Do you like the GCSE system?

[YesIReallyDoLikeRootBeer]

As someone who lives in America, I have no experience with GCSE (or A Levels either). Every year on results day I read the posts and it makes me think about whether I would like this system or not. So do I have it right that the result of a test determines your whole grade and ability to move on for A levels? What if a child has a bad or off day? If they had been producing great work all school year but then something just goes wrong on test day, or maybe they are not good at test taking, is any of that taken into consideration? Here my kids do have final exams for each class they take, but that is just a portion of their final grade. All the work they do during the school year is part of the grade too. So if a child has a bad day and doesnt do great on their final exam, it is still possible for them to pass the class. (for anyone who knows the American system I am only talking about regular classes where I am, AP "advanced placement" classes could be different but I dont have personal experience with that). I'm certainly NOT saying our system is better I'm just curious to hear if parents (and kids) like your system. And honestly just to add, I like how after GCSE they get to focus on only 3 or 4 subjects, so I am not saying "our way is the best way" but I do think about my kids. One would have had no problem with GCSEs but my other two sons were not great "test takers" and it would have been a big struggle for them to have a test on one day determine what happens next.

In recent years GCSEs had a portion of controlled assessment. In my subject (MFL) it was more than half the total marks. Trouble was it was really open to abuse; it was very easy for teachers to cheat (eg give a student a piece to write out for the written task). If you didn’t bend the rules at all your students would be at a disadvantage.

Edited to add: we didn’t cheat in my school but I know schools where that happened.

That’s why GCSEs are now all exam based. I agree it’s not ideal for everyone; otoh it does suit some people better than coursework would. It’s a tough one. Overall I feel that the rigour of the exam is something that can be preserved. And the standard expected is lower - in Eng lit for example, there is a lower expectation in terms of use if quotes and references, than if it were an in class assessment.

I don’t like it as the only option. my DS (SEND) struggles massively with exams and remembering information. He didn’t pass any of his GCSEs but did pass a level 2 BTEC (equivalent to two GSCEs) as that’s based of course work and short exams at the end of each term.

I would prefer maths and English language to be replaced by a pass/fail numeracy and literacy test (that can be taken anytime between 11 and 28) with maths and English then be an extension subject

Teacher-assessed grades are open to inflation and cheating, especially when schools' success/survival and teachers' reputations are dependent on results.

However... now that it's compulsory for kids to stay in education or some kind of training until 18, there's an argument to say that it's unnecessary to have high-stakes public exams at 16. Maybe there should only be English and maths ones.

Anything not based on exams is prone to cheating

there's an argument to say that it's unnecessary to have high-stakes public exams at 16. Maybe there should only be English and maths ones.
I agree with this. Just English and Maths at 16 while still studying a wide range of subjects, and maybe at 16 or maybe even 14 you decide on different pathways- academic science or arts/ humanities or vocational btec/ apprenticeship type L2 . Then wider ranges of exams based on the chosen pathway at 18.

I am a maths teacher and I do like the GCSE system. In my subject, maths, people generally get grades that are not a surprise. They have three maths papers to determine their grade, each is 90 mins. So even if they have one slightly off day, they have two other days to compensate.

As for not good at test-taking, in my view someone who is not good at maths tests is not good at maths. We also specifically prepare them for these tests by giving them practices etc.

The great thing about the GCSEs in maths is how fair it is. Pretty much the entire country sits the same papers at the same time in the same conditions and then the papers are marked anonymously. Other systems, where teacher grades are included are so much more open to abuse (as we have seen in recent years) eg during Covid.

Yes and will become increasingly more so as AI advances and it will be much harder to detect which pieces of work are written by a machine and which by the actual pupil. I think technology is going to force us to return to exams more and more.

Teacher-assessed grades are open to inflation and cheating, especially when schools' success/survival and teachers' reputations are dependent on results.

In a nutshell. Teachers aren't trusted to mark student work fairly. But then there is such emphasis on teacher responsibility for the grades that it kind of sets up that thinking.

I have worked in uk - mostly high stakes exams, europe - all teacher course work assessed and aus - 50:50. No system is perfect (although aus the best and interestingly highest respect for teachers).

I think the current system is awful and I hate it.
Far too many exams. Often 3 papers per subject and students doing 8, 9 or even 10 subjects. All taken over a 3/4 week period.
Ridiculous.
I was among the 4th ever year group to sit GCSEs (1991).
We had a mixture of coursework, short tests at the end of a 6 week module and final exams. All the grades added up to a final grade.
That was how they were meant to be. Not how they are now which is virtually ALL exam except for creative subjects like art/drama etc. GCSE's were created to make education fairer for all. Now they are just horrible and non academic children suffer.

