What changes would you make to GCSE`s

[4lennahcnosloohcsvti]

If you could make any changes to gcse`s what would they be ?

What subjects would you remove from the curriculum and what would you add ?

@Takeitonthechin That's exactly how post 16 works though. Pre 16 the idea is to have a good foundation of knowledge that enables you to easily access the vocational subjects. The UK system is great on paper but in reality it is hugely understaffed and underfunded. We have many many mathematically illiterate adults. Same with English.

Sadly there are alternatives but they don't count in the league tables any more.

We should not progress students based solely on age. School starting should be variable and so should progress.

But there's a problem with two separate qualifications where one is more valued than the other as well - at which point to you decide which one to enter them for and potentially write-off their chance of achieving the "more valuable" qualification?

It was the same problem with the Foundation Tier at GCSE maths where the highest grade you could get was a D. How could we enter kids for a GCSE tier knowing in advance that it denied them access to the vital C grade? Even for the kids who had no chance it was psychologically quite tough.

When maths teachers complained about this, what we wanted was a nominal C grade added to Foundation so that there was at least a glimmer of hope. What we got was the scrapping of Intermediate Tier and essentially the new Foundation replacing Foundation and Intermediate which has been pretty crap all round.

There is a problem with the 4 at maths and English GCSE and it's that they are both valuable, and yet for some, unachievable. The value doesn't come from the idea that if you get your 4 you don't have to resit, the resits are because they are valuable and you should be given more opportunities to gain them.

The value of them is because for better or worse, English and maths GCSE grade 4+ is seen, nationally, as the benchmark for being literate and numerate. There are many arguments that you can be literate and yet not achieve the 4, and achieve the 4 and yet not be numerate, but we are where we are and it would be foolish to try to deny that having those qualifications will unlock doors in terms of further qualifications and job applications.

So because they are valuable, at what point do you deliberately deny a pupil the chance to gain them?

@noblegiraffe , modular maths exams on different maths topics, just because a person is scoring lower in fractions doesn’t mean they can’t score high on angles, Venn diagrams, areas, etc.
Constant mini tests on maths topics and score. Therefore it is not a direct fail. Easier for those that need to resit for the different modules. A child should not be judge a failure on 1 subject if there is a way to show weakness and strengths on the subject ranges and use today’s technology to facilitate this.

But realistically employers or colleges aren't going to look through loads of different scores on different modules to decide whether a kid is good enough to do their job/course. They want an overall score.

It is the case at the moment that you can get a 4 at GCSE with serious weaknesses in some areas of the curriculum - a pupil I just taught who got a 4 was terrible at angles and geometry - I'm not sure it would be beneficial to him to have that weakness highlighted!

Overall score plus topic scores. Quite a few companies have computer software scan before an actual human review the CV..but that is another topic.

I'm struggling to imagine any company that would be arsed enough to care about module scores for a GCSE over final grade.

My modular suggestion was with an overall grade. More about being able to take an exam when a topic is still fresh in your mind than at the end of two years. Although differentiated from the ordinary maths GCSE qualification in some way.

@grass321 Lots of issues with that though. It's the model in a lot of European countries and it's difficult as all schools will teach the modules at different times and it's not very easy to 'catch up'. Even if they do teach it at the same time, UK generally has a very transient population of students.

@BodGaoithe I do think the UK system is flawed and very narrowed when they have to choose 3 subjects for A level and make that decision at 15/16. Having the final maths and English exam at this age is also very restrictive. So many teens never do any maths or English ever again and miss out on vital learning and skills. I see graduates who cannot do basic percentages or struggle to word a formal letter or email. How can this happen?

We did modular GCSE maths pre-Gove. One of the problems with it is that the constant preparing and revising for the next module ate into teaching time, another was that kids weren't really ready to sit proper GCSEs in Y10, and finally that because they weren't really ready to sit proper GCSEs, they then did resits of each module to up their grade which again distracted from the next module they were taking.

I can't say I miss modular GCSEs, it felt like such a treadmill. I do get the objection to high-stakes all or nothing exams taken over a few weeks but that doesn't mean the alternatives are automatically better!

We should definitely bring back AS levels that count towards the final A-level grade though, scrapping those was a big mistake.

Fair enough. I personally think a minimum threshold for literacy and numeracy is a good thing but I can see the 'everything exams' at the end of two years is tough for those students that find maths difficult.

@noblegiraffe I agree. Neither option is perfect. We'll never have a system that suits all kids to be honest but bringing back AS levels is definitely something that needs to happen. At least kids who left after Y12 left with something and didn't waste a year. That's what I did. After Y12 I realised A Levels weren't for me and went and did a BTEC extended diploma but also have my AS.

Scrap exams. They are just a memory test. These days all the information we need is online. Maybe they should be set a task to find valuable, reliable information from the internet, rather than relying on what they can remember

Having knowledge in your brain is important for being able to make links between different bits of knowledge and forming new conclusions. It's not just a series of unrelated facts that need regurgitating and that can be googled instead.

I also remember modular maths exams, and I didn't like them - as well as the constant preparation, there was also the fact that you couldn't have as many interesting, problem-solving questions that use information from various topics. By the end paper, ok, but sometimes you want to mix topics up more and even on the earlier papers, use different ways of testing. And that didn't seem to happen as much - they seemed more routine questions somehow.

