What do you think would happen if everyone sat the same paper for Maths and Science?

I imagine there would be far more people failing, not to mention being completely demoralised by the process....

But foundation tier and lower ability students get grades 1-5 with 4 and 5 being the only pass grades and you have to get most marks so in that sense passing foundation is harder, and in higher there are more pass grades and less marks to get a grade 4 and people of higher ability can get the grade 9. If lower and higher ability people did one paper they can get the grade they want and not be restricted (for lower ability students) and some people thinking sitting higher is easier as you get less marks to pass even though to gain marks it's harder so it's unfair

Yes but the questions are different in each tier, and more questions set towards the lower grade boundaries making it more accessible to students who don't do as well in those subjects so they are less likely to fail altogether. For the higher tier there are many more questions set towards higher grades (6/7/8/9 standard) which those students would simply be unable to cope with, and as there would be fewer questions set at the lower boundaries, they would be less likely to succeed overall in even getting a pass.

So if you and your class in set 2 were getting grade 4/5s (which is quite low for set 2), or if you were getting grades 4 and 5 in general what paper would you expect your teacher to enter you for? Higher or foundation?

Grade 3, 4 and 5 overlap on both foundation and higher tier papers but I see what you mean by 6,7,8,9 should only be available on higher tier

I would probably expect someone averaging grade 4/5s who the teacher felt wasn't likely to achieve a 6 to end up doing the foundation tier. This was what would've happened for me, way back when I did my GCSEs, when I was doing Spanish and really not doing that great to start with. I only got swapped to higher tier very late in year 11 because my teacher felt I had made significant improvements in that time (and ended up getting a B in the end). I think if she wasn't very confident in my ability to get a B she would've let me stay at foundation tier.

Also I'm not talking about grades being available on each paper - I mean questions targeted at students achieving those grades. As that is how they write the exam papers - they set the questions at different levels and have very hard questions to e.g. differentiate between 7 and 8/9 grade students, as well as others at the other levels on a higher paper. On a lower paper there are fewer levels to differentiate between so the overall range of the difficulty is much constrained so in general one would expect even weaker students to find the majority of the paper at least something they could attempt.

I would probably expect someone averaging grade 4/5s who the teacher felt wasn't likely to achieve a 6 to end up doing the foundation tier. This was what would've happened for me, way back when I did my GCSEs, when I was doing Spanish and really not doing that great to start with. I only got swapped to higher tier very late in year 11 because my teacher felt I had made significant improvements in that time (and ended up getting a B in the end). I think if she wasn't very confident in my ability to get a B she would've let me stay at foundation tier.

Also I'm not talking about grades being available on each paper - I mean questions targeted at students achieving those grades. As that is how they write the exam papers - they set the questions at different levels and have very hard questions to e.g. differentiate between 7 and 8/9 grade students, as well as others at the other levels on a higher paper. On a lower paper there are fewer levels to differentiate between so the overall range of the difficulty is much constrained so in general one would expect even weaker students to find the majority of the paper at least something they could attempt.

Agreed.

Foundation Tier students have to study less content for the course, and although they have to achieve more marks to get a 4 or 5, there are no questions designed to challenge the 7-9 students that they won't be able to answer. If the questions were of the same difficulty, then the theory that it is harder would be correct, but that isn't the case. Therefore, if you have a good knowledge of the content, it is easier to pass on FT than it is to pass on HT.

It also means that because there aren't any questions that are impossible to answer, you are more confident in the exam and come out with a better idea of how well you did. For example, in languages, you won't end up crying halfway through the listening from the difficulty (and end up missing more questions) because the foundation exams are more accessible, so instead of hoping for a 4 on Higher Tier and getting a 3, you can secure a 5 and move on with your life.

In maths and science, there may be a few 'foundation' topics that you might not fully understand, but that doesn't make you a foundation-level student. However, if you're averaging a 4 or 5 on HT and it seems like you won't improve, having the option to secure the 5 instead of failing on a bad day is much better for the majority of the students on that boundary.

Agreed.

Foundation Tier students have to study less content for the course, and although they have to achieve more marks to get a 4 or 5, there are no questions designed to challenge the 7-9 students that they won't be able to answer. If the questions were of the same difficulty, then the theory that it is harder would be correct, but that isn't the case. Therefore, if you have a good knowledge of the content, it is easier to pass on FT than it is to pass on HT.

It also means that because there aren't any questions that are impossible to answer, you are more confident in the exam and come out with a better idea of how well you did. For example, in languages, you won't end up crying halfway through the listening from the difficulty (and end up missing more questions) because the foundation exams are more accessible, so instead of hoping for a 4 on Higher Tier and getting a 3, you can secure a 5 and move on with your life.

In maths and science, there may be a few 'foundation' topics that you might not fully understand, but that doesn't make you a foundation-level student. However, if you're averaging a 4 or 5 on HT and it seems like you won't improve, having the option to secure the 5 instead of failing on a bad day is much better for the majority of the students on that boundary.

So what you are saying is it's better sitting the foundation paper if you won't improve from the 5? What if your whole class is the second top set (set 2) and obviously covering higher tier content so we are all good at higher tier stuff and not foundation tier, clearly higher is right for us? And people would say if you are passing higher and you aren't improving from the 5 (in my school if you do you are in set 1) why not give yourself a chance to see if you can get a 6 rather than limit yourself to a 5?

I failed a foundation mock with grade 3 and passed higher with 4s and 5s because I am a backwards person

In your case, HT was a more suitable fit because of what you were confident with and what you weren't. As stated, people are different, so it should be at the teacher's discretion to decide which tier is best for each student. Despite HT being better for you, it is generally worse for people who achieve the same grades by the middle of Year 11, which is why FT should exist.