The IGCSE Unfairness from Gove

[LuluJakey1]

For years, Tories have hailed the IGCSEs that public schools do, as much harder than the GCSEs that state schools do. They held them up as evidence of the academic rigour and high standards of public schools.

Now that state schools have been allowed to do them and they count in school league tables, what has emerged is that lots of schools are opting for them because actually, they are much less onerous, have less content, are very predictable and said schools are doing extremely well with them, as well as if not better than many public schools.

My friend mole at the DFE tells me that, surprise , surprise, Mr Gove will reverse his decsision of a couple of years ago and announce, in the near future, that IGCSE English and IGCSE Maths will no longer be allowed to count in state school league tables from summer 2016.

However, public schools, which are not restricted, will still be able to take them and count them in their results.

Who says the Tories are not elitist and don't favour the already privileged!

Waterhouse. Grammar schools work for some and don't work for many more (didn't work for me). Secondary Moderns work for practically no one (except your husband). In 1981, the year I did my O' levels (the year of the Cockcroft report) only 20% of the cohort achieved a C or above. I cannot for the life of me understand why having 80% of the population of the time without a qualification in maths can possibly be considered a good system???? What we have now is not perfect but education today is infinitely fairer than what we had back then.

That should read a C or above in O level maths.

Olivevoir for the sake of accuracy don't forget that those did not take O'levels took CSEs of which the top grade was the equivalent of a grade C for O level (almost certainly higher than a grade C for GCSE). Surely teaching core syllabus for GCSE is equivalent to this old CSE. Is education fairer because the exams have been put together under one name? I don't think the lottery difference between schools is at all fair. Do you think a child achieves any more in the lower sets of a poor comprehensive?

Maybe it would be better if the media & successive governments allowed things to bed in before they criticised? State schools have only just been allowed to take IGCSEs so how can judgements be made?

DS did IGCSEs & GCSEs, DD did GCSEs. I would definitely say the IGCSE syllabus was more rigorous. My only criticism is that exams in year 11 need to better prepare pupils for year 12/13 & right now they do not.

Summersend. I think the Cockcroft report, from where I sourced this information, included cse grade 1 in its reporting of 20%. Also don't forget, many of the cse grade 1 students, like myself were O level double entries from grammar schools. I achieved a B in my mock O level and was still double entered just in case I had an off day. So gaming the system is not a new phenomena.
In no other country in the world are people chomping at the bit to return to a system where 80% of 16 year olds are being set up for failure. Leaving certificates should recognise achievement, not assign kids to the scrap heap before their lives have started.

Olive is completely right, the old O level system failed a large group of middle ability children very badly.

My DSIS has a mishmash of grade 2-5 CSEs. She is far from stupid and would probably have got the magic five A-Cs today.

Although we were a comprehensive, the quality of teaching and expectations for the lower sets were no better than a sink secondary modern.

That exam structure, teaching and Ofsted expecting progress from all abilities has tried to address this situation in the last 30 years is all to the good.

No the present system isn't perfect, but it's hugely better!

Olivevoir no it did n't, that's Table 5 which also excludes double entries.
However that percentage is also very low, 25% and not that much better for English (~35%) so point taken. Might be a bit more assuming a D equivalent in those days is the same as a C now but still very poor.

happygardening

"The argument is illogical why would the super selectives independents with often 90%+ achieving A*/A's at Pre U/A levels choose to enter their pupils into easier GCSE's when they have such exceedingly high expectations for their pupils?"

You have answered your own question. "super selectives" choose an easier exam so they can get the grades.

summerends
"for the sake of accuracy don't forget that those did not take O'levels took CSEs of which the top grade was the equivalent of a grade C for O level (almost certainly higher than a grade C for GCSE)."

Where is your evidence for this?

But Boney my DS's school have chosen to only offer the much harder Pre U instead of A2. Why would they do this is they just wanted the grades? Surely if this was their rationale they'd stick with A levels like everyone else.
My DS was looking at and indeed doing the other week last years AS physics and math papers, he said the questions were virtually identical to those he'd practiced and/or done done on this years CEI IGCSE physics/math paper.

Who is telling you that the Pre U is harder than the A2?

When your son says that the questions are almost identical is he referring to content or composition?

Boney the universities think preUs are harder to achieve top grades in than A levels as they give more points for the higher grades.
I don't speak with certitude about comparing O'levels with GCSEs but certainly Ofqual seems to think GCSEs have been getting easier over the last 10 years. The hard work that so many children put into GCSEs seem to be more about careful exam preparation and lots of formulaic learning rather than learning how to apply knowledge to tackle unfamiliar questions.

Summerends

How do the universities know?

As has been pointed out upthread, igcses where harder now they are not.

It seems to me that its just another political statement.

Boney UCAS are telling me that the Pre U is harder than the A2 the equivalent grades carry more UCAS points! How do the universities know? I'm assuming they could if necessary read the same bit of UCAS website that I can read. Every university I've looked at states what Pre U grades they want. As someone whose recently started perusing university websites looking at what grades are required I've also noticed that sometimes they accept slightly lower Pre U grades than their A level equivalent. Finally before the school went over to the Pre U many boys did five six or seven A levels and one boy did 14 because they were so easy now most boys are restricted to three because the school have found it's so much harder for the boys to get the top grades an A** if you do more than three. Finally my DS 's school is a super selective priding itself and indeed marketing itself globally as a super selective the ethos of academic rigour underpins all it does why would it choose easier exams for the boys to sit? I personally think this is sufficient evidence that Pre Us are considered more difficult. So to return again to my original point why would my DS's school allow them to sit an the easier IGCSE knowing that are then going on to sit the harder Pre U this is not logical.
In answer to your second point my DS2 was referring to both content and composition he scored 98% + on all of the AS papers he tried on most he achieved 100% he tried them the other week with no preparation. In fact he thought the wording of the questions made them slightly easier.
I also doubt any MFL language teacher (in either sector) would query that IGCSE is harder than GCSE. The other day we had a friends daughter for lunch she was telling DS about her French AS/A2 apparently they listen to a French film and analyse it for the "literature" section. For the Pre U you study a couple of French plays, read a couple of French books and some French poetry. We have a very girl living with us whose in her AS level year my DS frequently helps her with her prep again commenting that they covered this for IGCSE.

happy

Curriculums change, grade boundaries shift, you cannot compare content in some subjects as it continually changes.

