Are GCSEs in need of reform or are they fit for purpose? The government is planning major reform to GCSEs that could lead to a return to O level-style qualifications and could give a single exam board responsibility for each subject. Here, leaders share their own views.

Reformed views

Consistency guaranteed?

My chief concern pertains to the reduction to one awarding body for a subject and the consequent reliability of marking. Currently, in smaller subjects, the examiner is monitored by a team leader, who, in turn, is checked by the principal examiner who runs that paper; with a larger entry, one extra tier of supervision is added, and the front-line examiner feels more remote from the principal examiner who he or she might never even see.

One single awarding body would mean an extra one or two tiers in the pyramid, and therefore a greater opportunity for variation between individual examiners. It would be iniquitous if the much-vaunted level playing field for candidates were to develop some molehills as a result of some political churn.

Guy Northern Former Acting Headteacher, Bentham Grammar School, North Yorkshire

Standards have declined

There is no doubt that GCSE standards have declined over time. This is supported by both credible independent research and my own experience of teaching GCSE English for the past 19 years. It flies in the face of 23 years of successive governmental celebration of statistical improvement in GCSE results.

Teachers and the wider public have lost confidence in a discredited GCSE system. Competition for market share amongst the awarding bodies and their corporate owners has created a slow, subtle but inexorable race to the bottom that Ofqual and others have been unable to prevent.

It is time for centralised assessment with integrity. We need assessment that is of the highest international standards and that safeguards those standards rather than allowing them to be eroded by short-term political expediency and market forces.

David Tickner Headteacher, Newcastle School for Boys 

GCSEs are fit for purpose

The existing suite of GCSEs is broadly fit for purpose. For too long, vocational equivalents have significantly muddied the waters, with students leaving schools having been awarded unprecedented numbers of GCSE equivalents. Many of these students would not have achieved comparable grades if they had sat traditional GCSEs, and, as a consequence, the public perception of the GCSE is of a less rigorous examination than it actually is.

I also feel a single awarding body would strengthen the GCSE by providing standardisation of syllabi. Currently, it is too easy for one syllabus to be preferred over another, on the grounds that it might yield higher results for league tables. In the eyes of the public, I feel if all students were compared on a like-for-like basis, there would be absolute transparency in the results and no one could gain an unfair advantage.

Craig Monaghan Assistant Principal, Oasis Academy Wintringham, Grimsby

Don't label people and schools

I understand how one examination board might lead to a level playing field. However, I'm concerned that a single exam board for a particular subject would have too much power over what was taught in schools, unless there was more choice within each subject.

I'm also concerned about controlled assessment. We should move away from students sitting for hours writing a long essay and pretending that it's like coursework in some way. I would rather have exams so we know that teachers can't influence the grades of their students by breaking or bending the rules on the amount of help and guidance.

I'm against a move to any exam that separates pupils at an early age. We want all students to succeed and don't want them convinced that at age 14 they have failed and that they are not 'academic'. Telling individuals or institutions that they are not good enough does not make anything or anyone better. Rather than driving standards up, we are labelling schools and people.

Glenda Hunter Deputy Headteacher, Buxton Community School and Sports College, Derbyshire

All things being equal

With the leaving age being raised to 17 and then 18 what's the point of a national qualification at 16? Until children are 13/14, we need a broad curriculum including vocational education and 'soft skills' like teamwork and independent learning. Some children should continue with this but narrow their focus as they progress, becoming more independent and discovering what really interests them. Others should be encouraged to take a more focused route, ending in a specialist qualification that employers would value because they helped design it.

The engineering diploma was such a qualification. Designed by engineers, academics and teachers, the qualification was recognised as being academically rigorous enough for its holders to get into the best universities and regarded as an excellent starting point for entry into the industry. Those studying the course were engaged by the challenging tasks and motivated by the tutoring they received.

Our education system will not be fit for purpose until we prepare young people for university and the workplace. Each route must be equally valued and have well-supervised standards. 

Robert Robson Principal, Samuel Whitbread Academy, Shefford, Bedfordshire

Designed with IMPACT

© 2024 Association of School and College Leaders | Valid XHTML | Contact us