GCSE's and National Curriculum Scrapped by 2014.....O levels to replace them

Permabanned
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Posts
0
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/21/michael-gove-scrap-gcse-exams?newsfeed=true

Michael Gove is to scrap GCSE exams as the government accelerates its schools reforms to improve the teaching of core subjects.

Pupils across England will sit GCSEs for the last time in English, maths, physics, chemistry and biology in 2015, paving the way for more traditional exams modelled on the old O-levels the following year.

The education secretary has already scrapped the modular element of GCSEs and his education white paper last November signalled a major reform of the exams introduced by the Conservatives a quarter of a century ago.

But the decision to scrap GCSEs altogether and to revive O-levels, though possibly not the actual name, will be seen as one of the government's boldest reforms.

The move was signalled in an internal education department document leaked to the Daily Mail. The document says: "The Department for Education expects that existing GCSEs will disappear … Those starting GCSEs in 2013 are the last pupils who will have to do them."

The education department refused to comment on leaked documents. But it is understood that there are two broad elements to the reforms: the national curriculum, which sets out what secondary school pupils should be taught, will be scrapped; and a more rigorous exam system will be introduced.

Gove believes it is important to extend to all schools the freedom enjoyed by academies and free schools, which account for half of schools in England. There will also be one exam board for each subject. This means that schools will not be able to sign up for exam boards seen as easier.

Gove believes that the twin reforms will hand freedom to all teachers.

The changes mean that, by 2016, GCSEs will no longer count in league tables. The requirement for five good GCSEs graded A* to C will be scrapped, removing any incentive to study for the exams.

The changes will be introduced in stages. The new exams will be sat in the core subjects of English, maths and the three science subjects from 2016. Gove sketched out the following timetable for the next few academic years:

• The autumn of 2013 will be the last year that pupils will start studying for GCSEs in the core subjects.

• The autumn of 2014 will be the first year that pupils start studying for the new exams in the core subjects.

• The summer of 2015 will be the last time pupils sit GCSEs in the core subjects.

• The summer of 2016 will be the first time pupils sit the new exams.

Gove began his assault on GCSEs soon after taking office, when he ended the modular element. He believes pupils do not learn properly if they are coached to sit exams every term, which they can retake.

He wanted a return to the more traditional way of teaching a subject for two years and then requiring pupils to sit exams at the end of the course.

He told the Andrew Marr Show on BBC1 last June: "The problem that we had is that instead of sitting every part of a GCSE at the end of a course, bits of it were taken along the way. Those bits could be resat. That meant instead of concentrating on teaching and learning you had people who were being trained again and again to clear the hurdle of the examination along the way. That meant that unfortunately less time was being spent developing a deep and rounded knowledge of the subject.

"I think it's a mistake and I think the culture of resits is wrong. I think that what we need to do is make sure, certainly at GCSE, that you have a clear two-year run."

Stephen Twigg, the shadow education secretary, said: "Michael Gove must explain his changes to parents and pupils. Will going back to O-levels for some and CSEs for the rest really improve standards for all? Labour wants to see a robust, rigorous and broad curriculum and exam system that is trusted by parents, pupils and employers. We will set a series of tests to measure these changes.

With no secondary national curriculum how will he ensure a rigorous approach to learning in all schools? When the Tories abolished O-levels and introduced GCSEs in the 1980s they said standards would rise. Now they say they've fallen."

Gove's move comes as influential Tory MP Elizabeth Truss calls for the teaching of maths at core, preparatory or higher level to be compulsory until the age of 18 by 2015. in a report to be published on Thursday tomorrow. Truss said: "The government needs to take urgent action to address the lack of mathematics attainment in schools. Current failings are hampering social mobility and the UK's long term competitiveness. Let's make this year – when we celebrate Turing's centenary – that we start to climb back to the top of the maths table."

Sorry for the post and run, I am on my way out, but I will return later.....

But briefly, The Govt seem to have decided that the GCSE is dead and are planning to replace them with an O level style exam so that 2015 will be the last time children will sit GCSEs.....while I welcome any improvement to the exam system this impacts on my Son as he will be in the last intake to take GCSEs and I am concerned that he will effectively be lumbered with a devalued and ultimately useless set of exam results.......

what say OCuk?
 
To Castiel, I wouldn't worry, if your son is going into further education then I see no problem.

I am not sure what my son will do...his talents really lie in his creativity rather than his academic potential...he is dyslexic (the actual diagnosed condition, rather than the excuse for not trying hard enough or being a dumbass) so he finds some things more difficult to express than others on paper, although he is improving now he is getting the right education and tools he needs to compensate, so we live in hope.