Around here the colleges set a maximum number of A levels that they can take depending upon the subject.

I'm happy that you believe that your DS is doing the hardest of the exams, I'm happy that he is doing well.

But I hope that you fight this hard to convince others that Pre U/A levels/IGCSE still have merit when they are replaced by the next big thing

I'm not asking you to be happy that my DS is sitting harder exams. You were the one who said (slightly illogically IMO) that super selectives choose easier exams to get better grades. You were the one who wanted to know who says Pre U's are harder. I answered your reasonable questions with facts.
The advantage of being in the independent sector is that they are less influenced by the next big thing that comes along.
There is someone posting in here saying it has been suggested her DS sit 6 A levels at I think a 6 th form college, so maybe not all colleges/schools restrict the numbers of AS/A levels a pupil can sit and at my others DS's school four AS levels are compulsory some do 5. The great thing about the Pre U is that there is no exam at the end of yr 12 it's a two year linear course. It also seems well accepted by universities with nearly 35% going onto Oxbridge another 10% going onto the Ivy League and the rest of to RG universities.

It's not the solution for all neither is the IGCSE just another option for so e schools to consider.
Good luck also to your DC's.

in science imo IGCSe is neither harder, nor easier than AQA ( i teach and examine for AQA, my kids sit IGCSE)
to the poster up thread who was concerned about the lack of practicals in IGCSE, many of the questions in those papers are focused on practical technique, worth at least as many marks as the current CAU for AQA, of which the actual practical really counts for zero marks, they have to do it to sit paper 2, but there are no marks awarded for their competency in regards to the practical.

The IGCSEs have no coursework. It was the rubbishing of coursework I think that created the idea that they were more difficult.

Boney it may well be that Gove's reintroduced O level thumgummies will be the new rigorous 16 plus exam. And at that point, schools which use the IGCSE might well switch.

However, today is what matters for the current cohort. And today like it or lump it, IGCSEs have the reputation for being harder to achieve an A* and for being the better prep for A level/Pre-u/IB.

Pretending that the most selective schools use IGCSE because they're easier does not make it so!

"Pretending that the most selective schools use IGCSE because they're easier does not make it so!"

Pretending that they are harder doesn't make it so either.

What it boils down to (and what I am badly getting at) is that there is no way to compare the different types of exam. IGCSEs are chosen by some schools because the pupils do better at a final exam.

Some chose courses with controlled assessment because their pupils did better at that. There is no way to compare the two.

Boney many of the top universities will award their degrees on the basis of exams plus a dissertation for humanities etc and sometimes a research project for science based subjects. I accept the fact that some young people do not perform to their best in exams but unfortunately exams will carry the most weight for their degree (if that is the path they choose). The course work of GCSEs may help those students to a better mark at that level through hard work and school guidance but that is all. It is not a good preparation for a dissertation unlike the EPQ.
MFLs at IGCSE are harder since learnt responses are insufficient for the IGCSE. I have DC doing both so as with others I have no axe to grind.
I also think the sciences are harder in a more technical way although as with maths the questions are less wordy than GCSE.

Summer

You are comparing apples to oranges.

"The course work of GCSEs may help those students to a better mark at that level through hard work and school guidance but that is all."

But there are those who do well at exams but struggle with coursework.

Then there are also the parents that pay for extra tuition for their children to enable them to do better at exams.

Some pupils who are good at exams struggle with the dissertation aspect of degrees.

As for the degrees, some also have vocational placements for the students, are these lesser degrees?

Whatever the case you are not comparing like for like.

Those who struggle with dissertations find research and long essays more challenging. As I said GCSE coursework does not prepare for the independent depth of study and writing skills required for this.
Vocational degrees include medicine, nursing and engineering which are certainly not lesser degrees but the students have to be very good at exams. Other vocational degrees also require exams as far as I am aware without the handholding of GCSE coursework.

"As I said GCSE coursework does not prepare for the independent depth of study and writing skills required for this. "

neither do IGCSEs

"Vocational degrees include medicine, nursing and engineering which are certainly not lesser degrees but the students have to be very good at exams."

So something that contains a comparable premise to controlled assessment is a good Degree.

"Other vocational degrees also require exams as far as I am aware without the handholding of GCSE coursework."

You make the assumption that controlled assessment has lots of help from a teacher. This is the same as a teacher going through past papers and teaching a pupil to answer an exam question.

Terminal exams without coursework select students best able to cope with university and professional exams. Coursework is often handheld with corrections by teachers and unfairly more at some schools than others.
Both IGCSE and preUs have a more flexible syllabus and IMO are harder exams at least at the higher end grades for MFLs, sciences and maths . More selective universities select students generally on the basis of who they think will best cope with the skills required at that level and preUs are regarded as more stretching and therefore get more points. That does n't mean that an A level student cannot be also stretched but that extra won't be differentiated by their final A level grade.