GCSE v iGCSE

[Gatehouse77]

My fuckface father has given my son a very backhanded compliment who did really well in his GCSEs whereas his daughter (yes, his youngest child and eldest grandchild are the same age. Go figure!) had lower grades but, as they were iGCSEs, according to him they were much harder to come by.

I have done some research and opinions seem to differ. The school my son attends put their lower ability students forward for iGCSEs because they see them as easier and less pressured. Yet independent schools seem to prefer them.

So, can anyone shed some light on it?

At the end of the day I am immensely proud of DS as not only has he achieved fantastic results but done that after being diagnosed with depression in March and times when we thought we'd be lucky if we actually got him to the exam! And I don't actually give a flying fuck what my father thinks but it's a typical shitty comment from him.

OP a very, very experienced ex headmaster and governmental adviser has talked me through this one and convinced me completely that IGCSEs are decidedly less challenging, if one is comparing GCSEs taken as linear. Indies adopted them as more challenging when some schools were going for modular GCSEs and thus could claim that IGCSEs were 'harder', but comparing like for like as the two exams now are, IGCSEs are the easier.

Still, not necessary on your dad's part either way. Blimey. And very well done from me at least for ploughing on through depression - a fantastic achievement in itself.

Thank you Molio. I shall simply sit back and enjoy that knowledge to myself (and my siblings and DH). I only forwarded the congratulatory part of his text to DS.

Yep, my father is such a tosser. Heaven knows what 'reward' his daughter will get. A trip to Florida was for passing her 11+ [shocked]
But when we were kids we got to choose the cuisine of the restaurant. Because he didn't want to bring up "little princesses and princes". Such a tosser.

My DD did IGCSE sciences and maths. Because school said that they were a better preparation for A Level.

I have however read on MN that DC find it easier to achieve a C grade at IGCSE than GCSE, but harder to achieve a A grade at IGCSE than GCSE. So, some schools use both systems and enter the lower sets for IGCSE, and the higher sets for GCSE so that all will maximise their chances. I have no idea if this is true!

And most importantly, Well Done to your DS!!

All the superselectives in the independent sector with the countries top exam results at A level etc including those offering the much harder Pre U only do IGSCE's so logic would tell you that there are two reasons for this 1. they are harder and therefore better preparation for A levels etc, or they're easier but this frees up teaching hours in a very bright already very well prepared cohort to enable teaching beyond the curriculum in preparation for A level etc.
Secondly every MFL teacher I've ever met in both sectors bemoans the current GCSE stating it is a rubbish exam and that IGCSE in a MFL is significantly more rigorous ditto Latin. When DS2 looked at moving for 6th form to the state sector he was told by independently by two state MFL teachers that his IGCSES in MFLs were equivalent to an AS and that he could skip year 12 i.e. sit the AS/A2 MFL after 1 year.
Thirdly DS2 sat Cambridge IGCSE math and DS1's math tutor thought it was harder than whatever math GCSE DS1 was being prepared for. I helped DS1 revise for science GSCE and was frankly stunned by how easy it was having said this I'm unable to compare it to DS2's IGCSE.
It may also (as with the GCSE) be exam board dependent they were only saying on the radio today how schools deliberately choose a variety of exam boards because some set easier papers in some subjects than others.
Ultimately I suspect in many superselectives it's irrelevant if they're easier or harder, IME at DS2 schools and many like it (I)GCSE's are seen as a bit of a nuisance; at DS2's school they only do 9, no history or Eng Lit at IGCSE although both are offered at Pre U, something you must have but not really an indicator of ability, certainly at his school the general consensus seems to be the top grades A*s/A's are dependent on effort rather than ability.

It seems that this year the grade boundaries in IGCSE English were pushed up and that has made it harder to get the higher grades. Lots of exam boards have done that though - it's all frustratingly political and not fair on the DC.

Top grades in IGCSE are harder to get than GCSE - or at least they have been for the last couple of years
middling IGCSE grades are much easier to get

which is why lots of state schools put their middling kids through the IGCSE to game the C/D boundary

your dad is an arse

I'm curious as to why top grades harder to get at IGCSE?

I also meant to say well done OP's DS.

Happy
no idea, but its what I was told ad infinitum last year and the year before when I pointed out that DDs comp used the exam for their C/D

so few take it that the data on top grades have high statistical margin errors

Depends on the subject and the ability of the child. IGCSE English still has coursework that can be repeated, rather than controlled assessments, and speaking and listening still counts I think, whereas it is assessed but doesn't count in GCSE Eng Lang. For Sciences, an able scientist will do really well at IGCSE IME. A weaker one will do OK in Biology, OK in Physics if they learn all the formulae, but Chemistry is tough. Science GCSEs have controlled assessments, but Science IGCSEs don't. The IGCSEs certainly cover more content, but in Biology particularly are a bit more of a memory test.

