Tories turn back the clock, it's back to O Levels

ILW

CLAPTON wrote: »

because the range of abilies is too great
so we either have exams that dont stretch the most acedemic or exams where some will score near zero

Cannot see the problem. Better than the current daft "everybody is roughly similar" model.

CLAPTON

ILW wrote: »

Cannot see the problem. Better than the current daft "everybody is roughly similar" model.

what possible benefit is there to either society or the pupil to teach at too high a level
surely better for an non acedemic child to learn suitable subjects at a suitable level

StevieJ

A reminder for everyone, they even have Graham's old paper

http://www.btinternet.com/~mathsanswers/html/o_level_papers.html

lvader

purch wrote: »

I am finding it quite bizarre hearing the opponents of this "announcement" claiming that the old O level/CSE system was a 2 tier system, as if the current system isn't.

Under the old system a Grade 1 at CSE was supposed to be the equivalent of a pass at O Level.

Under the current system, the less academically gifted students take a different examination from the others, which if they do very well in will give them the equivalent of a C grade at GCSE.

I see no real difference.

This really winds me up, the current system is already 2 tier, my Son was 'assessed' as being less gifteed, so while his sister did her GCSEs on got all As and Bs, he can only get a C at best.

If seems to me the neither the press or the polititians have a clue what the current system is.

System

purch wrote: »

The problem is that the current GCSE system has also proven to be unable to measure the abilities of the less academically able.

What do you mean by "measure the abilities" ?

Tell them they are thick, or give them certificates that pretend they have passed too?

Braveheart100

purch wrote: »

I am finding it quite bizarre hearing the opponents of this "announcement" claiming that the old O level/CSE system was a 2 tier system, as if the current system isn't.

Under the old system a Grade 1 at CSE was supposed to be the equivalent of a pass at O Level.

Under the current system, the less academically gifted students take a different examination from the others, which if they do very well in will give them the equivalent of a C grade at GCSE.

I see no real difference.

Really? The difference is that if you get a C in GCSE nobody can tell if it was from the higher tier or lower tier paper.

That's the true beauty of the GCSE. It's an exam for all.

Braveheart100

Just out of interest, how does everyone under the age of 42 feel about being told their qualifications are worthless?

Doesn't sound like a vote winning strategy to me.

(PS I'm guessing not many people posting on this board are under the age of 42?)

chewmylegoff

this is typical stuff, proposals to abolish GCSEs come to light and suddenly some are seeking to elevate them to some kind of "national treasure" status. what a joke.

borntobefree

chewmylegoff wrote: »

this is typical stuff, proposals to abolish GCSEs come to light and suddenly some are seeking to elevate them to some kind of "national treasure" status. what a joke.

I guess you are over 42 sir? After all, Thatcher got rid of O'Levels because they sucked yet everyone treats them as a long lost national treasure. Go figure?

ILW

Bring back proper grammar schools as well and we may get somewhere.