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

What's that? Doing a single GCSE in a night class as a mature student is easier than a load of exams all at the same time while still a child?

Also agree with Xenia, I've never said that before!

Hmm. Night school classes generally do better. I can remember an FE lecturer chivvying my class when I was a teenager. Now, I attend night-school classes, and witness the phenomenon. One GCSE that you are doing for love of the subject (to the point you were willing to write a cheque to do it), studying with like-minded peers, is a lot easier than 11 GCSEs at 16, which you are doing because they're compulsory.

Chivvying the daytime class (of which I was a member) about her evening class' better performance, that is. Basically, they'd all done the homework for the course.

noblegiraffe: "What's that? Doing a single GCSE in a night class as a mature student is easier than a load of exams all at the same time while still a child?"

Well, don't forget the course was two hours a week over nine months as opposed to four hours a week for several years. However, that's not the point.

My point is that the exam itself was easier. Loads easier.

But if you feel that being snarky is a helpful contribution to the debate, do continue.

I agree with Xenia.

Never thought I would hear myself say that.

Xenia for Education Minister!

And my point is that as the two situations in which you took the exams were completely different, your perceptions of them will also be different and thus not objective. And thus not really a helpful contribution to the debate.

It has occured to me that a return to the O'Level may actually help some children with learning difficulties such as mild dyspraxia which is prevalent among males.

My son is articulate, numerate and has a very good general knowledge for his age, but I am concerned that presentation will always be a problem. He does well in tests, but, unless he gets some one-to-one help, his written class work will not reflect his understanding. He'd be a good engineer as his 3D awareness is fantastic, and as most engineers use computers (like his Dad) then his writing would not hold him back.

I feel, in some ways, that GCSEs with all their coursework have had an emasculating affect on boys doing Maths and Science as it (a) takes up too much of their free time when they want to do sport and (b) does not suit their brains which can work well under pressure (like in a job).

noblegiraffe: "And my point is that as the two situations in which you took the exams were completely different, your perceptions of them will also be different and thus not objective. And thus not really a helpful contribution to the debate."

So someone who has done both types of exam is not qualified to contribute to the debate? Why? I thought they'd be ideal, actually.

Let me explain it to you in a little more detail. Some of my O-levels were in modern foreign languages. My GCSE was also in a modern foreign language.

For the O-level papers, I had to write an essay in the target language, translate a passage from the language into English, translate a passage from English into the language and answer a comprehension test in the target language.

For the GCSE, I had to do none of these things. There was a comprehension test, but the questions were in English. From memory, there were also lots of simple questions on the lines of "Describe what John is doing in this picture." But no essay, and no translation either from English to the target language or vice versa.

It was much, much simpler.

HTH.

It's changed again, then. I had four Controlled Assessments. Two speaking, and two writing. Quite a lot of rehearsal possible, admittedly. I can go into more detail if necessary, and rant about the teaching that could not be done, if you like.

Then two further exams. A listening exam- listen to CD, answer questions on exam paper in front of you type. Then a reading exam. Read sections of text. Answer questions on it.

Class numbers similar to hackmum's. Grades achieved varied from B to A, but the A was achieved by a student who had lived in that country for some years.

There were no pictures to analyse! I can now participate in conversations with native speakers on MSN style chat programs.

You could all look at the exam boards' mfl GCSE past papers, you know, by the way. They keep them online, so that candidates can practise lots and lots beforehand.

Surely this is exactly the context where informal language (e.g. the dreaded contractions) should be used? I agree my grammar is far from perfect, but to be honest neither is yours.

I actual do agree that our GCSE language sounds easier than the O level, but I don't agree that that's necessarily a bad thing as it still teaches enough to conduct a conversation in the target language and understand things like menus, road signs and sentence structure. There definitely aren't any analyse the picture questions though!

"Well, don't forget the course was two hours a week over nine months as opposed to four hours a week for several years. However, that's not the point."

Don't forget that we study the language for two hours a week in a mixed ability class of 25 as well as studying 10 other subjects.

LeQ, GCSE was talking about the modern mfl GCSE requirements, not GCSE English specifications. I expect GCSE English Lang/Lit is still write story, analyse Scottish dialect poetry (Robert Burns, who might meet with much criticism on MN today!), write about Shakespeare, etc.

Aren't you a linguist, actually? Thoughts on the modern mfl GCSEs and whether they match up with the Common European Framework for Languages?

One of the problems I see here is the premium attached to academic education, with the vocational track seen as something for the less able, the less bright -- this snobbery has led to the transformation of the old polytechnics into universities and the proliferation of worthless degrees among other regrettable developments. The vocational track needs to regain prestige; the persistence of the sentiment that academic ability marks you out as superior means that trades and the vocational education track are denigrated.

Perhaps it's too much to hope that mastering a trade would ever be seen as the respectable route to ensuring your future that it is in Germany, given the way classism is part of the warp and woof of British society, tainting absolutely every aspect of life. It's a quaint old relic of the past that Britain can't really afford any more.

