[Thectan]

(Original post by lewisbee)
I sent the educational government website an email stating what I thought on the matter as a student. I know Mr Gove (Idiot) won't read it and it'll be someone who doesn't even care but I wanted to express my anger to the government. Here's what I put...

"I would like to express my feelings about the proposed GCSE reform as both a student and a member of the public.

GCSE'S should not be reformed in any way shape or form, especially for a more difficult qualification! As someone who has just recently completed their GCSE'S I assure you that they are not as easy as you believe them to be. Over the past 3 weeks I have had to complete 9 GCSE papers all at a higher level. They have been stressful and difficult and the amount of pressure upon students at such an early stage in their life is not recognised enough. Yet the education minister, nothing but an overpaid fool on a ridiculous salary believes; in his eyes, that they are too easy. He is not in the position of a student taking their GCSE'S, therefore how can he justify whether or not they are too difficult. Maybe it was easy for him when he was a child. But from me speaking as a student this is absurd as he has little idea. He does not care about the morals of the children or the stress not just of their GCSE'S but their future in a struggling economy. He only cares about making a change which I deem as inefficient and a complete waste of people’s time, resources and money. The whole belief of GCSE'S as being easy is completely fabricated by you, the government when many of you were simply not inclined to go to a state school. But a Private school with a career path already set for you.

But, what about my recent GCSE qualifications for which I have spent 2 long hard years preparing for thoroughly. If these proposals go ahead; my qualification and millions of other peoples' qualifications upon the country will be deemed insufficient by employers. This will only mean instead of the economy prospering on behalf of the education system it will slump because the proposed system is not eligible enough yet to be provided to children. Also, have you thought of those who are less intelligent? Yes you may give them a different paper to do, but that will instantly batch label them as people who are insignificant to employers. This is not fair to those who have recently completed their GCSE'S as their qualification will be seen as outdated. And those who are not intelligent enough to take the new exams as they will be labelled absurdly as they will be instantly be pre-judged.

The proposed system is simply not fair! The current GCSE examinations are too difficult if anything. And students who are not academically successful will be labelled by the education system as people who 'couldn't be bothered.' I urge you to re-think your strategy and keep the current system in place as it simply works and presents a fair background upon students' eligibility.

Many thanks, Lewis"

Mate seriously? You found them difficult? A levels are hard.. Eg at maths GCSE to get the A* you need about 70%.. To get that at A level you need an overall 80% with 90% in your final year. THAT, is stressful, THAT is difficult. GCSEs are taking a poodle for a walk to the park, A levels are trying to stop an army of rottweilers trying to kill you when all you have is te clothes you stand in. I'm guessing that degrees are even harder..


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[funsongfactory]

(Original post by QuantumSuicide)
But Michael Gove hasn't studied them for two years, (well, he may have done in the past, but not recently) has he?
I'd be interested to know whether he did O-levels or GCSEs and his grades in them as well...

Yes I meant he ought to study them, I consider that part of sitting them. Then he'd realise they aren't as easy as he thinks.

Same, bet he didn't get top marks!

[Charlotte Hall]

I finished my GCSEs 12th June 2012. I am quite worried about what my GCSEs will now mean in comparison to O-levels but I do agree reform is needed. However, we should not hark back to O-levels and CSEs which were around in the 60s and 70s. GCSEs were bought in to replace O-levels in 1988 for a reason. GCSEs are flawed but are not broken beyond repair. For example, I took a GCSE in Food Technology as a kind of gap fill, it was a stupidly easy subject and the coursework (which was very long) was too easy and I just lost interest meaning that I didn't try. The exam itself was also stupidly easy with a question asking what a grater is used for. In this case GCSEs are pretty bad and need to be made harder but they do allow you to try and better your grade. I took French and absolutely hated it, got bad grades in my controlled assessments (along with English) but I stayed after school through most of the 2 years and got my grades up to B's. Too many people get A*s and A's which leads B grades to be devalued which is not fair. It is too easy to get an A* or A nowadays and this needs to be changed. A grade C is supposedly the average grade yet when my friends and I ever got a C on an exam we would retake as it is seen as a bad grade. Yes, GCSEs do need to be reformed but we should not be going back to a broken system that existed fifty years ago.