GCSEs as they currently exist are fairer than coursework. I don’t know why you are saying they are not fair. Everyone sits the same exams at the same time in the same conditions. That is called fair.

@Pythag because some children are better at exams than coursework and vice versa.
I was better at coursework. I could concentrate on it, take my time and I was very proud of several of my coursework projects.
Exams I found a very unnatural way to work, my mind would wander and I actually had no clue how to revise.
It's horrible to think that some of the work I did that was good, got a good grade and I was very very proud of wouldn't be counted towards the final grade these days.

We saw during Covid what happened with teacher assessed grades, and that grades were far more inflated at private schools than in state schools.

That’s simply not acceptable. Kids in private schools generally have enough advantages in life without this being added to the list.

Exams certainly don’t suit everyone but I think it’s the best system that we have tbh.

Grade boundaries and papers are different every year though. I think English language and maths should be competency based at 16. The only ones that matter long term are English and Maths. The need to constantly resit is depressing and demotivating for 40% of kids who are then basically told they are failures and have doors slammed in their face.

I understand what you’re saying but as a teacher who taught with coursework, then controlled assessment then exam only, I can honestly say that despite the pressure, I prefer this system. The fact of the matter is that with coursework, the teacher has far too much input and it’s only partly a child’s work. At least with exams it is all the child’s work. I do think there needs to be an overhaul of the exam system though (bringing back different tiers of paper, for example) and also an overhaul of the curriculum.

What I don’t like is that the grade boundaries are moved each year. My dd has just failed maths for the second time despite scoring higher than last year because the grade boundary was moved.

It is a shame your teachers did not teach you how to revise, I specifically teach my students how to revise.

I accept that some people may be more suited to coursework than others, but the major problem with coursework is that there is never a guarantee that it is the student’s own work and this has become ever more so with the internet. Back in the early 90s, before the internet was a thing, there was slightly more chance of being sure that coursework was done by a child. But it was still often marked by teachers who knew the child (thus subject to bias) and not external examiners.

It sounds like what you don’t like is the need to retake rather than the exams themselves.

@Moglet4 in my day though the teachers didn't help with the coursework - it was our own work.
It was mostly done at home which means in theory that parents could have done some of it (I doubt it in my era many parents only had a secondary modern education and never did things like algebra and french) but that could be solved by coursework being done in classroom time.
Or why can't it be just one paper per subject? Why do they have to do 3 papers?

@Pythag yes I wasn't taught how to revise. Exams techniques weren't really a "thing" in 1991 (except "make sure you've checked there aren't more questions on the back" 🙁)

I agree there should be fewer exams. I think coursework is completely unfair though, unless it's done in class under controlled conditions, in which case it's pretty much an exam really.

Of course parents (or older siblings, or anyone really) ccould do or help with the coursework if it were done at home. Plenty of kids would have had parents who were teachers or qualified in something that would have helped!

Three papers for maths is good in my opinion. It allows for most of the course to be covered, both calculator and non-calculator skills and it also means that if someone has an off-day it can be balanced out by the other two papers.

Thank goodness there is no coursework in maths!

I had a small amount of coursework too which was done in school and virtually no help given but for years there was no limit to how many times it could be marked and rewritten. It was absolutely ridiculous and (perfectly within the rules) ended up being staff work. It also meant marking essays over and over which is extremely unfair on teachers - when informed in the super selective grammar, the esssys were 30 odd pages and there were 5 of them with 31 pupils in a class! Admittedly those kids didn’t need many remarks. In the comp I worked in, they would redo them 6, 7 times, come back after school to ‘polish’ them with me and do on - it was such a relief when CA replaced them but even they were subject to abuse. Exams are not perfect but they are the fairest means of assessment, I think. You’re right, though, they do need reforming. Bringing back foundation and even intermediate papers would be a great start as the English papers are inaccessible to lots of children and just lead to demoralisation, apathy or bad behaviour and endless resits.

My DD is ND and today found out she failed most of her GCSEs (well got 2 grade 4's and the rest 3's). She is so bright and intelligent but finds exams far too stressful, people clicking pens will set her brain into meltdown and then the exam is impossible. Her predicted grades were much higher even though her mocks weren't great as teachers all said she was so capable, they just didn't realise how her Neurodiversity can affect how an exam goes.
Exams are very ableist

@Pythag but I LOVED doing my maths coursework.
I have fond memories of (over 30 years ago) working on the "Tea Box" project. The figuring out the size and shape of possible boxes, making little miniature (but in scale) practice boxes in different shapes before deciding on the final design...and then presenting it all in a beautiful hand written document with full colour illustrations and all the maths workings and my little set of prototype boxes.
Loved that piece of coursework. One of my favourite school memories.