The new 9-1 GCSEs. 79% for a 9? 17% for a 4? What do we think?

[noblegiraffe]

My class sat Foundation maths and got 4s and 5s almost exactly as I thought they should (I got the 5 grade boundary almost exactly right and my school was way out, so smug). They did well and I am pleased for them. There were some odd results for our Higher tier students and I think it might affect A-level entries. It's not clear whether we had the Foundation/Higher split in the right place and there's huge analysis ahead. There were quite a few 9s in our top set, but interestingly, not everyone who got a 9 even got an A* in Further Maths, let alone an A^, so elite mathematician for one didn't automatically translate to the other.

The grade boundary for a 9 on Edexcel was 79%. The stated aim of being able to separate the really able from the simply very able is going to be hard to defend when we still can't tell who got really high marks. (Oh yes, Jonny got a 9, but he only got 80% where my Susie got a 9 and 95%) Obviously this grade boundary will go up quite a lot over the next couple of years (sawtooth effect) and then probably creep up after, but it still has quite some way to go before it will be taken really seriously.

I've seen some comments on here where students unexpectedly got a 9 in English when a much lower grade was anticipated. Does this mean that the 9 lacks rigour? That the change to linear exams and lack of coursework means that a student can blag a result on the day that doesn't truly reflect their ability? Or was their ability simply underestimated or the boundary misjudged? Did anyone get a totally unexpected 9 in maths?

The 4 grade pass mark for the higher paper was 17%. Is it acceptable that you can get a pass at GCSE and not have to resit in sixth form based on 41 marks over 3 papers? I know the paper was tough and that's why the mark was so low, but does that percentage really give enough scope for students to demonstrate what they are capable of? It's pot luck with the questions. With the grade boundaries so low we will see more students being entered for Higher next year, thus missing the chance to do a substantial amount of maths aimed at their level of understanding in favour of chasing the grades. We need an Intermediate paper. Students should sit exams where they experience success, not failure.

In English, you only needed 6 marks out of 160 to get a grade 1. Is this reasonable?

There was lots of talk of students deciding against A-level maths because their confidence had been damaged by the difficulty of the exams. Have they changed their minds now the results are out? Are students feeling uncertain about taking maths with a 7 because there are now two grades higher?

Lots to think about.

Dd got an 8. Which is a fair reflection on her ability according to CAT scores etc. She was top set in a good large comprehensive. She said quite a few in her set and sets 2 and 3 ended up putting their pens down in despair. I had drummed it in her to persevere. There were hits and misses for a 9. One girl (completely unsettled my Dd) who bragged it was easy came out with an 8. And is having it remarked. I think there was of psychological stuff going on with maths this year. Dd had me convinced she had failed. She really worked extremely hard for the 2nd and 3rd paper to the detriment of last minute revision for other exams. I think this cohort had it bad because the bright ones weren't used to sitting papers that they couldn't do chunks of iyswim.

And btw I thought I needed to reply to your post because you helped my Dd. I quoted your posts on how low the % were in the mocks nationally to reassure her she was going to be ok. Thank you.

My DD and a few of her friends only got a 5 in the higher paper when predicted 7/8.
Equally some got 7/8 when expecting lower.
Her friends who were all borderline and sat lower paper all also got 5.
I'm really not sure what has happened, wether good or bad.
I will say though that the new higher paper favoured a certain kind of question that were not kind to my DD.
Her maths teacher is perplexed at it all.
But I do think that in theory it's a much bigger achievement to get a 5 on the lower paper than it is for the same grade for the higher.
I hope this makes a bit of sense. I'm just reeling at DDs 5. Especially when she has a plethora of As.
I'm just learning to let it go.
As a maths teacher I hope it all makes more sense to you

Well.....yes. Sort of. But we just accept it all and get on with our jobs really, don't we?

In English you can absolutely blag it all on the day. The exam definitely favours blaggers. I've made my peace with that, because blagging is a useful life skill, and can be taught. It's very annoying that the hard-working plodders are far less likely to get credit for their useful attitude to work though than they would have done in the past.

I'm sure you know how reliable English results are. I sent around 15% of ours cohort's off for a re-mark yesterday- but that's obviously only the students who appear to have weirdly underachieved. Yes, I have a suspicious 9 (and some 8s) too- but I'm certainly not going to complain about those! I examined this year and, whilst I realise that's anecdotal, in my experience the 'bell' of the bell curve in the spread of results was rather narrow i.e. the vast, vast majority of students seemed to have results which put them within 10 marks of each other. Now if you're norm referencing, then that's going to make it pretty difficult to decide on your grade boundaries.

And the problem you're talking about is created by norm referencing. The decision in Maths, I believe was that 3% of students nationally would attain a 9, and 2% in English. If that's the way we're going to have it, then we have to put the grade boundaries where the students fall. In a way, I would argue that that does show rigor, because both Jonny and Suzie have, technically, attained far higher marks than the rest of their peers.

As to students getting into the sixth form with only 17%? Well, yesterday, I posted about one of my students who has just failed her English GCSE for the 5th time- but needs it for the low level career which she desperately wants to go into. Do you know what? She doesn't need it. She's being told she needs it, and the childcare profession she wants to go in to say she needs it. But I can't believe that it'd be really that useful for somebody who wants to work in a nursery looking after babies. You know we need a re-think for students like her!

As for 6 marks for a 1? Meh, I can't get worked up about it. A 1 is absolutely meaningless. If you have only got a 1 then we know you're barely literate.

The college would say that English is more to do with writing needed for the course and BTec requirements than the actual work of a child care assistant in a nursery. However, functional literacy would be important for writing notes and reading and understanding care regimes etc. especially for special needs babies and children. Mostly though, they are arbitrary lines in the sand that filter out candidates. It's a shame they just do not do a suitability test at the college and then have an equivalent English exam as part of the course. That would help borderline students get in. Just a bit of imagination needed really!

Most people will not worry about grade boundaries. It will soon sink in that 8/9 is better than 4. Many employers will not see hoards of applicants 9 grades anyway. They should have had 1 - 10. It looks like the exams were too tough for the lower ability group.

Loads of exams produce odd results and people who are expected to do well do not and rogue questions appear that no-one has ever seen before. I remember DD having a bad time when a biology paper referred to an illness no 16 year old had ever heard of. They had knowledge of the subject, but the application of it to an illness you did not know existed produced a problem.

It is like most qualifications, the bars have to be set somewhere and all most people will ever know, or care about, is that a 4 is better than a 1, and 4 is the minimum level for lots of things, and that an 8 or 9 is pretty good!

It could be said for any exam, but I wonder in my DD's case if some of it is down to the mindset and as Jumping mentioned perseverance. She was in the top set with some very capable pupils, predicted to get those Grades 8 and 9. However, she very very much bottom of the set and predicted a 7 and against them she felt she really struggled and maths exams were a battle. She found the maths exam really hard (as many have said horrendous), but stuck at because that's what she was used to and felt she'd probably achieved a 6 (almost fearing a 5). Even if she just scraped her result, she got an 8 and two pupils she knows who have a much clearer understanding of maths than her and slipped down to an 8 and 7.

We know of a few that got a Grade 9 in maths, but they were predicted that, ie no surprises (supposedly her school is above the national average for maths).

Funnily enough, DD was capable of 8s in English Lit and Lang, felt she might have scaped a 9 for Lang, but got 7s.

Regarding English(s), my Dd got 9s. Again, regarding CAT scores and other data she was very capable of getting this but due to all sorts of stuff (bereavement) and missing school, she came back and was getting 4s last year. She couldn't concentrate. But she put so much work in (eg.her teacher marking extra essays) and we scrutinised how to answer each question with various study guides and teacher notes. One guide (Mr Salles?) said in English Language as much as 50% is down to exam technique. So we analysed exactly how the exam board wanted you to answer each question. There were some very subtle and obscure differences between question 2 and 4 if I remember correctly. Dd said it sucked out the joy of subjects but it got her the grades.

