IGCSEs easier to get top grades in than 9-1 GCSEs

[noblegiraffe]

Education Datalab has looked at the results for IGCSEs and 9-1 GCSEs and concluded that “At the top end of the distribution, perhaps IGCSEs are indeed not graded quite as severely as reformed GCSEs… there looks to be something in it.”

www.tes.com/news/igcses-not-graded-severely-new-gcses

So we should expect to see private schools ditch IGCSE now.

Seems a bit weasel worded to me

But let‘s not let that get in the way of a chance to bash private school students.

Who is bashing private school students?

It has long been argued that private schools opt for IGCSE because they are more difficult. Now that the opposite appears to be true we should see a change in policy.

I GCSEs aren't restricted to private schools, they are used internationally. Part of the appeal is that they consistent and highly regarded.

They are a great preparation for A levels, especially in sciences and maths (Cambridge at least).

Parents paying for a private education in the UK don't want their children subjected to the whims of the government.

Just as an example, do you consider the Cambridge IGCSE maths syllabus to be lacking?

Having taught both the IGCSE's are easier than the new linear 1-9 GCSE's.

I think private schools will be more likely to use iGCSEs.
What looks better:
9 x A* and 2 x A or 9x 8s and 2 x 7s?

But the new IGCSEs are introduced this year and will all be 9-1 from 2019 so this information is no longer relevant. The complaint should be that IGCSEs were allowed to delay the changes to see how it went with 9-1 GCSEs.

Most private schools are selective with most pupils and are looking for the best preparation for A levels, they are now moving over to the new linear format GCSEs as they are happier with the course content. Brighton College made a huge song and dance about being the first private school to move to all GCSEs and have posted better results than their IGCSE results in previous years and will be one of the top performing GCSE schools in the country, having been 45th in the Indy IGCSE tables last year.

DD's selectivish (by London dtandards) Indy school swapped to mainly GCSEs last year and posted their best ever results.

Witchend and anypne else who doesn't realise that the 9-1 system now applies to GCSEs and IGCSEs - they don't use the A* system anymore, see attached. Similarly see changes to syllabus etc.

qualifications.pearson.com/en/qualifications/edexcel-international-gcses-and-edexcel-certificates/International-GCSEs-from-2016-and-2017/9-1-grading-scale-explained.html

Why does anyone care? Pupils can do well taking either exam and be prepared for A level by additional enrichment. Schools that are independent have a choice and they exercise it. Fair enough really.

I suppose the only thing that would matter is if the differences between the two are not properly taken into account when ranking schools or students.

So for example, algorithms that create 'league tables' by GCSE results should take this into account.

As should admissions processes for highly selective sixth forms.

As well as any universities that use GCSE results as part of their selection / applicant screening processes (probably only Oxbridge, given that it only applies to the highest grades).

Relative ranking of schools by 'public opinion' tends to move glacially slowly anyway, so by the time most people have realised that the school getting lots of A* is less good than the school getting lots of 9s, we'll probably be on the next iteration but 1 of the whole qualification system anyway....

IGCEs are apparently easier. Independent schools sell them as more challenging and so results look better but a direct comparison does suggest they are less challenging. Some state schools that ‘game’ results use them too. Unfortunately most state schools can’t because of league tables and impact on Ofsted ratings so the already unequal playing field becomes even more uneven.

Cherry - the new revamped GCSEs are apparently harder compared to the old style IGCSEs which are being revamped a year later because they can. So last years IGCSE chort had apparently a very slight advantage, but its for one year only. Also, most private schools are happier with the content of the new GCSEs and are transfering to them so going forwards not a problem.

Before GCSEs were revamped, and whilst it was allowed, in our area it was the top performing grammars, Wilsons and Tiffins, who chose to enter their pupils for IGCSEs for Maths and Sciences because they thought they were better preparation for A levels. These are selective schools looking to challenge their pupils and prepare them for A levels not looking for easier options.

