The Labour Government

[I'm With Stupid]

Comparisons with GCSE​

Before changes to GCSE first taken in 2017, the IGCSE was often considered to be more similar to the older O-Levels qualification than the current GCSE in England, and for this reason was often argued to be a more rigorous and more difficult examination.[10] Before the early 2010s, most schools offering the IGCSE were private international schools for expatriate children around the world. However, in the 2010s, an increasing number of independent schools within the United Kingdom also began offering IGCSEs as an alternative to conventional English GCSEs for international IGCSE subjects, on the supposed basis that it is more challenging than the national curriculum.[11] A comparison between GCSEs and IGCSEs was conducted by the Department of Education in 2019. The study found that it was easier to achieve a grade A in English Language and English Literature in IGCSEs but harder to achieve a grade A in science subjects. Most other subjects were roughly equivalent.[12]

International General Certificate of Secondary Education - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I've taught iGCSE English and just having a look at 2022 AQA GCSE English exams, there are quite a lot of differences. Firstly, the iGCSE test has a lot more short answer questions, where you're specifically asked the meanings of individual pieces of vocabulary, or asked to find a word or phrase that means X. That seems to kind of acknowledge that while technically it's meant for first language speakers, it's often taken by people doing it as a second language. It's far more structured in terms of how you have to answer particular questions, whereas the GCSE text is entirely long essay-style answers. iGCSE though does a genre transformation question, where you have to read a text and use the information in it to write a different genre of text, which is quite challenging. It's different, but I don't think it's any more difficult. Obviously with something like this though, a lot depends on how it's marked.

But one interesting thing I found was the way international schools game the system. I went to work in a school that boasted 95% A or A* grades in iGCSE, and I asked them how they achieved it. Their answer was basically "Oh, we don't let all of the students take it." So if you're going to bring their average down, you'll do a different exam instead.

 

[Manc Born & Bred]

So Cheadle Hulme high school costs £75k for 5 years senior not including 6th form. You're going to tell me working class families are paying that? There is a big difference from having a working class background and being working class. Want to live like common people.

I have no idea, what do you think a working class family earns. If you have a working class background but you aren't working class is that because you want to better yourself? Nothing wrong in that at all is there? I shall ask again, is a footballer playing for Salford on £500 a week and his wife who is a cleaner classed as working class?

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

So Cheadle Hulme high school costs £75k for 5 years senior not including 6th form. You're going to tell me working class families are paying that? There is a big difference from having a working class background and being working class. Want to live like common people.

I went to private school.

I can only speak to the one I went to but they had a means tested bursary scheme, which I benefited from. It didn’t make it free, but it did make it more accessible.

Now in a perfect world there would not be any need for private schools and every kid would be given an equal opportunity of course. But sadly we don’t live in that perfect world.

When I hear stories about the lack of provision in state schools now it horrifies me. It’s unrecognisable to the experience I had growing up, and I’ll be forever grateful to my mum for the sacrifices she made for my education and the doors it opened.

I’m actually in favour of the VAT policy as I reckon most private schools will just swallow it or factor it into their bursary schemes, and the treasury desperately needs to generate revenue. But not everyone in private school is a millionaire.

For context I started senior school in the late 90s.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

That’s £12K a year. A lot of people spend that on cars holidays and clothes.

Who are these 'a lot of people?' No working class people I know. And if you've got 2 kids, it's suddenly £24k a year or a very difficult decision about who's your favourite.

There's also a big difference between being able to splash out on the occasional holiday, finances permitting, and basically having to commit to 5 years of private education. If you can't afford a holiday this year, that's no big deal. If you can't afford to continue your kids' education, that's a massive disruption where your child has to go to a new school and make friends all over again.