Well done your DS, most importantly!!

Boards set their own grade boundaries. Not English but for the GCSE I teach, DC had to get an overall raw score of 97% for an A*.

IGCSE pushed the boundaries up this year. We do it at my school.

TalkinPeace your last comment made me snort!

Thank you for all the responses.

So, essentially it doesn't matter to me. As far as we're concerned you need to get the grades at GCSE to enable you the choice of A levels. And then they're pretty much meaningless.

You need to get the A level grades to get the choice of University. And then they're pretty much meaningless.

You need the degree level to give you the choice of job. And then it's pretty much meaningless.

So, hopefully, we're encouraging them to do their best at each level but not get too bogged down by the actual grades.

I have to say that the constant pressure of the GCSEs with ISAs and controlled assessments across so many subjects has been really tough. I'd much rather be doing my O levels!

TheFallenMadona it must be exam board dependent I don't think DS2 did speaking and listening for Eng Lang.
OP as you say (I)GSCE grades quickly become virtually meaningless.

It's harder to get an A* in IGCSE because there are no assessments ( ISAs, CAs etc). Which tend to be ways to bolster grades.
In MFL you have to able to display a greater amount of grammar ( though not terribly complex ).
Plus grade boundaries. Very high this year in some subjects.

I have twins. One doing IGCSE one GCSE. So no reason to give a biassed answer.

That should say they've done IGCSE and GCSE. All finished now. Results today.

I live overseas, so my son took igcse - only option. He took 2 at the end of year 10 with Cambridge. English language is 50% coursework and there is an optional speaking exam, but this is marked separately and not included in the final grade. Level was certainly easier that when I took 0 levels back in the early 1980s. Maths was 100% exam based and was pretty rigorous, although no calculus. He also took 2 mfl exams earlier and the level was IMO pretty low and nowhere near as demanding as o level. I looked at gcse past papers too (for extra revision material) and level was also low and there was a difference between exam boards too, with some questions so basic that my husband (with very little knowledge of any mfl) would be able to answer a good chunk of the comprehension questions.
Anyway, to answer your question - it is meaningless to make comparisons and your dad is being a prat.
Congratulations to your son.

Thank you for all the replies - much appreciated

(I)GSCE grades quickly become virtually meaningless.

Except that they are used by universities, as well as by schools to work out who should be an Oxbridge applicant.

Oh, and well done OP's DS! Take no notice of your DF, OP.

The 'i' in iGCSE stands for 'international'.

iGCSEs are designed for students who speak English as an extra language. So, for example, Maths questions will be less wordy. The English paper has shorter source texts.

They are meant to be of equivalent difficulty to the GCSE, however, they are in some ways more accessible. iGCSEs are attractive to independent schools partly because independents tend to have a higher proportion of EAL-but-otherwise-very-able students. And because even native English speakers will find the iGCSE easier.

No school in its right mind would deliberately seek out a harder exam for its students.

Having said all that, both GCSEs and iGCSEs are getting more difficult, not easier. Very well done to your DS

This is what I have heard from various teacher friends:
It is harder to get an A* in Gcse sciences (so my friend who teaches IGcse sciences at a private school tells me) because the Isa/EMPA mark usually brings down the overall mark. There is no Isa/EMPA in the IGcse board that she teaches.
It is easier to get an A* in IGcse maths because the language used is simpler and clearer. Although IGcse does include simple calculus.
The MFL IGcses are harder than Gcses.

itchy I think the reasons for introducing IGCSEs into independent schools were more diverse than that.

The first reason; because they could. Being independent and all.

Second, they are far less subject to state interference and last minute change.

Third, they have no modules. Which appealed historically because modules were seen as a soft option and also because modules completely broke up years 10 and 11 so many students were in a complete round of endless revision, module exam, resit and repeat. Schools were keen to avoid this.

And even now, after modules have gone the way of the Dodo, IGCSEs still offer the possibility of no CAs etc. Given how much hassle these can cause (so many threads on MN about them; lost papers, late submissions, no information for parents, too little guidance, inconsistent systems), there's a case to avoid them.

Fourth, MFL and ancient languages have a (slightly) higher brief. Interestingly, my DD's school, which has stuck with GCSEs, has introduced IGCSEs here, but only for top set.

And to add to shegot's list - our school has said that the standard of marking has been more consistent with the igcse boards they use.

Of course schools would seek out harder exams. Some schools (ok, mainly independents, because of govt policy) think it's more important to stretch kids and actually educate them than gain them exam grades. My kid's school does pre u in a number of subjects, which is significantly harder than the a level syllabus, but prepares them far better for uni courses. And many schools do EPQ's now, not because results in them are included in league tables but because they genuinely stretch pupils and give them excellent learning and research skills.

Dd has just sat IGCSE English language. On her results slip it says first language English. She was predicted A/A* and got a B. Apparently the marks are a national enquiry.