The Independent Schools Council is a politically independent, not-for-profit organisation representing 1,270 independent schools educating more than 500,000 children. It exists to promote choice, diversity and excellence in education, developing talent at all levels of ability and from all backgrounds.

Search by: Schools Site Suppliers

Enter Search Keywords:

DfES Consultation on IGCSE in the Maintained Sector in England

22 February 2007

Response from the Independent Schools Council

The Independent Schools Council (ISC) represents the seven leading independent schools associations in the United Kingdom, collectively educating more than 500,000 children in 1,278 schools. ISC exists to promote choice, diversity and excellence in education; the development of talent at all levels of ability; and the widening of opportunity for children from all backgrounds to achieve their potential. ISC urges the government to recognise and accredit the IGCSE as a qualification fit to be included in the National Qualifications Framework and in DfES performance tables. It should be available to maintained and independent schools alike. This will allow all schools the flexibility to offer this method of assessment where they feel it will be of benefit to their students. At present, only independent schools enjoy this flexibility. The take-up of IGCSE in the independent sector is increasing: 39.5% of ISC schools teaching GCSE level students now offer IGCSEs in at least one subject. A further 8% intend to do so in the next 2-3 years. Schools take this decision based on their professional judgment as to whether the IGCSE exam is the best fit for their students - in spite of the fact that none of these results will be counted in official national league tables. Equally valid reasoning lies behind the choice of other independent schools to sit GCSEs, but crucially the autonomy they have in the decision making process means that they can be confident that their students are sitting the most appropriate assessment for them.

Question 2

Do you see a role for IGCSEs in helping schools to meet the assessment objectives of the National Curriculum?

The full reform of 14-19 education envisages young people choosing between three routes: the traditional route of GCSEs and A levels; the work-related route of specialised diplomas; and the work-based route of apprenticeships. In his speech to the annual conference of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust on 30 November 2006, the Prime Minister stated:

"If we are serious about tailoring education to the needs of young people, they should have real choices after 14 - strong qualifications with A levels, Diplomas, the IB and apprenticeships".

If the government is serious about "real choices", the IGCSE should be included in this list of options from age 14. Choice should be offered not only between the three routes, but also within each route to meet the diverse needs of students.

Given the power of the argument for increased personalisation, the use of the QCA review as the sole reference document accompanying this consultation is surprising for two main reasons: a) it has significant limitations, as is noted in chapter 3, that radically reduce the value of its findings; and b) it confuses comparability with identity.

a) The QCA study draws comparisons between different qualifications as they were in 2005. The conclusions do not incorporate changes since then which have already been made or decided upon and do not consider the potential implications of the ‘far-reaching changes at GCSE' which will mean that ‘students taking examinations in 2008 will be taking radically restructured assessments'.
b) The QCA study applies a mechanistic technique to determine comparability, taking the view that ‘any variance from one-to-one identity was a significant point of difference', and not attempting to understand where common values had simply been differently expressed. CIE particularly notes this issue in its consultation response stating that ‘such an approach seems to fly in the face of QCA's encouragement elsewhere to avoid confusing a subject of study in the National Curriculum with the skills taught via the curriculum as a whole'.

Many of the ‘major differences' were interpreted to mean that ‘the IGCSE examinations did not meet the GCSE subject criteria in significant ways' and therefore could not be ‘regarded as assessing the relevant programme of study to the extent that the GCSE does'. Inevitably, there is not a precise match between IGCSE and GCSE - otherwise there would be no discussion to be had and no choice to deliver. However the differences picked out by the QCA review could have been viewed in quite another way if the review had considered the reasoning behind some of the differences and adopted an approach that took account of the evolving nature of these assessments.

IGCSE English

Five main issues are identified in the English subject-specific findings summary as potentially significant. Two of these stem directly from the fact that IGCSEs separate the assessment of English Literature and Language. The QCA review only looked at IGCSE English Language and therefore did not find significant prescribed reading or inclusion of texts as these are examined within the IGCSE Literature course. This is not an example of National Curriculum objectives not being met, but simply of them being met alternatively.

Equally, one point relates to differences in the time allowed for assessment, and also, in part to coursework. Whilst quantity of assessment cannot be entirely detached from the achievement of assessment objectives, this is certainly not an area where a one-to-one mapping technique is appropriate. Candidates should be given the time to demonstrate their skills within an assessment: it cannot be accepted that the longer you give a candidate the better the assessment. On the issue of coursework, the widespread debate in this area should be noted and the potential validity of different approaches should be credited rather than criticised.

A further point concerns the treatment of speaking and listening, which can be assessed in both programmes, but is optional and separately endorsed in the CIE qualification. Here, the IGCSE approach, in contrast to the GCSE approach, addresses the problem faced by students with disabilities or special educational needs who, for reasons of their disability, are unable to speak with fluency. At the moment, GCSE students are provided with certificate indications that they have not undertaken the spoken part of the exam for these reasons and have had to have their grade raised artificially to indicate their ability in the other areas examined. However, this approach is not ideal, as candidates prefer to be able to obtain their grade on the same basis as other students and avoid the need for certificate indications; something which the IGCSE allows for. Unfortunately, students in maintained schools are not currently able to benefit from this option.

IGCSE French

The Dearing Review Interim Report highlighted as one of the causes of the sharp decline in the uptake of languages at Key Stage 4, the structure and content of the National Curriculum. It expressed the view that the current GCSE syllabus is clearly not attractive to students and a review should be undertaken. Assessment ideas from the IGCSE, in this context, may provide valuable alternatives.

The option for students to take languages at different levels, something recommended by Dearing who endorsed the Asset Language Ladder, is valuable and particularly motivating for students whose first language is not English.

IGCSE Mathematics and Science

In both these subject areas, differences are identified that will no longer remain issues as the new National Curriculum programme for Science is introduced and forthcoming changes in GCSEs reduce differences in the treatment of coursework and paper tiering in Mathematics.

Equally, other differences noted do not detract from the achievement of over-arching National Curriculum objectives.

Question 3

What particular aspects or obstacles need to be considered for effective introduction of IGCSEs in the maintained sector?

The main obstacle to the introduction of IGCSEs in the maintained sector is the belief held by some that the National Curriculum should be delivered in a highly prescriptive manner. This is not appropriate as schools need to tailor their courses to suit individual children.

Independent schools which have recently adopted the IGCSE have not reported any practical difficulties in delivering these qualifications as compared to GCSEs either in availability of resource materials or in training.

Question 5

Would you like maintained schools to offer access to iGCSEs in all subjects or English, Maths and Science only?

The IGCSE should be available to all students in all subjects in all schools. It is then a matter of professional judgement on the part of teachers as to which qualification best meets the need of particular students. It is desirable that the same qualifications should be available to children in both sectors, and undesirable for children in either sector to have a choice which is more restricted than in the other sector.

Conclusion

The consultation document states, accurately, that the QCA review ‘highlights significant differences between GCSE and IGCSE'. It then says, without explanation, that these differences are ‘significant obstacles to these qualifications being introduced into maintained schools'. This is a non-sequitur. IGCSE offers an alternative to GCSE, and the offering of alternatives is in line with meeting the diverse needs of students. Differences in approach from GCSE do not in themselves jeopardise the delivery of the over-arching National Curriculum objectives.

ISC Qualifications Survey 2006

GCSEs and IGCSEs compared, QCA November 2006

GCSEs and IGCSEs compared, QCA November 2006

Response to the UK Department of Education and Skills consultation on IGCSE in the maintained sector in England, CIE January 2007
URL link

GCSEs and IGCSEs compared, QCA November 2006