Comments on: Background to the changes http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/ This consultation covers the changes being made to current GCSE specifications in England. Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:30:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Kate Richardson http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-162 Kate Richardson Tue, 01 Nov 2011 14:13:55 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-162 My eldest daughter has just received certification for GCSEs (summer 2011). She achieved 14 GCSEs, all at excellent grades (10 x As and 4 x Bs - 2 of these As were from a Distinction for BTEC Business Studies which we don't really count!). However that still leaves her with an impressive 12 GCSEs. She worked really hard to achieve this and did re-sit a couple of the early science modules. Why are re-sits such a bad thing? (OK, I appreciate you shouldn't be allowed to re-sit forever but surely a second chance is fair enough, anyone can have a bad day or lack maturity in exams initially, thus failing to reach their true potential). Anyway, she is now settling well into 6th form having achieved the entry requirement grades no problem. By contrast, my second daughter is currently in Year 9 and will be one of the first to be effected by the proposed changes. She is about to sit her first GCSE maths module (Nov) which now may or may not actually count towards her final GCSE as I understand it? The playing field is not level and I am confident that the 2014 GCSE results will show a steep decline, severely knocking the confidence of the students. Are 6th form entry requirements going to change to reflect this does anyone think? Also, are universities and employers going to start checking as to which year GCSEs were taken and judge there value accordingly? My eldest daughter has just received certification for GCSEs (summer 2011). She achieved 14 GCSEs, all at excellent grades (10 x As and 4 x Bs – 2 of these As were from a Distinction for BTEC Business Studies which we don’t really count!). However that still leaves her with an impressive 12 GCSEs. She worked really hard to achieve this and did re-sit a couple of the early science modules. Why are re-sits such a bad thing? (OK, I appreciate you shouldn’t be allowed to re-sit forever but surely a second chance is fair enough, anyone can have a bad day or lack maturity in exams initially, thus failing to reach their true potential). Anyway, she is now settling well into 6th form having achieved the entry requirement grades no problem. By contrast, my second daughter is currently in Year 9 and will be one of the first to be effected by the proposed changes. She is about to sit her first GCSE maths module (Nov) which now may or may not actually count towards her final GCSE as I understand it? The playing field is not level and I am confident that the 2014 GCSE results will show a steep decline, severely knocking the confidence of the students. Are 6th form entry requirements going to change to reflect this does anyone think? Also, are universities and employers going to start checking as to which year GCSEs were taken and judge there value accordingly?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Pierrette Sims http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-149 Pierrette Sims Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:44:01 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-149 I do approve of students taking their GCSE exam at the end of Year 11. Not all Year 10 pupils have that level of maturity necessary to get a respectable grade in English Language. Being able to respond with sophistication to what is read and to write with confidence and style is not simply a matter of SPAG. If you really want to improve standards, then get rid of controlled coursework for English. Make them part of the terminal exam if you wish. It is impossible for schools to administer. 6 pieces of controlled coursework in one year doesn't sound so bad, I agree and my Faculty has certainly worked really hard to plan for these changes by writing stimulating and challenging schemes of work. HOWEVER... what do you do when pupils are absent? You provide after school catch up sessions so that you don't lose any more of precious teaching time. Some students miss the planning stage and some students on longer absences turn up for the controlled writing stage without a clue about what is going on. One student is permitted one hour, another has missed two hours etc. Then there are the new starters from another school, joining half through the year. They have done a different syllabus or, as is normally the case, arrive with no coursework and somehow teachers have to get 3 or 4 pieces out of them. It is a nightmare keeping track. At the same time my teachers are marking coursework, essays and homework for KS3 KS4 and KS5 as well as preparing lessons and helping students to catch up. Do you know how long English teachers spend marking? An A Level essay takes 30 mins, GCSE 20 mins, KS3 15 mins. Marking just ONE piece of work for each class taught amounts to 60 hours. And that is just ONE piece. These hours are put in after school and weekends and holidays. I really thought someone would see sense regarding controlled coursework but I am amazed to see that you don't propose to change this. PLEASE get rid of the controlled coursework, turn it into an extra exam at the end of a two year course if you must. Or at least limit the amount of it for English Language and Literature. They constitute two subjects and merit two GCSE grades, but as in so many schools we don't have the luxury of science time to complete our course. I do approve of students taking their GCSE exam at the end of Year 11. Not all Year 10 pupils have that level of maturity necessary to get a respectable grade in English Language. Being able to respond with sophistication to what is read and to write with confidence and style is not simply a matter of SPAG.

