IGCSE branded 'marketing tool'

[UnquietDad]

here

"A head teacher leader says independent schools which enter pupils for International GCSES will create a two-tier, private-state system."

Am I the only one going, "well, duh!" at this? Like we don't have one already?

Forgive me for being a bit dim - only a state-educated grammar school boy here, so obviously I am slow on the uptake - but isn't this why people want it? Indeed, isn't this part of the thinking behind private education anyway?

Govt should get its act together and reverse the decline in the standards of the GCSE. Without taking any sides at all on issues around independent fee-paid schooling, if I was head of a school that was in a position to opt out of crap GCSEs then I would so just that.

Well, yes. It's been downhill since they introduced the GCSE. And especially now that it's ingrained in teaching culture - GCSE generation are now old enough to be deputy heads, pretty much.

It is very depressing. Exam standards are so low, and yet the children's entire secondary education is a cramming for them. DS1 is studying Romeo and Juliet atm, and his teacher talks endlessly about how many marks are available for this element and that, never aout how wonderful the flaming play is. She has lost the ability to think about her subject.

If schools are saying they need something better than GCSEs to stretch the more able pupils, then maybe the govt should pay some attention to that, rather than saying "state schools can't use them".

At the moment, iGCSEs are looked at on a "like for like" basis by universities, even though they are often talked of as being a more rigorous exam.

The GCSE, ironically, was brought in with the intention of making pupils think more about their subject and asking for less "regurgitation" than in the O-Level. I'm not starry-eyed about the O-Level - a lot of it, in English and History especially, was simply "recite the plot of Richard III from this point to this point", and "Tell me the causes of the First World War" - total brain-off, get-it-down stuff. GCSE was supposed to be more about lateral thinking. What went wrong?

My original point, though, was that I found it odd the head of a private school saying that a two-tier system would be bad. Surely that's what we've already got? And if you use private education that's what you want?

I think he may be a state school head-teacher, not a private school one. The article doesn't make it clear, but does say "The ASCL represents school leaders in both the state and independent sectors."

Good point AMum. My mistake if so.

But whether you have the IGCSE or not, there is still a two-tier system. And that's undeniably seen as desirable by some.

Well yes, if people didn't see private schools as "better" in some way than their available state schools, they'd die out wouldn't they? I guess his worry is that if iGCSE is seen as fundamentally better, just because private schools have decided to go for it, then there'll be a bigger disadvantage for state school pupils than there would be otherwise.

I mean, at the moment, an A in GCSE is worth the same whatever school you got it at. But if universities started thinking an A at iGCSE was better than an A at GCSE, then state school pupils who can't take iGCSEs wouldn't be able to compete.

Isn't that already happening?

I don't know - do universities and colleges rate people's results differently according to where they went to school? I'd have thought if anything an applicant with a clutch of A grades from a comprehensive might be thought more able than one who'd been to a posh private school, since you might assume the private school one had been pushed much harder, had tutors, etc. Whereas an applicant who got good results in a "lesser" school has obviously got the ability.

BTW I don't want to sound like I think people are better or worse, more or less able, just because of where they went to school. I'm interested in the iGCSE angle because that's what DS is currently studying for - but that's because he's studying through an internet school where the lack of a need for marked coursework makes iGCSE the practical choice of exam.

SOme boys at my son's prep school have been doing scholarship exams for various private schools. They are 13. Actually, some are probably still only 12. The French papers were the GCSE French exam from a previous year. Part of the revision for maths involved looking at some AS level papers.

This suggests to me that a lot of very bright 16-year olds must be treading water at GCSE.

I'm sure that's right, abraid. DS1 has been told that pieces of his writing would be A* at GCSE history and English, and he is 13 (year 9). I don't find that wonderful, because it is testimony to the inadequacy of the GSCE, and to the fact that he will spend another 2 years cramming for an exam he can already manage.

(Whoops, getting ahead of myself there, since I'm only a foetus right now. Forgot namechange)

Yes, I agree with UQD. There is already a two tier system going on.

But I do think universities realise this to a certain extent and tailor their offers accordingly. However, there are many, many pupils at state schools who are not 'in the know' who lose out. The education system is becoming a game that you have to play, coupled, as you have said before, with the pretence that 93% or whatever of the population actually have a choice in the schools to which they send their children.

At the moment universities are having to look back at GCSE results as tie-breakers among all the A*s at A Level. They do have systems for weighting exam results to counter the higher average grades at independant schools. I don't know how well this works and I imagine that IGCSEs might well generate a two-teir qualification system to match the two-teir education system we already have.

But able pupils are losing out massively as things stand because there is n way for their greater suitability for higher education to be recorded in our current pitiable exam system. I have sympathy with indep heads who opt out of gcses

In a way I am glad more schools are opting out of GCSE because hopefully it will force the govt to confront the issue of dumbing down. However, if it carries on and is ignored it is going to entrench inequality in education even more. Am just glad my dcs are only toddlers so there is time for this to be sorted out before it affects us....

They have only just brought in an A at A level this year. Oxford, I think, has already said it will be predominantly independent school pupils who achieve this and therefore will take it into account when making offers, (ie NOT to discriminate against state pupils) which will incense the private sector no doubt. However, I am willing to bet that many of the pupils at my DCs state grammar school will get the A grade though.

By the way, those able ones who are getting A grade GCSE levels in their work at 12 or whatever, sometimes get bored by the time they doing the actual GCSEs (along with very teenagery and distracted) and don't always get the As when they actually take the exams (I know from experience with my DS1 I am afraid...)

Well, I agree, bagsforlife. It's not optimal for anyone, is it?

My understanding is that the igce doesn't have course work whereas some gsces do. Since lots of people consider course work a 'soft option' and open to cheating then the exam based igce is considered more rigourous.
But I'm no expert on this.
Either way instead of bleating about unfairness the state should ask themselves why independent schools want to do it and why state schools don't offer them.

DS1's old independent school says this of iGCSE (and this year's league tables for GCSEs):
Government statistics ... suggest that students at X School gained ?zero? in the league tables of GCSE examination performance. We are delighted to make it clear that 100% of our students gained 5A-C grades, including Maths and English. In fact, 87% of all their examinations were graded either A or A - an absolutely outstanding performance.

It is because X School is a pioneer in the use of IGCSEs that these achievements are not recognised in the government league tables.

IGCSEs are the international form of the qualification, which our students sit in Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. We are convinced that IGCSEs in those subjects are more rigorous than the conventional GCSE course, and better preparation for A-level and beyond.

Universities know that the IGCSE qualification has full parity with standard GCSEs. It is a matter of regret that the government does not similarly recognise them in these tables.

However, we wear our 'zero' with pride. It is a sign that we are not driven by league table performance. Instead, we use our independence to design a curriculum which offers our students the most stimulating educational experience and the soundest preparation for future life.

(It's an academic school for academic children largely from academic/professional families that models itself on grammar schools rather than public schools)

Presumably because it's too hard for 'average' children and they won't be able to get a C grade in it, whereas they can in the normal GCSE.

The state sector has to take into account children with many varying different levels of intelligence and they do not have the resources to teach the IGCSE separately for those brighter children nor to spend time tutoring the 'average' children up to that level, which the private sector does.

It would be interesting if more (any?) state schools opted out of the GCSE. Then we could perhaps see more schools cultivating an "independence" which was not merely a euphemism for "having lots of money".

I think there are several tiers actually.

Two of the top private schools locally do iGCSE's. The other two don't yet - but may follow suit. All offer A levels or IB in 6th form

The less academic private schools stick to GCSE's with much the same topic coverage as state.

The good local state schools do GCSE's in largely traditional subjects, whilst shipping less academic students off to local college for courses in eg Health & Social care. All do tradit A levels and IB

Less good local state do far higher proportion of vocational courses - in fact, if you get a place there it's actually quite difficult to do a traditional set of GCSE's. This is to boost their apparent A-C success rate. They do A levels, Btecs and now going to offer the new diplomas.

Yes, the less good state schools also do the more vocational GCSEs because it's easier to fiddle the results. Some of them have an element which can count as an extra grade.