCSE where they were trying to combine CSE and O-levels.

Top grade CSE were supposed to be equivalent to o-levels but often weren't seen as that - so they wanted one qulifcation came in in 86 - exams sat 88 - after I think a decade of trials.

So above C - level 2 qualification like old O-levels - described as level 2.
Below C level 1 like old CSE.

When Gove did changes in England they wanted to raise min to 5 but too many would fail - so old money C is split between 4 and 5.

However 4 is a level 2 pass. If they get it in English and maths - they don't have to endlessly re-take GCSE till 18 - often why it's a big deal.

It not that usual with SEN/ND to have spiky profiles so be good at maths/science or essay subjects so have very split GCSE marks - and if they get pass on what they struggle at and then really high in good areas I don't think it holds them back as much as some on here are claiming.

I think the problem is huge number getting nether English or maths and that's where focus should be not so much 4/5 what kind of pass they are. I think these issue start in primary so need to look there IMO.

Here in Wales still need C - you need 5 C including maths and English and then individual A-levels have there own requirements on top often B or higher. Most level 3 course are looking for at least that. They all sit way more GCSE than that currently - all mine have 13-15 GCSE/level 2 qualifications - way more than are every needed which I think does disadvantaged some.