The Student Room Group

What's everyone's opinion on the new 9-1 gcse system. Rant, discuss, positives?

wanna know your opinions! I'll start off, it's not awful but it's not easy compared to the previous system.
(edited 5 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

why?
No. Just no.

Let's get one of the MPs or officials that thought changing the syllabus was a good idea, and had a hand at creating these monsters, to sit one of their new GCSEs. If they don't get a 9, fire them.
(edited 5 years ago)
My teachers believe that the reason the 1-9 system was introduced is so that they can keep adding more numbers in future to differentiate the very top students e.g grade 9= 90%, grade 10= 94%, grade 11= 97%. It would look silly if they kept the old system and introduced A**, A*** and A****.

Though the exams are more difficult now, suppose the boundaries are 80% for a grade 9, then a student who scraped 80% will be given the same credit as one that achieved 100% in the exam, as both will receive the same grade 9. So the higher achieving student would have worked harder for no reason to get full marks when they're not credited for it.
Original post by RazzzBerries
No. Just no.

Let's get one of the MPs or officials that thought changing the syllabus was a good idea, and had a hand at creating these monsters, to sit one of their new GCSEs. If they don't get a 9, fire them.

Are you arguing that the exam is harder or that the grade boundaries are too high?
Reply 5
The new 9-1 system is difficult in terms of revision because there are not many past papers to practice from.
It was a little confusing for me, partially as I was the second year on it so all the teachers had no idea about it, also as the grades didn’t equate directly to letter grades from the old system.
Original post by Anthos
The new 9-1 system is difficult in terms of revision because there are not many past papers to practice from.

You're right about insufficient practice papers from exam boards, but I was in the first year group to do 9-1 maths and found plenty of websites with top resources and a lot of practice papers, which helped me to get a 9. You just have to spend some time searching for this stuff.

However, all students doing these new GCSEs are in the same boat as you; they all have a limited number of practice papers, and so they don't have an advantage over yourself. The exam boards set grade boundaries depending on how well the students perform; if most people do badly then the boundaries will be low to ensure that the same number of students get each grade every year.

So it's not about what mark you achieve, but instead about how well you do compared to your year group :smile:
Original post by Infinite Series
My teachers believe that the reason the 1-9 system was introduced is so that they can keep adding more numbers in future to differentiate the very top students e.g grade 9= 90%, grade 10= 94%, grade 11= 97%. It would look silly if they kept the old system and introduced A**, A*** and A****.

Though the exams are more difficult now, suppose the boundaries are 80% for a grade 9, then a student who scraped 80% will be given the same credit as one that achieved 100% in the exam, as both will receive the same grade 9. So the higher achieving student would have worked harder for no reason to get full marks when they're not credited for it.

Yeah that's what mine said, I can see why they do it. The GCSE boundaries really were not that high though when I did it in 2018
not enough resources imo but the younger years shouldn't be complaining as much as they're gonna have more papers to practice from.
everyone did moan about how hard the new exams were, and it's true, they're meant to be hard. but they're still manageable. and i still didn't give a **** about gcses by the end of exam season:lol:
I think it was unnecessary and stressful for teachers and students.

The only point was to differentiate ability levels even more, and it wasn't necessary. Who cares if someone has a mid C or a high C, for example? And we already had the A* for the best performing pupils - did we really need to differentiate between 8 and 9s just so that even people with an 8 could experience the feeling of having failed to perform quite well enough, in some alternative universe
(edited 5 years ago)
I had it explained once and now its simple. I don't get all the fuss to be honest. Just do your GCSE's and hope for a high number. Whats hard about that?
I was in the first year that did 9-1 maths and English lit/lang (got 9 in maths and 7s in English) and while I don't think the system is as bad as everyone makes it out to be it could have been implemented a lot better than it was. There was a lot of confusion for teachers, unis and employers that could have been avoided if it was better explained and given more time. I don't really understand the need to keep differentiating between the top performers because at that point where does it end? In a few years they could do the exact same thing, say there's not enough differentiation between the 9 grade students and introduce another system :erm: Or just keep adding more and more numbers until we're at a system where the top grade is 20..
Seems super confusing and hard to achieve 9’s. I’m glad I had the old system.
Original post by froggi.png
I In a few years they could do the exact same thing, say there's not enough differentiation between the 9 grade students and introduce another system :erm: Or just keep adding more and more numbers until we're at a system where the top grade is 20..

Agreed - and then the people with 19 would be crying :s-smilie:
It really is quite silly now, to be honest. We have four different grading systems across these nations, and each system has to be understood by employers, FE and HE providers.

So at 16+, England has a 10 point scale of 9-U, Northern Ireland has a 10 point scale of A*-U (with a C* snuck in the sequence), Wales has an 9 point scale of A*-U, and Scotland's N5 has a 5 point scale of A-no award.

Even England can't decide whether a good passing grade is a 4 or a 5, and Northern Ireland's C* suggests a better than normal good pass. I don't have a clue where the comparable line is in Scotland, although the stats would suggest it is somewhere between a B and a C.

Mr Gove's reforms have a lot to answer for!

EDIT: Oh, and I forgot my post script: Independent schools can opt to take IGCSEs under the old English A*-U scale (retained for most purposes by Wales).
(edited 5 years ago)
The system is bs, they make two grades ( 8 and 9 ) for an A* only to separate the best of the best, so when someone gets an 8 they still think they didn’t get that good a grade.
Original post by 学生の父
Mr Gove's reforms have a lot to answer for!

That Man!!! :mad:
Reply 18
Original post by sammyj97
Seems super confusing and hard to achieve 9’s. I’m glad I had the old system.


Huh? What's so confusing? Just get the marks for a 9 and you'll get a 9.
To me the grade boundaries were surprisingly low.
Reply 19
Original post by 学生の父
It really is quite silly now, to be honest. We have four different grading systems across these nations, and each system has to be understood by employers, FE and HE providers.

So at 16+, England has a 10 point scale of 9-U, Northern Ireland has a 10 point scale of A*-U (with a C* snuck in the sequence), Wales has an 9 point scale of A*-U, and Scotland's N5 has a 5 point scale of A-no award.

Even England can't decide whether a good passing grade is a 4 or a 5, and Northern Ireland's C* suggests a better than normal good pass. I don't have a clue where the comparable line is in Scotland, although the stats would suggest it is somewhere between a B and a C.

Mr Gove's reforms have a lot to answer for!

EDIT: Oh, and I forgot my post script: Independent schools can opt to take IGCSEs under the old English A*-U scale (retained for most purposes by Wales).


4 is a standard pass, 5 is a strong pass, that's about it really

Quick Reply

Latest