Also re English Lit, I wish I had taken photos of Dd's bedroom. She had revision cards with annotated quotes (3 for each of the 15 poems) stuck on her walls. Then all main themes cross referenced for characters of the 3 books. It helped she had the most amazing memory. She only dropped 6 marks in English Lit.

This is now the probelm with English - memory. Remembering quotes. It has less to do with undertanding the text and knowing your way around finding out the answers, but more to do with memory. This does not suit everyone and is not realistic for work and university where research is important. It is the Gove method of education in the "good old days" when hardly anyone got a good education.

My DD was also in the top set for maths a few years ago and was 1 mark off an A at iGCSE. Just about all the group got As. She did not want to do maths at A level so it was not a problem, but I think your position in a group can have an effect on results. So can coasting though!

I am a GCSE student and collected my results yesterday. I got 6A*s, 2 9s (in English), 2As, and 1 7 (in Maths) which I'm pleased with overall. Your post resonated with me so here are my experiences, I don't if they'll be useful or interesting to you.

I am in the top set of my comprehensive and have been since Y7. I was disappointed but not all that surprised by my maths grade yesterday. If you told me at the beginning of the year that I would have got a 7, then I would be surprised because I've always worked really hard in Maths (especially in class), maybe even more so than any other subject. My wonderful teacher predicted me a 9 which was stupid, and I've always felt it was stupid. For our December mocks, we sat papers made up by the school instead of the ones released by Edexcel, which I got an 8 in overall. My teacher said the papers we sat were hard, but compared to the real exams, they weren't really. Nonetheless I felt firmly on track for an 8, maybe even a 9. I sat one of the sets of the mock papers (can't remember which one) for our March mock which my school marked as a 9. It was definitely not a 9, I barely completed the second paper because I was sick in the exam so I don't know what sort of fucked up boundaries the school used.

The real Paper 1 comes round and it's very hard, but I found it not too much more difficult than the papers we sat in March and I thought I did a little better in it, so I didn't feel too bad. But Paper 2, that sucked ass and I cried. I forgot how to do quadratic sequences. Paper 3 went much better but I knew any chance of a 9 had gone although I didn't feel too bad about that because I always felt my prediction was overambitious anyway! I thought I could still get an 8 but then I went online and saw the predicted mark scheme and predicted grade boundaries everyone had come up with. Fuck. They were way higher than anything I had come across. If they were true (and a fair few of the predictions were spot on actually) then my chances of an 8 were also in danger.

I spent the whole summer mentally preparing myself to miss my much wanted Grade 8 so I wasn't too gutted when it happened. 7 is still a good grade. However, for someone who always thought herself close to "top of top set" (arrogant, I know, but that was the picture I had built up over the years), it left a bit to be desired. As for the rest of my friends in my class (who were also in top set), they got mainly 5s and a few 6s. A bit of a crap result for us all. I met a few people who got 8s (one girl said not more than 10 out of 180) and one of my friends, who I always placed on a whole different level from me (seriously, she's a brilliant mathematician) also got a 7 like me.

My school is all-girls and I would say 60-70% do STEM at A-Level (including compsci, we have 60/180 doing it at GCSE), others do social sciences (is psychology STEM? I don't really know) and few do humanities/arts. I am one of the latter, but nonetheless I wanted to do Maths at A-Level because I liked Maths. Am I still going to do it now? Probably, but I'm considering other options that I wasn't before because of my grade 7. My confidence in Maths has really been knocked by it. I won't make it seem like it's a bad grade because it isn't. But the fact that it isn't even a high A has made me think a bit. Which is annoying, because I'm halfway through that fucking maths transition work!

I digress. I don't need maths at A-Level at all, I want to do something like history/politics or French at a good university and I don't need maths for that, I need good grades and if taking maths stops me from getting that I'm not going to do it. My saving grace, however, I that I got a B in Further Maths. I couldn't be prouder of this grade. My teacher had to stop teaching it since January to help people who were struggling with normal maths instead, so I've self taught it since then. It's made me think that with a good teacher I could do really well at A-Level Maths. So, I would say that I won't be dropping maths on my sixth form enrolment day next Thursday. :) I hope the new A-Level Maths isn't as fucked as the new GCSE Maths, because parts of this process have felt awful. My maths teacher got a really nasty eye infection and said the stress didn't help, and ended up taking 3 weeks off post Christmas. She's now found out that the vast majority of her top set haven't got their predicted grade (most were predicted 8s, the odd 7 or 9 here and there). I don't envy her at all. She told me once that I thought like a mathematician, and that made me really happy and excited to take A-Level Maths.

I now realise that the past two paragraphs sound a bit egocentric because my maths mark didn't affect me like it affected most of my year who wanted to do science and maths post GCSE. I don't know if my physics teacher will have an A-Level class this year, I really don't. Most people who wanted to do it didn't get the required 7 in Maths. This is fair enough, if you can't do the necessary maths you shouldn't take the class. I sense that it's not because of an inability to do it however, but psychologically, it's been an uphill battle in a time of poorly thought through change that caused us all (including teachers) to struggle in a way they shouldn't have. I feel that if I sat the old spec I could have got an A*, maybe some of my classmates would have got their required A to do Physics. Oh well, the people that didn't make the cut have left the school to go to college if they're really determined to do STEM or just changed their choice of subjects. In fairness, the most popular science at our school is biology (this is in keeping with national trends for girls, isn't it?) which I think had a minimum maths grade of 5. I think most achieved that, so it isn't a catastrophe for science in my school. Computer Science too isn't adversely affected as it had no minimum maths grade required (even though most of my compsci class got a lower grade than expected, including me - that's another story!). But up until now Physics was getting more popular, a trend that has been stopped firmly in it's tracks by the new reforms. And then there's the issue with not being able to take Maths itself.

This has been longer than some of the essays I wrote in my English exam - do I get a grade 9 for this response, noble ? A final note on the English vs Maths issue: almost without exception, everyone I've spoken to has met or in most cases, actually exceeded their predicted grade for English and failed to achieve their predicted grade for Maths. The two departments at my school are equally great (well, there are only 3 maths teachers at my school that have seen a cohort through the GCSE stage!), so I genuinely would attribute this to the fact that the reforms in English are nowhere near the drasticness of the ones in Maths, at least in my experience. The English work we were set in KS3 was always challenging and prepared us well for the rigour of the new GCSEs, whereas there was a much larger discrepancy in difficulty in Maths. Ultimately, there wasn't enough time to fill in all of the gaps. Hopefully future years will have a more positive experience.

Hope this proved enlightening to someone. I have some practice algebra to do now. :)

throwitaway as one of the examiners this year, I can absolutely tell you that I would have known you were in the top band of the assessment criteria from your first paragraph here.

throwitaway123

I have really enjoyed reading your post. So thoughtful, honest, eloquent and I wish you had been one of my students! You will certainly go far in life, through your attitude. Well done (but sorry you didn't get your 8)

Students who studied Romeo and Juliet got an error with one exam board and a really obscure question from the other
See I didn't think the Romeo and Juliet question was obscure at all if you mean the AQA one on male aggression. My class loved the question but felt the extract was a little short.

I think the Lit questions for my texts were great for being accessible and yet deep enough to get the top makrs.

Dd did AQA and got a 9 in Maths and an A in further maths. Is this an unusual discrepancy ? She was very pleased with her 9 as she said the maths exam was hard, and thought she might get a 7. She has always been 'top of the middle' in a very high performing top set.

So, in the end, did 2-3% get 9s or has that plan gone out the window?

This is an interesting read as a parent of a child going into year 11.

Are there any recommendations for approaches to homework/revision off the back of what we're now beginning to understand about the 9-1 courses?