Xenia
I think Gove should let education alone. Let us have 10 years with no changes to anything. I am not against the suggestion that schools be told that clever children ought to be doing science, maths, english, a language etc as all good private schools already do that and the fact some comps don't is terrible for the children as employers want to see those subjects on CVs.
HEAR HEAR

I never looked my older children's GCSE course work but I understand now there is much less course work than there was and more supervised which sounds a lot fairer. I never even saw the older children's and one reads some parenrs do it all so that is never going to be fair.

I don't think we need to merge GCSE and O level. there are all kinds of exams for the not so bright from HCSE childcare to HNDs or whatever they are called to lower tier GCSEs. If GCSEs are too easy schools can get children to do iGCSEs. There are alsio some countries around like Singapore which apparently still do our old O level exams even we could use if we wanted to.

What must be sorted out isif there will be this change. Mine would be the guinea pigs and that is never a good plan for those involved. Just imagine if their year everyone suddenly gets Bs where they would have had A and in 6 years' time a recruiter doesn't notice mine were GCSEs 2015 or 2014 and thinks mine are much worse as they were B O level not A GCSE.

That even happens today with students who are older or did A levels a few years back - their current grades look worse than more recent ones due to grade inflation. My AAB ((A level) was far and away better than anyone else in the whole school in its day. Today even in that school I bet that would not be so. Then hardly anyone got an A. people stopped my parents in the street and said she must do Oxbridge it was so startling.
(GCSE I think it's great that you are posting.)

I disagree with Xenia, which comes as no surprise.

'I think Gove should let education alone. Let us have 10 years with no changes to anything.'

How ise going to sort out dumbing down if he does nothing? What's teh point of being Education Secretary?

The Royal Society of Chemistry and many employers are asking for change and an end to dumbing down. Dumbing down is harming our future. Gove needs to sort it out and intends to do so. He has already scrapped coursework in many exams and has a lot more work to do before our exams are world class once again.

Gove has already warned people to prepare for lower grades. He intends to increase standards, and that means that there will be less A* grades than there used to be.

Sashh, a warning -- I am about to be cruel and pedantic.

I teach teenagers and I have to teach them basic English along side my actuall subjects. So taking GCSEstudent's post:
'Alongside' is normally written as one word, not two.
'Actual' is spelled with one L.
I think you should have used a comma after 'so', because it indicates a logical conclusion or a summary of your thoughts arising from the previous sentence.

^Sorry for gate crashing but I found this when I was reading about the proposed change.
What is the subject of the above sentence? Why is there no comma after 'crashing'?^
If you can't find the subject there, you shouldn't be teaching English.
The phrase, 'the above sentence', sounds a wee bit dodgy to my ear.

OK this is an informal context so I will allow the contractions with apostrophes.
Where is the comma after 'OK'?
Is 'OK' a word?
Shouldn't there be a comma before 'so'?

Again as it as informal writing I won't pick up the '27' instead of twenty seven
You probably should have used a comma after 'Again'.
You should have proofread -- you typed 'as' where you meant 'is'.
You probably should have used a comma after 'writing'.

You missused a personal pronoun. Your first sentence both does not make sense, and appears to have no subject.
'Misused' is spelled with one S. It should be 'misused'.
Your second sentence should read:
'Your first sentence neither makes sense nor does it appear to have a subject', or alternatively, 'Your first sentence does not make sense, and it appears to have no subject.' Simple is often best.

I did not say anyone was or is thick, I said you would not have passed 'O' Level English, and that is based on this single post, riddled with errors.
There is one comma too many here -- you should have put a full stop after 'thick', and started a new sentence with the next word. Alternatively, you could have used a colon after 'thick'. I prefer the full stop.

I hope you do well in your exams. I really do not want to put you down or devalue your hard work. I am genuinely sad that you do not use standard English conventions, and rightly, or wrongly, I have assumed this is because you don't know how.
Goodness gracious, you do love your commas, don't you? If only you knew where to use them...

He intends to reverse years of New Labour policy in the teeth of fierce opposition. He won't be the most popular MP amongst progressives, but he will be praised to the rafters by readers of the Daily Mail.

That should be an indication to him that he is barking up the wrong tree, Claig. I think you could have a fantastic drinking game spotting the grammatical errors in the average DM article.

'I think you could have a fantastic drinking game spotting the grammatical errors in the average DM article.'

I suspect that your lips would still be dry and your throat parched after a day of spotting. We are talking about the world's leading online newspaper, and about a paper that was awarded Newspaper of the Year 2012 by the distnuished Society of Editors. We are talking about the creme de la creme of British journalism.

Claig, hate to break it to you but it was Labour that scrapped coursework in some subjects and replaced it with controlled assessment in others. I don't think Gove has changed any of that. Does that now mean that you are going to demand a return to coursework?