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

Morbius said:
Surely the main problem is not with the qualification but the fact that there are multiple exam boards, each one a private company. Why do schools go with one over another? To get better results so that they are bumped up the league tables. And so we have a "race to the bottom" where the exam boards are lowering standards so that more schools pick them over the others.

Keep the GCSE but have one state-run exam board.
Click to expand...

You can't change something and keep it. If they were to change they way GCSEs work, then there would still be a difference, but things become muddy if the name sticks. Pupil from year X gets 9 GCSEs, Pupil from year Y also gets 9, but somewhere between them the standards were changed. How do you compare the pupils?

compare that to: Pupil X get 9 GCSEs, Pupil Y Gets 9 O-Levels.

Much easier to compare.
 
Castiel said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jun/21/michael-gove-scrap-gcse-exams?newsfeed=true



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?
Click to expand...

Continually keep changing the system and in the next ten years acted surprised that standards have fallen. You could not make it up!!
 
So does the new style of 'O Levels' only affect the core subjects; english, maths and science?

What about other subjects like languages, geography etc?

I am currently doing AAT level 4 and there is also talk of merging some of the units together for this qualification aswell.
I gather that perhaps the overall education system has to be revised to take into account current social, economic and political factors??
 
Dj_Jestar said:
If they were to change they way GCSEs work, then there would still be a difference, but things become muddy if the name sticks. Pupil from year X gets 9 GCSEs, Pupil from year Y also gets 9, but somewhere between them the standards were changed. How do you compare the pupils?
Click to expand...

Pupil from school A gets 9 GCSEs from Edexcel. Pupil from school B gets 9 GCSEs from OCR. There's no certainty that Edexcel papers are the same difficulty as OCR papers, so how do you compare these pupils?
 
Morbius said:
Pupil from school A gets 9 GCSEs from Edexcel. Pupil from school B gets 9 GCSEs from OCR. There's no certainty that Edexcel papers are the same difficulty as OCR papers, so how do you compare these pupils?
Click to expand...

Answer: You can't. Hence new names please.

Thanks for falling right into line and arguing against yourself \o/
 
paradigm said:
Or are the type of person that can do that without trying. I was fortunate enough to be one of those.

I had to make an effort at A level though, which I guess shows that GCSEs were indeed far too easy.
Click to expand...

True...

They are made out to be difficult, but really aren't. All the practice papers we do are much harder than the actual exam. (Probably because they're nothing but A* questions, but that isn't a bad thing)
 
I went from GCSE to AS levels and it was a massive smack in the face. I went from 2 A*, something like 8 As and a B, to CDUU, the U's in Chemistry and Further Maths. Whilst I obviously don't want to lay the blame at others (because it makes it look like I won't take responsibility for myself) I know that if maths and sciences at GCSE were harder I would have done better at AS level because I would have been more prepared for the difficulty, because I came into AS levels without any idea of the principles and everyone was racing past me. (GCSE was just fact-cramming and some mild maths theory) Now I've resat the AS year and hopefully will have done well, I have swapped Further Maths for Economics and Chemistry for Biology, so hopefully I can get into a half decent uni.

It didn't help that no-one else in my family had been to university - my parents left with little/no qualification. However I'm determined to turn it around and hopefully it's been enough. :)

That's from a student's perspective. (well, mine, anyway)
 
Morbius said:
OK, if you want to change the name that's fine with me. I was thinking more about the course itself but the name is unimportant.

I shall call our new exam... the Rupert.
Click to expand...

Trying to divert the argument away from the main point is so uncool.

You cannot keep the same name for something that is used to compare individuals if you are intending to change it. If the system changes, the name must change too.
 
Does wind me up when people go shouting about x being easier than y when they have no actual evidence for anything. Just going off of what the media says most of the time and to big themselves up.

I have no objection to this change; I think it will make things harder for the students taking them and I got off lucky you could say by doing GCSE's. However I can totally agree that taking one long exam is not a great way of testing somebody. I was pretty ill for both of my English GCSE's (runs, sick, etc) and I'd say that definitely hindered my performance so I'm grateful that I had some other work (previous years exams) to back it up somewhat.

I would welcome anything that makes the step easier from GCSE to A level though. Personally I didn't find the step too challenging with the subjects I took (maths, fmaths, physics, chem) although lots of people said it was a huge step. What really annoys me though is how to get in top uni's you have to do more work than just the A levels, (step papers etc). I'd rather the actual was exam was harder but retained more value.

I am lazy and got through GCSE's with little effort, I don't brag about it like a few on here though.. However at A level I have definitely had to work harder, listen more in lessons, and get help when I need it. I don't see a problem with that though.

WALL OF TEXT! :p - Oh and for reference I am a current AS student.
 
Don't you dare say that Core 4 is easy, I will chop your head off with my flexi ruler!
So this new system is going to split the students up at 14, which is completely stupid.
 
Number_25 said:
Nice.

The whole argument that GCSE's are too easy is a complete load of bull-mess though, I struggled like hell with the pressure and only managed 9 GCSEs of C and above.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, I couldn't speak a word of English when I came to England and went straight to 2nd year towards the end of Term 1. 3.5 years later I took all the exams like everyone else and passed both English Language and Literature at grade C. I swear I didn't learn a single new thing in maths until year 10.

It's easy! The gap to A-Levels are much harder.
 
TheCenturion said:
How do you propose that is changed though?

Let me give you an example. Let's say you set an exam paper worth 100 marks, and 100 students sit the exam. You make it quite a difficult exam. Luckily, the students have prepared well, and it just so happens that 12 of the students get 90 marks or more. That means that if you got above 90%, you're in the top 12% of students, not the top 10%.

I think the main problem with this is that although it allows comparison of students within a cohort, it is very difficult for comparison of students between cohorts.
Click to expand...
You normally distribute the grading in a way where 50% are distributed below average and 50% above average. Yes, this doesn't solve the calibre of students we are producing, but it means we could better make international comparisons etc
 
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 :)

Nick Clegg is prepared to block plans by Michael Gove to "turn the clock back" to the 1950s by replacing GCSEs with a two-tier exam system modelled on O-levels and CSEs, which were scrapped a quarter of a century ago.

A furious deputy prime minister, who was not consulted on the reforms, has made clear that he will reject Gove's plans out of hand if a leaked internal education department document on the changes is correct.

Clegg, who is in Brazil at the Rio+20 summit, instructed senior party officials in a transatlantic telephone call to condemn the plans and to denounce Gove in highly personal terms shortly after the education secretary outlined his plans to MPs in an emergency commons statement.
Click to expand...
 
scorza said:
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 :)
Click to expand...

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.
 
PermaBanned said:
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.
Click to expand...

Because older forum members did O-Levels and they turned out much better then the yoof of today so it must have been better. :D
 
Castiel said:
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.
Click to expand...

to be fair though they have got more of their policies achieved than any libdems before them :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom