To think GCSE are wrong for many kids

[Mountainsuccess]

I see the level of parental involvement and stress many parents go through when the kids are doing GCSES.

I think if there is so much parental involvement needed surely GCSES are not the right thing for many kids. The number of exams and pressure is completely crazy for a 15/16 year old. Do they actually remember anything after the exams? Or is the UK education system just an exam factory?

The government put so much pressure on schools and schools on teachers, parents, kids. It is just all about results. I feel there is so much micromanaging from the government. Why is this? Why the Government doesn’t trust teachers and parents? Is this ever going to change? Isn’t this supposed to be an advanced country?

Please enlighten me. I am not English but raising kids here.

GCSEs are mainly a stepping stone to what you want to do next, whether that's A levels, Btech, apprenticeship etc. No one cares too much about them in the long term as long as they get you to where you want to be. I mean they're not perfect, but what are you suggesting as an alternative?

What do you suggest then? How does a 16 y/o prove that they have a good enough level of education to proceed to the next stage?

Many kids could pass the exams without all the added stress tbh. They don’t all need an A*/8/9. Those who can’t pass on their own steam are more suited to functional skills etc.

GCSEs are used to prove you can work at that level , and the open door to A levels , level 3 courses. There is still course options available if you have no or very few GCSEs but these are limited at our local college and you will then be expected to study and pass either GCSE or functional maths and English to move on to the next level course. We need to bring make more coursework so results are not all dependant on how you preform in a exam.

Thank you. No idea what the alternative is but what other countries like Netherlands, Sweeden, Japan, Germany and Singapore do?

DH and I grew up in different countries; didn’t have to do GCSE, just some exams at the end of school around 18 years old. We both have successful careers.

I haven't got involved in my son's revision at all. I know plenty of parents who leave them to it. He also doesn't seem stressed.

Most of his friends are similar, they are still out enjoying hobbies and seeing friends. Balancing some revision with socialising and sport.

Just to say, my youngest has done the National 5s (Scottish equivalent of GCSEs) this year. My involvement consisted of driving her to school on exam day, ironing her uniform, letting her off chores and a takeaway after the last exam. Oh, and nodding sagely pretending I understand what she's talking about when she explained some chemistry answer.

Also, over 20 exams; is this necessary?

I don't remember GCSEs being stressful, in fact I found revision /exam leave glorious for the freedom. But doing exams then helped me start to learn how to revise. By a levels at 18 I had a reasonable idea how to revise and by the time I was through law school I felt like an expert in exams and revision. I found them enjoyable not something to be afraid of

Totally agree with OP. Awful stressful situation to put children through, lots of pressure and it breaks some of them. Barbaric way to test kids, other countries do it way better than this. Lots of pressure families too not just parents but siblings. My daughter had a terrible time really impacted her metal health

Stress is a part of life. GCSEs are the base and then you specialise at A-level. My eldest did 14 and got all A*s and As. All my other kids handled their 10+ GCSEs well.

I think that for those strong in arts/humanities having 9 of 21 exams in maths and science is ludicrous. Why do weaker students need to do three maths exams? I completely accept that GCSEs need to include a baseline ability in maths and science but when you end up doing almost half your exams in subjects that you find harder (and require much more revision which detracts from the things you’re actually good at) it feels unnecessarily hard going.

Conversely not everyone has to do English literature which means that STEM students in theory only have to do two English Language exams and can spend all their time on the stuff they’re good at.

The problem with GCSEs is the “one size fits all” nature of them. When I was young, there were two different exams, GCEs, which were the precursor to A levels, and CSEs which were aimed at less academic children who in all probability would leave school at sixteen and get a job. The GCSE has to be all things to all children, which of course it can’t be, hence different levels, but it’s not right for all pupils. The whole of secondary education needs a radical overhaul to bring it into the twenty first century.

Are you suggesting you have successful careers because you didn't do GCSEs?

GCSEs don't need parental input. Parents choose to micromanage. It's a choice, (generally a poor choice as it gives a false result) to become so involved.

Only they dont for many kids who dont pass them.
They are a very blunt instrument.

Exams are fun. A chance to show what you’re made of, a break from the usual routine. A lovely focus on putting it all into practice.

In Ireland, the equivalent is the junior cert but it is nothing close to the stress and weight of the GCSEs in terms of deciding their future.

For most dc, it’s simply their first experience of a state exam. There will be some repercussions in terms of some subject levels for the leaving cert, but it’s well recognised that many dc just don’t have the maturity to get it together at 15/16.

Most dc will go on to do a transition year, exploring subject options, career paths, developing leadership and other skills before getting back into academics for 5th/6th year.

It is possible to leave after the jc, and get into an apprenticeship or vocational training, but schools really try to hold on to the dc if they can.

I have a highly anxious under achiever and have been so grateful not to be in the uk, because he just needed a bit longer to mature.

Continuous assessment. No equivalent to GCSEs in my country, instead children have exams throughout the year every year (nothing like GCSE exams, they don't take hours) and they access the next stage of education based on their grade point average over the last 3 years of comprehensive (equivalent to years 9-11)

Wwell they maybe for you but they are not fun for lots of kids who really really struggle academically
As this thread shows there is a lot of assumptions on mumsnet that just becsuse their chiidren dont struggle nobody struggles .

Yes, definitely. My son is a kid who needs calmness and routine or else struggles. The hype and build up to it seems so unnecessary to me. I've my son told to be aware of it and to take a break from it if necessary

I largely agree with you, OP. This high-stakes testing at 15/16 is a hang over from the days when you could leave education at 16.

I also agree with you about the ridiculous number of exam papers. Initially, GCSEs had a large coursework component, which was stopped largely because results tended to align with the educational level and degree of involvement of your parents. I'm not sure that replacing this with another paper achieves anything useful tbh.

The European model of high-stakes exams at 18 in a broader range of subjects seems much more sensible, not least because kids might then spend more time learning rather than how to pass tests.

That’s kind of what GCSE used to be. Multiple exams and coursework over 2+ years. But the more coursework… the more cheating.

100% this. The posters chiming in with “but my kids did really well in them so they’re fine” spectacularly miss the point, which is that GCSEs are poorly suited to - and pointlessly stressful for - a significant percentage of children, for example those with a monotropic way of learning. They were horribly, unnecessarily stressful for me (and I subsequently did a Master’s and PhD, so my academic ability wasn’t the problem). We need a radical overhaul of the system, including more bespoke pathways, vocational/practical courses and a wider range of subjects, but there’s no money or political appetite for this so we’re stuck with a narrow, Victorian system that fails too many children.

Completely agree. Teacher assessments would be so much better. It’s all just a memory test of mostly useful information.

I can understand less coursework these days with the issue of AI (and wish it had been less coursework in my day because I was a terrible procrastinator) but module exams are so much better than big exams at the end of everything. They don't do much coursework here but they do a lot of exams plus some of the final grade is based on class participation and general level of classwork (depending on the teacher, the teachers choose how they weight their assessment)