[Purple Giraffe]

So this has happened because students are doing too well in schools.

I wonder if students had been doing badly with only a handful achieving the top grades, would the politicians sit back and say "Yes, our exams are tough enough. Nice one". Of course not, they'd be in uproar saying "Our children are becoming less and less intelligent, what has happened to the youth of today!?". There's just no pleasing them...

[Lit teacher]

Before anyone compares percentages needed for certain grades, bear in mind that these figures are meaningless unless you know the difficulty of the exam. Scoring 50% in a Higher tier exam will be harder than getting 70% at Foundation, just as losing 1-0 to Spain takes considerably more skill than putting 4 goals past San Marino.
One of the faults with 'O' levels or CSE's was that in many subjects teachers had to select at the end of year nine which option to enter pupils for. As well as it being difficult to predict future performance, I had friends who, after they were told they were going to the CSE class, became completely demotivated. Although a CSE grade 1 was supposed to be equal to a 'C' at 'O' level, in reality the CSE was seen by many as inferior.
Personally, I was put into an 'O' level group for French. I did badly, missed the threshold for a D and so failed completely. At least with the modern system I could have taken the foundation paper and had something to show at the end.
Gove is hopelessly out of touch. The men's 100 metre sprint record has been broken 5 times in the last 10 years. Presumably Gove thinks this is because the track has been getting shorter.

[Thectan]

It's not a case of people are doing well. The boundaries of each exam each year allow only a certain percentage of people to get As etc so if the boundaries are low then thick people are taking the exams. The I level and CSEs are designed to be harder for everyone so people can earn the A and the A* instead of turning up hungover and still achieving the highest grade even if you miss completely a high marking question..


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
This will be a very interesting development it it transpires to be true - though as the only source so far is someone tweeting it's going to be in the Mail, I won't hold my breath.

The BBC said it is "going to come back in 2017", yesterday so I don't care.

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by Lit teacher)
Before anyone compares percentages needed for certain grades, bear in mind that these figures are meaningless unless you know the difficulty of the exam. Scoring 50% in a Higher tier exam will be harder than getting 70% at Foundation, just as losing 1-0 to Spain takes considerably more skill than putting 4 goals past San Marino.
One of the faults with 'O' levels or CSE's was that in many subjects teachers had to select at the end of year nine which option to enter pupils for. As well as it being difficult to predict future performance, I had friends who, after they were told they were going to the CSE class, became completely demotivated. Although a CSE grade 1 was supposed to be equal to a 'C' at 'O' level, in reality the CSE was seen by many as inferior.
Personally, I was put into an 'O' level group for French. I did badly, missed the threshold for a D and so failed completely. At least with the modern system I could have taken the foundation paper and had something to show at the end.
Gove is hopelessly out of touch. The men's 100 metre sprint record has been broken 5 times in the last 10 years. Presumably Gove thinks this is because the track has been getting shorter.

So, basically, CSE is the same thing as foundation.

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by Thectan)
Mate seriously? You found them difficult? A levels are hard.. Eg at maths GCSE to get the A* you need about 70%.. To get that at A level you need an overall 80% with 90% in your final year. THAT, is stressful, THAT is difficult. GCSEs are taking a poodle for a walk to the park, A levels are trying to stop an army of rottweilers trying to kill you when all you have is te clothes you stand in. I'm guessing that degrees are even harder..


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Who the eff told you that you need to get 70% for an A*in maths? "Mate" you need to do your research before you put a few words together and talk bullsh*it.

PS you need to get over 90% for an A* in GCSE idiot!

[Lit teacher]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
So, basically, CSE is the same thing as foundation.

Yes, except that the 'O' level / CSE decision has to be taken much earlier, and at GCSE a C is a C - there is no stigma if you reached this standard on the foundation rather than higher paper.

