Possible re-introduction of "O-Level" standard exams...

[MoonRocker]

Good idea or not?

[lcg]

no. a complete waste of money.....they should concentrate on 'fixing' gcse's instead if they view them as a problem and not completely change the system. the tories whinge about things being crap and then want to scrap them and throw money we don't have at rubbish ideas....how is that being cost effective or improving the situation?

[THEMOTLEY1]

How I ever survived the mid 60s I'll never know, 10 O levels + 3 A levels, and no-one told me they could affect my mental wellbeing, how inconsiderate was that, how would I have coped with failure?

[chaptazbru]

Good answer TheMotley .....

[jake-the-peg]

One board per exam subject good idea

Remaning GCSEs O'levels silly and pointless

Making them harder?

Does making tests harder make children brighter - or cause more to just give up?

Answer in less than 200 words?

[MoonRocker]

More to the point if exams are so easy anyone can pass them with no effort, what value are they? what makes pupils try?

[jake-the-peg]

No not a good answer a very bad one and one that's typical

An answer that's just showing off

This is the point people object because they think if exams are getting easier it devalues their past efforts.

In practice people aren't competing against multiple years - this is just peoples vanity talking.

There purpose of exams is to seperate the spread of abilities - providing that is done there is no reason to draw an arbitary line at all say above this is a pass below is a fail.

Despite rumours to the contrary the system does generally do this

[murraymints]

I know that when I moved away from Scotland to Herts..I was appalled at the standard of education..as an employment adviser with what was the manpower services commission I worked closely with schools and various youth organisations...could not beleive the sub standard of basic english, maths, arithmetic...may help to go back to the three '"rs"

[craft1948]

I thought that a lot of students were struggling/dropping out of uni, because the knowledge gap between what is now needed for 'A' levels, and what is necessary for first year at uni, has broadened.

[Johnysid]

What I find amazing is that the media coverage has been in terms of O Levels giving a small number a future and putting the rest "on the scrap heap". Over half of school leavers do not go to university and get poor GCSEs, so according to the media reasoning these are already "on the scrapheap".

The debate about O Levels seems to be between GCSE elitists and O Level elitists with the former being slightly less elitist than the latter.

Shouldn't we be concerned about those who do not benefit from either exam? Perhaps we should devise an education system that also provides a future for those without any academic ambitions and/or aptitude?

[Old_Geezer]

Some years back I was astonished to find they had been abandoned, but took it that having 2 different exams, CSE and GCE was considered not ideal. One standard to measure achievement against seems so much more sensible.

Of course the problem is not that so much, it is the illusion that the human race is getting smarter and smarter every year and the consequential loss of usefulness of an exam that appears less able to sort the gifted from the average from those with issues.

With complaints from those taking exams now that folk are saying it is so easy (which I'm sure it's not, it's the inflated grades that are the problem more than how easy or difficult learning is) it is a difficult subject to tackle or even discuss.

I'm unsure returning to O Level is a cure-all, but maybe it marks a point where a problem is finally being tackled. Really should we care what the exam is called, just as long as it achieves the aim of measuring capability and knowledge ?

[Bambiagain]

O levels and CSEs used to complement each other. I went to a grammar school and those from the local secondary modern who got good CSEs could transfer and take A levels. But since they were scrapped in favour of GCSEs the best solution now would be to fix what isn't working rather than just go back to the former exams (or, what would more likely happen, the names of the former exams). The idea behind GCSEs was sound, so why not make them work as they were intended to do?

[jake-the-peg]

Good point Johnnysid

The idea with GCSEs was that everybody should take the same exam - rather than O levels and CSEs

This proved impractical and a "cheat" was devised with two standards of GCSE

One where the papers were easier and a C was the best you could get and one that was harder and you could get an A or A*

Coniving newpaper stories that you'll all have read almost always compare loweer level GCSE papers with O levels

It's not a fair comparison but it makes a certin type feel superior compared to the "youth of today" which sells papers.

And yes we are letting down the less academic but we must also not let down late developers

Professor Brian Cox got a D in his Maths A level!

[jake-the-peg]

Actually Old Geezer the Human race *is* getting smarter all the time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

[THEMOTLEY1]

///"Perhaps we should devise an education system that also provides a future for those without any academic ambitions and/or aptitude?"///

I thought that's what we have now, dumbed down for the 'hard of understanding' with no incentive to do better.

[Old_Geezer]

:-) Even were I to believe this is true and not a result of the test or of improved conditions/nutrition simply allowing folk to reach their true potential, I don't believe any annual increase is being accurately reflected in the GCSE results. Despite the claim that new takers achieve better scores with old papers, that wasn't refleceted when a TV programme tried a similar check on today's students and papers from a few decades ago. I think these things must be hard to check.

[jake-the-peg]

Yes I am being mischievious

the Flynn effect is real but it doesn't account for a slight grade inflation


My point is that doesn't matter provided the exams split people over any particular year.

What you see in the answers above is the real root of the cause of concern

People's feeling that their academic achievements are being undermined

It's vanity pure and simple

First answers you get "It was harder when I got my 27 O'levels'

Not whether the system is fit for the purpose it needs to serve which is the real question that needs answering

[anagram]

Exactly the point MoonRocker, if exams are so much easier now that anyone can pass, then why bother? Back in my day at school (the 70s) O-levels and A-levels were a standard to aspire to, and probably more importantly a standard that employers looked for. I am proud...and not showing off, Jake!!....to say that I gained a fistful of O-levels, which definitely helped in my career.
Ok I agree that the 'not so bright' pupils have to be catered for but does that mean that the brightest have to be dragged down to their level? The GCE levels may have been flawed but in my opinion they worked far better than today's system.

[jake-the-peg]

:c) ^^^^^

"Back in my day"

I rest my case

[THEMOTLEY1]

Jake, it would be interesting to know from what standpoint you formed your opinions, are you 'well qualified' and proud of it, or are you an underachiever who has been brought up to be proud of it?

[modeller]

Having taught 'O's ,CSEs, GCSEs, I know that GCSEs were steadily dumbed down over the years. It wasn't so much that the questions were easier but also that acceptable answers were so wide and inclusive that almost any answer earned a mark no matter how far removed it was from what would have been acceptable for the old 'O's and CSEs.
The modular system was a total farce . Q