Did you know GCSE A* grades are being slashed this year?

[roisin]

The Joint Council for Qualifications have required all GCSE subjects to grade A* differently in future. OFQUAL have required all the exam Boards to return to the level of awards as made in 2008, leading to a reduction in the pass rate at all grades.

I don't have information for all subjects, but apparently in some subjects the difference is massive. In 2011 in AQA Biology 23% of all entries were graded A. In the Jan 2012 Biology module, just 0.9% of papers were graded A!

I approve wholeheartedly of the revised exam board policy of reserving A* for truly exceptional - and statisticallly rare - performance.

but Haggis, exactly the same is true the year A levels went modular for example or the year before the latest science syllabus started and science results were inflated. Those who sat the year before were disadvantaged. And what about bright children who sat exams the year before A*s were introduced? Having year groups disadvantaged for one reason or another is nothing new. I think people just have to get on with it, and if it really bothers them work a bit harder and up their grades that way instead. It doesn't sound as though it will be a massive change in any case - restoring grades to 2009 levels. Just view it as a few years that got slightly lucky - it won't be everyone that got higher science grades in those years in any case, only those near the grade boundaries.

Not all schools do modular though Haggis. DS has 25 exams this year as all of his courses were linear rather than modular. Undoubtedly this means the pupils at his school and others who don't do modular/early entry are disadvantaged but there's nothing we can do about it. The same applies for the change in the grade boundaries, our DC will just have to deal with it.

It's also worth remembering that these changes will affect the whole cohort so will make no difference to applying to college as everyone could potentially have lower grades.

Does that mean it will be harder for my DD to get a 'C'? If so, that's not fair! She will work her socks off, would have just scraped a 'C' in certain subjects, yet she will now probably miss out, and be 'rewarded' for all her striving and effort with a 'D'.

She has Learning Difficulties, and she has worked bloody hard to scrape a 'C', and now she might miss out because they are changing the goal posts?

Source of my info is here

For the record, this is not my boys' school: it's just something I came across.

I've read the link but am still not clear.
Science exams - this summer, final modules will be downgraded? Or is it those pupils taking modules in Yr 10 at start of Science GCSE will be downgraded?

Final wards 2012 downgrade? or is it final awards in 2013 downgraded? Sorry - but I couldn't quite work it out.

My understanding from Gelatinous's link was that it applied to current year 10 who are taking modules over 2 years and will therefore complete the GCSE in 2013. My DD sat one paper in each science in January and many students got 100 UMS which must be an A*. In fact I went to a meeting at the school on the day the results came out and the deputy head mentioned how pleased they were with the results, so I don't think it applies to the current year 11's sitting the other two papers now.

Re Roisin's link about the year 10 students who have not done as well as expected, perhaps the teacher means that they will do another exam this summer and the final one next year - he doesn't seem to be talking about the year 11s. I assume that the GCSE science courses are different from the ones the current year 11 are doing - if not that would be really unfair.

It's yr10 pupils sitting exams for final award 2013. So modules sat this summer in the old spec are marked in the 'old way'. But modules for the new science spec from Jan 2012 and including summer 2012 modules.

So if you are in yr10 and taking double science, this year - at some point- you will do 3 science exams; together they amount to one GCSE - called core science or something. This GCSE and these modules will be assessed in the new, harsh way.

If you are in yr10 and doing triple science, this year you will sit the same exams as those in the preceding paragraph: P1, C1 and B1. Each - marked under the new, tough regime - counts one third toward each separated science GCSE.

Does that answer your question daffodilly? (it's actually rather more complex than that as there are internal assessments too!)

Well not too sure but my DC is doing IGCSE sciences and there are no modules involved as far as I know, DC has not had multiple attempts at improving scores throughout the year, you just sit your exams and get what you get. I dont think its as easy to get A* at IGCSE but people do say IGCSE students are better off when it comes to A level sciences as there is a good grade boundary between IGCSE and GCSE ie an A in GCSE would be a B in IGCSE. This is what I hear anyway.

The new science exams are different Fluffybunny; the spec is different. But it's certainly not easier! Some may view the changes as 'unfair', but it's just the cost of transition to a more sensible model where A* grades are only awarded rarely.

I have a son in Y9 and I have no objections to them getting tougher but they do need need to name them in such a way that they can be distinguished by employers. I know they are only returning to how they were but because the inflation has been slow over 20+ year then the impact has been smoothed out, this return is like falling over a cliff edge from one year group to the next.

I shall be encouraging my son to refer to them as 'GCSE (post-2012 style)' where possible if there is no re-naming.

Thanks roisin; I meant that it would be unfair if they were sitting exams to the same spec with similar types of question but the grades were awarded differently. DD1 is sitting all hers this year in year 11, so it won't affect her.

DD2 is doing two GCSEs as one year courses in year 9, so the changes will affect her and I imagine exams will have changed yet again, to linear by the time she is in year 11.

I'm an employer and only know because I am on here and have children caught in the backfire. I personally can't see why it can't just stay as it is without any more inflation so we start a stable process rather than go through yet another rollercoaster, but in the opposite direction. Or, a sun den change but with a new name or grading system - such as 1,2,3 etc.