If you really want to improve standards, then get rid of controlled coursework for English. Make them part of the terminal exam if you wish. It is impossible for schools to administer. 6 pieces of controlled coursework in one year doesn’t sound so bad, I agree and my Faculty has certainly worked really hard to plan for these changes by writing stimulating and challenging schemes of work.
HOWEVER… what do you do when pupils are absent? You provide after school catch up sessions so that you don’t lose any more of precious teaching time. Some students miss the planning stage and some students on longer absences turn up for the controlled writing stage without a clue about what is going on. One student is permitted one hour, another has missed two hours etc. Then there are the new starters from another school, joining half through the year. They have done a different syllabus or, as is normally the case, arrive with no coursework and somehow teachers have to get 3 or 4 pieces out of them. It is a nightmare keeping track. At the same time my teachers are marking coursework, essays and homework for KS3 KS4 and KS5 as well as preparing lessons and helping students to catch up. Do you know how long English teachers spend marking? An A Level essay takes 30 mins, GCSE 20 mins, KS3 15 mins. Marking just ONE piece of work for each class taught amounts to 60 hours. And that is just ONE piece. These hours are put in after school and weekends and holidays.
I really thought someone would see sense regarding controlled coursework but I am amazed to see that you don’t propose to change this. PLEASE get rid of the controlled coursework, turn it into an extra exam at the end of a two year course if you must. Or at least limit the amount of it for English Language and Literature. They constitute two subjects and merit two GCSE grades, but as in so many schools we don’t have the luxury of science time to complete our course.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Vanessa Sinclair http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-148 Vanessa Sinclair Wed, 26 Oct 2011 11:26:50 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-148 I am not scared of change, I embrace it. Furthermore, I believe that through change that we can improve the education we deliver to our students. However, sometimes the scale and pace of wide-sweeping reforms such as those proposed here is shocking. In my 8th year of teaching, and one of the very few from my cohort who still works in the state education sector, I have been part of the introduction of 3 new GCSE specifications, major KS3 changes and changes of A level specifications. None of these changes were optional for my school or department but were national. As Head of Science each time a new specification is introduced I have to justify it to my department. We then embark on the huge task of preparing for teaching of the specifications; buying in resources, writing our own resources, preparing new practicals and researching the examinations in order to provide the best chance for the young people we teach. I therefore ask this simple question; what are the reasons for the change to linear assessment? I have found no evidence that it will improve standards from educational literature. I would ask those who have the power to change the timings of this proposal to think carefully. Their decisions will directly impact the teachers who work so hard to do their jobs as best as they can. But, more importantly, if the current timescale is adhered to, this change will be rushed and lead to a real fall in standards as schools and teacher scrabble to design Schemes of Work and prepare their students for a new model of assessment. Ultimately, it will be the targeted cohort of students who will suffer the consequences - I would be very uneasy if my child were in this group. I am not advocating that we change nothing, simply that teachers views are taken into consideration and that teachers are treated as the expert professionals that many are. A listening excercise was embarked upon as part of the NHS reforms. Perhaps one is also necessary in this case. I am not scared of change, I embrace it. Furthermore, I believe that through change that we can improve the education we deliver to our students. However, sometimes the scale and pace of wide-sweeping reforms such as those proposed here is shocking. In my 8th year of teaching, and one of the very few from my cohort who still works in the state education sector, I have been part of the introduction of 3 new GCSE specifications, major KS3 changes and changes of A level specifications. None of these changes were optional for my school or department but were national. As Head of Science each time a new specification is introduced I have to justify it to my department. We then embark on the huge task of preparing for teaching of the specifications; buying in resources, writing our own resources, preparing new practicals and researching the examinations in order to provide the best chance for the young people we teach.
