The return of the O Level.

[hermionestranger]

Leaked reports suggest that the government is to scrap the GCSE from 2015, 2013 option takers will be the last year to take them.

I'm sorry it's the mail bug they were first on my twitter feed. I 'm on my phone so can't link properly.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2162369/Return-O-Level-Gove-shake-biggest-revolution-education-30-years.html

. . . bit of trolling on this thread??

Really fig? I think it's just a rigorous debate like what we do best on MN.

LeQueen they don't sit the same style of exam. They sit the Foundation GCSE papers, which are totally different to the Higher GCSE papers.

I think this is where the confusion lies. Unless you have dc actually taking these exams, you will not know this distinction. The press for some reason don't like to mention it. I wonder why?

Quick although I don't agree with LeQueen on a lot of what she's said here, I think her DH is a maths teacher so she might know.

' I've read similar studies about IQ rising '

I've read stories about standards in maths rising too, but when you analyse the papers it's difficult to see how. I don't know if it's the Flynn effect or the flippin eck effect, but something doesn't compute.

I spotted my error Lequeen and I am sorry , your teacher friends were sneering at A level papers and it was you sneering at the abilities of SEN students .

Noble I wonder if LeQueen misread the question?

kern I don't think her husband is a Maths teacher. I may be wrong though.

claig the substitution isn't completely straightforward though, you would need to substitute 10-4x into -3y, the double negative undoubtedly catching some out.

I think comparing individual questions is a non-starter though, the higher GCSE might have had a harder quadratic than the O-level paper later on (not that the Guardian showed us anything like that). Or the previous year's GCSE paper might have had a harder simultaneous equation and the O-level an easier one. The question on the O-level paper could conceivably have been on a GCSE paper as it is on the syllabus.

Interesting that you've moved away from attacking the English GCSE Claig? And I think the Flynn effect applies to IQ tests, not Maths GCSEs.

Would add that without the mark schemes, it's hard to know the weightings for the questions, what % of the entire GCSE rests on one particular paper/ question and where exactly the grade boundaries lie. Often teachers don't know exactly as grade boundaries are often set by the exam board after the GCSEs are completed and we mark to a set of skills criteria rather than exact grades.

Sorry Quick you're right I think. It was a friend of her DH who's the teacher.

noblegiraffe, I agree, you would have to look at the complete papers and over a number of years.

I don't know what the Flynn effect is, but I do wonder whether IQ tests may also have become easier, if you say that IQ levels have risen a lot.

I haven't got time to read the entire passages and analyse the English paper. I also do not have access to the GCSE picture and would need to read the marking scheme. I could do it, but by that time the thread would have moved on.

As I said before, the mark scheme is on the AQA site. You seemed happy to criticise it before without knowing very much about it.

Why highlight picture? Analysing presentational techniques and understanding how and why texts have been designed require the same skills as analysing language use. Trust me, it's not easy, and I do know.

Because it is an English exam, not a media studies exam.

And once you study English at degree level you are frequently required to understand the use of language in more forms than just classic texts. English Language A Level prepares you for this and the GCSE offers progression to the A Level.

So claig provided with proof that IQs have risen, you are now saying that IQ tests have got easier?

'You seemed happy to criticise it before without knowing very much about it.'

No I made my quick observations, but you seemed happy to defend it without knowing very much about the content of the GCSE text or the nature of the picture, be it a cartoon or a photograph.

You seem to have a very narrow definition of the idea of 'English'. Surely it's as relevant to study how the language is used in everyday texts as it is to study its use in Shakespeare? Same skills, different application.

'So claig provided with proof that IQs have risen, you are now saying that IQ tests have got easier?'

The proof is in the pudding. Employers say pupils can't spell and do basic maths, universities put on remedial classes because students can't cope with the level of first year undergraduate maths. New Labour showed us proof of the increasing numbers attaining A and A*, but for the facts you don't need to look far.

"you seemed happy to defend it without knowing very much about the content of the GCSE text or the nature of the picture, be it a cartoon or a photograph."

I teach English GCSE every year so I know a fair bit. Not sure EXACTLY what the text or graphic is without going into school and finding the hard copy of the paper but if you PM me your address then I'll happily send you a copy.

'You seem to have a very narrow definition of the idea of 'English'

I have a traditional view that it is about text and not pictures, be they cartoons or any other type of picture.

And the employers that you refer to are the ones who are quoted by the press. I'm not convinced that all employers feel this way. There is a lot of focus here on KS4, but the foundations are laid way earlier than age 14.

IMO traditional doesn't necessarily = better.

I don't know if GCSEs in English ask questions about the illustrations in classics by Dickens. I would hope they stuck to the words of our great national author. Pictures have a place in children's picture books, but not in exams for 16 year olds.