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

Is it fair that only a few students will be able to get the top grade?

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!

...a criterion-referenced approach...
In light of these shortcomings, we do not propose that new GCSEs should be awarded using grade descriptions and examiner judgement only.

In view of this range of shortcomings we do not propose that new GCSEs should be awarded using a norm-referenced approach.

We propose that in 2017, when the standard of the new GCSEs will first be set, awarding should use statistical predictions, much as now. The predictions will show the proportion of students who would have been expected to be awarded at least a grade C, had they taken the current GCSE. We propose that these predictions should be used to determine the proportion of students who are awarded at least a grade 4. The predictions will be derived from the cohort’s performance in their Key Stage 2 tests relative to the performance of previous cohort’s, as now.

Once the standard has been set in the first year, we propose to maintain the standard by strengthening the current approach to awarding. We propose that this approach will allow us to identify changes in a cohort’s performance that should then be reflected in the grades awarded.

In future years, we envisage statistical information will continue to be important at awarding, because the evidence is that it is otherwise difficult to be confident that standards are being maintained. However, exam boards will be able to use information from the national reference test too.

Once the standard has been set in the first year, we propose to maintain the standard by strengthening the current approach to awarding. We propose that this approach will allow us to identify changes in a cohort’s performance that should then be reflected in the grades awarded.

In future years, we envisage statistical information will continue to be important at awarding, because the evidence is that it is otherwise difficult to be confident that standards are being maintained. However, exam boards will be able to use information from the national reference test too.

I don't think limiting the top grade my number is ever going to work, especially with the appeal culture in schools. If pupils find they're 1 mark off getting a 9, they'll appeal, but if there's a limit to how many people can get a 9, then surely the entire system goes wrong.

With respect this isn't true.


The way to do well is to persuade independent school heads (for whom KS2 SATS are optional) to rig your year's SATS results more than they rigged last year's SATS results. The key to getting more top GCSE results is to get more kids to get better grades in SATS, but whilst state schools have to enter all kids private schools can skew the entrants by only entering the brightest and best. If nationally your year does better than the previous year, their GCSE results will go up.

I din't really understand how it will work given the numbers of people that must surely get exactly the same mark...

Look at Nulli Tertius' post - it will not be a fixed 20,000 grade 9s. Instead 20,000 is the approximate predicted number of pupils who will achieve it.

Also, I liked the top comment on the BBC article when I read it yesterday: "look at my new grade system. It goes up to 11."

While a GPA-like system would be ideal, I can only see this as a generally good thing for identifying the best pupils. However, I worry that some universities may place more emphasis on people getting this grade 9. And realistically a cut-off of 95% is stupidly high for any grade. There's a reason most universities have the top grade at 70%. Having a grade with such a high threshold means that getting the grade can be as much about not making easy mistakes than it is about being knowledgeable.

where would the distinction lie between 8 and 7?

I'd be worried it would end up like the university system where a high 2:1 is much harder to obtain than a low 2:1 yet there is no distinction between them (fell foul of this myself!)

Well if 4 is the new C-grade cut off, it would suggest that grades C,B,A,A* will be replaced by 4,5,6,7,8,9 - 4 grades become 6, giving more distinction.

andrew2209, that's really interesting. So you think students will be appealing for a 9, when they have an 8, and have their appeal accepted?


Do you think that this new system will lead to more pressure? Or in house competitiveness?

While a GPA-like system would be ideal, I can only see this as a generally good thing for identifying the best pupils. However, I worry that some universities may place more emphasis on people getting this grade 9. And realistically a cut-off of 95% is stupidly high for any grade. There's a reason most universities have the top grade at 70%. Having a grade with such a high threshold means that getting the grade can be as much about not making easy mistakes than it is about being knowledgeable.

While I agree a 90% or 95% cut of is ridiculously high grade boundary, where you could easily lose 5% from easy mistakes, surely if the exams can be made harder then the "top 20,000" would still get a grade 9 even if the highest mark was 89%?

Either way, I think making it harder to get the top grade on exam papers, whether they're easy or not, is certainly a good thing in this day and age. Universities offering A*,A*,A (and the number of people achieving that) just shows how much the threshold needs to be moved. Exams grade aren't supposed to be "fair". Those who've spent more time revising and paying attention should be rewarded. What's the point of saying "Oh nobody should be allowed to fail"?

While I agree a 90% or 95% cut of is ridiculously high grade boundary, where you could easily lose 5% from easy mistakes, surely if the exams can be made harder then the "top 20,000" would still get a grade 9 even if the highest mark was 89%?

Either way, I think making it harder to get the top grade on exam papers, whether they're easy or not, is certainly a good thing in this day and age. Universities offering A*,A*,A (and the number of people achieving that) just shows how much the threshold needs to be moved. Exams grade aren't supposed to be "fair". Those who've spent more time revising and paying attention should be rewarded. What's the point of saying "Oh nobody should be allowed to fail"?

which course wants A*A*A*?

which course wants A*A*A*?

which course wants A*A*A*?

which course wants A*A*A*?