Connect with us

Education

‘They are making young people ill’: is it time to scrap GCSEs? | GCSEs

Published

on


It’s approaching 8.30am on a Wednesday in June and 140 grim-faced teenagers are making their way into an exam hall. Today it’s GCSE maths paper 2 (calculator). A posse of smiling staff encourage and cajole: “Good luck, hope it goes really well.” “Bags at the back please!” “Use a black pen only.” A few stragglers reluctantly make an entrance. “Find your seats quickly, please. Good luck!”

Once everyone is seated, there’s the exam prayer. (This is Urswick school, a mixed Church of England secondary in north-east London.) “Heavenly father, be with me as I take this exam, keep my mind alert and my memory sharp, calm my nerves and help me concentrate.” Some candidates bow their heads, others stare glumly into the distance. Then, a few final words of encouragement. “So, year 11, this is your time to shine. Good luck – you have an hour and a half. You may begin.” And they’re off. Welcome to the 2025 summer exam season.

GCSEs – the qualifications taken by 15- and 16-year-olds at the end of their secondary education – are well under way in assembly and sports halls across England, Wales and Northern Ireland. But so too is a growing debate about whether it might be time to reform, or even abolish, the exams that have shaped young people’s fortunes for almost four decades. The government’s national curriculum and assessment review, including potential reform to GCSEs, will be published later this year. Not a moment too soon, for many.

The GCSE – or general certificate of secondary education – was introduced in 1986, replacing the two-track “sheep and goats” system of O-levels and CSEs (certificate of secondary education). Since then they have undergone several changes, most significantly under David Cameron’s government and the then education secretary Michael Gove, who wanted a more “rigorous” set of qualifications. He increased content, and replaced modules and coursework with end-of-course exams, graded by a number (from 1 to 9, with 9 being the best) rather than a letter.

Critics have argued there are too many exams: students in England typically sit between 24 and 31 hours of exams in year 11, which is double, even triple, the totals for countries such as Ireland (16) and Canada (10). They say the curriculum content is vast and unwieldy – teachers struggle to cover it in the allotted time and pupils struggle to master it – and the high-stakes nature of the assessment creates excessive anxiety and stress for teenagers, more of whom now experience poor mental health, particularly since Covid.

They are worried about the narrow academic focus, the danger of teaching to the test and the alarmingly high failure rate. Every year, about a third of GCSE pupils across England finish year 11 without achieving a grade 4 pass in English and maths. Then there’s the fact that children in England are now required to remain in education or training until they’re 18, making GCSEs at 16 kind of redundant.

The roll call of industry leaders who would like to see them scrapped is growing. Among them are the former Ofsted boss Sir Michael Wilshaw and Kenneth Baker – the former education secretary who introduced GCSEs. They join institutions that have spoken out against the exams, such as Eton college, Bedales school, St Paul’s girls’ school and the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. Many teachers, parents and pupils still under the GCSE cosh would concur.

“While there is a place for these sorts of exams”, Blair wrote in the Telegraph in 2022, “we cannot rely on them alone: they only measure certain skills, they do not always do this accurately, and they invite narrow teaching styles aimed at passing tests rather than building other key aptitudes.”

Writing in the Guardian earlier this year, Simon Jenkins condemned what he described as the destructive cult of the exam, warning it was harming young people. “Just say it,” he urged. “Spit it out. Abolish GCSE. It has nothing to do with young people or their advancement. It has everything to do with quantifying, measuring, controlling and governing their preparation for life.”

Then there’s the chronic unfairness of the system. Covid fuelled the attainment gap between rich and poor pupils; now a boom in private tutoring is adding to the sense that there’s a two-tier system, with wealthier families able to pay to secure their children advantages that poorer families cannot afford. According to a 2023 Sutton Trust survey, almost half (46%) of pupils in London received private tutoring, compared with 30% for England as a whole.

“GCSEs are failing the fairness test,” says Lee Elliot Major, a professor of social mobility at the University of Exeter. “We must face up to the stark truth that they reward children not just for what they know, but for the resources their families can draw upon – whether it is extensive help via the booming industry of private tutors or the middle-class assumptions embedded in our curriculum that alienate and disadvantage those lacking a particular cultural capital.

‘Failure is baked in.’ Photograph: Linda Nylind/The Guardian

“We’ve created an exam system that perpetuates privilege from one generation to the next. Our meritocratic elites, obsessed solely with narrow academic memorisation tests, are losing the bigger political battles over our failure to nurture all talents in society.”

