Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'English' started by install, Sep 29, 2016.
There it is - exactly what you said....
Consenus from where ?
Erm - the whole point is that Maths is just 1 GCSE....
Because you obviously didn't read all of it the first time, here is my entire post, with that line in context:
Technically, no student has to sit any GCSE. GCSEs are encouraged for the vast majority of students, of course.
A student sitting both GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature would have covered the National Curriculum. A student just sitting one GCSE would not have covered it. In the past, GCSE English did so, but it doesn't exist anymore.
Any school choosing to enter their students for just one GCSE now would have to teach the rest of the National Curriculum outside the qualifications. Or, if they are exempt from the National Curriculum (like some academies), justify why they are not teaching it (which I think they would struggle to do).
I'll now bullet point it to make it really simple:
No student has to sit any GCSE
Most students have to follow the National Curriculum
Sitting GCSEs means that students will automatically cover the National Curriculum
For the National Curriculum in English, this means taking GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature
Some students may not take one, the other or either
Therefore, your claim that it is more permitted for GCSE English Language to be taken on its own than GCSE English Literature is incorrect
The GCSEs can be taken in any combination – but the league table rules encourage both Lang and Lit to be taken
Here is as good a place to start as any.
And so is GCSE English Language. Or GCSE English Literature!
Progress 8 takes two GCSEs and double-weights them:
A Maths GCSE
An English GCSE (just one of them)
This has been explained to you several times (by several different people), but you seem to wilfully ignore it each time.
You keep on trying to conflate this with the existence of two English GCSEs. As you've been told, that's not really relevant as the other English GCSE can still count elsewhere.
Erm no - it is Eng Lang and Eng Lit which both have to be sat. Then it is the best grade. So 2 GCSEs have to be sat as opposed to one.
Indeed this has been explained several times...
This sounds like backtracking - this is not 'general consenus'. Far better to have a survey available from all schools or the majority of schools when using statements like 'general consensus'...
I do not agree with much of what is stated as you know. So I will just choose this one bulley point..
Yes students have to sit GCSEs.
Again, you are muddying to waters by putting two rules together.
Yes, it is true that both Englishes have to be taken for the better to be double-weighted.
But, once you are past that, the rules for English and Maths are the same. The better English is double-weighted. Just one English GCSE. It might be GCSE English Language. It might be GCSE English Literature. But all that happens is the grade is taken and its points doubled. Just like Maths.
Meanwhile, the other English GCSE can count in the open group of subjects.
You keep on claiming that a single Maths GCSE being double-weighted is unfair. That may be the case*, but an English GCSE – on its own – is being double-weighted too. The rule is exactly the same for English and Maths..
The fact that students have to take two English GCSEs is not the issue. They have to take eight GCSEs to fill all their Progress 8 slots.
The double-weighting just applies to one GCSE at a time. An English one and a Maths one.
* Personaly, I think it's fair that an English and Maths GCSE is double-weighted, due to their importance. But that's not the issue here.
Old system: three non-English and Maths qualifications could count
New system: six non-English and Maths qualifications can count
Which do you think more likely to benefit the arts?
No, they don't.
Every year, my school has a couple of students who don't take GCSEs because they can't access them. They tend to take ELCs. The same was true at my last school, though to a greater extent. In special schools, it is very common.
Erm ...after stating 'No student has to sit a GCSE' the evidence is now that 'a couple' don't take them.....???
No one has to take any qualification. In fact, barely two thirds of students took a GCSE in English Language last year. The rest took IGCSE-style certificates.
There are many factors that encourage schools to enter students for GCSEs (or other approved qualifications), such as the league tables and Ofsted, but there is nothing statutory (unlike the National Curriculum, which is).
Therefore, your statement that 'students have to take GCSEs' is false.
Erm - igcses do not count anymore.
Therefore 'no student has to sit a GCSE' is really not true...Thanks for your thoughts anyway CandysDog.
It doesn't matter. They were just an example. ELCs don't count in the league tables either, but are still taken by some students.
Around 5% of students at the end of KS4 every year (around 25,000 students) do not take any form of English GCSE or equivalent. And before you ask, this information can be found in the annual DfE statistics.
Erm - using 5percent as a figure is desperate.
This hardly backs up the statement and proves that 95 percent do ...
But your original claim was not that 95% of students sit GCSEs. Your claim was that all students have to (direct quotation: 'students have to sit GCSEs', which was in reply to me saying that no student is obliged to sit GCSE English Language or any other GCSE).
No - your claim was that students do not have to sit GCSEs :'no student has to sit a GCSE'....And to back it up you have come up with a figure of 5percent - hardly convincing.
The fact that 95percent do sit GCSEs backs up my case far more that students have to sit GCSEs.
Thanks for your input anyway - I think it has been an interesting discussion. The saga of Progress 8 - and students doing GCSEs -will continue regardless ....
And we will have to agree to disagree...
But don't you both agree that this 'measure' is actually interfering with the market choice of children and their parents? In the guardian today there is a story of someone who home schools their children. Not for them GCSEs, Ebacc or Progress 8.
I don't actually believe in testing children at 15 and 16 because I think the way the DofE is too frightened of criticism to hold the accountability for education and devolves this to MATs, individual schools and OfSTED means that choices are made which are in the best interest for a statistical table over that of an individual child. When a statistical table is more important than a real child then the system is broken.