Igcse to gcse

[Lfs2126]

Are the syllabuses very different?is it possible to transfer from one to the other?

Crikey wordfactory, I am very at your school suggesting A maths isn't an indicator of suitability for A-level! They might not find it easy, true, but I would hate to think of any A kid being put off completely.

noble they mean an A* isn't enough in itself to show suitable ability in maths/physics.

The boys who want to do an A level (and a huge percentage do) have to have the say-so of their maths tutor and sit a secondary test, I believe.

Any new students to the sixth form have to sit a maths exam.

Probably wise, as Maths A level is really hard!

Ah, we also have a test a few weeks into sixth form that has to be passed to continue on the course, but I don't think anyone with an A at GCSE has ever failed. It's more an issue with A grade students. If they are finding that kids with As can't cope with A-level, then I would suggest they need to look at how they approach it!

You might be right noble. I have no idea how maths works .

I suppose it's also to do with expectations of A level grades. Most students are aiming for A/A* at A level. If they're not likely to get that in maths, then I assume they're encouraged towards subjects where they are likely to get it.

From what I understand A level/Pre U math isn't particularly hard if you are good at math in fact my DS has found it really enjoyable so much better than math IGCSE, its the further maths that causes all the problems. An A* at Pre U further math is very difficult to achieve by all accounts.

DD has had a gut full of controlled assessments
they soung like a total waste IMHO because the teachers clearly help the strugglers and they get to have several tries at the darned thing and it just chews up time when she could be doing something more useful.

Almost looking forward to DS doing proper linear.

but genuinely
I do find it funny that about three years ago, private school parents raved about the iGCSE being "much more rigorous" than GCSE and are now having to find other reasons for the high grades their kids got
now that comps put middling kids in for it but not top ones

My DS1's school ("high achieving" state comp/academy results better than many grammar schools) changed to IGCSE Eng Lang after the marking debacle a few years ago. The head who was a true spin doctor told us his rationale was that the marking of the controlled assessments was very erratic and carried enough marks to have a significant impact in the over all grade. The controlled assessment did impact on my DS1's grade he failed English Lang becasue of it, it was still marked low on appeal but when resubmitted the same course work for for the November resit he achieved a B!!?? So I suppose I'm forced to see it from the heads point of view. I think the course work is only worth 10% in the IGCSE so maybe its more predictable and obviously has less impact and therefore suits the C/D borderline group but I don't think the stats show more are getting A*'s at Eng Lang than they were a few years ago.
My DS1 recently sat and passed the higher paper's in GCSE science and I helped him revise frankly I was stunned by how inane and easy the whole thing was science was never like that in my day.

Thanks for the reply to my query noblegiraffe. I've only just got back.

Talkin it sounds as though the only reason you and friday are advancing to support the theory that iGCSEs are easier is that some schools are using the exams for their lower ability sets to get better results.
Do we know if this strategy works? As I asked before, is there comparative data for pass rates and higher grades at these schools
BTW you could also equally argue that the same schools are not entering higher ability children as they are worried that they might get less A grades. Those schools are obviously showing that they are keen on improving their results through exam selection so why stick with GCSEs? Maybe because of the targeted help you mention that occurs with controlled assessments?
It certainly does not sound a very stimulating learning environment.

It is the time that the controlled assessment take up that does seem to bother teachers and pupils. Take these out of the equation and you have more time to go beyond the curriculum, start exploring other areas, do a bit of A level/Pre U stuff which must help pupils decide whether or not they are up to the A level/pre U in a certain subject and as importantly decide if they're interested enough. My DS has started the Pre U chemistry course and he definitely wont be continuing it into yr 12 because unlike math and physics he finds it very hard but is still predicted an A* at IGCSE. Now there are less controlled assessment perhaps schools will go back to the GCSE's.

happygardening
DCs school will not make any move towards working on any part of the A level syllabus because it (and most of the others round here) do not have 6th forms.
And yes, getting rid of the mid year faffing might settle things down a bit - until Gove's next brainwave.

summerends
I have no idea if its harder or easier.
But I do find it funny that what was "exclusively" for private schools a few years back seems to work fine with the great unwashed as well.

"DCs school will not make any move towards working on any part of the A level syllabus because it (and most of the others round here) do not have 6th forms."
I hadn't really thought about it before thats a bit of a failing with the schools without a 6th form. But I suppose talkin just going beyond the curriculum could give a child an idea if he/she wishes to continue it onto A level.

talkin the reason schools considered them more challenging was because they precluded the endless round of modules and resits and contriolled assessments.

Thus a clutch of iGCSEs at A*s was seen as a greater challenge. And frankly, having just expereinced how CAs work with DD, I haven't changed my opinion on that.

