If you could sit the GCSEs this year instead of your DC ......

[SomersetBrie]

.... would you do better than them in anything?

My DS is doing nowhere near enough revision and I reckon, given there's a couple of months to go, I could probably knuckle down and do well in a few of them.
English Lit - well, he can do that one! Also product design. And maybe French.

I'd be prepared to have a bash at English Language, maths and science.
We could maybe split geography as there's quite a lot for me to learn there.

Anyone else?

<this is lighthearted by the way ..... unless anyone knows a way that I can actually sit a few of them ????? >

But 40 years ago or more there weren't GCSEs. There were O levels taken only by the top ?20-30%? and CSEs taken by everyone else.

Anyone who did O levels, myself included, can't really say that exams are easier now, as we are comparing apples with oranges.
And what does 'easier' mean anyway? Questions more straightforward, or a lower percentage needed now to get the same equivalent grade? Results are now back on a curve again, where ~1/3rd are destined to never pass maths or Eng Lang however well they do.

For what it's worth I think in a lot of subjects the content is different / skills different. I don't remember covering bias in history, I only covered Christianity in RE, and no 'ethics' at all, I wasn't allowed to do Biology as well as Physics & Chemistry. I still studied Macbeth though.

I could pass Eng Lang GCSE (I got an A at O level for it) but only because I've listened in on DD's tutoring, I wouldn't have instinctively known what was required from the questions.

@TeenDivided

I don't remember covering bias in history

Maybe different exam boards had different emphasis? I certainly remember our O level History teacher constantly going on about it, as well as reliability, and also about the "history" of history, i.e. how we know what we think we know as "fact" and that huge amounts of even relatively recent history (up to 1500 ad) are lost forever (apparently Henry VIII burning down lots of monasteries meant lots of local history is lost in some areas and a lot more is known in areas where monasteries survived due to them keeping records in the form of historic manuscripts). I certainly remember having to practice on explaining and interpreting drawings, old newspaper articles, images painted or carved on historic monuments, etc., to explain, initially, what was happening in the picture with it's historic context and then going on to say how reliable it is, what "message" it was trying to send, who it may be biased in favour or against, etc.

This concept would make a great reality tV show!

Just perused some English and maths papers, English language could easily get a high mark, maths could do half of each paper straight off so would need to revise the other half. Geography would be easy I got an A* first time round in 1997 with no revision, so a quick read through the cgp guide would get me on my way, I think French, eng lit and chemistry would be my areas I’d need to go quite hard on.

About the only one I think I'd do better in is English Lit as they hate it and I loved it. No chance at maths or science.

Mine both did very well in their GCSEs so I couldn't expect to "do better than them". Youngest sitting A levels this year - maths/physics I ought to be able to pass from cold but I went to school in a different country and there are some subtle and not-so-subtle differences in what we did when. Music - who knows, I know a lot but wouldn't necessarily have the right terminology.

Were I to have a go at GCSEs I'd need a bit of revision time for sciences, to know what detail is expected. Maths I'm sure would be fine from a standing start. English language I'd hope I'd do fine. Literature and history - who knows? Maybe ok with some work. Geography probably similar. All fall into the category of "I don't know what I don't know". Modern languages not a chance (even if I had a go at French which I supposedly learned at school...). Latin - possible but would take a fair bit of work. Music - see above comment wrt A levels!

I'd belt him at art. But he'd absolutely crush me in everything else.

So probably best he does the exams 🤣

I was helping dc revise tonight - chemistry about ‘moles’. The moles were not at all cute, and the maths was also quite complex imo.

poor kids - if they miss a lesson then it’s unlikely they’d fully understand it from a book.

thank god we could afford to buy all the revision books. Without them it would be even more difficult.

I think my science GSCEs were mainly Multiple choice. Those were the days !

Yes to English lit and English language, possibly to history and biology. An absolute no to maths, art, physics and chemistry.

Yes to English language, literature and biology. Chemistry, no I'd needs to revise at least as hard as he does for that. Physics, maths and history - no chance. Drama - don't make me laugh.

Yes because he's 4

This. I have a “friend” who frequently spouts “I did calculus at O level” in reference to modern GCSEs but the current exams cover much wider content than history syllabus did. And to the person who said modern gcse biology is easier- tell me about monoclonal antibodies?

The reason I think I would do better, is that I'm simply more academic than my DDs. I revised with DD1 because she couldn't do it on her own so at that point I knew her subjects. I can formulate a coherent argument better than either of them and have a better fact memory.

OTOH DD1 is better than I am at remembering scripts and has a beautiful Spanish accent and she is great at chatting to strangers. DD2 has a lovely soft nature and is fantastic with animals, sadly those skills are not appreciated at GCSE level.

oh my goodness no way.....I am 30
years out of school......
the only GCSE's I would feel confident in having a go at are French and German, oh and music. Even though I was great at maths at school and also got Bs on science and English I wouldn't know any of it now!!!!

I would not have the patience or time to revise. The methods taught for things like math are completely different and essays are not as I remember. So without the two years schooling I wouldn't do well at all (and I have a masters).

Heck no. I did pretty well for the 1990s. DD did better than me when she took hers last year, but anyway when she and I looked at a couple of papers and mark schemes during revision it became clear I know nothing! I swear some of the science curriculum didn't exist back then.

I am kind of assuming that anyone doing it would have to do some revision. Which is why I thought it might be easier for people who currently have a DC doing GCSEs.
My main strength lies in my life experience and the fact that I know how to revise/learn/commit to short term memory. DS still thinks that glancing at something, writing something down and not checking if it is correct or answered fully, counts as revision.

All of you saying English Language - unless you have been drilled in exactly what the examiner wants for each question and in what format, you wouldn't have a hope on the reading papers, trust me!

English, English literature and history definitely. Science if I had a bit longer.

Maths and languages no chance.

If I had to sit the exams having had no preparation/revision time I'd be terrible at it!

DS is far far brighter than me and got mainly 8s and 9s - I'd never have managed that even when I was young - my best grades were two Bs in Maths and French O level - the rest were Cs ( weirdly I was considered one of the brighter pupils at school back then!)

I could probably do better than my DD if I actually prepared and revised as she will only just scrape level 4s if she's lucky.