What is far more interesting to me is that Brighton College who are the first Indy to switch to all GCSEs will be one of the top performing schools last year. I think its only Tiffin girls that have better results. It is incredible to think that BC has achieved better GCSE results than the most super selective grammars like Wilsons.

The old IGCSEs were much harder than the old GCSEs in languages, maths and science. However, the new GCSEs are harder than the new IGCSEs in languages!

I tutor languages and am currently preparing kids for both. The IGCSE has less writing and no translation. There is also a bigger choice in writing tasks. There is one task that is more challenging than GCSE in the reading. The speaking is far more planned in the IGCSE so easier to prepare for.

Also, because of no F/H tiers, even high level candidates get easy questions where they can pick up lots of marks whereas GCSE you have to choose whether to do F or H and you can no longer mix and match your papers.

I don't know about other subjects but I think the old English IGCSE used to be a bit more straightforward than the GCSE.

Both the maths gcse and igcse papers are significantly harder than their predecessors. Having said that, the gcse has 3 papers while igcse still has 2. Other than that, we don’t think there is much between the two.

However there is a difference in the standard between different exam boards and schools try to game the system by choosing boards that set easier exams in a particular subject. Generally OCR is considered harder in most subjects, particularly in maths. Wjec is considered the easiest so some schools choose it. I think this needs to be fixed.

To suggest Brighton college is not super selective is somewhat disingenuous. It’s like Anthony Seldon claiming to be a socialist! Let’s not forget that independents don’t necessarily declare all results so league tables aren’t entirely accurate.

The old GCSE languages were a joke. Three years ago DS1 sat 2 IGCSEs for languages he had learnt over a period of years and also sat a GCSE in a challenge language he learnt over the course of one year. He A*d all 3 despite knowing very little of his challenge language and he was shocked at the difference between the papers and thought it was ridiculously unfair how much easier the GCSE paper was. The GCSE was purposely chosen by his school because it was easier and the IGCSE content was too much for a challanege year language.

Last year the school still sat GCSEs for the challenge languages and you can see the usual results from the attached. Russian and Italian are the main challenge languages.

www.kcs.org.uk/media/3049/gcse-results-2018.pdf

Language IGCSEs change this year and if there is one year when the old IGCSE is easier than the new GCSE it will not make up for all the years there was a huge gulf between them. It will also not make up for all the GCSE language pupils dropping out of A levels because the step up to A level was too big resulting in a huge fall in the numbers studying languages.

Cherry - Brighton College is not super selective and for some it is a backup. Boarding schools I consider super selective would be Eton, Wycombe Abbey, Westminster (if you count it as boarding) and schools in that league. But even then you have to factor in that boarding schools cost over £35k pa and are beyond the means of most families. Anyone can sit for the super selective grammars like Wilsons, Judd etc, there are no financial barriers to entry so it should have a higher ability cohort.

DD is at a top second tier London school, when looking at 6th forms we looked at BC amongst others as a possibility. We did not even consider looking at Wycombe Abbey or a super selective grammar like Tiffin Girls because she wouldn't get in.

It's not really comparing like with like, though is it?

Surely the comparison should be between IGCSEs and GCSEs using 9-1?

Yes there will be a couple of years where the data is inadequate because the changeover did not occur at the same time, but that will be a brief anomaly.

My DD's have taken a mix of GCSE and iGCSE.

DD1 did a mixture of pre-reformed GCSE and iGCSE, the GCSE's were so easy it was laughable. In English she got 100% in all of her coursework for example.

Before the reforms the iGCSe's were definitely more difficult and demanding, based upon the old GCSE and being a final exam. This is surely why the new GCSE had to be toughened up.

DD2 now doing REFORMED iGCSE, has all new syllabus and 9-1 grades, as well as retaining the final examination component. It will be interesting to see what shakes out with reforms in both systems.

