Will new GCSE's bring a halt to Social Mobility?

[BlueBelle123]

This is something that I have been pondering - if the new grade 9 becomes the entry requirement for the top universities and competitive courses and if the vast majority are awarded to private school pupils then pupils at the local comp. are going to find it almost impossible to access these places. A lot of Ifs I know but it does make you think - or am I talking complete rubbish, love to hear what you think?

I do wonder why the boards don't just distribute the harder questions (grade A* or 8/9 questions) to more expert examiners instead of having one marker marking all the questions of a candidate's paper.

They do in maths. The papers are marked electronically so the same person marks a bunch of Q5s so they really get in the swing of it. Questions like 'How many sides does a pentagon have?' are marked by random people off the street and the harder questions are marked by proper maths teachers.

No idea how it works in other subjects though.

You are assuming that the top 3% for ability at university level are picked out by the top 3% grades. at GCSE level (which goes back to my previous point). Even for maths that may not be the case.

Previous post in response to Ricardian

Noblegiraffe that sounds very sensible but is it true of all boards for maths?

But tiggy do you really think the good will be differentiated from the great or just the more perfect from the less perfect?
It is 3% for some boards.

That isn't quite correct. 3% don't get an A at present. It is around 7%*

GCSE English, 2015: 3.1% A*.

GCSE English Literature, 2015: 4.9%

Source: www.bstubbs.co.uk/gcse.htm

The overall figure for A* is 6.6%. But because the whole cohort is entered for English, the proportion is smaller.

I am sure some people will set great store by achieving a 9 instead of a 7 or an 8

MN Parents of Y11 pupils. And almost no-one else.

I don't think universities use or expect that level of differentiation on the GCSE front.

Quite.

My department certainly look at GCSE grades and would be expecting to see A* in both English and English Lit.

The difficulty in respect of widening participation is that government interference in English in recent times was felt disproportionately in the state sector.

This obviously has an impact doe the road.

Introducing further distinction is unlikely to help if state schools struggle to get those 8 and 9s and independently educated applicants take IGCSE (which many will continue to so as they sit out this mess - I certainly would).

Couple this with some applicants having no AS scores to offer and some with AS scores ( some private schools will continue after decoupling simply because they can) and we will have a fairly well delineated two tier system.

Now sure, this won't be a problem at many universities that are actually recruiting rather than selecting. But if we 're talking about widening participation in a meaningful way we have to look at the most selective courses too.

You might also argue that the greater transparency on levels of achievement afforded by the 9-1 grading scheme at GCSE will allow parents, teachers and pupils to measure the differences between schools more accurately and hence be better placed to advocate for improvements.

You're assuming that it will be reported, Bobo.

Not really.

Here in France grades aren't reported but a 0-20 grading system is very useful!

Bobo I think there's certainly a case for being able to assess which state schools are providing an appropriate education to the most able and which are not.

However, I have reservations that this new qualification/grading is going to provide much evidence one way or the other.

But if it does, then what? Parents will have no more choice or power to effect changes than is currently the case. Their children will simply find themselves inside the eye of the perfect storm with Morgan/Gove et al blaming teachers and teachers blaming Morgan/Gove et al. And parents, teachers and Morgan/Gove et al looking to the universities to somehow see through the rain and fog and produce widening access via whatever means necessary.

It will also be even harder to compare state and independent education as the later will avoid where possible this new system and continue doing what they do best, whilst the state sector struggles to implement a new system that has been badly thought out and rushed through and (perhaps more importantly) one that they do not support.

I think there are arguments for a single examination board for English schools. The current system is a bit of a mess.

It is indeed.

But I can't foresee a standard exam system being implemented any time soon. The different boards are an industry in themselves. And whilst the government can bring the state sector into line regarding early GCSEs/IGCSEs etc it can do nothing meaningful about the independent sector and has no will in any event.

Thanks for all the thought provoking replies!

I know in the OP I have talked about GCSE's but surely grades 1-9 will be extended to A Levels in time. I was also talking about comprehensive schools and by this I didn't mean grammar's.

My concern is that the focus of comprehensives is to achieve 5 good passes including Maths and English and whilst I agree with that, my personal experience has been that they are not so good at meeting the needs of their more able pupils and so if there is to be greater differentiation at the upper end will these children despite having the capabilities be taught the necessary material and skills to be able to obtain these grades.

Whilst I agree that getting a 9 is not the bee all and end all, for a comprehensive pupil it does give them the confidence to say yes I can achieve the very top, whilst if they get a bunch of 7's although technically it may still be possible, they may not feel confident enough to even consider it.

I really hope like many have said up thread that these changes will make no difference - time will tell!

Whilst I would consider differentiation of assessment at the upper end no bad thing, it is fairly pointless unless it is coupled with extra resources or redirected resources (more likely) and a 'buy in' by schools and teachers in respect of the concept.

This is going to require an entirely different paradigm in many comprehensive schools. Schools which are already spread as thinly as Value margarine and already struggling to serve the most able under the current system.

My DD is in yr 12 and their 6th form budget has been cut by 25% leading to class sizes of 20-22 whilst before it was capped at 12! So I don't see there being extra resources for their more able to access 9's.

There won't be any extra resources.
Schools will have to redirect resources. Or not.

I tend to think that the implementation of transparency and differentiation within the exam system are, necessarily, going to precede buy in to the concept by the wider population. People pretty much generally hate change before it happens and they have experience of it.

I agree bobo.

And if I genuinely believed that this new system was ultimately going to lead to the most able pupils getting a better deal than they do now and thus widen participation at the most selective tertiary level, I would wholeheartedly support it and say schools/teachers will just have to suck it up!

But I have a lot of reservations.

I guess I will just have to wait and see (and be very grateful that my own DC have already taken their GCSEs).

In the UK, and in particular in England, no exam system can, of itself, have a positive impact on widening participation. However, a more transparent and better differentiated exam system can increase awareness of discrepancies in achievement between schools and pupils, which at the very least will allow those pupils (and their parents) who so desire it to add to their educational experience and cover the ground that will allow them to have a shot at top grades.

More transparency is always fairer for those who lack access to insider information.

The French system is a very good example of how a standardised exam (one board equivalent) with great capacity of differentiation is only as good as its marking particularly for the humanities. Marks for humanity subjects are not infrequently unexpected with regards the track record and ability of a candidate. There is the added disadvantage of lack of transparency for marking as remarks are not possible.

For any system to work the marking of exam scripts must be consistent and appropriate.

I mean marking must be appropriate for how the questions are seeking to differentiate between the higher grades.

Introducing further distinction is unlikely to help if state schools struggle to get those 8 and 9s

If you currently expect A* in both Englishes, why would asking for Grade 8 be unreasonable?

Is there a concern that there are people who would currently properly get A*, but won't get 8? Why not?