What grade of new GCSE's will be good enough for Facebragging?!

[VagueButlmportant]

So I understand the new GCSE's I think.

DD has just started Y10. She's only been given a few of her targets but they are all 7s so far.

So are there any local journalists out there who can tell me whether they will be wanting all 9s before she's invited to leap in the air next to a smug-looking headmaster come August 2018? Or will we all be Facebook bragging if our DC get a "string of 8s"?

As for 7s (which I understand is equivalent to an A) - are they going to prompt the pushy mums to be "devastated?"

I think we perhaps need to come up with an official Mumsnet policy on this. I'm not sure if I should be delighted that DD is predicted 7s (I think I would have been with As) even though there are two more grades she could be getting?

Gove didn't really think this through from the POV of the Facebook / Mumsnet mother angle!

That's pretty much the one of the two grades that is known. The same proportion of students will get a 7 and above as got an A and above. i.e. The grade boundary between a 6 and a 7 will be the same as between a B and an A, or the bottom of a 7 is the same as the bottom of an A.

So if they required at least an A before they should require at least a 7 now.

The new maths GCSE has harder content but for this year they are tethering that grade boundary (7/6) to the old A/B one so even if it has harder content, the same proportion will get at least a 7 as got at least an A this year.

Does that help or make it more confusing?

gillybeanz DD was the last year to do old SATS and she should do GCSEs in 2020.
Her school are introducing a system where they have written statements for each subject showing what they expect a student to achieve in each Year in order to be on course for a particular grade. I have the statement for Mandarin for Year 8.

Some examples:

Speaking Skills:

Band 7-9. I can take part in a short conversation of 6 exchanges without prompts

Band 5/6 I can take part in a etc of 4 exchanges.

Band 3/4 I can ask and answer 3 simple questions.

Band 1/2 I can answer 1 or 2 questions with support.

So if DD is achieving almost all the things listed in Band 7-9 in Year 8 the school expects she will achieve that grade in GCSE. Of course if she doesn't achieve at least Band 5/6 she won't continue with that subject for GCSE.

Hope this makes sense. The school is promising to put all these statements on its website which I think could be very useful for others! Can't find them there at the moment but if I do I will PM you the link.

I think I get the new 7, 8 , 9 banding HPFA!

So if 25% currently get an A or A*, the top 5% will be given a grade 9. It sounds as though the next 10% would get grade 8 and the next 10% would be a grade 7, so you would need to be in the top 75% - 85% band to get a grade 7, 85% to 95% band to get grade 8 and 95% to 100% to get grade 9.

If 20% currently get an A or A*, the split would be the top 4% getting grade 9, the next 8% getting grade 8 and the 8% below them getting a grade 7.

So glad they've cleared that up.

As far as maths goes I would assume that 9 is the equivalent of A^

It's a nightmare for businesses too. My friend just doesn't understand how they will work out who is the better candidate.
They have been told (at a regional training day) to just swap an A for grade 9, B would be grade 8, C would be grade 7 etc when in fact they will be rejecting candidates that have a grade 7 mistakenly thinking they were a grade C equivalent while they're looking for A/B attaining students for their higher apprenticeship schemes.

What's wrong with A,B,C? Just make sure that an A grade is genuinely the top 10%, don't add stars or anything as having grades A, A, A* just makes people think that it's the same as A,B,C just renamed or the exams have been made easier.

To be honest, I wish they would just give the candidates their percentage figure and ditch the grades altogether! Just decide once and for all that a particular percentage is a pass and leave it there.
It's truly frightening that the people running that training didn't go and get the simple table of grade equivalents!

I routinely see candidates with straight A & A* grades who find it impossible to their professional exams. It comes as a complete shock to the system for them, as they have been led to believe that they are outstanding. Under the old O level system they would undoubtedly have had a combination of grades A to C. At least the new grading system will actually give them a spread of grades again.

I can see FB boasts having to bring in mentions of Grade 8 harpsichord exams just to compensate for a dire performance comprising grade 7s. Alternatively they will compete for the more obscure academic subjects, only taught at private schools and grammars.

..to pass their...

I am unsure about the new GCSEs. I accept they are harder, but do we have anything we can use as comparable resources for revision. Eg were the O Levels of the 70s just as challenging as the new GCSEs. I ask as I have such papers in the attic.

I hate this

It catches two of my children

The system is completely fucked, it makes me either want to cry or punch someone

We dont even have a two tier system in this country we have a four or five or six tier

Ds1 took 9 gcse's. Other parts of the country take 12 or 13 or 14

Dh interviewed a young woman who got A's in science...she didnt sit any exams it was all coursework and practical

how is an employer supposed to look and go well that candidate only got 9 gcse, lete hire the one who is more intelligent and got 12

Or that candidate got an b, obviously much better than a 5 which some fuckwit on a training course told me was a D

And i know that it all balances out once A levels and apprenticeships are taken into account, but i am really pissed off and dont feel like crying

And i give it 5 years or less before there is a grade 10

Fucking fuckwits...i am off to find something to punch

The formula for the proportion of 9 grades is

a(0.5a + 0.07)

where a = the proportion of A* and A grades

This may be collated across similar subjects to reduce distortion.

The formula implies that subjects with a higher A/A rate will award relatively more 9s, even if currently there's a low proportion of As to As.

Overall 60% of As now will be 9 grades in the future, however in Maths only 42% of current As will be As.

The fixed points are
1 = G
4 = C
7 = A
9 according to the formula above
then 2 and 3 are set based on equal mark divisions (so not % of candidates) between 1 and 4, likewise 5 and 6 between 4 and 7, and finally 8 between 7 and 9.

It's a form of inflation in that:

• A 5 is still a C and becomes the new target, especially as Foundation tier goes up to 5, not 4.

• A 7 is an A, but then most 8s are too.

Hence I would imagine people quoting 7/8s and then 9s separately.

But in time that could go to 8s and 9s.

Note that 4 grades (A* - C) become 6. And 4 grades (G-D) become 3.

Hence
1 = G,
2 = F+,
3 = E+,
4 = C,
5 = C+,
6 = B,
7 = low A,
8 = A or low A*
9 = A*

So the gulf gets bigger between 3 and 4 compared with a D and a C. Hence targeting a 5 rather than a 4.

How long before we have 9** and need to abandon it in favour of a new system of I, II ... X? Just wondering if it is worth paying attention, youngest is 8 years old, no doubt we'll have a new system by the time he gets his results.

eh, they can just add on 10, 11, etc.

that seems to be a big feature of the system

That was actually the reasoning behind 1 being the lowest - that you can easily add a new top grade - which no doubt will be the demand of the very selective indies who like telling us how easy their students find GCSEs.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3200362/GCSEs-punish-pupils-sophisticated-Leading-headteacher-says-intelligent-children-penalised-required.html

Apparently many years ago the O-Levels used to be 1-9 but 1 was the top grade. Someone wrote to the Times saying that in a few years his grandchildren will be very impressed that he got all 9s!