GCSES: are they fit for purpose?

It’s that time of year again, said Jon Andrews in The Guardian. GCSE results are in, and we’ve seen the usual photos of delighted students jumping for joy. But how pleased should they be? Grade inflation has long been a problem in our education system – if virtually everyone has A*s and As, it’s impossible to differentiate between students. That’s why, back in 2013, Michael Gove, then the education secretary, unveiled a major overhaul of the GCSE system for schools in England. His grand plan was to make exams harder – with tougher questions and almost no coursework – and to introduce a new 1-9 grading system, under which the top grade (9) would be a tier above the existing A*. That new system was introduced last year for maths and English, and this year it was rolled out to about 20 other subjects, including history, the sciences and foreign languages. So, has it had the desired effect?

It’s really too early to tell, said The Times. The exams themselves are definitely harder. (Sample maths teaser: what’s 25.68 divided by 12?) And the number of papers given the top possible grade was a third lower than it was two years ago, under the old regime. But all the other grades still rose: the questions were tougher, but the grade boundaries were lowered. (For one exam board, the grade 4 pass mark – equivalent to a C – for maths was about 21%.) That may have been to avoid penalising this year’s students for being “guinea pigs”. We shall see. The system remains a “work in progress”.

I beg to differ, said Judith Woods in The Daily Telegraph. The problem with Gove’s reforms is that they don’t address the main issue with the education system as a whole: that it punishes students for not being good at everything. Take my daughter. She wants to study fine art at sixth form college, and secured a “fantastic grade” in her art GCSE. But because she didn’t do as well in maths – a subject she is dropping – she has been rejected by the sixth form of her choice. It’s a recipe for discouraging talent. I don’t know why we make children sit exams at this stage in their lives, said Sandra Leaton Gray in The Guardian. There was some sense to GCSES when children could leave school at 16 – but since 2015, all pupils in England have to stay in education until they’re 18. What’s the point in a system that piles pressure on 15- and 16-yearolds, and forces teachers to prepare them for tests rather than provide a broader education – all for exams that aren’t really necessary? The UK now has the unenviable distinction of being “the only European country to have high-stakes testing at 16”. The best thing to do with GCSES would be to get rid of them altogether.