If they don't then, yes, I would also advise my children to put the date of entry described on their CV.

I am relieved as my DS is close to a grade boundary in his Physics - which will be awarded this summer.

I do agree a more open approach for Yr 10 pupils would be fairer. By the time my DD gets to Yr 11, it will be established, so not such a bother - she is currently in Yr 7. Those in Yr 10 and Yr 9 are going to feel disappointed as are employers not going to understand.

It is a bit confusing. I think the part in roisin's link that says they are using a different statistical method to set the A* may mean they are using 'comparable outcomes' as described in my link rather than 'comparable performance' which has been used in the past. If so, this isn't a big difference (basically just prevents year on year grade creep) and the key issue this year will be with the year 10 core science results (and their subsequent science results) which will be going back to 2008 levels, with strengthened versions of English Lit, maths geography and history gradually coming in over the next couple of years.

oddboots the inflation has actually been mostly concentrated at the points in time when the syllabuses have changed not spread out as you say (so the 2008 science was very much harder than 2009). Also a return to 2008 levels is only 5 years not 20.

BeingFluffy I have two DDs in Year 9 and I am interested in your comment about a change to linear exams when your DD is in Year 11.
What about the pace of change in set-up? Surely that will take at least two/three years? Not being controversial by the way. Just thinking aloud on screen if you like. It may well be changed for "First teaching from September 2013" which will be after they start their GCSE courses. Hope for the best.

dear cardymow,

I feel for you with your DD, we don't want pupils who achieve an acceptable standard to fail - that is why GCSE's were brought in, and D is seen as a fail by many although , of course, it is close to average outcome. It is important to keep a safe level of C's. Too many failures at 16 is disastrous for young people and their self esteem and prospects. GCSEs are not all about A*s and universities but a general education for all.

I have DCs in Y11 and year 9. Posted on this before.
I thought the exam pressure was tough on my elder son who is in mid GCSE but I think his 14 year old brother will have an even harder time.

Personally, when we were O Level (and that dates me) even at grammar schools, it was usually only the top 20% who got A Grades (unless the year was very, very bright or the teacher(s) was/were truly inspirational and exceptional). So it was extraordinarily rare for anyone, even the uber-clever, to get 11 or 12 A Grades - SIL got 14 O Levels of which 7 were A, 6 were B and 1 C and she was always regarded as a swot by her peers and went to Cambridge.

I just don't buy it that so many children have suddenly become so much cleverer than in our day. It is right to reduce the numbers getting A* because I think for our generation(s) we tend to regard such widespread high achieving with a level of suspicion, maybe some of it unfounded but not in a lot of cases.

The problem is that those going through that stage from now onwards and possibly the next five-ten years will have their grades compared to those who mega-achieved in the past ten years - and will look on paper to be less clever/academic even though it's not necessarily the case.

It would be a lot easier really if they rebranded the GCSE level so that there is no confusion about who got what grades in what era.... If that makes sense.

I welcome it in the interests of academic rigour!

I have just looked this up on the Ofqual website and the linear exams will be introduced for first teaching from September 2012. Sorry if my previous post was a bit confused.

Thanks for looking that up Rezolution. DD2 will be sitting GCSEs in 2013/14/15 as her school has a policy of doing the option subjects as one year courses. I think she will be disadvantaged compared to her elder sister not only because of the grade boundaries changing but the change to linear exams. She is dyslexic but generally able and in the top set, but gets very nervous in exams and finds it difficult to memorise large chunks of information. She will also be penalised for spelling - not a lot of marks but it will still have an effect. Inevitably she will compare her results to those of DD1.

So although DS's in year 11 he's doing the same modules as current year 10s as they don't do early entry. Will the grade boundaries be higher for him because they didn't do early modules? Will he be disadvantaged because he didn't do exams last summer when the grade boundaries were lower?

I'm very confused by this

Bringback there are two sets of syllabuses, one for year 11s which covers all science modules for core science, additional science and separate sciences and thsi is what your dd will be doing (some others who did do modules early may be doing resits too).

The other set of syllabuses is for those who will generally certificate next year (so for the year 10s), and only includes modules for core science which can be certificated this year because a lot of schools do core science one year (usually yr 10 and additional science the following year (yr 11) but both need to be in the same syllabus. The additional science and separate science modules for the new syllabus won't be available until next year.

Does that make sense? Your dd will be doing the old syllabus as she is in year 11, but she will be sitting different papers to the year 10s doing just core science this year.

your ds, sorry.

Actually from the chat I had with Science teachers this year there are 3 syllabuses. The one year 11 are doing, very modular but already toughened up from years before. The one for year 10, with limited resist, and a certain percentage in year 11. And the year 9 one, which is yet to be released but will be all linear (unless you are in Wales).

If everything is going linear, why do they not just all do iGCSEs?

Also, will controlled assessments go, so everything is tested linear at the end? (Mixed thoughts on this - quite good for assessing over time but soooo much teaching time lost)