Ben Davis, headteacher at St Ambrose Barlow Roman Catholic high school in Swinton, Salford, is among those who want change. “GCSEs have run their course and are not fit for purpose. I’d go so far as to say they are making young people ill and they impoverish teaching.”

They are not inclusive, failure is “baked in” and “there is a disconnect between GCSEs and what employers need and expect,” says Davis. They should be replaced, he suggests, with a single diploma-based system for all young people, so that vocational, life skills, apprenticeships and academic qualifications sit alongside one another and pupils can combine these in the way that suits them best.

Sammy Wright, head of school at Southmoor Academy in Sunderland and author of Exam Nation: Why Our Obsession With Grades Fails Everyone and a Better Way to Think About School, agrees the system is ripe for change. “The short answer is that GCSEs are designed to fit an academic trajectory. The model of learning they follow dovetails neatly with A-levels and then university, but that isn’t what many kids do.

“Essentially, GCSEs ask children to try an academic pathway, and then only when they fail do they offer a different version of what education might be. My favoured alternative,” he says, “is a passport qualification, where instead of discrete grades, they get an overall mark, within which there are many different elements. But this is long-term, it must be thought through and not rushed. It’s a decade’s work, really.”

It is a huge challenge, says Dr Mary Richardson, professor of educational assessment at UCL’s Institute of Education, “because GCSEs are (a) not ‘bad’ assessments at all; it is the culture they support and breed that is our major societal challenge, and one which I feel adds little value to both education and to the lives of teenagers. And (b) they are part of a massive, corporate assessment industry.

“I’ve been castigated in the past for suggesting that we should review national testing of this kind at 16, mainly because there are thousands of jobs that rely on this aspect of our education system. However, if we could invest more money in teacher education, and supporting teachers to assess in schools, then that is a way to reorientate all that expertise in assessment. And by that I mean a really rich type of assessment that adds value to learners and learning, not simply a one-off test situation with limited context.” Maybe, but concerns would doubtless persist about the reliability of and potential for bias in any teacher assessment-based system.

Former education secretary Michael Gove, who made changes to GCSEs as he wanted a more ‘rigorous’ set of qualifications. Photograph: Jon Super/AP

No prizes for guessing what Britain’s strictest headteacher thinks. Katharine Birbalsingh, who founded the high-achieving Michaela Community School in the London borough of Brent, is a firm supporter of GCSEs. She approved of Gove’s changes and thinks it’s important for children to face challenges such as exams, to help build the resilience that will get them through the vicissitudes of life.

“Look, GCSEs are not perfect. I would be the first one to say that. All exams have problems. But exams hold institutions to account. It’s not just about holding the children to account. Most of it is about holding the entire system to account.

“There needs to be something to set the standard. It’s also the case when it comes to employers that they have some sense of how the child has done. Otherwise it’s just a free-for-all where everybody’s just making up whatever they’re doing.”

Richard Brown, headteacher at Urswick, may not see eye to eye with Birbalsingh on everything, but he does agree that GCSEs should be retained, with some changes. “At the end of the day, this is an outcomes-driven business,” he says ruefully. This is his last summer of exams before retirement. “Personally I would not get rid of GCSEs. They are such a powerful brand and children do thrive on the challenge of them.

“I can just about remember when I took exams and I’m sure I was nervous, but I went in and did it. That’s grit and resilience, isn’t it? That’s what schools have to look at and make sure their youngsters can deal with setbacks.”

We are chatting in his office, reflecting on his 40 years as a teacher. Over in the exam hall, maths paper 2 draws to an end. It seems to have gone reasonably well, though the question on angles caused some problems. “It was OK,” says Scarlett cautiously. “A lot of predicted topics came up.” “Challenging questions but nothing I couldn’t overcome,” Kelvin adds confidently. “Topics that I didn’t revise came up but I used my foundation mathematical knowledge to work it out,” says Fatou. “Perfecto!” breezes Joshua.

And so the annual ritual continues. The see-through pencil cases, the clocks, the rows of desks, the last-minute revision and prompt cards, and the final reassuring words from ever-attentive teachers who are desperate for their students to do their very best. Maths paper 2 is over but there’s maths paper 3 still to go, plus religious studies, history, French, English language, geography …

Elsewhere in Urswick’s bright, modern classrooms, year 10s are well on their way through their GCSE courses, preparing for next summer’s exam season. The debate will go on, but in all likelihood, so too will the exams. In some shape or form. For the time being.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Education

9 AI Ethics Scenarios (and What School Librarians Would Do)

Published

on


A common refrain about artificial intelligence in education is that it’s a research tool, and as such, some school librarians are acquiring firsthand experience with its uses and controversies.

