GCSE Reforms

[Ardemax]

Because Gove knows all about state education, the ****.

[Amberr]

I don't see how making students read through the whole of a shakespeare play over what they do now is better. Also the poetry thing? Have they not seen the size of that dreaded anthology book, I never wanted to read another poem again after GCSE. Changing the letters to numbers as well is just pointless, as Kardan pointed out, there is no benefit whatsoever. I heard on the radio this morning driving to college that they were thinking of changing the name to I-levels or something ridiculous? Unless they were joking I don't know.

[dbgtz]

Stupid policies.

[Inseriousity.]

I actually think the reason for the numbered system makes sense. If you need higher grades to distinguish between the borderline A*s and the outstanding A*s, having A** could start getting ridiculous. Having 8-1 means you can just add 9, 10 etc. It'd start getting a bit ridiculous if you add too many but on the whole, easier to use numbers.

The changes to the syllabus though are based on sweeping generalisations of the "dumbing down" of education, where if you actually spent any time in a school you'd know are unfounded. Everyone knows, for example, that you'd need to read the whole of Shakesphere or Of Mice and Men to answer the question even if the question itself focused on a particular Act or chapter.

[Chippiewill]

Everyone is moving away from solely assessing on examinations to more continuous assessment, not the opposite way round.

Schools are doing it so they get better grades so they don't get put into special measures by ofsted. Not because its better for the students.

[GommeInc]

I don't understand how changing fro A* to a number system changes anything - they're still just a way to grade results. The cost to change the system just for that seems a waste of resources from the get go.

The education system in this country is becoming worse and worse each year. Just teach core subjects and leave sixth form for the subjects which look into specific areas of a core subject. Art is art, it can incorporate painting, sculpture, photography and art history. Don't break up the subject just to spite the quality of teaching all for the chance students may be interested in too specific a subject area. It's like English being broken up into more than Literature and Language - Drama shouldn't be a subject, it can be taught in English Literature and Language when studying Shakespeare and other related texts.

Is this just all too obvious or have I lost my marbles and a grip on reality? :S

[Kardan]

I actually think the reason for the numbered system makes sense. If you need higher grades to distinguish between the borderline A*s and the outstanding A*s, having A** could start getting ridiculous. Having 8-1 means you can just add 9, 10 etc. It'd start getting a bit ridiculous if you add too many but on the whole, easier to use numbers.

The changes to the syllabus though are based on sweeping generalisations of the "dumbing down" of education, where if you actually spent any time in a school you'd know are unfounded. Everyone knows, for example, that you'd need to read the whole of Shakesphere or Of Mice and Men to answer the question even if the question itself focused on a particular Act or chapter.

But a current A* is already 90% of the marks. Why would we need a higher grade when each grade is done in 10%s?
And what is the point in differentiating between someone that got 90% and someone that got 93%? In what situation would someone even go 'No, you only got an A*, not an A** (or in the new case 8/9). GCSEs are pointless as long as you get 5 inc Eng, Maths (maybe Science in some places) above a C. Seems pointless.

[Inseriousity.]

But a current A* is already 90% of the marks. Why would we need a higher grade when each grade is done in 10%s?
And what is the point in differentiating between someone that got 90% and someone that got 93%? In what situation would someone even go 'No, you only got an A*, not an A** (or in the new case 8/9). GCSEs are pointless as long as you get 5 inc Eng, Maths (maybe Science in some places) above a C. Seems pointless.

I think the key word there is 'current' Universities and business leaders have been campaigning the government for a while hence the change. That's what politicians respond to: pressure groups.

[Special]

no point in this i bet when a pupil gets a score of '3' the teacher will just say 'yeah it's the same as a B'

[-:Undertaker:-]

The government can change and move around how the exams are done/taken all it wants, the fact is that while masses of children in our country learn dance, art, music, drama, and media - over in China and the far East they are learning english, mathematics, history, geography, the sciences...

And there can only be one economic winner at the end of it if that trend continues, and it ain't us.