will GCSEs be harder from 2016?

[2catsfighting]

I was wondering about families with children of different ages, and the different educational challenges they face. My eldest DS's education was at the time when course work was able to be repeated. His sibling seems to have a much tougher time of it.

Ah, thank you.

long and very wordy questions

I wonder if PISA influenced that. The little I've seen of PISA via their samples the other year can be described as wordy (and multi-step).

Most year 9 pupils have already chosen their options for GCSEs which they'll take in 2017. In my youngest daughter's school they were not required to take all of the EBacc subjects. I know of some schools where they make some option choices at the end of year 8.

I have daughters taking GCSEs in 2016 and 2017 - the only thing I can say is that the results are not comparable with other years. This has been the case over the last few years with changes in format/ not as many modules being sat early (and resat if necessary).

I wish they would change the name of the exams.

Ds sat his GCSEs last year. There was a huge dip in results - tougher marking. Plus his cousin, who sat her GCSEs the year before, re-took practically every module of every exam to get a full house of As. She took History three times to move from a C to an A.

I am doing a GCSE language at the moment so I have first hand experience of the difference between 1980s and today. Flippin' joke. Back in the olden days one had to write a short essay on surprise subject, plus translation back and forth of text. In my GCSE I have spent oodles of class and home time memorising pieces I (Google Translate) have composed (and had corrected) which I then regurgitate in a controlled environment. I could pass Swahili by this method, but be unable to understand a single word or perform any grammatical construction. I wouldn't be able to do the speaking/listening, but I'd still pass by dint of rote learning. I therefore can't possibly understand why every student doesn't pass a GCSE language under the current system.

I agree that they should change the name. They've mucked around with everything else, the GCSEs taken in the future are nothing like the GCSEs taken 10 years ago.

My worry is that the first few years will be a shambles. I remember when GCSEs were introduced and for the first 3 years it was a complete and utter farce. For my first 3 years of secondary school I was at a partially selective girls school and for the GCSE years we moved and I was at an awful school. The teachers were completely clueless and had no idea how to teach, mark or make any sort of predictions when it came to GCSEs. Nobody did very well at all. There were a few subjects where nobody came anywhere near to gaining a C grade. I really hope this time they know what they are doing.

I wish they would change the name of the exams.

That didn't really work for O-level/CSE to GCSE.

Grade C was the minimum one for O-level and grade C still seems to have that association, however only the top 20% got that or better with O-level and for GCSE it's now the top 60%.

The change to numeric grades for the reformed GCSEs ought to help, but only time will tell.

I really hope this time they know what they are doing.

No, we don't. Sorry.

I feel really bad for my current Y9 group, they would all have had a decent shot at a C, but with the new GCSE who knows if they will get a 4 or a 5 and if they get a 4 which is an old C whether that will be seen as worth anything any more.
The government should be ashamed at gambling with young people's futures in this way, to satisfy their election timetable.

i have had an advance look at one subject's papers. OH MY GOD YES

and the actual exam WAY longer

That's not great is it noblegiraffe.

When the changes were first announced I thought that grade 4 was supposed to be the new "good" grade but at our school presentation we were told that 5 will be considered good.

I think that 4 should remain acceptable for entry onto level 3 courses but 5 should be the minimum for A levels.

It's all going to be a complete mess. Children used as guinea pigs and schools and teachers will end up getting the blame .

My DC are past GCSEs thank goodness but it absolutely the right thing to do to get rid of coursework. It's too easy to cheat. I've known both teachers and parents helping way too much. One of my DC had a 'very' helpful teacher mark her spoken French and I have plenty more examples. My friends DC are at a private school where every kid seems to get 100% on all coursework. It's a bit suspicious

I also don't think kids should be able to take too many resits although they definitely should be able to take some. Maybe you should be allowed to retake the whole exam but not just the modules.

BrendaBlackhead - I took my O Levels in the early 80s and was very surprised at the change in the french exam. I confused DD2's french teacher (admittedly she is french so she hadn't been aware of older style exams) by asking where was the dictation! Our orals for french and german were unrehearsed - we went into a room with the examiners (not school staff) and could be asked questions about anything.

Iwantacampervan - I was surprised at how relatively easy the French GCSE seems too.

I am shocked (obviously very naive) at pupils getting help for their controlled assessments. At my son's school they are done under exam conditions, provisionally marked by the teacher and then, as I understand, sent off for moderating. They don't know their marks until August and don't keep re-taking them. At least the new system will get rid of any 'cheating' from that.

When GCSEs were first introduced, the orals were still as you described. I took German and we went in a room with an examiner for an unpracticed oral exam. We hadn't actually been taught German for 2 years so quite how they expected anyone to pass is beyond me!

That didn't really work for O-level/CSE to GCSE.

"Five subjects including maths and English all at C or better", which has been one of the benchmark targets for schools is school certificate in all but name. The O Level pass was normed to school certificate when O Levels were introduced in 1951, and the five subject thing is again from school certificate (hence the "General Certificate of Education" name).

It hardly seems reasonable to continue to norm qualifications taken in the 21st century by a vast cohort of children in modern schools with modern education techniques and huge amounts of pedagogic support against a qualification introduced in 1918 and taken by the tiny proportion of the population that made it through to 16 still in school.