Leading a presentation last week at the ISTELive 25 + ASCD annual conference in San Antonio, a trio of librarians parsed appropriate and inappropriate uses of AI in a series of hypothetical scenarios. They broadly recommended that schools have, and clearly articulate, official policies governing AI use and be cautious about inputting copyrighted or private information.

Amanda Hunt, a librarian at Oak Run Middle School in Texas, said their presentation would focus on scenarios because librarians are experiencing so many.


“The reason we did it this way is because these scenarios are coming up,” she said. “Every day I’m hearing some other type of question in regards to AI and how we’re using it in the classroom or in the library.”

  • Scenario 1: A class encourages students to use generative AI for brainstorming, outlining and summarizing articles.

    Elissa Malespina, a teacher librarian at Science Park High School in New Jersey, said she felt this was a valid use, as she has found AI to be helpful for high schoolers who are prone to get overwhelmed by research projects.

    Ashley Cooksey, an assistant professor and school library program director at Arkansas Tech University, disagreed slightly: While she appreciates AI’s ability to outline and brainstorm, she said, she would discourage her students from using it to synthesize summaries.

    “Point one on that is that you’re not using your synthesis and digging deep and reading the article for yourself to pull out the information pertinent to you,” she said. “Point No. 2 — I publish, I write. If you’re in higher ed, you do that. I don’t want someone to put my work into a piece of generative AI and an [LLM] that is then going to use work I worked very, very hard on to train its language learning model.”

  • Scenario 2: A school district buys an AI tool that generates student book reviews for a library website, which saves time and promotes titles but misses key themes or introduces unintended bias.

    All three speakers said this use of AI could certainly be helpful to librarians, but if the reviews are labeled in a way that makes it sound like they were written by students when they weren’t, that wouldn’t be ethical.

  • Scenario 3: An administrator asks a librarian to use AI to generate new curriculum materials and library signage. Do the outputs violate copyright or proper attribution rules?

    Hunt said the answer depends on local and district regulations, but she recommended using Adobe Express because it doesn’t pull from the Internet.

  • Scenario 4: An ed-tech vendor pitches a school library on an AI tool that analyzes circulation data and automatically recommends titles to purchase. It learns from the school’s preferences but often excludes lesser-known topics or authors of certain backgrounds.

    Hunt, Malespina and Cooksey agreed that this would be problematic, especially because entering circulation data could include personally identifiable information, which should never be entered into an AI.

  • Scenario 5: At a school that doesn’t have a clear AI policy, a student uses AI to summarize a research article and gets accused of plagiarism. Who is responsible, and what is the librarian’s role?

    The speakers as well as polled audience members tended to agree the school district would be responsible in this scenario. Without a policy in place, the school will have a harder time establishing whether a student’s behavior constitutes plagiarism.

    Cooksey emphasized the need for ongoing professional development, and Hunt said any districts that don’t have an official AI policy need steady pressure until they draft one.

    “I am the squeaky wheel right now in my district, and I’m going to continue to be annoying about it, but I feel like we need to have something in place,” Hunt said.

  • Scenario 6: Attempting to cause trouble, a student creates a deepfake of a teacher acting inappropriately. Administrators struggle to respond, they have no specific policy in place, and trust is shaken.

    Again, the speakers said this is one more example to illustrate the importance of AI policies as well as AI literacy.

    “We’re getting to this point where we need to be questioning so much of what we see, hear and read,” Hunt said.

  • Scenario 7: A pilot program uses AI to provide instant feedback on student essays, but English language learners consistently get lower scores, leading teachers to worry the AI system can’t recognize code-switching or cultural context.

    In response to this situation, Hunt said it’s important to know whether the parent has given their permission to enter student essays into an AI, and the teacher or librarian should still be reading the essays themselves.

    Malespina and Cooksey both cautioned against relying on AI plagiarism detection tools.

    “None of these tools can do a good enough job, and they are biased toward [English language learners],” Malespina said.

  • Scenario 8: A school-approved AI system flags students who haven’t checked out any books recently, tracks their reading speed and completion patterns, and recommends interventions.

    Malespina said she doesn’t want an AI tool tracking students in that much detail, and Cooksey pointed out that reading speed and completion patterns aren’t reliably indicative of anything that teachers need to know about students.