One of the more stupid aspects of this is that Gove recently overturned the rules to allow iGCSE's to count the same as actual GCSE's. iGCSE's are taken by schools that don't need to follow the National Curriculum, and in English at least they are an easier option, with less work and a narrower curriculum. He's happy to lower standards if it suits the private schools.

[anna-chipie 95]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
Who the eff told you that you need to get 70% for an A*in maths? "Mate" you need to do your research before you put a few words together and talk bullsh*it.

PS you need to get over 90% for an A* in GCSE idiot!

Isn't that for A-Level??

[nmr1991]

I didn't get any good GCSE's back a few years ago so this change is unlikely to affect me.

[f1mad]

(Original post by anna-chipie 95)
Isn't that for A-Level??

It is.

[QuantumSuicide]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
Who the eff told you that you need to get 70% for an A*in maths? "Mate" you need to do your research before you put a few words together and talk bullsh*it.

PS you need to get over 90% for an A* in GCSE idiot!

I think you need to do the research; it is never 90% for an A* at GCSE. Heck, the last Edexcel maths GCSE exam was 158/200 for an A*.

[Thectan]

And that's about 79%... And boundaries fluctuate, and that seems pretty high for maths, so jamal (?) I have done my research and have you looked at a level boundaries for each exam? You normally cannot afford to lose 10 marks or the A* is lost, at GCSE you can lose a good 20 marks if not more, ergo, a big question can be missed out entirely and the marks can still be achieved, hence, reform needs to be made.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by QuantumSuicide)
I think you need to do the research; it is never 90% for an A* at GCSE. Heck, the last Edexcel maths GCSE exam was 158/200 for an A*.

That means the exam was harder than usual. And I did that exam. They wrote questions that were never in the CGP books or in past papers. And also, it was 158 because the top 2% of the people who did that exam might have had low marks, maybe.

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by Lit teacher)
Yes, except that the 'O' level / CSE decision has to be taken much earlier, and at GCSE a C is a C - there is no stigma if you reached this standard on the foundation rather than higher paper.

One of the more stupid aspects of this is that Gove recently overturned the rules to allow iGCSE's to count the same as actual GCSE's. iGCSE's are taken by schools that don't need to follow the National Curriculum, and in English at least they are an easier option, with less work and a narrower curriculum. He's happy to lower standards if it suits the private schools.

I agree. Gove also wants to force children, under the age of 5, to remember their times table and spelling. At least that's what my teacher said. I learnt my times table at the age of 9 (not really I just knew the methods to find the answer mentally), and I'm not too bad at maths. I agree he wants to change the curriculum if it please the private schools.

[JamalAhmed]

(Original post by Lit teacher)
Yes, except that the 'O' level / CSE decision has to be taken much earlier, and at GCSE a C is a C - there is no stigma if you reached this standard on the foundation rather than higher paper.

One of the more stupid aspects of this is that Gove recently overturned the rules to allow iGCSE's to count the same as actual GCSE's. iGCSE's are taken by schools that don't need to follow the National Curriculum, and in English at least they are an easier option, with less work and a narrower curriculum. He's happy to lower standards if it suits the private schools.

What do you mean by decision needs to be taken earlier? In GCSE my teacher made the decision of who does Foundation or higher tier exam the day before the actual exam.

[R.P.Everything.]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
What do you mean by decision needs to be taken earlier? In GCSE my teacher made the decision of who does Foundation or higher tier exam the day before the actual exam.

Surely not, schools have to sign for the papers their pupils will do months before the actual exam period itself.

[Intriguing Alias]

(Original post by JamalAhmed)
Who the eff told you that you need to get 70% for an A*in maths? "Mate" you need to do your research before you put a few words together and talk bullsh*it.

PS you need to get over 90% for an A* in GCSE idiot!

1. I'm pretty sure he was talking raw marks - but may have been exaggerating a bit (I think it's nearer to 80% raw at GCSE for an A*).

2. No need to insult people and call them names - even if they were completely wrong (which I reiterate he wasn't really - you just misunderstood).