Are remarks/review of marking just for the wealthy?

[runner2023]

I have 2 friends whose children have sat exams this year.

Parent A: Her DD got 4 A stars and an A last year for A level and had a place at Oxford. Parent A put in for a remark for the A grade and her DD then was awarded 5 A stars.
Today her DS got 2 x 6s in English, she requesting remarks and also for maths and physics because DS 'only' got an 8 and she would like 9s. This must be costing her a fortune to have 4 subjects remarked. He got 9999998877766. They are well off.

Parent B: DD got AAC and needed AAB for a place at the LSE (contextual as she goes to a low achieving school). She lost her firm and is going to City University instead. She was 3 marks off a B grade, but parent B can not afford a remark and said it the same cost as a week's shopping. Her DD is fine with going to her insurance. The family has 4 children. They are not on the breadline but money is tight.

It seems the wealthy are able to request remarks at the drop of a hat. This seems very unfair.

No idea and honestly I don't really care. Of course they have to investigate schools potentially gaming their position in league table. They investigate everything to do with impact on pupils

In my state school 10 was standard and everyone in the top set for maths had the opportunity to do statistics as an added extra. (I think we might have had classes after school once a week, or maybe at lunchtime). I also did German outside of school and took it in year 10.

So in my school it was 11 GCSEs for those who were good at maths and took statistics, 10 for everyone else. The only people who took fewer than 10 were the ones who were really struggling academically.

If someone told me they had 8 GCSEs I would assume they had some sort of academic difficulties and were advised to take a small number in the hope of passing more of them.

If someone told me they had 8 GCSEs which were all top grades I'd think it was weird that they hadn't done more and assume they'd have been more of a B student if they'd had to take 10 or 11 like most people do.

Yes that's 1 school.

The data clearly shows the majority do 8 or 9 GCSEs. Not sure how many more times I can cope with having to say it.

Some schools encourage 10 but majority don't

Why is it so hard to understand with teacher shortages, budgets slashed etc? There aren't the staff to teach 10 subjects! There are barely the teachers to teach 8 and many GCSE years are being taught by supply teachers or non-subject specialists

What happened 20+ years ago has zero bearing on what happens today in terms of number of GCSEs taken.

Kids only taking 8 or 9 GCSEs because they don't have enough teachers is a completely different thing, and not a positive one!

What a waste of time when they could be investigating real problems like why so many teachers are leaving.

Who said it was positive?
Take it up with the government

Weren't you the one suggesting that kids taking more than 9 GCSEs is a bad thing which is why Ofsted feel the need to investigate it?

They are the #1 reason why teachers are leaving! Them plus shocking behaviour of many kids in schools.

No I never said it was bad, I said Ofsted don't like it. You have misinterpreted my comments

Ah, well, bugger Ofsted. Schools and children should do what is right for them and not worry about what some jobsworth from Ofsted thinks.

Except Ofsted grade schools and report on them. Most schools only do what's right for Ofsted, you've obviously never worked in education where there is frequently a mantra of "what would Ofsted say" and a culture of being "Ofsted ready". Ofsted can literally break teachers and Heads.

I personally don't give a flying fuck how many GCSEs children sit but it is simply not accurate to say many children sit more than 9. Some do. Very very few sit 12+ GCSEs

So you can’t compare the situation in the OP to the national data. The data shows most 16y/o’s do 8 or 9 in the summer series of Y11. That isn’t quite the same thing as only doing 8 or 9 in total. The national data doesn’t show how many DC sit GCSEs early and, if they do, how many GCSEs they sit early.

And are they really going to downgrade a school for doing too well in the league tables?

That data doesn't because, back to a previous point, GCSEs weren't designed or intended to be sat individually. They were a 2 year KS 4 course commencing in Yr 10 and tested all together in Yr 11.

Very, very few pupils sit 13 GCSEs, either together in Yr 11, or accumulatively in Yr 10 + 11.

Ofsted tried to protect the interests of children in the face of schools strategically staggering gcse exams to increase overall grades for the school, when it wasn’t in the best interest of the children.

It’s lovely if someone is so good at a subject they do their qualification a year or 2 early, but what happens to them then? If there’s no plan from the school, they’ve then got a 1 or 2 year wait without progressing in that subject they they are so good at, and end up disadvantaged at A Level. Or schools woudl stagger the gcse options, doing half in year 10 and half in year 11, hot-housing the students to get the best grades. Any subject taken in year 10 would have a gap of a year before A Level. Having multiple exam periods, as was quite common in the schools I worked with, means less time teaching and learning and more time revising and hot-housing for an exam.

You have missed my point. You used the data to support your point about the OP when you can’t do that. It doesn’t cover the OP’s situation.

The government recognises not all sit at GCSEs at 16 the end of Y11 after 2 years study. Hence the statistics this year broken down into all candidates and 16 year olds.

I think to be honest it's a bit of a shame the original topic of this thread has been derailed by what was an irrelevant comment!

They do - kid at DD's school just got 13 x grade 9 yesterday. Was on the website today.

And yet again the data shows only 0.1% do ie 390 pupils.
My comment below that admitted my error in saying no-one did

A lot of people assume there is only one way of doing things - in fact there are many options.

DD's secondary do a 3 year GCSE system, so you pick options in Y8 and start GCSE courses at the beginning of Y9. They all take one early in Y10 (RS or Citizenship).

Most schools do a 2 year system.

I have friends who are homeschooling and their DC started doing GCSEs at 12 and just do a couple every summer and every autumn. One of them will probably end up with a ludicrous number because universities don't want them at 16 and they want A levels sat in one tranche. So now they've got to do something to fill a couple of years until they can do the A levels... so more GCSEs... Astronomy and other stranger subjects.

I’m amazed the children don’t get bored studying only a few subjects at a time and taking the exams but if it works for them then well done those kids.

Yes because GCSEs are 2 year courses. They are supposed to be delivered in KS 4 ie Yrs 10 + 11. Obviously some schools don't do this.

I am muting this thread because I'm getting sick of constantly repeating myself

Home Ed kids often do a few each year because if nothing else it spreads the cost for the parents both in terms of tutoring and exams.

@runner2023hope you now know that school can request a remark if they feel the grade is not right.
also if my DC was 3 marks off the grade to go to LSE I would definitely explored the avenues mentioned by pp and try and get that remark.
In any case her DD sounds driven and high achieving and will hopefully be surrounded by go getters at Uni and she will learn how to make things happen for herself.

We didn’t have to pay anything as the grades went up.