 

[metalblue]

I've taught iGCSE English and just having a look at 2022 AQA GCSE English exams, there are quite a lot of differences. Firstly, the iGCSE test has a lot more short answer questions, where you're specifically asked the meanings of individual pieces of vocabulary, or asked to find a word or phrase that means X. That seems to kind of acknowledge that while technically it's meant for first language speakers, it's often taken by people doing it as a second language. It's far more structured in terms of how you have to answer particular questions, whereas the GCSE text is entirely long essay-style answers. iGCSE though does a genre transformation question, where you have to read a text and use the information in it to write a different genre of text, which is quite challenging. It's different, but I don't think it's any more difficult. Obviously with something like this though, a lot depends on how it's marked.

But one interesting thing I found was the way international schools game the system. I went to work in a school that boasted 95% A or A* grades in iGCSE, and I asked them how they achieved it. Their answer was basically "Oh, we don't let all of the students take it." So if you're going to bring their average down, you'll do a different exam instead.

That last paragraph is very true. They don’t tell the parents until the last minute so make sure they get the fees first.

 

[urban genie]

You sure?

obviosly he forgot to say using klana or bank loans

 

[I'm With Stupid]

I went to private school.

I can only speak to the one I went to but they had a means tested bursary scheme, which I benefited from. It didn’t make it free, but it did make it more accessible.

Now in a perfect world there would not be any need for private schools and every kid would be given an equal opportunity of course. But sadly we don’t live in that perfect world.

When I hear stories about the lack of provision in state schools now it horrifies me. It’s unrecognisable to the experience I had growing up, and I’ll be forever grateful to my mum for the sacrifices she made for my education and the doors it opened.

Arguably it wouldn't be necessary if people couldn't buy their way out of the state system, because all of the upper-middle and upper class parents would demand higher standards. Finland don't allow private schools, and for years had the highest education standards in the world.

While it was great for you, it's also worth mentioning that they've studied this, and the vast majority of these scholarships and bursaries go to fairly well off kids. A huge number of them are for sporting excellence, for example, and usually not in the sorts of sports that working class kids have been learning. I knew a guy who got offered a full scholarship to St Andrews university because he could play the pipe organ. He was not someone who would have struggled to pay the fees. I also know someone from a poor background who got a full scholarship to the local private school, so I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that the majority of their scholarships are not given to poor people on academic grounds.

 

[BrianW]

A nation that needs charities is a failed one on a social scale imho.

how can any government say they cannot prioratise savimg the children, helpimg the aged or have proper mental health or social care, so much that charoties need to be formed.

The gerogian/victoriann idea of rich benevolance is outdated, if someome is wealthy enough to set up a charity they are wealthy enough to pay their fair share in
tax so such things are not necessary

I agree, but we are a long, long, long way from that model. And unless the national consciousness changes to a point where people are willing to elect a government substantially to the left of the present one, it will never happen.

I was pointing out that if this is such a big deal, people with money could sort it.

For my money, any kid with half a brain will succeed perfectly well in the state system, and 'school fee' money would be better spent on buying educational capital. For example, books. Encouraging a child's interests, especially in intellectual matters. Going on educational holidays, taking in great museums like the Louvre. But this does not buy social cachet, does it?

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

Arguably it wouldn't be necessary if people couldn't buy their way out of the state system, because all of the upper-middle and upper class parents would demand higher standards. Finland don't allow private schools, and for years had the highest education standards in the world.

I’m conflicted on this.

On the one hand I don’t think it’s fair for money to buy better education, but on the other hand I believe people should have choice. And if it were my family (we don’t have kids) I’d want the best for them and would almost certainly send them to a private school, if we could afford it.

I feel the same about the NHS.

My politics are peak centrist dad :)

 

[denislawsbackheel]

That’s £12K a year. A lot of people spend that on cars holidays and clothes.

I think you’ll find it’s £15K…

 

[metalblue]

I have no idea, what do you think a working class family earns. If you have a working class background but you aren't working class is that because you want to better yourself? Nothing wrong in that at all is there? I shall ask again, is a footballer playing for Salford on £500 a week and his wife who is a cleaner classed as working class?

The majority of people aren’t working class (~30%). The, albeit slim, majority have working class values (~51%). So given the majority aren’t working class I’m not sure what the benefit is of benchmarking affordability off their theoretical incomes.

