JCQ and ofqual gcse grade warnings...

[nostress]

There was a news story a few weeks ago and again today (bbc eduation section and the times) warning about the results falling this year. Saying to governing bodies please dont sack heads! I'm very worried for my DS1! I'm just praying that he secured Cs and above.

Lizs Saying no child with SpLD should be capable of A* is ludicrous

It's not ludicrous, it's obscene. But it was said. Although what the person actually said was 'they shouldn't be getting' not 'shouldn't be capable of'. The whole point is, they are capable of, with and without special considerations (as DD1 proved) - but there are people in positions of influence who don't want them to. Because they don't think 'shicldren like that' should be getting A*. This is what I was told by the person who did the pre GCSE evaluation of the DD1, who heard it said at a meeting explaining the new regs when people were up in arms specifically about the impact this would have on very bright kids with SpLDs and their prospects of fulfilling their potential.

rabbit what am I supposed to do, fall on my sword, just because in spite of my own dyslexia I managed to climb the greasy pole and make enough money, and by dint of a bout of Cancer, then have my time freed up for me (via a constructive dismissal case) to enable me to give my DDs those privileges. I do know we are lucky (well sort of, I could have done without the Cancer and managing to be on the right side of having 60% chance of surviving) . I have every sympathy for everyone who struggled in the face of what I acknowledge are massive difficulties and discrimination but really would you like to go back to a world where a Head could tell my mother, a teacher, when my brother was diagnosed dyslexic even in the 70s that "the trouble with you middle class parents is that you cannot admit your children are stupid" and could send him into the world with a CSE in woodwork and no confidence? Part of the reason I post here, and I stopped for a while because I got fed up with the sniping, and will again, is that I can see all that has been achieved in levelling the playing field for those with SpLDs and indeed other difficulties like autism, being eroded by this current government and I want that to be more widely appreciated. I honestly think we have more in common in that sense than sets us apart so I really don't see why you feel the need to rant at me, or what you are aiming to achieve. Not for the first time I am going to hide a thread you are on because I really don't need to be a target........

Needmoresleep - nowhere have I suggested that I think French education is superior. Indeed, I post very regularly about its many failings idiosyncrasies. Some bits of it are fine, some very good but generally speaking the whole system is creaking at the seams under the weight of heritage. Le Musee de l'ecole francaise is daily reality for pupils in 2014. However, French families do a lot of adding on - hence the statistically strong correlation in France between affluence and educational success.

Shooting - I don't know. Perhaps cultivate some empathy? Perhaps stop trying to claim that your success and privilege hasn't obtained better allowances for your DD than those available to state educated DCs with similar conditions? A lot of what you post is very helpful and bang on the nose but it is always interspersed with extrapolations of private school privilege to state school DCs which are not valid. And the comment about proactive parents was particularly self serving I thought. And not a little cruel. Your DD has had superb treatment because you have money,not because you are a better parent than others. Despite what you clearly think.

Just some acknowledgement that the sort of treatment your DD has had is very very far from the norm would be helpful.

And fewer personal attacks would be nice. Although I'm not holding my breath.

Needmoresleep thanks. I certainly get the impression that economics is one of if not the most internationally competitive undergraduate subjects at present (possibly for some with an eye on lucrative financial jobs). I have also heard that mathematicians are the strongest candidates at places like Cambridge. Your DS has done extremely well to get an offer.
I still think real academic differences between these high calibre candidates (particularly without interview) may be almost non existent and a lottery.

I do think the problems for students will come further down the line, rather than say, at the university application stage. Also, problems will be greater for those who miss out on C grades, rather than A* grades (although this could be equally personally upsetting).

I've dealt with admissions at a fairly average university. For the school I worked in, certain GCSEs were required- at least a C grade in maths and English and a C or a B grade in biology or double science depending on the course. Beyond this, actual GCSEs weren't looked at too much (although we did have access to AS grades). When most of this cohort apply, it will be remembered that they had a more difficult year WRT GCSEs than others, and they will be mainly competing with each other for places. However, the C grades for maths and English won't be an area where compromise is made, as it's likely the courses could easily be filled without bending this requirement.

The issue will come in 5 or 6 years time, when people might consider returning to education, but the particular issues this year will have been forgotten. For example in 2008 (?) the A-level syllabus for many subjects changed in order to phase out cw- the students who took the first exams in the new syllabus were probably at a disadvantage. At the time, this might have been known to people in admissions and maybe taken into account, but now it has mostly been forgotten about.

Universities and colleges at least pay attention to exam changes, but most employers won't. When filtering job applications, it's easy just to reject those CVs without 5 A-C grades or whatever the minimum you want is. The year the applicant took the exams may not even be noted, let alone taken into account. Most employers won't remember that 2014 was a bad year to take your GCSEs in a few years time. They'll just compare grades as if they are like for like.

This isn't meant to be doom mongering, but I do think it's a serious issue and children's futures shouldn't be used as political football.

The change if any will be slight. Schools/ colleges now have to ensure young people carry on with maths/ English if they don't get a c. Therefore this cohort is in that way at an advantage.

In terms of getting a job GCSEs are being overegged in the extreme. The key to sustainable employment is having a skill that someone wants to buy.

If you are worried about this, rather than stressing about gcses go online find out what the skills gaps are in the economy. Look at apprenticeships. There is not a reliable relationship between exam results and earning power.

Tobysmum makes a very good point, although I daresay employers will look for a minimum C grade in Maths and English. It is clear this years cohort had a much harder exam cycle than last year if my DCs experience is anything to go by. Possibly other MNs have had similar or different experiences. It will interesting to see what the fallout will be after results day if schools, parents and most importantly students feel they had been treated unfairly. In answer to the comment about changes to exams in the past Ofqual has given some leeway for student sitting a new exam. Those rules do not apply this time. My understanding of Mr Goves reforms was his insistence GCSEs were too easy with too many students achieving top grades. The reforms it seems were aimed at changing this. It would politically embarrassing if a large number of students failed to get a C grade suggesting the impact of the changes will be in the top 20%

tobysmum clearly does not have a year 11 child who has had the rug pulled out from under them at every term

those who are in favour of the changes conveniently forget the utter HELL they are putting the transition kids through

• funny that

none of them have Secondary Age kids in the state sector selfish bastards

Like DD who moved from a solid B, to a barely scraped C because of the speech bit & had to spend hours after school re-doing work to improve her grade

I think it sounds like a total fuck up from start to finish.

I think that the papers have been marked and those high up have suddenly realised what a huge fuck up there's been and are desperately backtracking and trying to stop it being a massive shock on the 21st.

And WTF do they mean by ' This year's Geography has been strengthened?'

I understand for future cohorts that they have made it harder by making them have to study the entire curriculum ( quite rightly) and I know the Edexcel exam was unlike any other previous exam. Does this statement about geography mean the grade boundaries will be higher then?

It is true this Yr 11 students have had a rough deal - just comparing the exam timetables of DC1 who sat last year and DC2 who did exams this year - DC1 hardest week contained 4 exams with plenty of days to revise in between. DC2 easiest week contained 4 exams with few days off in between and no time to revise effectively. Coupled with changes to CAs, increased weighting for exams, plenty of timetable clashes with exams having to be taken back to back. I empathise completely with all who have DCs who have worked so hard not to be rewarded as well as students in previous years. It is the first time I can remember a Government who`s aims to reduce the number of students passing exams and heralding it as a success.