I also know of a couple of pupils who really shouldn't have passed them, given their lack of understanding, but because they had quite good short term memory, they did manage to scrape through by memorising methods that they had no understanding of, but got them the right answer or at least a mark or two. This isn't great either for their understanding, or for what the exam was meant to test - an employer who thinks that with that grade, they could do certain types of calculations would have been disappointed. The pupils would have been better served with an easier exam that tested them on material that they understood, and had time to learn properly. I don't think the modular exams did much for the overall state of maths ability in teenagers, even though it helped specific children get through the hurdle of passing, and I can understand why that was good for them.

I think we shouldn't specialise so early, and allow more subjects up to age 18, with different levels of maths and English and other chosen subjects, possibly that could be taken at age 17 or 18 (or even 16) and then move on to harder levels if you want, or just keep working towards that basic level if needed. And have a whole lot more differentiation in earlier years, rather than forcing pupils to sit through more difficult work when they don't have the basics. There could be different tracks/curriculum from year 8 or 9 aiming for the basic level to be completed at age 16/17/18. In many countries, you have a list of requirements for a diploma at age 18, that requires a basic level of maths that could be done at age 16. After that you could take harder maths or repeat the basic one, and you can combine it with various other subjects that you choose as long as you eventually meet minimum requirements in certain basics. In some countries there is much less empahsis on what year you are in, and more on whether you have completed and passed the pre-requisite for that course.

I have one DC in year 9 and one in year 6. DD in year 6 is doing tutoring with Explore Learning to fill in her knowledge gaps from the covid years. I really like their way of doing continuous assessment - it checks that they've understood something when they're taught it, then comes back a few weeks later to see if they've retained that knowledge. It's very clear and to me continuous assessment is a better gauge of a child's knowledge and ability than a one-off exam.

@BlowDryRat Schools do this though. At least good ones do. How do you think they monitor progress?

One of the problems with it is that the constant preparing and revising for the next module ate into teaching time

It did not have to be like that. Say, you prepare your class to sit one module, focus on it properly, so that almost everyone is successful, and after the exam move on to the preparation for the next module. By mid-year in year 11, almost everyone has done all modules well, and you spend the last couple of months preparing for resits.

kids weren't really ready to sit proper GCSEs in Y10

Strongly disagree.

We should definitely bring back AS levels that count towards the final A-level

But wouldn't preparing for AS eat into teaching time according to your own logic? In fact, this argument is the reason why counting AS towards A-level grade was scrapped.

Definitely more course work more continual assessment .

my D’s just finished year 11 with exams over 5 weeks .. He has adhd so 5 weeks of expecting to be quiet- focus for hours at a time .. Honestly his mh in year 11 was worse than lockdown..

exams are only one way of assessing children..and for many not ideal .

I also say as someone who did the first year of GCSE’s this was meant to be the point more continual assessment

@SilverGlitterBaubles yeah I think when students 100% know what they want to do with their life, A level is fantastic. Also I teach Art and Photography and I’d much rather teach GCSE and A level than Junior Cert and Leaving Cert. However I do feel for a huge amount of students, the English/ Welsh (and NI?) system narrows down way too early. 16 is v young to pick 3 subjects.

(How many subjects do Scottish students do for highers? I must Google it. I know they finish a bit younger, like Irish students do.)

@NotQuiteHere "kids weren't really ready to sit proper GCSEs in Y10

Strongly disagree."

Out of interest, why?

Also AS and A2 were ultimately one course but you were able to get a qualification if you stopped halfway. It didn't eat into anything. Kids are still taught in a similar way now but if they leave at the end of Y12 it doesn't count for anything. AS also made it slightly easier to do predicted grades.

Say, you prepare your class to sit one module, focus on it properly, so that almost everyone is successful, and after the exam move on

You still need revision lesson and mocks, and mock review lessons. Not to mention the endless results analysis.

kids weren't really ready to sit proper GCSEs in Y10

Strongly disagree.

The existence of some children who are ready to sit GCSEs in Y10 certainly doesn't mean that all are mature enough. There's a definite benefit to the minds focused by the next steps caused by college applications, entry requirements and so on.

But wouldn't preparing for AS eat into teaching time according to your own logic?

They still generally sit AS exams anyway as end of Y12 exams for UCAS prediction purposes, just internally instead of externally.

But when I say bring back AS exams, it's so that we can have a return to 4 subjects in Y12.

Yes there was definitely an issue with some children just not being ready to sit a GCSE that early in Year 10. Some of them hadn't got the hang of revision, were just younger or more immature, possibly barely turned 14, didn't really feel the importance of exams yet etc. Some were absolutely fine, but not all.

@noblegiraffe "They still generally sit AS exams anyway as end of Y12 exams for UCAS prediction purposes, just internally instead of externally.

But when I say bring back AS exams, it's so that we can have a return to 4 subjects in Y12."

Agreed. In fact most sixth forms around us require 4 subjects in Y12 and one gets dropped, same as when AS was a thing. It's basically the same system but now you don't get the qualification which is a shame.