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.

Apparently the marks are a national enquiry.
As they were last year and the year before.

Politicians want the grades to slip back.
Kids are caught in the crossfire.

Report today in TES said there was a decrease of about 3% in A grades and A grades for IGCSE. They said only a decrease of about 1% for C grades, but given the decrease in A and A grades, that's a few thousand who have missed out on Cs and fallen to Ds.

dingit yes, there are two IGCSEs.

One for those with English as first language. One for those for who English is not their first language. I think it's the later people think about when they say why/how they were designed.

But schools in the UK actually sit the former.

iGCSEs were not designed for candidates who speak English as an additional language. They were designed for candidates who were at schools outside the UK and which did not have the same resources as schools in the UK, making things like continuous assessment impossible to implement.

It is, IMO, shocking that schools can shop around for GCSEs to improve their or their students' exam profile. All DC in a given year should be taking the same paper. Competing exam boards should exist to submit syllabuses and examination papers for selection as the single permissible paper.

My two have been very busily comparing their older siblings' GCSEs done int he days when super selectives did GCSEs over 10 years ago with their iGCSEs in most subjects. I have not really seen major differences. The school prefers the challenge of the iGCSE work. I think there is probably a bit less course work which might suit boys better too but in subjects where an iGCSE may not be the best academic challenge they do GCSE. My two of course say to their siblings that their 2015 iGCSE is like the much tougher O levels I did before the state merged O levels with the old CSEs and the standards went down. Who knows.

I would certainly prefer one board only and one type of 16+ exam only as it would be lot simpler and fairer for all.

You don't have to do coursework for IGCSE English. My school doesn't. We find that the unseen analysis paper is better preparation for A Level Lit study.
However, all of this may be a moot point for state schools soon as the DfE is in the process of revoking IGCSEs acceptability for league tables. Expect some dramatic headlines on the next couple of results days!

igcses are cheaper to teach, independant schools are profit making organisations. That is the full answer.

It is doubtless cheaper to teach syllabuses leading to final examinations rather than those which are continuously assessed. All things being equal, cost effectiveness is a valid criterion for selecting one exam course over another.

I would frankly much rather my fees be spent on more teachers and better facilities than time sober overseeing CAs.

How is it cheaper to teach? Teachers get paid the same whatever syllabus we teach in class.

I would frankly much rather my fees be spent on more teachers and better facilities than time sober overseeing CAs.

if you want science taught more theoretically less practically, - fine.

I am still confused. I started another thread on the same subject as DD;s maths teacher has told their class that they will be sitting IGCSE maths in January, and not GCSE maths next June. I am still not clear as to why. It's a good state comprehensive BTW.

And congratulations to your son Gatehouse. DD has dealt with depression and I know how hard it is for us parents as well as the child.

charis I am perfectly content that my DS has had plenty of lab time ( in a very well equipped lab) whilst doing his IGCSEs.

There is no rule that schools may only do what is included in a syllabus! No one will be arrested for doing stuff that is just interesting rather than aimed at an exam .

ISAs and CAs have just become part of the sausage factory that is our GCSE system.

Bunbaker thank you!

At the end of the day we are really pleased with DS' results and that it allows him to take the A'levels of his choice. Whether they were harder/easier I don't care, it was my father's seeming dismissal of his achievements that riled me. Yet I know he will be bragging about it to others as some kind of reflected glory of himself.

Controlled assessments have bugger all practical. The IGCSE has either a practical paper or an alternative to practical paper which assesses practical skills more directly than a CA. And the syllabus specifies practicals which should be done. I am not a massive lover of the IGCSE, but the GCSE CAs are not developing practical skills.

"Controlled assessments have bugger all practical?" ours are practical

Yes but practicals/experiments should be all about trial and error/ making mistakes etc.

CAs are all about scooping up marks for GCSE grades.

Why not abolish GCSEs (as in the exams)? It would leave a lot more time for teaching. Other countries/systems work without a two-tier secondary school exam system. GCSEs plus A-levels seem to be excessively onerous.

Anyway: OP, your DS has clearly done very well. Shrug off your father's pointless competitiveness. It's a long road ahead and GCSEs are a minor hurdle on the long path of life. The race is just beginning

Do any of the marks actually come from doing the practical. Or just for planning it, analysing the results etc? All the marks for AQA come from exam papers.

yes, a lot of marks come from the practical, don't they in your CAs?

No. For AQA all the marks come from 2 exam papers and a graph, also drawn under high control. As I said. What board do you do?

TJEckleburg
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

Lol @ independents stretching kids and not worrying about exam results.

Science controlled assessments for GCSEs are being withdrawn from teaching in September 2016 (exams in 2018).

Ofqual's Assessment reads as follows:
"Current science GCSEs require students to complete a controlled assessment component. Students have to carry out set practical work and complete written work about it. The written work is then marked and this is worth 25% of the final grade."
"It is generally accepted that current practical assessment arrangements are not working. They lead to a focus on a narrow range of practicals ..... GCSE students are frequently overfamiliar with a few experiments and their marks tend to skew towards the top end of the mark range."

Ofqual want GCSE students to carry out more practical experiments, make notes about them and their knowledge of these experiments will be tested in linear written exams. Some schools have already complained that they don't have the equipment or the lesson time to carry out the increased number of practicals.

For what it's worth, ds1 has just finished Year 8 in an independent school and will take science IGCSEs; he tells me that he carried out different practical experiments in Chemistry and Biology every week last year (separate double lessons for Chem, Bio and Physics). The independent schools near me are competing with each other to build the biggest and best science labs and ds2 has been wielding a Bunsen burner in a purpose built science lab (with a specialist science teacher) at his prep school since the age of 7. These schools are not trying to save money teaching IGCSEs - take a look at Oundle's SciTec development.

That's not to say that the op's ds hasn't done very well - good luck with his A levels.

I teach in an independent school and we have changed from GCSE to iGCSE. The cost to deliver both is exactly the same. Our reasons are:

We would much rather spend our lesson time teaching and also fostering a genuine interest in the subject than spending hours mindlessly preparing for CA.

The iGCSE prepares the students much better for A-level study and/or use of the subject in real life.

We have spent too many years watching, heartbroken, as students do not get the grades they deserve due to a combination of astonishingly poor exam board marking, watching parents spend money paying for remarks that they don't know will pay off, and being at the mercy of government fiddling of grade boundaries. The iGCSE is much more consistently marked, it has to be, as it is an exported product and not one relying on a trapped monopoly.

And the students enjoy the course more, which we happen to find rather important.

And big congrats to your DS for pulling off some good results after a tough year. No one gets good results without effort.