The DfE needs to stop the farce of compulsory Maths and English GCSE resits

[noblegiraffe]

Another year, another 124,560 students failing their GCSE maths resit and 99672 students failing their GCSE English resit.

Colleges have been saying for years that this government policy is a failure, that students are entered into cycle of resits and failures that does nothing to boost their confidence or enhance their qualifications.

If you get a 3 in maths or English GCSE you have to resit GCSE. If you get a 2 or below, you can take other qualifications like functional maths instead.

The government argues that GCSE is the key to opening doors and as many students as possible should be resitting to get that opportunity. But wouldn’t a qualification that they are actually likely to pass be better?

The resit pass rate for English dropped from 35.5% to 33.1% this year and for maths dropped from 37% to 22.7%. This is not an improving picture!

www.tes.com/news/gcse-results-english-and-maths-pass-rates-drops

Maisy here’s the full document www.gov.uk/guidance/16-to-19-funding-maths-and-english-condition-of-funding

It says that the International Certificate in Christian Education is an equivalent qualification to a GCSE pass, Oliver

A pass in maths?

A pass in English as well?

Am I reading it right?

“holding the International Certificate in Christian Education (ICCE) exempts a student from further study in maths and English; when students have achieved an ICCE, institutions can record an exemption for holding an overseas equivalent qualification”

Never heard of this qualification, is it dodgy?

It's ...interesting:

website [[https://icce.education/overview-of-certificates/]]

article [[https://www.theguardian.com/education/2009/jul/31/creationist-exams-comparable-to-a-levels]]

Oh bleep.That really didn't work:
Own website
Guardian article

It sounds like overseas students are exempt from the Maths and English debacle was which if true further puts British born students on the back foot
If I am reading this correctly it does have a hint of racism against British students.

Correct me if I am wrong

This one too...

Looks like a course sometimes taken by home ed students, which might be why it is being taken as an equivalent.

Oliver, I think the 'International' part of its name is misleading in this context.

It's studied in some private Christian schools in the UK, and by some home educated students, so the students affected by the exemption may well be British but taking an international qualification (like pupils from private schools who do iGCSEs, designed for international use, not GCSEs)

I wonder what would happen if you waved an ICCE in the face of colleges demanding grade 4 and above Maths and English

It was the exemption for holding an overseas qualification which sounds like if you passed the equivalent ICCE you might not even speak English or can add up but you would be welcome onto a course that might be out of someone else's reach

Overseas students are exempt from resits if they have recognised qualifications equivalent to GCSE.

I read it as having equivalent of the ICCE.

Which appears to cover both English and Maths.

I think - willing to be corrected - that they have been recognised as equivalent by UK-NARIC but they don't appear on Ofqual's list of accredited qualifications.

There is - sensibly - a recognised 'equivalence' for those who move between countries www.gov.uk/what-different-qualification-levels-mean/compare-different-qualification-levels and UK-NARIC's role seems to be a consultancy one to deal with non-European qualifications for this purpose.

This is the news article which indicated that NARIC benchmarked the ICCE qualifications. How the ICCE qualifications compare with new GCSEs I have no idea, but it looks as if, although doubts have been expressed since, the responsible agency has examined these qualifications and found them to be equivalent to GCSEs.

No, Oliver, I think it is telling colleges which box to tick:

' the ICCE is deemed equivalent to the GCSE; the box you tick to show this is the one you already have on the form [because there was already provision for ticking a box to show that a student was from abroad and had equivalent qualifications to GCSE] which says 'Overseas Equivalent Qualification'"

The ICCE is a crock of bollocks. Plenty on the Internet about ACE (Christian education) and its curriculum and learning methods.

Dermymc, That was the opinion I was rapidly forming...

Maisy, Piggy and others

You really must stop attributing your own outbursts and projections to me, stop distorting and facifying what I actually said. Your tone and aggression only reflects on you.

As a matter of fact it speaks for itself.

Just as a matter of interest, Cakes, and genuinely just for information: as a primary teacher I am usually quite good at guessing what a child means by what they have written, even if it's not conventionally spelled or used in an unusual way.

However, 'facifying' has me completely stumped. Do you mean 'falsifying' (as in 'altering so as to mislead')? Or do you mean something else / different?

cakes what on earth is facifying?

Surely falsifying.

I’ve been looking up the ICCE and inexplicably can’t find any course materials. Hopefully they can’t do too much to mess around with maths (except maybe put ‘Because God made it that way’ at the end of things like a2+b2=c^2) so it could represent a reasonable level of maths attainment.
But I read that they reckon apartheid was good in South Africa because it allowed communities to pass on culture more effectively, so god knows what the English syllabus is like.

Your tone and aggression only reflects on you.
Aggression or exasperation?
I'd say exasperation regarding a poster who chops and changes their mind making sweeping generalisations and massive claims throughout the thread (like claiming bottom sets are never taught the material required to get grades) and then tells anyone who disagrees they are projecting.
At a poster who acknowledges there's a statistical allocation of grades at GCSE but thinks that teachers being more ito learning styles will automatically make everyone at or above average.
As a matter of fact it speaks for itself.
Yes. As teachers who care greatly about education and the children in our care, the frustrations we have with the current system, how we'd like parts of it changing, how much we have an issue with people calling less able pupils dim.

It's like many school threads, you get a range of people (parents and teachers) saying the system isn't perfect but x y z is reasonable and then a very vocal minority making sweeping claims who'll claim all the teacher's are closing ranks, people are being aggressive etc when challenged.

Noble, I have been wondering about the potential for Bible-based word problems..

Or those based on evangelism: If Pastor X preaches the Word of God to just 2 people on Day 1, and they in turn preach to 2 people each on Day 2, how many people in total will have heard the Word by day 10?

(Just for the record, I come from a very religious, but very 'quietly C of E', family. I know that those who use this type of material will reflect only the tiniest minority of the tiniest minority of Christians)

Pi was 3 in the Old Testament (that or they were really sloppy calculators) so that could be problematic.

More worried about their science curriculum though. Hope that wouldn’t be seen as an equivalent to anyone get onto a science A-level