I must be mistaken in thinking BC have pre selection testing, admissions interviews and selection by finances. Completely comprehensive intake then?
No not everyone can attend grammar selection. Cohorts are entirely unrepresentative of the population they serve. Selection is both overt by testing and covert in subtle ways such as exams on Saturdays when children of unmotivated parents won’t get taken. The first category for admission to Tiffins are girls with EHCP. Interestingly there are much higher proportion of pupils coming from independent schools who request additional exam time and support for minor disabilities. Pupils in some top independent schools are encouraged to be assessed for dyslexia and told how to score highly (we have direct experience of this). Other covert selection is through coaching or independent prep schools preparing children for the assessments.

This thing about superselectives is moving away from the topic of the thread, but in terms of that, I think some people perhaps aren't understanding the idea of superselective vs selective. Any school which has an entrance exam and more applicants than places could be described as selective. However, the level of selectivity varies - superselective is usually used as a term for state Grammars which admit purely by score without reference to geographical location, and hence which draw from a huge geographical area and attract vast numbers if applicants and only a tiny proportion receiving offers - hence superselective. It's difficult to apply the same term to independents because none of them have geographical catchments, but I think the term is being used on this thread to refer to those which are most difficult to get into, most competitive and demand the highest academic standards to gain entry. On this basis, of course BC is selective as it has an entrance exam - no one is saying it has a comprehensive intake. However, there are other schools which might be harder to get into and this is where people talk of top and second tier schools, although it's a matter of opinion about where lots of schools fit within these pecking orders.

I'd expect we can all agree that making comparisons between GCSEs and IGCSEs is complicated by the fact that GCSEs moved to the 1-9 grading earlier - the short period of time where one was running a reformed system and one wasn't might well mean there wasn't parity. Even once they are both reformed and using the same grading system there might still be debate about one being easier than another, in the same way those discussions always exist about different exam boards. People have different views and these change over time. Unless everyone has to sit exams orivided by the same examining board these debates will always continue and we will have to accept that exact parity won't exist in the same way it will never totally exist between subjects either, despite efforts to improve it. And we will have to accept that schools of all types will always be looking to perhaps prepare their students best for the next phase of education, or to take the exams which will look best on paper for their students entering the next phase of education or for themselves in league tables. The whole system incentivises such behaviour doesn't it.

It always strikes me as a bit odd that those who say league tables are useless for a variety of reasons are often those who then get most het up about the impact of these seeming differences in parity and want adjustments made for them. Isn't the whole problem that there is subjectivity and even any adjustments wouldn't meet with universal acceptance and agreement. Again, until the unlikely event of everyone taking exactly the same exam, there can never be total parity in grades,.

Why don’t people just sit the same exam? Then it would be easier to compare. I sat different boards and i thought one exam format was harder than the other.

The tes paper doesn’t really elaborate on the comparator subject - was the comparator always old gcse or was it Igcse for pupils doing igcse maths/English?

the 9-1 maths IGCSE still only has two papers, both with calculator, and seems more straightforward to me. There are a few topics that it covers that the GCSE doesn't, and a few that the GCSE covers that IGCSE doesn't, but the way the questions are worded on the IGCSE seems more straightforward and easier to work out what needs to be done.

Certainly for the pupils I tutor, the struggling ones are much happier in IGCSE that they can use their calculator for everything. (I"m not!). They also find it easier to memorise methods and learn how to get the right answers, without necessarily having a full understanding that would be needed to apply the knowledge to some of the more complex problems.

IGCSEs were more difficult than old GCSEs but seen as making the transition to A levels easier.

I wonder if once the hiccoughs are ruled out and more past papers available schools will willingly transfer over. Give the teachers a realistic time frame to learn the syllabus and prepare the teaching material. Basically their students and teachers don't need to suffer in the same way that state ones did!

the 9-1 maths IGCSE still only has two papers, both with calculator

Seriously?

Yes, Random. Exactly. Indeirndentvscholls have flexibility so why not use it in the best interests of their students and teachers? There is no need for a change to happen quickly. I also think those that dislike tables now seem to crying foul! Too bad. Many parents paying £35,000 pa are not looking at what exams the local comp takes anyway! As if! So therefore few parents buying a top drawer private education will care!