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.

@Baital completely agree!

When they came in children could leave education at 16 so this was their main shot at qualifications. Now they have to stay in education until 18 anyway and get further qualifications

Aren't they meant to be in education, training or employment? So you can leave at 16 if you have a suitable alternative path. For most, this does mean more school, college or an apprenticeship (which involves some college,) but for a few, it could be the only qualifications they do. No idea what the numbers are; presumably low, but could still be thousands.

@EBearhug yes the whole "they have to stay until 18 now" is such a lie.
Technically if they have a full time job that includes some "training" (don't all jobs have that at the start 🤔) it's perfectly legal.
There are still jobs available that are happy to take on a 16 year old.
The only restriction on 16 year olds is they can't work nights.

I also feel quite strongly that students who will not get a grade at Eng or maths should not be forced to do it.

A student of mine made themselves ill with worry and when I asked their Eng teacher she said “they won’t get a 1” well what’s the point then? But the govt insists.

There are other quals - DS1 has three English fails and then a pass at FSL2 which was much more accessible for him.

Nope, it’s hideous. Too much pressure too young, too many exams all bunched together. My DD just did hers, and has passed everything and got onto the A Levels she wants, which is brilliant. But the one she got the lowest grade in was the subject where the exams were right at the end of the exam period and she had 2 exams in one day. She was exhausted by then and dropped 2 grades compared to her mock.

Also all subjects are not equal- I’m am MFL teacher and students typically get a grade lower than their other subjects. And don’t get me started on the higher/foundation tier fiasco!

I've taught in the US and in the UK. One aspect of 'teacher assessed' versus 'final standardised exams' is that in the UK, the teacher is, at least in theory, a coach trying to help the student get the best grade. In the US, the teacher is also the judge, jury, and sometimes executioner, personally responsible for issuing the grades. It makes for a very different dynamic in the classroom and with parents!

GCSEs are the main exams taken at 16 but they are not the only exams / qualifications.

GCSE passed at grade A*-C or 9-4 depending where you are in England, Wales and NI are 'level 2' qualifications, lower grades are 'level 1' qualifications.

Level 3 can be A Levels or a certificate / diploma often called BTECs but other exam boards have their own. You can also take IB, depending if you have a local provider.

Scotland has a different education system.

Pros of the system are that the school choses the exam board and all children taking that GCSE sit the same paper wherever they are.

So teachers cannot play favourites or mark down students they don't like.

Everyone understands the system, '5 GCSEs or equivalent with English and maths' is regarded very much like a HS diploma and counts as such if you apply for a US college.

Cons of the system - well it favours the students who are good at exams and there is little incentive to work all year if you are that kind of student.

I'm old and we did O Levels and CSEs which were amalgamated into GCSE. What often happened under that system was:

a) academic students being entered for one or two exams a year early giving more time to concentrate on the other subjects

b) you could sit both a CSE and an O level in the same subject, very common if you were borderline on a pass.

c) you were only entered for the exams your teachers though you could pass.

At present schools are constrained by 'progress 8' which means the school's 'rating' depends on the 8 GCSEs the student sits in their final year. So academic students can be twiddling their thumbs for 6 months and less able have to sit exams they may not be ready for. Or have no interest in. The government also weights subjects differently so there is bias towards STEM.

Things have also changed uni wise. When I left school in the 1980s nursing was not a degree profession, you worked and trained at your local hospital and entry was the aforementioned 5 O levels including English and maths.. Now you have to take a degree.

FE colleges used to run 'consolidation' courses which were basically resits in a year, these have disappeared so outside school it is difficult to do a reset of anything other than English and maths.

You can actually leave school at 14 and transfer to an FE college, although it is rare, it does happen. Personally I think it should be used more, schools in England (I can't say for the rest of the country) don't have the facilities to teach things like mechanics or catering.

STEM subjects don’t have a different weighting in progress 8. English and maths have double weighting, but sciences have same weighting as humanities and languages.

Yes they have the same weighting but most school do ebacc as well so:

English lang and Literature (2)
Maths (1)
MFL (1 or 2)
History or geography (1)

Then you get the sciences, most schools do double or triple (2 or 3) but there are 4 options if they don't do that so Biology, Chemistry, Physics and Computer Science.

It's only then you can fit an art subject. And it is usually one. When there was a free choice you could do Art, photography, 3D design and a couple of others.

If it isn’t all schools that follow a strict ebacc then Surely it can’t be used as a standardised measure?

i think all schools offer the Ebac (I am not aware of any that don’t offer it) but lots of schools don’t require kids to take it.

it is still useful as a standardised measure, to see what percentage of kids in each schools pass it.

Optional is key here. It can’t be a valid measure if a proportion of pupils choose not to take it. It skews data if one school has 100% take up and another school 25%

@Pythag Very few independent schools offer the EBacc.

My DDs school doesn't enforce EBACc fortunately. Her dyslexia makes languages hard. She's planning on History, comp sci and then dance or animal care as her last option... and will get a better grade for those than a language!

Oh wow! Animal care GCSE sounds fab! Never seen that before!

How can that be true? You mean very few private schools offer maths, English, science, history or geog and MFL?

@TickingAlongNicely the school I worked at offered animal care GCSE - it was amazingly popular and genuinely gave a chance for some students to shine where they might not have done so well in other subjects.

I agree btw that tho the vast vast majority of schools make the ebacc available, fewer schools IME are enforcing it now. I think they got bitten. DS2's year (GCSE 2019) was forced to take MFL and a lot of them did badly compared to their other results.

They do offer those subjects, but as A-levels, not part of the eBacc, is how I understood it.

I thought the same about colleges no longer offering a resit year for GCSEs but the college my DD wanted to go to has just been offered this as she only got 2 grade 4's (predicted grades were way higher but the stress of exams meant she did terribly in them). I'm hoping this year we can work on exam techniques and due to her SEN she can get better exam conditions.
The college didn't advertise this so I was really surprised when we were offered it.

OK the ebacc is a (stupid) measure of how well a school does - it relates to those GCSEs and the number of students sitting them. It's of no benefit to the students (except as in it promotes a spread of subjects - but most students do something fairly broad at GCSE anyway).

I wonder if you are talking about the IB - international Bacc - which is an actual qualification taken instead of A levels?

I like externally marked exams as it takes away teacher bias. But I dont like the one shot at the end of the course. I'd rather a grade that built up on a modular basis, with opportunities to resit.

I also dont like the grading system covering level 1 and 2. I feel saying gcse grade 2 doesn't say to employers that this pupil passed a level 1 qualification. It signals that they did badly at a level 2 one. The GCSE covers the whole cohort and I feel it would be nicer to come out with a clutch of level one passes to progress on to the next stage. I know that's what they are. But I feel the certificates should emphasise this somehow. I dont mind the same paper giving opportunities to get either a level 1 or 2 qualification. But noone I know in real life sees a low grade as the level 1 qualification it is.

Point taken! But, as far as I know, private schools don't appear in EBacc league tables or performance indicators, and so the EBacc is never referred to by students, teachers, or parents. It's just not a thing. Also I don't think that IGCSEs count towards EBacc, and a lot of private schools use IGCSEs for some or most subjects. (Maybe those two points are linked?)

I genuinely don't know whether students who do happen to take that combination of subjects, from GCSEs, are counted as having an EBacc or not, and if so, by whom!

Yes DS was offered this to get hus English language up from a 4 to a 5 and go onto A Levels. He's not keen but I think it will be a good idea. They only did 3 gcses in the year.

I guess it depends upon whether or not you think as many students as possible should study maths, English, a science, a humanity and a language to GCSE. That is what Ebac measures. I do think as many pupils as possible should do this, which is why I like Ebac as a measure. You presumably do not think as many students as possible should study maths, English, a science, a humanity and a language to GCSE so don’t care if we don’t have data on this.

We were encouraged to have this sort of mix when doing our options at school, back in the '80s, before National Curriculum or League Tables.