So the government wants people to get at least a C in GCSE...

Original post by TheBigJosh

This is ridiculous.

I would have to agree with you here.

The amount of work required to get 100% in Foundations is nowhere near the amount of work required to get 100% in Higher.

If my 100% grade (at higher level) was treated in a manner where I could have done a much easier paper and still achieve an A then I would feel very hard done by.

The real problem is that many students aren't ready for qualifications and are in circumstances where getting A grades isn't obtainable, yet.

If A grades were given out to those who had to learn the easiest parts of a higher tier spec then that would be incredibly unfair for those learning everything and working for an A in higher.

At the end of the day, a grade is just a letter, it's what you know that really matters. I think personally, that if great grades were handed out for so little everyone would be getting these grades and the system would collapse - grades are used to determine what we know, that's why you have to sit a higher paper to be fully rewarded for your studying.

I've got quite strong views on this, if anyone disagrees I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Reply 22

Original post by Jargonium

All I can add is that on some papers at GCSE it can be only 30-40 percent for the C grade, how much easier can it get? That requires minimal effort.

Reply 23

Original post by TheBigJosh

They used to have that in the past, it got changed so it will never happen again.
And AA* what is that?

Pathetic, why should they not be allowed to get Bs but people with high paper at chemistry be allowed to get C's with just 20%? It's not fair on those who actually work hard.
AA* is meant to be double A*

Reply 24

Original post by notthegreatest

If you worked hard, you wouldn't be sitting the foundation paper anyway ...

Reply 25

Original post by TheBigJosh

If you worked hard, you wouldn't be sitting the foundation paper anyway ...

Maybe for some who can't be bothered to revise.. But there are students who do revise especially maths... but maybe suffer from discalculia, or don't have it at all but is just finding it difficult which kind of pushes them back so they choose to do foundation instead.

You may say foundation paper for maths is easy but real it not that easy... For you it may be but not for everyone.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 26

Original post by TheBigJosh

All I can add is that on some papers at GCSE it can be only 30-40 percent for the C grade, how much easier can it get? That requires minimal effort.

My friend got 98% in Chemistry at foundation, I got 100% in Chemistry at higher.

He said he deserved an A* too..

I'm not for elitism, and I can see how for some people getting a C isn't easy. It requires work. And lots of it.

But to say that you should be given a better grade than you deserve as if it is a human right to be given passes is absurd to me.

If those studying foundation think it's shocking that people who got 20% in Higher Chemistry got a C then why don't they sit Higher.. All of the grade boundaries are mapped using UMS and statistics.

By using UMS AQA said that in that year, 20% at Higher was worth the same as a C grade in Foundation. If they want change then sit the Higher paper, the more people that score highly, the higher the boundaries are.

Reply 27

Original post by notthegreatest

I see your point, but have you seen a GCSE Maths paper?
http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-43603F-QP-MAR13.PDF
That is ridiculous.

Reply 28

Original post by TheBigJosh

I see your point, but have you seen a GCSE Maths paper?
http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-43603F-QP-MAR13.PDF
That is ridiculous.

That is AQA... They are a joke overall even with higher paper... Try edxcel...

Reply 29

Original post by notthegreatest

That is AQA... They are a joke overall even with higher paper... Try edxcel...

That's not the point, your original argument is about the attainability of C grades, please tell me how it is not possible to get a C from that paper.

EDIT: Edexcel is no different it is just as easy -

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 30

Original post by notthegreatest

Those with learning difficulties are given additional time. If you have dyslexia you are given additional time on Maths papers.

If someone finds something difficult and wants to truly pass, they will keep sitting the paper until they do.

It's very unfair that some people are brought up really well, sent to the best schools with the best teachers yet others aren't at all. However, that is the sad reality of life. If those people (that would include me) were given easier papers then it would be outright unfair. Education should be equal, but it isn't.

Personally, I think everyone should sit the same paper. That means that the result everyone achieves is a fair representation of their knowledge in the exam that everyone sat.

I think that it's important to note that you can do qualifications called equivalencies that can get you up to a B in science and maths - mostly coursework with a tiny exam at the end. I think that's unfair, but it's reality.

Reply 31

username1214455

Original post by TheBigJosh

That's not the point, your original argument is about the attainability of C grades, please tell me how it is not possible to get a C from that paper.

Youd be surprised by the awful teaching in lower sets. Some 16 year old kids I know dont even understand timestables. The foundation papers are too easy but if you look at Higher OCR for example its much more complex.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 32

Original post by TheBigJosh

Well sorry to hurt you because the real papers don't really look like that.

Reply 33

Original post by Obiejess

I suppose, I can't imagine it, but if there are 16 year olds that can't mark a number on an arrow, I am worried by our education standards.

Reply 34

Original post by notthegreatest

Well sorry to hurt you because the real papers don't really look like that.

Sorry to hurt you, I read the paper, taken from the 2012 Summer exams! Plus a 2010 Edexcel paper...

Reply 35

username1214455

Original post by TheBigJosh

I suppose, I can't imagine it, but if there are 16 year olds that can't mark a number on an arrow, I am worried by our education standards.

There are. I think those of us with more opportunities tend to forget that people are struggling to get their C whilst we fill out our Oxbridge apps.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 36

Original post by Obiejess

There are. I think those of us with more opportunities tend to forget that people are struggling to get their C whilst we fill out our Oxbridge apps.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Haha I don't consider myself Oxbridge material anymore ( I declined Oxford) but I see both sides to the argument, OP doesn't, that's the issue here.

Reply 37

Original post by TheBigJosh

I see your point, but have you seen a GCSE Maths paper?
http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-43603F-QP-MAR13.PDF
That is ridiculous.

I had to sit one.

My previous school was the lowest attaining in my area, with most pupils not gaining 5 A*-Cs.

Everyone was forced to sit Foundation Maths and most were forced to sit Foundation English (even those who already had A*/As in both, me and a few friends) - lucky enough I got out of sitting Foundation English!

I find it really sad that papers are made up with such easy questions, for those sitting this they will never experience real maths.I guess it's understandable that there's nothing about the golden ratio, euler's identity or anything about i..

But, it takes away from the real subject.

Physics is the best example. A subject that has such difficult maths is reduced to nonsensical numeracy.

Reply 38

Original post by TheBigJosh

Sorry to hurt you, I read the paper, taken from the 2012 Summer exams! Plus a 2010 Edexcel paper...

Sorry to hurt YOU I have some of the foundation papers and if i snap a
Picture from it, it's not that "easy" maybe for some but not for all.

Reply 39