|
|
Post by caledonia on Mar 23, 2016 13:54:53 GMT
Following on from the post about the importance of SATs does anyone understand the new GCSE process and how schools will be assessed?
As I understand it, SATS are now being used as part of the assessment process for GCSEs. It all sounds very confusing and I may not get it right but it seems that SATs will become more important to schools starting with the GCSE results from children moving into Year 10 in September. No longer will schools be assessed with respect to having 5or more GCSEs at A-C grades but some complicated process where GCSEs will be assessed against SATs. Nor will children be able to say that they got 8 GCSEs at B grade or whatever.
GCSES will no longer be grades as A - E but graded from 1 - 9 with 9 being the highest. Subjects are divided into three groups now an choices from the groups are controlled.
The first group includes maths and English only and only two exam results, one of which must be maths, can be added to this group. The score for maths as well as the higher of the scores for English Language or English Literature (or combined language and literature if only a combined English exam is taken) are put into the group 1 score and multiplied by two (gives double the emphasis on doing well in English and maths).
The second group only includes a few limited subjects like English (if you sat 2 English exams), languages, sciences, English, History, Geography and computing but can take up to four subjects. Scores for these subjects are added together (but not multiplied). If you only take one or two of these subjects that's all you can add.
Group 3 takes any other subjects and I think it has room for up to 3 spaces. Again these scores are added together but not multiplied.
Then the scores from all three groups are added together, divided by 9 (I think - but it could be 10) and that gives the pupil a single GCSE score which will be used by colleges, employers etc.
That single number score is then compared to your Year 6 SATs score and this resultant figure shows how well a student has improved since Year 6 and this is how schools will be judged.
This system puts more importance on the core academic subjects so children that are not as academic and who would prefer to do GSCEs in drama, music, HE, Technical or practical subjects can only have 2 or 3 of these subjects count towards their overall GSCE Score. This seems to tie into the Baccalaureate system which gives one overall score.
For DD it means that she will never do well as although she is predicted to get A* in music, drama and dance, she can no longer so all three and get them included - school forbids it now. She will be lucky to get a 3 in any subject as her disabilities prevent her from focussing, learning and retaining information.
Has anyone else heard about this and can anyone shed light on my interpretation of it.
It all seems very odd.
Cale x |
|
|
|
Post by corkwing on Mar 24, 2016 7:28:42 GMT
Hi, Caledonia -
I don't know about the combined scoring for GCSEs but if that's correct, it sounds horrific for employers! Even the fact that they're now graded on a totally different system is going to confuse them. But then I was talking to someone the other day and she was telling me that there are hundreds of qualifications out there and it's really hard for employers to know what level they're at: how does a level 2 NVQ compare to a grade C A-level, for example? And there are many more obscure qualifications than NVQs! Anyway...
The bit about comparing GCSEs with SATs...
The big problem with the current league tables is that they don't show progress: they just show an overall score. A school in a catchment area where you'd expect low grades (add your own reasons why that would be - I don't want to get into politics, sociology, etc.) would appear to be worse than one in a catchment area where the kids "naturally" achieve more: the latter would have better raw scores than the former.
Instead, OFSTED are looking more for progress. So if a child starts school with a certain attainment level, do they stay at that level all the way through, do they improve (in which case it looks like they've had good teaching) or do they achieve less than expected (poor teaching). Obviously they look at combined results. There are many reasons why an individual pupil may achieve better or worse. But if they can see that, say, 84% of the pupils coming through this school ended up with better scores than they started with, that looks pretty goood!
|
|
|
|
Post by kstar on Mar 24, 2016 7:33:31 GMT
It's more than odd it's bonkers. Most of us who are living and breathing it don't understand it either. The best bit about it is that the government are not letting schools know what the target grades for students are (these being the target grades we are judged on!) until AFTER the GCSE results are out. We will be provided with information about what our students were supposed to get and compared to what they actually got!
Everything you said above is correct except that the progress bit (comparing them to what they got in their SATs) is only valid for the school, not the student. The student's grade (yes grade singular - everything added together) is based on the grades they receive in individual subjects and doesn't relate to their SATs results. Here we go in a nutshell:
All students have three "pots" of results.
POT ONE: GCSE Maths, plus their best score out of Eng Lang or Eng Lit. These are crucial because these score are doubled.
POT TWO: Any three subjects from Science (any combination of science, so if they do separate sciences all three can count here), history, geography, French, German or Spanish.
POT THREE: Any other two GCSE or GCSE-equivalent subjects that haven't been counted in pots one or two. These can include subjects that are overflows from pots one and two, for example whichever English didn't count in pot one.
These scores (all 1-9, with approx 4.8 being the equivalent of a current C although it could be 5.2 the government haven't decided yet) are added together and divided by 10 to give one grade...
However this will only happen from current year 10 onwards. Current y11 are on the old system but with Maths and English already converted to numbers and schools being judged on targets that won't be set until after the exams. Schools will then also be judged on how much progress has been made by individuals since their SATs, but again with no indication in advance how the two will be compared.
I'm afraid we are likely to increasingly see schools dropping arts, technology and subjects like RE which don't count in pot two... Because basically the government expects all kids to be academic and that's where our focus is. Once schools are academies they can do what they want - they are no longer forced to follow the national curriculum, so could for example just drop arts subjects altogether. It's all desperately sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by kstar on Mar 24, 2016 7:35:42 GMT
Sorry forgot to add that all "progress measures" are based on how students performed in their Maths and English SATs combined... So for example a student's GCSE Art, Music or PE grade will be set based on how good they were at English and Maths when they were 11.
|
|
|
|
Post by pingu on Mar 24, 2016 8:25:08 GMT
I do so hate all this messing around with exams. Changes in the Scottish system affected my older boys performance and limited his subject emphasis, he was in the guinea pig year ( as he called it) of a new scheme , particularly badly approached by his school compared to how other schools did it.