'the great unwashed', Do you really use that term for state school pupils or is it just for boys of a certain age?

happy
many counties have the 6th form college system - and Hampshire's results do not seem to suffer too much for it.
I admit that it did not appeal to me AT ALL when I first dealt with it, but now I'm used to it.
And the top set all do further maths GCSE so if they enjoy that, chances are they will cope with the A level.

summerends
"great unwashed" is better than the term adopted by ex public school friends - the word they used was "scum"
and I did not make it up after all

People always seem to bang on about linear assessments being tougher and more rigorous too, but my school (before modules were scrapped) had a lot of success in getting C grades out of kids in Y11 who had bombed their modules in Y10 and so had no chance of getting a C in modular. Thus making linear 'easier' than modular

As I asked before, is there comparative data for pass rates and higher grades at these schools

It's interesting how the goalposts are moved.

iGCSEs are adopted by private schools. The heads assure the parents that this is because the iGCSE is more rigorous and demanding and offers a better preparation for A Level, a glossier coat for your horse and a wetter nose for your dog. Of course, say the parents, this is self-evidently true, and no-one demands to see GCSE results (shouldn't they drop, if the exams are tougher?) or the A Level results (shouldn't they rise, if the preparation is better?) The horses' coats and dogs' noses equally remain unaudited.

iGCSEs are adopted by state schools that are flirting with the floor standards, and a switch to iGCSE appears to often precede or follow being placed into a category. Observers suggest that it's a bit of a coincidence that many hundreds of schools, few of them with stellar results, a lot of them without sixth forms, should be switching, and suggest that the reason might be that the exams are easier. Suddenly, evidence that isn't asked for to support the proposition that they're more demanding is required for the proposition that they aren't.

Where's the evidence that the iGCSE is "more rigorous?" There isn't any, apart from some private schools who may have all sorts of agendas moving to them, and providing no evidence other than assertion.

Where's the evidence that the iGCSE is easier? A rather larger number of schools, most of them with challenges, moving to them.

Which you choose to believe is up to you. Neither argument has significant evidence beyond the behaviour of schools.

the reason schools considered them more challenging was because they precluded the endless round of modules and resits and contriolled assessments.

Or, alternatively, allow you to do little work for two years, revise furiously, and get decent results (as I, and many others, did for O Level thirty-plus years ago).

No-one has convincingly explained why any school, of any variety, would voluntarily take on exams which will give lower results, or why any set of parents would accept that.

Because indies aren't as rigorously assessed as state schools, and because they have to promote themselves for getting good results, wouldn't it make sense for them to choose the easier exam so that they have more to brag about in terms of results achieved?

Seems kinda obvious to me. Why wouldn't private schools play the system as much as any other school.

Plenty of kids who are in private for GCSEs either don't do A-levels or don't do A-levels at same institution, so not a good idea to focus on early prep for that.

Oh for heaven's sake.

Schools who are moving their low achievers to iGCSE are doing so to avoid the grade debacle which has been so problematic in GCSE English.

It affects the C/D border pupils.

For those pupils it is probably a much safer bet to go with iGCSE, than have his Lordship Gove mess with the bouyndaries. Again.

They're not switching because the exams are easier. They're tryinmg to avoid another political move where those struggling get left without a pass! And I don't blame them.

lljk I think the reason why the most selective private schools don't play the system at GCSE is because they don't need to.

First, their pupils will cope with either sort of GCSE.

Second, they're really not judged on their GCSEs. Prospective parents assume a good raft of those. What they're bothered about is A levels and where the pupils end up at university and what they study there.

That is what these schools are judged on.

So the schools pick the exams which serve that end. And iGCSEs fit the bill. They're linear so no modules and faffing which allows a more fluid school year, as happy pointed out, in turn allowing the teachers to ski off piste and go beyond the curriculum, thus prepping the students for their A levels and beyond.

Plus, these schools like to get large swathes into the most selective unis, so 9 or 10 iGCSEs help. They show a certain aptitude that those universities like.

So yes, these schools are of course choosing iGCSEs to advanatge theirt students, just not in the way you and others are saying.

Now all GCSEs are going to be linear/terminal, you might find some public schools going back to them. But that said, they probably enjoy the lack of interference from the Secretary of State.

Ultimately does it actually matter?
Having said this Friday what about my Latin teacher/tutor friend no axe to grind either way who clearly states Latin IGCSE is harder, that the set text for this year is normally only found on A level paper and never on the GCSE paper because it's so boring difficult (he teaches both by the way and has done for 40 years with great success), also that the bottom Latin set at my DS2's school sit GCSE Latin. This seems to me to be pretty clear evidence that Latin IGCSE is harder. I have stated this before and was then told "oh Latin's different".
I can't comment on my DS2's school past GCSE results or even their current IGCSE results they are not published but I do know that they are obviously doing something right because they are one of only a couple of schools who get more than 50% at the much sought after A* in the A level or in their case the much harder Pre U. I can't comment whether it's the IGCSE that helps them achieve this or the lack of course work means that more time can be given to extended work or starting the Pre U curriculum early or that they just have better teachers or the pupils are all just super clever, . I also know as I approach 50 no one even asks me about my GCSE results so in a few years time it don't matter to our children if they've sat GCSE's IGCSE's or Martian GCSE's

TBH, friday I don't really care either way, I'm not even sure which for which subjects my DC are taking.
However I was curious to know the data behind your statement that it is known that IGCSEs are easier resulting in more non selective state schools switching to them.

Now you are saying you don't need to provide any since the inverse has n't been proven by the private / selective sector. If you have been criticising them for using that tactic, I would n't have thought that was a robust argument.

Around here it's very common for people to send kids to the very best private schools for GCSEs & transfer to state sector for 6th form. Obviously some transfers in other direction, too.

How interesting to hear (?) that's so unusual elsewhere.