A GCSE by any other name...

In 2015, the biggest educational reform of our generation shall be put into place. The much maligned GCSE shall be replaced with the ‘English Baccalaureate’ (EBacc), the brain child of the Coalition’s combined educational reforms. This initial bout of reformation is reserved only for specific subjects – Mathematics, English Literature and Language, Chemistry, Biology and Physics. However, Geography, History and the languages shall also get to undergo the EBacc transformation in 2017, the inclusion of the Languages being hailed by Stephen Twigg, the shadow Minister for Education.

Is the change going to be reserved to the name of the qualification? The answer to this is a resounding no. The EBacc unashamedly harks back to the old days of the O level, where more emphasis was placed on grammar, spelling and punctuation. Also, the current tiered GCSE system shall be scrapped, alongside the modules used to divide the GCSE into bite size chunks. There shall also be no coursework and no in class assessment – the child’sperformance at the ‘do or die’ end of year exam shall be the only factor that decides success or failure. And, in possibly the most significant change to the current system, there shall be only one exam board to one subject. As Michael Gove himself stated “if we remove modules and reduce coursework, get rid of the factors that encourage teaching to the test and, above all, ensure there is just one exam board for each subject, we can restore faith in our exams”.

The EBacc unashamedly harks back to the old days of the O level, where more emphasis was placed on grammar, spelling and punctuation. Also, the current tiered GCSE system shall be scrapped, alongside the modules used to divide the GCSE into bite size chunks

The reception to the proposed changes has been mixed, some of the sternest criticisms coming from the teaching unions, NASUWT and NUT. NASUWT General Secretary, Chris Keates, recently said that the changes were part of a “cynical and wholly unjustifiable attempt to discredit the quality and rigour of the GCSE qualification”. NUT has criticised the proposed reforms, arguing that they shall just “test memory and essay writing, which are not crucial skills for the majority of jobs or life today”. Sir Nicholas Serota, Director of the Sadler Wells Theatre, raised the point of the arts subjects that have been excluded from the Eng Bacc qualification, stating that the arts “are integral to our understanding of the world, as

NASUWT General Secretary, Chris Keates, recently said that the changes were part of a “cynical and wholly unjustifiable attempt to discredit the quality and rigour of the GCSE qualification”

important as reading, writing, geography and arithmetic”. The architect Richard Rogers, whom worked on the iconic Pompidou Centre in Paris and the EU Court of Human Rights building in Strasbourg, has also condemned the possible reforms.

The English Baccalaureate does not just exclude the arts – IT, Sociology and Psychology are absences that shall raise many eyebrows, especially in an age where all three make up a significant minority of university courses. The possible impact of this was considered by UCAS, who argue that the reforms “could create a two tier system, where some subjects lose value, and students may be discriminated against because of subject choice”. In reality, this has probably happened – the Russell Group have already voiced their preference for specific subjects. However, UCAS go further in their criticisms and say that there is “a potential for negative impact on social mobility”. This is

The English Baccalaureate does not just exclude the arts – IT, Sociology and Psychology are absences that shall raise many eyebrows

possibly one of the most troubling counter arguments for Michael Gove, the Minister for Education in a Coalition Government that has four Eton educated white males in the four most important and influential jobs in the country (Prime Minister, Chancellor, Mayor of London and the Archbishop of Canterbury). The argument is even more troubling due to its validity – state comprehensives and further education colleges thrive on the arts and the social science and by discrediting the qualifications one gains by studying them, one discredits the institutions and the pupils that study them.

Another criticism lies behind the exclusion of vocational subjects, with the reforms focusing on academic subjects, thus ignoring the need for a vocatiohnical baccalaureate’ fallen by the wayside, this has worried many commentators and business leaders alike, many of whom have already actively called for a generation of workers to be practiced in the art of doing, rather than discussion.

All in all, the reforms by Michael Gove appear to tackle only one aspect of a complex problem – the problem of credible qualifications within our school system, whilst wilfully ignoring other, perhaps more malignant, issues.