Seems like you are out of the frying pan and into the fire, with this move, Caledonia. I am wondering if it would be possible for your dd to mitigate this a bit by doing music or dance or drama ( whatever she has to drop) as an extra curricular thing and sit the relevant external exams for that subject e.g. I used to do flute and a private teacher put me in for Grade 4 of the royal music college scheme. My mum taught piano after working her way through a similar scheme to end up with a music teacher qualification called ATCL ( and another one that I cant remeber the initials of!) iIf applying for jobs in arts areas these qualifications are just as relevant to employsrs. And it will enable her still to show some good grades on a CV
|
|
|
|
Post by fruitcake on Mar 24, 2016 15:49:45 GMT
So would the total number of GCSEs taken be 7?
Maths, English, 3 subjects from the second pot and 2 subjects from the third pot?
Surely if a pupil did 7 subjects his combined GCSE number grades would be added up and divided by 7 to get his average, not 10?
If so, that would be quite a change from recent years in which academic pupils at least seemed to be encouraged to do 10 subjects or more.
Thanks for the discussion: it helps this home educator make sense of the system with a view to helping my 2 youngest to make good choices re GCSE. |
|
|
|
Post by fruitcake on Mar 24, 2016 16:57:40 GMT
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/497937/Progress-8-school-performance-measure.pdf
By Jove I think I've got it.
It is a performance measure for schools, so not "compulsory" for every child (though schools will obviously be under pressure to herd as many children into this measure as possible).
Maths, English and science remain compulsory.
Maths and the higher grade out of English language and literature will be double-weighted, (though only if both English language AND English literature are taken will English be double-weighted).
Three more subjects are to be taken from the Ebacc subjects, which are science (single, double or triple award), foreign languages, history and geography.
Three more subjects are to be taken from the approved list. This can be extra Ebacc GCSEs, non-Ebacc GCSEs and some other non-GCSE qualifications such as technical qualifications or graded music exams. English literature can also be included as one of these. You could do 3 creative subjects, in theory anyway, and still make the measure.
So under this system children will take 8 subjects, of which two will be double-weighted so totalling 10. All the number grades will be added up and divided by 10 to give one numerical grade.
Bingo: each child reduced to a number! Horrible really.
One advantage though over the previous Ebacc is that there is more individual choice. If a child is hopeless at foreign languages because of dyslexia, like my son, but good at sciences, he would not be pushed to take a foreign language. I also think it is good that children will take fewer subjects at GCSE but strive for a higher level in those subjects - if that is the effect.
If you end up being a 7 or above that might feel quite good. But if you are graded a 1 or 2 or 3? :-( |
|
|
|
Post by rosie on Mar 24, 2016 22:45:52 GMT
Is there any scope in this new system for retaking subjects ? If a child does really badly in several subjects currently they can retake; but on the new system the average score would be very low and presumably couldn't be adjusted without retaking the whole lot. It's all a bit depressing.
|
|
|
|
Post by pingu on Mar 25, 2016 9:32:34 GMT
This doesnt really make sense to me. I can see it working for long. If I were an employer I would want to know WHAT subjects a person was good at and which ones their performance was poor on. An overall single score/number wouldn't tell me that.Same with Universities and colleges. For example, an Art college might not be too bothered about low scores in Maths and English but would presumably want a decent score on Art, even if overall score is low.
|
|
|
|
Post by fruitcake on Mar 26, 2016 16:53:51 GMT
I think this system really is about judging schools and placing them on the league tables, rather than judging the pupils per se. So I don't see why there shouldn't be opportunities to re-take exams. Our local sixth form college has a GCSE re-take year for those who have achieved on the C/D boundary, for example. It is already compulsory to re-take maths and English up to age 18 if a pupil hasn't achieved a grade C (which will become a grade 4 or 5, whatever they decide).
|
|
|
|
Post by kstar on Mar 27, 2016 9:01:44 GMT
They will still get their individual results as well for each subject, not just their overall score. It's even more complicated for schools as we are being judged on other measures as well - for example we are still judged on number of students getting the traditional ebacc even though the ebacc has changed! So we at our school are still pushing our students to do a language. Some local schools have removed almost all choice except for perhaps allowing students to opt for their third pot subjects. This is something that will become increasingly common when academy chains take over individual schools as franchises.
In terms of the number of subjects students take, that's still up to individual schools to decide. All students need 8 to fulfil their progress score; some schools will just do eight but that doesn't allow any flexibility for something going wrong. So all of our students have to do the ECDL computer course and the IFS money management qualification as well, so they have back up scores (as well as genuine life skills such as managing their income and avoiding debt!)
|
|
|
|
Post by gilreth on Mar 27, 2016 19:55:11 GMT
Hate to do say this but I really really hope that this is not there when Sqk gets to secondary.....just said to DH we will be looking at independent schools locally as several are moving away from GSCEs entirely. They are going back to a purely academic system with nothing to catch those children who will not cope. People sometimes look at me funnily when I start being strident about this as I am one of those people who actually this would suit (Cambridge graduate, PhD and pretty much top grades on everything in school). But I am a fairly unique person and I do not want my son dealing with this. I couldn't HE him (for one thing we need my salary) but I start to wander what we could do as he is bright but this type of education is not going to suit him due to his poor start in life.
DH & I seriously considering joining Labour in part because ofthis - and we are people who have always been floating voters...
|
|