O Levels weren't even consistently graded for about about 20 years. Some boards used letters with C as a pass, some used letters with E as a pass, some used numbers in various forms. The harmonisation into a single scale with C as a notional pass (ie, school certificate equivalent) didn't happen until the 1970s, and even then the grades weren't printed on certificates, you had to look at the results slip to know what grades you got, and no-one particularly cared so long as you passed. The focus on the grades of GCSEs is relatively recent: I went to what would now be a RG university in the early 1980s with O Levels that had a lot of Cs amongst them...

I'm hoping that by the time DS and DD (currently in year 6 and year 4) are doing GCSES that there may be some idea what's going on. Although that will be in 2020 and 2022 so not really that far away. And then A Levels will probably get revamped...

I really wish that education policy was independent of government.

My DD is currently in year 8, so I think she will be among the first to do all the new exams?

I think the controlled assessments had to go.

They're no real indicator of aptitude and they take up far too much teacher/class time.

But the new exams have been terribly rushed .

Yep, my DS, currently year 9, will be one of those fortunate ones.

DD currently doing GCSEs doesn't know how lucky she is.

By the time DD2, year 1 will be year 11, things will have changed again.

I agree KPlunk. The system as it stands is too open to "gaming." I have a very conscientious DD and I am sure the present system would suit her dogged and perfectionist style. But I still think the changes are good and more "fair."

It may help improve boys achievement too.
Here's an interesting digression on why girls tend to do better in school than boys, if you have the time! US based research, though.
www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/09/why-girls-get-better-grades-than-boys-do/380318/

The problem I see with removing all coursework (for GCSE's and A levels) in a system where, wrong or right, the ultimate goal is always university, is that university study requires lots of essays/coursework/assignments done over several weeks and handed in. I'm currently studying for my degree as a mature student (finishing in a couple of weeks) and despite being a first class student I've struggled with managing my time for essays and other coursework type assignments as my A levels (also taken in my 20s) were all exam only. I can revise and bash out some fab exam grades, but the kind of study involved in researching and writing an essay is very different. How will even very bright students cope with this at university if they have only ever taken exams and never had to produce a different kind of assignment? Exam only assessment doesn't prepare for university study, and doesn't really prepare children for work either, and the necessary time management and increasingly project based work of many occupations these days. I can't think of any jobs where your performance is evaluated entirely on one day out of two years.

Though I agree constant retaking should stop. Retakes should only be allowed once and only to bring a child up to the now required C (or 5 or whatever it is), accepting extenuating circumstances such as illness, or the death of a close relative for example which would need medical verification (As it works at universities)

Though on the subject of O levels and C grade passes, the notion of there begin a 'pass' grade at all is a pretty new invention. O and A level exam grades were never meant to denote a pass or fail, they were simply the level to which you were able to work. A D grade wasn't considered a fail in the 60's it simply told employers that that was your level of say, maths or english. Only later did the idea that a grade was a pass or fail come, and every child must meet a certain standard for it mean anything, instead of it simply being a representation of what you were able to do.

How will even very bright students cope with this at university if they have only ever taken exams and never had to produce a different kind of assignment?

The same as they did before the introduction of coursework into schools?

Only later did the idea that a grade was a pass or fail come

Leaving aside the point that in the 1960s an O Level grade D often was a pass, because many boards used A-E to cover the range that A-C covered post the 1975 realignment, the key point is that O Levels replaced the matriculation requirement of school certificate, which was Credits in five subjects including English and Maths. So you needed five O Levels at a standard equivalent to a School Certificate "Credit" in order to matriculate, without which you couldn't go to university. For some universities this was "Form R", it had other names in other places. That was the case from the 1950s onwards.

kplunk / hayfever
you do know that coursework except for controlled assessments went several years ago

and that retakes went two years ago

this latest change is just Goveian micro meddling
its still not too late to roll it back.

If Nicky Morgan really has the interests of children at heart, and her own brain, she would do so.

paper there's nothing to stop schools teaching those skills/techniques.

Indeed I think they should, but the essays need not count towards the ultimate exam.

"It hardly seems reasonable to continue to norm qualifications taken in the 21st century"

Confined to GCSE then: what pedagogical magic increased the five stout GCSE pass rate from ~40% to ~80% in two decades? Or ~50% to ~80% in the last decade?

That kind of big change should make a splash elsewhere (TIMMS, PISA and the like) and it didn't.

what pedagogical magic increased the five stout GCSE pass rate from ~40% to ~80% in two decades?

I don't think it did, did it?

The figures for the past four years for five including English and Maths were 59%, 59.4% 59.2%, 53.4%.

The crazy high figures quoted between 1997 and 2010 related to (a) 5 GCSE not necessarily including English and Maths and (b) the use of a variety of crazy "equivalent" qualifications which were, bluntly, worthless.

O Level pass rates had gone up to around 40% by the end of their use because of structural factors. The "20%" figure one sees bandied around was prior to ROSLA and Circular 10/65, so O Levels were only being taken by those that passed the 11+ and voluntarily stayed on to 16, who were disproportionately boys. Just as the increase in university takeup in the 90s reflected as much as anything else the admission of the previously missing women, O Level pass rates increased because more people were being entered for them.

An increase from around 40% to 60% over thirty years when, for example, the incidence of university education amongst children's parents will have gone from 2% to 30%, the qualifications of school teachers will have increased beyond recognition and vastly more money is being spent on education doesn't seem, of itself, surprising.

I forget the exact figure, but I think in 1918 something like 2% of children got school certificate. Rather as with university admission, most people appear to think the year they did it the qualifications were worth something, but it's all been downhill since then.