I therefore ask this simple question; what are the reasons for the change to linear assessment? I have found no evidence that it will improve standards from educational literature.
I would ask those who have the power to change the timings of this proposal to think carefully. Their decisions will directly impact the teachers who work so hard to do their jobs as best as they can. But, more importantly, if the current timescale is adhered to, this change will be rushed and lead to a real fall in standards as schools and teacher scrabble to design Schemes of Work and prepare their students for a new model of assessment. Ultimately, it will be the targeted cohort of students who will suffer the consequences – I would be very uneasy if my child were in this group.
I am not advocating that we change nothing, simply that teachers views are taken into consideration and that teachers are treated as the expert professionals that many are. A listening excercise was embarked upon as part of the NHS reforms. Perhaps one is also necessary in this case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Brian http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-146 Brian Mon, 24 Oct 2011 22:42:30 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-146 Are re-sits a major issue? I have taught many very able students who due to the stresses of exams have failed to realise their potential in exams. However, after re-sitting the exam have acheived grades apporpriate to their ability and more importantly rewarding their efforts. How about reviewing equivalent qualifications, where students are rewarded (with 4 GCSE equivalences) for plagarism. Lets not forget that in core subjects we start working towards GCSE qualifications as students move in to KS3 (a five year process). During my taeching career (12 years) I have never been able to prepare any one cohort of students over a five year period due to the regularity of reviews / changes. Are re-sits a major issue? I have taught many very able students who due to the stresses of exams have failed to realise their potential in exams. However, after re-sitting the exam have acheived grades apporpriate to their ability and more importantly rewarding their efforts.

How about reviewing equivalent qualifications, where students are rewarded (with 4 GCSE equivalences) for plagarism.

Lets not forget that in core subjects we start working towards GCSE qualifications as students move in to KS3 (a five year process). During my taeching career (12 years) I have never been able to prepare any one cohort of students over a five year period due to the regularity of reviews / changes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Sarah Shepherd http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-104 Sarah Shepherd Tue, 18 Oct 2011 16:13:34 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-104 As the HoD of a large and successful Geography dept currently entering over 140 students in yrs 10 and 11, along with over 50 AS and A2, I am outraged at the thought of yet more expense changing from the modular AQA B course we follow to a different linear course. At no time,2 years ago,were we advised by OFQUAL that the modular course would be so temporary. This seems just another political decision made without thought or consultation to real teachers and their students about the routes they use to become successful. As the HoD of a large and successful Geography dept currently entering over 140 students in yrs 10 and 11, along with over 50 AS and A2, I am outraged at the thought of yet more expense changing from the modular AQA B course we follow to a different linear course. At no time,2 years ago,were we advised by OFQUAL that the modular course would be so temporary. This seems just another political decision made without thought or consultation to real teachers and their students about the routes they use to become successful.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: S Chuhan http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-99 S Chuhan Fri, 14 Oct 2011 13:33:51 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-99 We have also fully resourced (at a cost of ~ £6000) and planned a Y9 route through GCSE which has already begun. This is a brand new specification that was approved by OfQual only 6 months ago! I am getting fed up of the snap decisions being made, with very little or no solid scientific evidence for them. We are having to start in Y9 because we only get an allowance of 3 or 4 hours a week of Science (depending on year group). This is another debate in itself btw. I don't disagree in principal with having to take exams at the end of the course only. (After all I did this myself). But it is the manner in which this government is handling these changes that is really starting to get on my nerves. We have also fully resourced (at a cost of ~ £6000) and planned a Y9 route through GCSE which has already begun. This is a brand new specification that was approved by OfQual only 6 months ago!

I am getting fed up of the snap decisions being made, with very little or no solid scientific evidence for them.

We are having to start in Y9 because we only get an allowance of 3 or 4 hours a week of Science (depending on year group). This is another debate in itself btw.

I don’t disagree in principal with having to take exams at the end of the course only. (After all I did this myself). But it is the manner in which this government is handling these changes that is really starting to get on my nerves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Paul Turner http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-85 Paul Turner Sun, 09 Oct 2011 09:31:30 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-85 Like many schools our most able Year 9 scientists began their 3 year modular GCSE course leading to 'triple award science'this September. They take their first exams in November as part of what was, before Michael Gove's intervention, a carefully planned (rotation of specialist teachers etc), newly resourced and differentiated route to GCSE Biology, Chemistry and Physics. What now? The way in which Gove announced his decision to end modular GCSE on a TV show (so what sort of consultation is this exactly?)and the uncertainty created for students who have already started is shameful. Like many schools our most able Year 9 scientists began their 3 year modular GCSE course leading to ‘triple award science’this September. They take their first exams in November as part of what was, before Michael Gove’s intervention, a carefully planned (rotation of specialist teachers etc), newly resourced and differentiated route to GCSE Biology, Chemistry and Physics. What now?
The way in which Gove announced his decision to end modular GCSE on a TV show (so what sort of consultation is this exactly?)and the uncertainty created for students who have already started is shameful.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Mr Feldman http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-75 Mr Feldman Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:46:13 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-75 If students can only take terminal examinations then is is essential that we reduce the number of examinations that are required for each qualification to manageable numbers. Students doing modular exams are tested far more extensively at present but there is would not be fair to simply put all their current examinations into one series. If students can only take terminal examinations then is is essential that we reduce the number of examinations that are required for each qualification to manageable numbers. Students doing modular exams are tested far more extensively at present but there is would not be fair to simply put all their current examinations into one series.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Mrs S Raymond http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-62 Mrs S Raymond Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:41:31 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-62 The cost of replacing the existing, most of them newly bought, GCSE and A level courses/textbooks and resources, will be extraordinary. The only beneficiaries are the exam boards and the publishers, , which already take a significant proportion of our budget, better spent on supporting individual students. In terms of resits as the main reason for going for linear courses, there are hardly any resits at KS4 as we simply can't afford them and never intnded to do the modular courses just because the stundets can keep resitting them and improving their grades. We do them in order to spread the wrokload as a majority of students do 12-14 GCSEs over the two years. It would be good to talk to soem students and teachers, before making decisions informed by the narrow experence of selective education 40 years ago. The cost of replacing the existing, most of them newly bought, GCSE and A level courses/textbooks and resources, will be extraordinary. The only beneficiaries are the exam boards and the publishers, , which already take a significant proportion of our budget, better spent on supporting individual students.
In terms of resits as the main reason for going for linear courses, there are hardly any resits at KS4 as we simply can’t afford them and never intnded to do the modular courses just because the stundets can keep resitting them and improving their grades. We do them in order to spread the wrokload as a majority of students do 12-14 GCSEs over the two years. It would be good to talk to soem students and teachers, before making decisions informed by the narrow experence of selective education 40 years ago.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Steve Harvey http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/introduction/background-to-the-changes/comment-page-1/#comment-53 Steve Harvey Sat, 01 Oct 2011 11:09:02 +0000 http://comment.ofqual.gov.uk/gcse-reform/?p=17#comment-53 I note that as of today (1/10/11) this web page states that in June 2015, "GCSEs offered as linear qualifications only for subject awards in summer 2014". While I thoroughly support the change back to linear GCSEs, I do think that the candidates ought to be allowed to take their examinations BEFORE they are awarded their grades. I note that as of today (1/10/11) this web page states that in June 2015, “GCSEs offered as linear qualifications only for subject awards in summer 2014″. While I thoroughly support the change back to linear GCSEs, I do think that the candidates ought to be allowed to take their examinations BEFORE they are awarded their grades.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>