We had one student with a 9 in Lit and a 4 in Language. I'm not an English Teacher but I was doing sixth form enrolment earlier today. The 9s looked a bit random to me, a few exceptional kids just had 8s whilst some bright but not unusually so kids had 9s. For a couple of kids the 9 they got was not accompanied by an A* in any other subject.

What a brilliantly written, inciteful post - throwaway.

Dd1 got a 9 in maths and A in additional maths (no A*)

She said about half the top set (standard comprehensive) got a 9, and a smattering of the second set.
I don't know what the correlation between those who got 9s and those who got good grades at Additional maths, but I can ask.

The English does seem a little odd. Dd1's always found literature hard, but got an 8 and was only just off a 9. She scraped a 6 in language though, when she would have expected a 7.

She's normally fairly good at guessing how well she's done on exams (she guessed between 214 and 217 marks on maths and got 216) but both Englishes were a surprise. Obviously English is harder to predict though.

One of my queries, was after the Edexcel exams were deemed much harder than AQA, it seems odd that they've got exactly the same grade boundaries. Any thoughts those in the know?
Ours did Edexcel exams, so they were worried after the papers. Wonder if they'll swap to AQA if this happens again.

DumbledoresApprentice
I have that.
A couple os students who I thought were 8s (we dont predict 9s) got 9s.
A student who i thought would get a 9 didn't and then a random student got a 9 who I wouldn't have expected. Not unbelievable but happily unexpected.

Saying that sometimes I find top end students can be so desperate to get a top grade they tie themselves in knots.

Are there any recommendations for approaches to homework/revision off the back of what we're now beginning to understand about the 9-1 courses?
For English (based on my most successful studenys):

• technical accuracy. 50% of the marks are for original writing in English Lang. Easiest way to gain/lose marks.
• know the books for literature well. Make notes on key quotations as you go.
• buy your own copy of the set books and write in them during the lesson. It saves time and you get a great set of notes.
• don't rely in obvious themes coming up. Make sure you know the whole text (some schools I've heard have inly taught extracts!! I hope thats not true)
• when there's mocks in y10, learn the stuff. Don't try to blag it and then sort it in y11.
• Work hard in class and on your homework for 2 years. With some revision you'll be fine.

throwitaway. My DD always recommends that you add MFL into any degree. So History and French or Politics and French for example. MFL departments are very short of good candidates and they may make a lower offer if you include French. Or add an ab ignitio language. Do joint honours though with an MFL somewhere. You get the year abroad too!

do I get a grade 9 for this response, noble?

Yes, absolutely! Wow, great writing, I can see how you got your 9s in English! Really thoughtful.

I hope you still take maths, it's fantastic that you self-studied further maths to a B, it's really not an easy course. It's a shame that your school seems to have underestimated the new maths GCSE - it won't have helped that they didn't do the proper mock papers in November because that's when people really started to get an idea of how challenging it was. Comments from the exam board suggested that candidates were struggling with unstructured problem-solving which was a large feature of the new GCSE so if your school didn't appreciate this they may have missed the extra preparation needed for question style on top of content.
Maybe your school will lower the maths entry requirement for physics in light of the exam results. I hope so, we need as many girls doing physics (and maths!) as we can get!

Witchend I'm also astonished that the grade boundaries were so similar for AQA, the papers really did appear much easier.
I didn't see OCR's papers, but they also had very similar grade boundaries.

The 4 grade pass mark for the higher paper was 17%

Am fairly shocked at this, tbh.
I thought a Grade 4 indicated a clear pass. I would not expect 17% of any test to be a pass

(Parent of 2 older ones, and a dd2 who is about to start Yr11)

Aqa examiner for English Lit here (Shakespeare/C19th prose). Saw some superb answers, gave nearly full/ full marks a couple of times and so was then truly shocked at the low threshold for a 9. I thought it would be much higher and means some less 'sparkling' responses would have received the highest grade.

I just can't see how this is a raise in standards. @noblegiraffe I'm really interested to know what you think about how grade boundaries will shift in coming years, what did you mean by the sawtooth effect?