I'm just getting my head round Gove's changes to the exam system- and I am even mor horrified than I thought I would be!

[curlew]

The three things that leap out at me are 1)all year 11s have to do 8 GCSEs of which 5 have to be EBacc subjects, which will be a real struggle for many, 2) no more tiered papers, so one exam for all, so kids for whom a C is a real achievement have to sit a paper which has also to cater for the effortless A*, and 3)only the first attempt at an exam counts for the league tables. This means for a school like ours, where the vast majority of students are middle/low ability, and where we have always let many have a "practice go" early, won't be able to- because the risk to the school is too great.

Fair dos raven. As I say, I see no real problem with the two tier system.

I guess I'm just questioning how much it protects the hurt feelings of the less able!

wordfactory - can only speak for Eng Lang. Harder texts, harder/different format questions, so you'd probably need to move sets &/or attend extra sessions to get your head around the paper; but we do both of these routinely & successfully.

No problem for Eng Lit - it's all essays. Foundation questions only differ in having a couple of bullet points for guidance.

my view on the op and the other posts...
weknowmemes.com/2011/10/the-educational-system-comic/

rigorous recognisable standards

Has anyone defined the term rigorous yet because gove sure as hell hasn't.

Well I guess a rigorous assessment must keep the variables to an absolute minimum, no?

Matsikula
"there might not always be tractor drivers, if (if) we can develop sufficiently cheap artificial intelligence to steer a plough over an uneven field. Probably not soon though."

And we might be able to genetically engineer unicorns :) , but it isn't going to happen anytime soon.

This reminds me of a fairly recent thread about IGCSEs where it was said that they were easy enough to ensure more Cs in lower ability sets. They are n't 2 tiered though as far as I am aware and still according to that thread allow an 'easy' C to an A*.

This reminds me of a fairly recent thread about IGCSEs where it was said that they were easy enough to ensure more Cs in lower ability sets. They are n't 2 tiered though as far as I am aware and still according to that thread allow an 'easy' C to an A*.

Curlew, "why give children a goal they can't achieve?" Well surely if you don't believe that they can achieve it, why should they? Self fulfilling?

I must be on form tonight! I need a two attempts system for my posting

Happypeeps that's a lovely sentiment but despite teachers' best efforts and high expectations, in the real world it just doesn't work like that. Not every child can get an A, no matter how hard they try. Honestly.

Tiered papers may make more sence for maths but definitely not English.
It is not just the exam, the problem is it affects what is being taught. I understand that teachers have the hard job of getting everyone through their exams with an acceptable result, but shouldn't education be about more than that?

I can't get over the fact that kids only have 3 years of studying history and geography at school!
Shouldn't schools aim to produce well-rounded, thinking, inquisitive individuals regardless of ability? At least showing them what's out there, even if they can't or don't want to reach it at the moment. Education should be about opportunities. In practice, it might be easier to enter a lot of kids for the lower paper and pretend the higher one doesn't exist and it's not for the likes of us. But the ideology of it is very damaging, because it kills aspiration.

But, IHeart, it is not only about getting an A. It is about being taught less, because you're deemed capable of a C at best. So your education suffers. You are not even given the means to get anything higher.

Whilst there are many amazing teachers out there, that see children as individuals, there are also those that pre judge children and form expectations of them that may be below the child's capabilities. By "capping " the grade, they cannot exceed expectations and I agree aspire.

I agree leftover

There is no benefit to a school or a teacher of capping a child's grade below their potential. We are judged on the progress made by every child. It would be foolish indeed to limit a potential A grade student to a C in Maths or English.

You can exceed a C grade in a foundation paper if your controlled assessment marks are higher. This will not be the case in future as it is 100% exams

What is a controlled assessment mark? How, in real terms, do you exceed a grade C in a foundation paper?

Because the mark is linear. It's all added together and if a pupil gets a range of B and C grades in CA work, and a high C in the exam they can get anB overall. Controlled Assessments replaced coursework.

I myself, was told to do the lower maths paper and convinced my teacher to allow me to do the higher as was really upset. They said ok as expected c. Achieved a b! Maybe things have changed in comprehensives these days??

But what is a controlled assessment?

A controlled assessment is where the pupil is given the question in advance, discusses it in class, writes up their answer and then regurgitates it under exam conditions.

It is a written essay. Pupils in English language do four which make up a percentage of the coursework. Done under controlled conditions to prevent parents/tutors doing it for the kids. Gove has scrapped these.

I don't know when you were at school, but schools are so different now compared with when I started teaching, it is almost unrecognisable.

The focus on progress is one of the changes.

Now that is where I have a problem. Is it not then simply a test of short term memory, or even worse do they get to take the answer they have written up in class into the exam to regurgitate it in which case surely it is no test of knowledge at all.

I can't get my head around that at all.