  • Scenario 9: An AI tool translates texts, reads books aloud and simplifies complex texts for students with individualized education programs, but it doesn’t always translate nuance or tone.

    Hunt said she sees benefit in this kind of application for students who need extra support, but she said the loss of tone could be an issue, and it raises questions about infringing on audiobook copyright laws.

    Cooksey expounded upon that.

    “Additionally, copyright goes beyond the printed work. … That copyright owner also owns the presentation rights, the audio rights and anything like that,” she said. “So if they’re putting something into a generative AI tool that reads the PDF, that is technically a violation of copyright in that moment, because there are available tools for audio versions of books for this reason, and they’re widely available. Sora is great, and it’s free for educators. … But when you’re talking about taking something that belongs to someone else and generating a brand-new copied product of that, that’s not fair use.”

Andrew Westrope is managing editor of the Center for Digital Education. Before that, he was a staff writer for Government Technology, and previously was a reporter and editor at community newspapers. He has a bachelor’s degree in physiology from Michigan State University and lives in Northern California.





Source link

Continue Reading

Education

Bret Harte Superintendent Named To State Boards On School Finance And AI

Published

on






Bret Harte Superintendent Named To State Boards On School Finance And AI – myMotherLode.com

































































 




Source link

Continue Reading

Education

Blunkett urges ministers to use ‘incredible sensitivity’ in changing Send system in England | Special educational needs

Published

on


Ministers must use “incredible sensitivity” in making changes to the special educational needs system, former education secretary David Blunkett has said, as the government is urged not to drop education, health and care plans (EHCPs).

Lord Blunkett, who went through the special needs system when attending a residential school for blind children, said ministers would have to tread carefully.

The former home secretary in Tony Blair’s government also urged the government to reassure parents that it was looking for “a meaningful replacement” for EHCPs, which guarantee more than 600,000 children and young people individual support in learning.

Blunkett said he sympathised with the challenge facing Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, saying: “It’s absolutely clear that the government will need to do this with incredible sensitivity and with a recognition it’s going to be a bumpy road.”

He said government proposals due in the autumn to reexamine Send provision in England were not the same as welfare changes, largely abandoned last week, which were aimed at reducing spending. “They put another billion in [to Send provision] and nobody noticed,” Blunkett said, adding: “We’ve got to reduce the fear of change.”

Earlier Helen Hayes, the Labour MP who chairs the cross-party Commons education select committee, called for Downing Street to commit to EHCPs, saying this was the only way to combat mistrust among many families with Send children.

“I think at this stage that would be the right thing to do,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “We have been looking, as the education select committee, at the Send system for the last several months. We have heard extensive evidence from parents, from organisations that represent parents, from professionals and from others who are deeply involved in the system, which is failing so many children and families at the moment.

“One of the consequences of that failure is that parents really have so little trust and confidence in the Send system at the moment. And the government should take that very seriously as it charts a way forward for reform.”

A letter to the Guardian on Monday, signed by dozens of special needs and disability charities and campaigners, warned against government changes to the Send system that would restrict or abolish EHCPs.

Labour MPs who spoke to the Guardian are worried ministers are unable to explain essential details of the special educational needs shake-up being considered in the schools white paper to be published in October.

Downing Street has refused to rule out ending EHCPs, while stressing that no decisions have yet been taken ahead of a white paper on Send provision to be published in October.

Keir Starmer’s deputy spokesperson said: “I’ll just go back to the broader point that the system is not working and is in desperate need of reform. That’s why we want to actively work with parents, families, parliamentarians to make sure we get this right.”

skip past newsletter promotion

Speaking later in the Commons, Phillipson said there was “no responsibility I take more seriously” than that to more vulnerable children. She said it was a “serious and complex area” that “we as a government are determined to get right”.

The education secretary said: “There will always be a legal right to the additional support children with Send need, and we will protect it. But alongside that, there will be a better system with strengthened support, improved access and more funding.”

Dr Will Shield, an educational psychologist from the University of Exeter, said rumoured proposals that limit EHCPs – potentially to pupils in special schools – were “deeply problematic”.

Shield said: “Mainstream schools frequently rely on EHCPs to access the funding and oversight needed to support children effectively. Without a clear, well-resourced alternative, families will fear their children are not able to access the support they need to achieve and thrive.”

Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “Any reforms in this space will likely provoke strong reactions and it will be crucial that the government works closely with both parents and schools every step of the way.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending