Top GCSE grades for only top pupils - what do you think?

What do you mean 'will only be available to top students'? How do they pick out these top students?

There are these things called exams.

Ok so the thread-starter means that the least intelligent won't be able to reach the top grades because they're the least intelligent, not because they're segregated? Isn't that how it works now? What's different?

The wording of this thread title/header should be changed. The new '9' grade will be a true mark of distinction, allowing the best and brightest to be truly rewarded - like they are at the current A2 levels, where A*s are very hard to obtain. Students may even be more encouraged to do better, seeing as there's more differentiation and therefore more competition among them.

The biggest announcement of the day so far is the planned grading system for the new GCSEs. (Have a look here: http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/education-26854297).

Scrapping the A*-E system, grades will now be ranked by numbers - with 9 being the highest grade, and 1 being the lowest. For the first time, the English system will be in line with the international systems.

But, the top grade (A*/9) will now only be available to a precious few - 20,000 students! This has never happened before in England!

What do you think about these measures? Is it fair that only a few students will be able to get the top grade? Will the new GCSEs be better or worse than the current GCSEs?

Want to hear your thoughts!

Sloppy J.

Of course it's fair, in the same was as it's fair that not everyone was (supposedly) able to get an A* or A at GCSE. If everyone were able then it would lose its value straight away. People don't want to be told that they or their children are not going to get the top grade, but not everyone can be in the 95th percentile - that's the point of it.

Personally I think the new GCSE system is going to cause more problems than it solves and I think we'd have been better off adopting a GPA system so it's a more continuous scale, but I see absolutely no problem in giving the best grades to the best students and helping them stand out. It can be hard to stay motivated when constantly surrounded by a group of people who don't recognise the value of the education they're receiving and would rather not be there.

Unfair so daddy's little princess at private school and extra tuition get everything and get grades and those in public schools with kids that scream and shout and fight get sweet FA it's out of order

He only said A*A*A. This is the standard for all science courses at Cambridge now, and has been known to be given out by Imperial for various courses, Manchester for Physics, and probably a few others. 3A*s does happen occasionally for these same courses.

It's hardly the fault of the exam system that this happens. The solution is not to scrap a meritocratic system, it's to make sure that everyone has equal opportunities to succeed in this system.

I wouldn't be surprised if people appealed if they're one mark off, especially in subjects such as English, where it can be hard to accurately mark something. Also, if these "9" grades become sacred, then it would put pressure on schools to get as many as they want, to boost their "league table" position.

To be honest, I just think GCSE exams are becoming more about learning a syllabus than actually understanding the subject at times.

Medicine

Unfair so daddy's little princess at private school and extra tuition get everything and get grades and those in public schools with kids that scream and shout and fight get sweet FA it's out of order

I don't see the point in changing the grading system.

Setting a cap on top grades for only 20,000 students is ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. You can't determine who is worthy of an A*/1 grade based on how many other people have achieved one! You base it on the quality of the work in front of you.

Michael Gove is worryingly stupid, he needs to. Massive w***er