I just don't want him to feel that any effort he puts in is wasted before he begins and whether it might be worth considering Private Education so that he takes a Baccalaureate instead.
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/21/nick-clegg-gove-scrap-gcses

This is why the country didn't return an outright Tory majority :)

Yeah sure.....then he will capitulate when the Tories offer his party something inconsequential like Gay Marriage or promise to look into reforms of the HoLs or something else they know will not get through due process or become a rope around the Liberal Democrats electoral necks......

To be honest the Liberal Democrats sold their souls and and are now realising that they are screwed. Clegg and his minions are dumber than a bag of spanners and the Tories know it.
 
Still this, and also - can someone explain to me why O Levels would be better? I've seen plenty of reasons why GCSEs aren't 'good enough', but non in favour of the proposed system.

Whether they were better or not I cannot say, but the point is that it is believed that they were more challenging and gave a better indication of the ability of the individual at that point in their educational development.....the problems have been discussed, such as the two tier GCE/CSE system which automatically devalued and disenfranchised those without the GCE, something that GCSEs were developed to counter........

I think that we need to have a single system as we do now (although the baccalaureate has made limited inroads into the creation of another two tier system) but with the esteem that GCEs were held in.......

We need to get away from this 'everyone is a winner' attitude that simply devalues real accomplishment in favour of uniformity......having 10 GCSEs, 3 A Levels and a 2:1 degree is meaningless if everyone has one...there is no way to assess the value of the individual (educationally, not generally) if we are all equal........we need a system that not only rewards those of ability and those who put in the effort while not ignoring those whose talents either lie elsewhere or who develop later. The 'no child left behind' maxim, but only done individually, not by setting a national standard and making sure the standard fits to the lowest common denominator to ensure success......because that helps no-one.
 
I'm not sure i agree with this attitude. The purpose of the education system isn't to ensure that only a pre-determined number of pupils are able to reach a certain point. Educating as many people as possible as far as possible is a good goal for the system, and results in a much better country overall.

I think you read what I said and then interpreted it as something else.....I never suggested that there should be a pre determined number of pupils able to reach a certain point (that is pretty much what happens to day with the tiered GCSE system) but assessing each child individually and enabling them to receive an education that both suits their needs and promotes their particular talents and proclivities. It is about making sure that every child gets the education that best suits each childs needs and abilities, and not the one size fits all approach that seems to be the current model....

Trying to create an artificially level educational standard only means that you are forced to effectively educate to the average ability....those who might do better are held back and those who need more support are disenfranchised.....

That is what I said and has nothing to so with only providing education to a predetermined selected group...quite the exact opposite in fact. :confused:
 
Last edited:
Right, so just to check - does Gove actually have a plan here? Or has he simply come out and said 'i want things to be like they were back in my day'?

Ask Gove, I don't see what that has to do with me or what I said.....with respect to you (I know you are intelligent and like reading your ideas and thoughts on politics and other topics) but if this line of questioning and considering your disagreement with a post that actually stated what you put forth as your prefered outcome is indicative of the level of comprehension being taught at GCSE currently then maybe a change is warranted.

In any case, I wasn't making the argument for a return to O levels that you seem to be implying and I thought I was clear on what I would like to see.....if that includes an O level type approach to core subjects then I see no issue with that as long as it is part of an overall approach to give each child an education suited to their individual needs and abilities and not about concentrating on an elite qualification without addressing the needs of the rest.
 
Last edited:
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/873443-deborah-thorpe-6-passes-gcse-maths-exam-with-e-grade

E grade? I know she's just 6 but it's not that impressive. Failing GCSE math is nearly impossible, anything under a C shouldn't be considered a pass. When you are studying for one subject it makes it much easier I think many 6 years old would be able to pass with a few months preparation.

I disagree, at 6 years old, even being able to answer enough questions in order to be graded at all is impressive.
 
I think the move to a single exam board per subject is possibly a good thing. Stops schools shopping around for easier boards to improve pass rates. The talk in the staff room this morning was guardedly positive about the move, though the devil is of course in the detail. The renewed focus on Computing over ICT is also something that most ICT teachers seem to be pretty happy with (though obviously concerned about having the skills to teach it).

I had no idea that the exam boards were giving different papers, let alone that schools could shop around for the easiest ones.

I thought the exam boards were just regional and that they had to adhere to a set standard of exam.......

This makes the GCSE a lottery of sorts......
 
It's OK, there is a regulator! Of course, like many, the are a bit useless.

Unfortunately school league tables are a good example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. If you make the most important thing for a school to do is pass exams then the school is going to do everything it can to pass exams.

Of course the real difficulty is find a decent metric that is relatively easy or cheap to measure. Though before league tables parents still managed to work out which were the best schools in the area...

As unscientific and probably equally useless that is might be, I have always looked at the appearance, politeness and behaviour of the children to and from school as a good indicator of how good a school might be......

But you are right about target driven education...all you are encouraging is teaching to target and not giving a broad inclusve education....
 
Back
Top Bottom