GCSE overhaul

I don't really see what's wrong with the current system to be honest (aside from standards - controversial). What will actually be achieved by replacing letter grades with numerical ones? And reducing coursework in favour of more/longer/harder exams will just skew the system back in favour of students who excel under exam conditions, which are rarely if ever encountered in the "real world"... is that really a useful measure of achievement?
 
Last edited:
sorry. i meant lesser.

The current grading system with A* to G grade passes, will be swept away and replaced with a numerical points ranging from 1 to 8. A 6,7 or 8 point pass will be the equivalent of today's A* or A grade.
Click to expand...
 
"And Chris Keates, general secretary of the NASUWT teachers' union, said: "The Government has tried consistently to portray GCSEs as broken qualifications. The fact is, however, that the GCSE has proved itself to be a robust and reliable qualification."

Humm, what?

I fear this will be like the Poll Tax, people will hate it not because it's a bad idea and worse than the current system but merely because it's a Tory policy.
 
The number system sounds like its there so they can add a number 9 later without people laughing at a A** grade as grade inflation persists
 
Though I do agree that to improve the standard of teaching we do sometimes need to mix it up with exams as by the time I took GCSE's 8 years ago we were just guessing what would be on the exams (they have become really stale), I don't think this is a particularly sensible thing to be doing right now.

The main problem of our schooling system is that there is limited transference from what we are taught to the work place/adult life and its is nearly impossible to leave school at 16 and do anything of worth other than continue in some form of education. Even with further education it's getting harder and harder to progress into the real world. These changes are just papering over the cracks to look like they are doing something useful, which they really aren't.
 
It's a regressive move being rushed through by a minister with too much power and delusions of 'the good old days'.

It's idealistic and politicised, with little or no regard for the children being subjected to it (no matter what Gove and his cronies say).
 
Last edited:
Judgeneo said:
The number system sounds like its there so they can add a number 9 later without people laughing at a A** grade as grade inflation persists
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as "grade inflation". Grades are awarded based on how the actual paper went. Something like the top 20% of students will get an A and so forth.

There are a lot of problems with our education system, but this isn't even close to one of them.
 
Judgeneo said:
The number system sounds like its there so they can add a number 9 later without people laughing at a A** grade as grade inflation persists
Click to expand...

i think that is the main reson for the change, so they can move the goal posts every year to make them sound liek they are doing better...

if 80% gets you an 8 this year, next year they can say "so many students got hte top marks we will add a new one on..." the next year 80% gets you a 9.. and the next year a 10... and so on...

There are countries that are acknoledged to have superior education and exam systems (though their names escape me) simply copy them...
 
I guess the numbered system is an easy way to tot up points, for college or university entry. However the new system of an exam at the end of 2 years and minimal coursework is just the old (better) system brought back.

Coursework was always easier than exams. I chose one GCSE option, Integrated Humanities, purely on the basis that it was 100% CW as I hated exams. It was easy to walk an A.
 
Why are they slashing coursework?
At my University, nearly 30% of my marks come from coursework. It's ridicilous that they are cutting coursework, students need to be able to do practical work as well academic.
Seems like gove is just one of those "back in my day" people.
 
WillyNelson said:
However the new system of an exam at the end of 2 years and minimal coursework is just the old (better) system brought back.

Coursework was always easier than exams. I chose one GCSE option, Integrated Humanities, purely on the basis that it was 100% CW as I hated exams. It was easy to walk an A.
Click to expand...

That's not a problem with coursework in general, but a specific problem with that particular module and exam board (though admittedly, one that's fairly common!)
 
PermaBanned said:
There's no such thing as "grade inflation". Grades are awarded based on how the actual paper went. Something like the top 20% of students will get an A and so forth.
Click to expand...

Doesn't explain the upward trend observed pretty much from the inception of GCSEs up to about 2010.
 
AJK said:
...And reducing coursework in favour of more/longer/harder exams will just skew the system back in favour of students who excel under exam conditions, which are rarely if ever encountered in the "real world"... is that really a useful measure of achievement?
Click to expand...

One of the major problems of the assessed coursework element of GCSEs (and many other qualifications) is that they are subverted in too many ways. The obvious problem is cheating by the candidates, which is widespread, but there are other problems. Having coursework done under supervised conditions may have improved matters (I haven't seen any studies on this yet).

Now, about exam conditions not occurring in the "real world"; in a sense this is obviously true, but if one is to test the knowledge/ability of individuals then there seem to be few workable alternatives. An exam does also test the ability to work swiftly under pressure, which is definitely a real-world situation! One of the ways that I've found to be productive (at university level) is the use of the long "open book" exam; it's a very good way of finding out whether students are actually able to use what they have studied. This can be difficult for some subjects (mathematics, for example) but I'd like to see the technique used more.
 
cm1179 said:
would a better, even fairer solution to be the reintroduction of grammar schools with the eleven plus being brought in across the board?
Click to expand...

All the evidence suggests not.

You have to remember this is a Michael Gove proposal, which means it's probably backed up with a Mumsnet survey and makes a good headline. Following numerous u-turns and back-tracks once the proposal has been subjected to scrutiny, it won't look anything like it does today.
 
Monkeynut said:
Surely the solution would be to simply keep GCSEs, and just make them longer and more thorough?
Click to expand...

This would at least have the benefit of simplicity!

One of the problems with GCSEs as they stand is the extremely wide "dynamic range" of abilities tested by a small set of papers (usually two ability ranges). On a paper that can differentiate amongst the high ability children, lower ability children struggle to answer anything at all. I suspect the idea of publishing marks rather than grades is an attempt to paper over the problem of high-ability differentiation, but I'm not sure it will work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom