GCSE's and National Curriculum Scrapped by 2014.....O levels to replace them
- Thread starter Castiel
- Start date
The Conservatives offer this country nothing except regression to the past. No doubt Gove will be introducing compulsory mortar boards and gowns for teachers next year. IMO the only thing wrong with GCSEs was the harmful competition between examination boards; in short we "let the market decide" how difficult exams should be.
What is wrong with reverting to a past method if it is better for the pupil?
Why is it better for the pupil?
Why isn't it?
IF their 'O'-Levels meet the same international standard, especially in Maths and Science.
I studied in Singapore for majority of my life till I came over here at the age of 15. I opted to take a year back to to coursework at Year 10 and finish the whole GCSE properly - turns out my 'Secondary 3' standards in Singapore was the equivilent of 'GCSE' here. My Maths and Science level was essentially 'held' the same level for 2 years till I got to AS level, which finally match Singapore's O Level standard.
Yes it was an easy ride for me, apart from Food Technology, everything was A and A*, but when I went into A-Level, there was this bridge between GCSE Maths and AS Maths, college had to spend the first half of the semester bring student up to speed - it's a waste in my option.
Lets see where this will lead, will it be naming it O Level with same GCSE level or will it be more of the international equivilent that they do with Republic schools such as those in Singapore.
I studied in Singapore for majority of my life till I came over here at the age of 15. I opted to take a year back to to coursework at Year 10 and finish the whole GCSE properly - turns out my 'Secondary 3' standards in Singapore was the equivilent of 'GCSE' here. My Maths and Science level was essentially 'held' the same level for 2 years till I got to AS level, which finally match Singapore's O Level standard.
Yes it was an easy ride for me, apart from Food Technology, everything was A and A*, but when I went into A-Level, there was this bridge between GCSE Maths and AS Maths, college had to spend the first half of the semester bring student up to speed - it's a waste in my option.
Lets see where this will lead, will it be naming it O Level with same GCSE level or will it be more of the international equivilent that they do with Republic schools such as those in Singapore.
And this was one reason that GCSEs came in. The problem was the old two-tier exam one: only O-levels made you employable (or able to go on to A levels in most cases) so the GCE (the exam for less able kids) just screamed "I'm a thicko" to employers. From memory, the conversion was Grade A GCE was the same as a pass (grade E at O level, but I may be wrong. But to be consigned to taking GCEs rather than O levels was to be written off an never getting a decent job, ever.
Of course, what many Tories think in private is that nice Middle Class children will take these spanking new son-of-O levels, and those nasty pleb children (who are obviously less intelligent or they wouldn't be poor) will take the replacement for GCEs. Assuming that there is one. Because I haven't seen any explanation of what exam the less able children will take (an bear in mind that O levels were intended for the IQ 100 and up group, and thus eliminate half the population). Since there's almost no correlation between class and intelligence, it might not work out quite how they planned.
All this stinks of being yet another move by the current crop of the elitist end of the Tory party wanting to put the poor back in their place, working for peanuts to help the party donors get rich. Sorry, improve the economy.
M
My school year was the first to sit GCSEs. As I was in top set for English and Maths, we were prepped to take the exams for those subjects a year early so, obviously, sat the O Level papers. So I have a fair insight into comparing the two. At the start, the level of difficulty of subject matter for GCSEs was directly comparable to O Level but the method of continual moderation made them far easier to pass although it did require constant effort throughout the course rather than a bit of cramming at the end.
Personally, I do not think O Levels are the answer due to their complete reliance upon an end of course exam. But my main concern at the moment is that I have a 12 year old daughter who would be amongst the first to sit the new exams in 2016. However, her school had just decided to make the GCSE course run over 3 years (rather than the standard 2) to allow greater variety and the teaching of additional content. This news probably blows their rather sensible decision out of the water.
Personally, I do not think O Levels are the answer due to their complete reliance upon an end of course exam. But my main concern at the moment is that I have a 12 year old daughter who would be amongst the first to sit the new exams in 2016. However, her school had just decided to make the GCSE course run over 3 years (rather than the standard 2) to allow greater variety and the teaching of additional content. This news probably blows their rather sensible decision out of the water.
I think you must be referring to CSEs (Certificates of Secondary Education). O and A Levels were GCEs (General Certificates of Education).
Because the proposed O-levels are a test of memory rather than ability and the two tier exam system means we'll return to the days when education professionals made decisions that adversely affected a child's prospects in life.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 572
Other than anti tory hyperbole why do you believe this would be a bad thing for educational standards.
On face value it seems to me having a single exam at the end of the course suggests pupils are more likely to learn the subject in a deeper and more rounded way. From two years out you are much less likely to be able to learn just the bits you needed to pass a test perhaps.
The thing I'd like to see any reform remember though is the focus needs to be on helping children learn. Exams, whilst a measure of how well a child has learnt a topic should be just that, a reflection or measure, not an end goal in and of itself.
Sometimes I do wonder if as a society we miss the actual point of some of this stuff.
frankly I think this twaddle says more about your prejudices and sweeping generalisations than "many Tories".
I actually don't see what's wrong with the current GCSEs except the multiple exam boards. I guess you could start by making them more relevant to the workplace but at the end of the day, they hardly teach you rubbish you're never going to use either.
I think this is standard Gove policy of "change the name and people will think it's less ****", and...
In short, a waste of money.
I think this is standard Gove policy of "change the name and people will think it's less ****", and...
In short, a waste of money.
My partner works for the University of York and teaches first year Psychology.
When she first started teaching it was just before the new wave of students started last year and some of the things she's told me about how thick they are is unbelievable.
Some of the students are handing in papers without titles, incorrect grammar and spelling, incorrect use of tables and charts, asking for help and getting rude when refused as they dont understand how University works, using inanimate objects (like a swivel office chair) as a reason why there experiment could be floored.... 65% + students are Oxford and Cambridge students who didn't pass the bar and the rest are international students. Bare in mind you need to get at least 4-5 (AFAIR) A Levels at grade A to get into York.
And people are trying to defend our current level of education system?
Next year York will be accepting a record level of International students and the same for the year after, because the teachers are getting fed up with teaching current generation education system taught students.
When she first started teaching it was just before the new wave of students started last year and some of the things she's told me about how thick they are is unbelievable.
Some of the students are handing in papers without titles, incorrect grammar and spelling, incorrect use of tables and charts, asking for help and getting rude when refused as they dont understand how University works, using inanimate objects (like a swivel office chair) as a reason why there experiment could be floored.... 65% + students are Oxford and Cambridge students who didn't pass the bar and the rest are international students. Bare in mind you need to get at least 4-5 (AFAIR) A Levels at grade A to get into York.
And people are trying to defend our current level of education system?
Next year York will be accepting a record level of International students and the same for the year after, because the teachers are getting fed up with teaching current generation education system taught students.
Considering GCSE questions are so easy, Michael Gove doesn't do very well when some are put to him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNR0AuGnoUg 