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

For my money, any kid with half a brain will succeed perfectly well in the state system

Sorry but that’s just not the case at all mate. I’ve got family who work in education in a poor area and they’ve told me first hand the amount of bright kids that don’t get the opportunities they deserve is heartbreaking.

 

[remember arthur mann]

I’m conflicted on this.

On the one hand I don’t think it’s fair for money to buy better education, but on the other hand I believe people should have choice. And if it were my family (we don’t have kids) I’d want the best for them and would almost certainly send them to a private school, if we could afford it.

I feel the same about the NHS.

My politics are peak centrist dad :)

But state schools and NHS should be the best.

 

[Scottyboi]

I have no idea, what do you think a working class family earns. If you have a working class background but you aren't working class is that because you want to better yourself? Nothing wrong in that at all is there? I shall ask again, is a footballer playing for Salford on £500 a week and his wife who is a cleaner classed as working class?

I'd say above 100k combined before tax but that's just off the top of my head. I have nothing against people coming from nothing and making good money or them paying to educate their children, but why should you get a VAT break for it? I'm not jealous one bit of people making money or aiming for the sky. The reality is that most don't and are a product of their surroundings and will never get that opportunity, there is plenty of luck involved not just hard work.

I'm guessing the Salford footballer is going to be some trick question where it's an ex pro who has already earned tens or hundreds of 1000s throughout their career and are now playing for fun? If not then my answer above should cover it.

 

[west didsblue]

I think you’ll find it’s £15K…

He obviously failed his Maths.

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

Arguably it wouldn't be necessary if people couldn't buy their way out of the state system, because all of the upper-middle and upper class parents would demand higher standards. Finland don't allow private schools, and for years had the highest education standards in the world.

While it was great for you, it's also worth mentioning that they've studied this, and the vast majority of these scholarships and bursaries go to fairly well off kids. A huge number of them are for sporting excellence, for example, and usually not in the sorts of sports that working class kids have been learning. I knew a guy who got offered a full scholarship to St Andrews university because he could play the pipe organ. He was not someone who would have struggled to pay the fees. I also know someone from a poor background who got a full scholarship to the local private school, so I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that the majority of their scholarships are not given to poor people on academic grounds.

I can say for certain my bursary was not for any sporting achievements!!

 

[bluenova]

A nation that needs charities is a failed one on a social scale imho.

how can any government say they cannot prioratise savimg the children, helpimg the aged or have proper mental health or social care, so much that charoties need to be formed.

The gerogian/victoriann idea of rich benevolance is outdated, if someome is wealthy enough to set up a charity they are wealthy enough to pay their fair share in
tax so such things are not necessary

I understand where you're coming from, but the charity sector is a lot bigger and more complex.

There are plenty of charities doing things that wouldn't always be classed as "need", for example organisations providing social events for people who might be isolated, environmental charities improving the local area, 'friend' charities providing lifts, or just popping in to check on someone who is elderly or disabled, or charities caring for abandoned animals. There's a huge benefit in terms of happiness/satisfaction/quality of life for the people who volunteer in these areas, as well as the people who they're targeted at. While some of these areas might be provided by the state up to a point, there's still a huge benefit to a society helping itself.

You also have charities which might be better if they're not totally beholden to the state. I've worked for organisations providing legal advice, which may get some state funding, but relying on that totally can create issues over independence.

Even the most benevolent state shouldn't be controlling everything, and a successful society should have room for charities.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

I’m conflicted on this.

On the one hand I don’t think it’s fair for money to buy better education, but on the other hand I believe people should have choice. And if it were my family (we don’t have kids) I’d want the best for them and would almost certainly send them to a private school, if we could afford it.

I feel the same about the NHS.

My politics are peak centrist dad :)

Haha, yeah. I mean I get it. I think if I was having kids in the middle of 14 years of Tory ruin, I'd want the choice to opt out of the system they refuse to properly fund too. It only works if we have political parties that actually believe in the things they're supposed to be running.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

He obviously failed his Maths.

Expensive failure for his folks…

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

But state schools and NHS should be the best.

Not in the real world sadly pal.