This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

GCSE's should be harder!! yes!

patricko

And how are you doing now? That approach still working?

Perhaps If I had tried harder and not just thought they were gona be a breeze my grades would of be excellent instead of just good. I learned a lesson and worked harder last year and got very good grades at as. More sort of a learning experence than a difficult set of exams.

no I've matured alot more, AABB at AS.

Reply 21

gozatron

16

I find GCSE's harder than A Levels at the moment, the only reason i can think of is GCSE's are very broad compared to a levels...

Reply 22

tanakataku7

OP

1

Oh, i'm sorry i've been ambiguous. I've not taken my gcses yet!!! but, i;ve made my inference from the fact that i undertake triple science in double time, as well as taking additional subjects. Also, I took an unofficial past paper in the sciences and maths, achieving A grade.
Yes it's hard on people of a lesser ability. But it just means try harder. The academic system shouldn't sympathize. It's meant to distinguish exceptional pupils. So if you're good at a subject you get what you deserve. If you try hard enough, you also get what you deserve. If you're bright but revise the day b4, you get your comeupance.

Reply 23

shrep

2

Why did they get rid of the old 2 tier system of CSE's and O Levels?

Reply 24

Jfranny

3

A levels are alot harder.

Reply 25

tanakataku7

OP

1

It's so exasperating. The exam boards have obviously lowered standards for the sake of competition. Mark my words, the day will come when a completely different system is adopted.

Reply 26

disneygeek

I don't know.. When I was doing GCSEs it seemed like a big deal at the time. But I do think that languages should be harder at GCSE. It's such a huge jump between GCSE and AS in a language. Like for CCEA GCSE you can do 2 papers (reading, writing, listening or speaking) at foundation level and two papers at higher level and still get an A!

Reply 27

Komakino

14

Examinations are a very bad way of measuring progress, those with better memories or better temperament for pressure will always do better, not to say they will succeed when they finish school. Furthermore some people don't function well in examinations, there's evidence to suggest those with right-hemisphere brains don't do well from examinations and this fails to measure their intelligence effectively.

Reply 28

wer343lit

11

Komakino

Examinations are a very bad way of measuring progress, those with better memories or better temperament for pressure will always do better, not to say they will succeed when they finish school. Furthermore some people don't function well in examinations, there's evidence to suggest those with right-hemisphere brains don't do well from examinations and this fails to measure their intelligence effectively.

Well how else would you measure progress? exams seem the best way to me. Exams aren't measuring "likelihood of success after school". They're measuring how well you know the subject.

Reply 29

Komakino

14

Jonty99

Well how else would you measure progress? exams seem the best way to me. Exams aren't measuring "likelihood of success after school". They're measuring how well you know the subject.

There's a number of different methods being considered in the United States, here's some of them:

http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-927/tests.htm

Personally I favour the Contract Grading method most.
As for the exams, they are indirectly measuring how well prepared you are for living independently, my point was that lots of people achieve well in school and then not so well afterwards, I think this may be because the standardized examinations dominate the curriculum and this means the content doesn't cover all that it should do. Also that the learning method isn't participatory. Some students are left out because they don't fit the learning method, whilst some who do are only prepared for working in such an environment, and the fact is outside of school there is no such working environment. That's just a number of my grievances, which stem from the imposition of standardized exams.

Reply 30

pimpman777

2

lol 7% is not high at all it's quote low actually

Reply 31

tanakataku7

OP

1

pimpman777

lol 7% is not high at all it's quote low actually

Yes, consider (you probably already are) your a bright pupil. You get good gcse results but your achievement isn't respectable to to the sheer amount of average students who got the same! I'm really dissed, i'm sitting my first couple exams in may for year 10 and it doesn't look like it's gonna be hard!!

Reply 32

pimpman777

2

tanakataku7

Yes, consider (you probably already are) your a bright pupil. You get good gcse results but your achievement isn't respectable to to the sheer amount of average students who got the same! I'm really dissed, i'm sitting my first couple exams in may for year 10 and it doesn't look like it's gonna be hard!!

I think you've missed the point. 7% is quite low, if it's just 7% sure they can't be average students. I think you should come to this conclusion after you take your GCSE's; maybe they won't be so easy after all.

Reply 33

tanakataku7

OP

1

pimpman777

I think you've missed the point. 7% is quite low, if it's just 7% sure they can't be average students. I think you should come to this conclusion after you take your GCSE's; maybe they won't be so easy after all.

Oh, i can see your point actually. I'm bound to get a c in welsh gcse (compulsory) because they only permit you to do foundation in our school. Actually, are you up for this........? My first lot of exams are in may, if we stay in touch maybe get to know each other, i'll let you know how it goes.??? it'll be rlygood encouragement for me and you.

P.S
you gotta admit, the amount of people on tsr achieving a* grades is ridiculous, how can the top universities distinguish these results? the smart people and kinda smart people will be indistinguishable. That's my point, therefore, implying that they don't indicate a great level of ability more how swatty you are.

Reply 34

hendy16

I agree they should be made harder as they do not prepare students for A levels as the step up is massive!!

Reply 35

hendy16

tanakataku7

implying that they don't indicate a great level of ability more how swatty you are.

this is also definitely the case

Troll

ijustlovetolearn

They're easy if your intelligent and at a decent school but some people do actually really really try and still get low grades. So its not fair to say anyone could get an A if they bothered to revise. Its still a good way of separating hair and beauty crew from the A level crew.

doing well at gcses has little to do with intelligence

Reply 38

ijustlovetolearn

1

tom//

doing well at gcses has little to do with intelligence

Why? A person who tries hard and still gets a D at GCSE English isn't intelligent enough to do it at A level. That said a lot of subjects are just having a good memory. But the same could be said for A levels.

Reply 39

tom//

17

ijustlovetolearn

Why? A person who tries hard and still gets a D at GCSE English isn't intelligent enough to do it at A level. That said a lot of subjects are just having a good memory. But the same could be said for A levels.

no, to do well at gcse requires you learn a syllabus and tick the boxes of the mark scheme. doing well at gcses doesnt mean youre intelligent. i could be absolutely brilliant at english, but if i dont manage to fit my answer into the mark scheme i could get a D. again, that doesnt mean im not intelligent.

GCSE's should be harder!! yes!

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you