This year’s dip in the GCSE pass rate has been ascribed to, amongst other things, a dramatic increase in the number of 17-year-olds resitting maths and English - which they are now mandated to do by government. The numbers are stark - around 40,000 more 17-year-olds sat a maths GCSE this year than did so last year, and an additional 31,000 sat GCSE English.
The impact of this is predominantly felt in FE colleges, which have both larger numbers of students and a higher proportion which haven’t yet secured the C grade.
The total number of entries for GCSE English and maths in colleges increased by 40 per cent this summer to top 200,000. For large colleges, the sheer logistics of handling resits can be daunting: at City College Norwich, 1,200 students sat GCSE English this summer - three times the number two years ago.
The college had to hire the Royal Norfolk Showground exhibition hall to accommodate them. This burden on colleges - which are suffering the effects, in many instances, of poor secondary provision, and with less funding to boot - is why last year I proposed placing a levy on schools to cover the costs of these resits.
A GCSE grade C is, in many ways, a ticket to the future
And the results? Well, they’re not great. Education Datalab analysis shows that only 29.5 per cent and 26.9 per cent achieved a C or better in their resit in maths and English respectively.
And the majority of those were D-grade students. Those who got an E or below had only a 1 per cent chance of securing a C if they resat the exam within a year.
So should we scrap the resits? Or at least allow the pupils to sit another, more applied qualification? We absolutely should not, and here’s why. A GCSE grade C is, in many ways, a ticket to the future. A huge number of further study programmes and jobs require a C in GCSE English and maths. Denying some young people another chance to gain this qualification is akin to accepting that they shouldn’t be able to access these opportunities.
This access to a qualification that has value is the difference between GCSE resits, and Year 7 resits - which I don’t like .
Education is a ladder, but it should also be a safety net. It should catch those who don’t make it the first time and give them another chance to succeed - even if the student doesn’t want that chance.
Where opponents of resits have more of an argument is in the promotion of functional skills qualifications. But here too, I have concerns. Such qualifications may be more accessible. And they are recognised by some apprenticeship providers; for example, as a condition of entry. But, sadly, I don’t write the rules, and the rules say that most people prefer a GCSE brand, not a qualification that is perceived as lower-quality.
We can spout pious homilies along the lines of, “Well, employers should know better.” Or we can give young adults a chance to access the brand that has currency. I know which one I prefer.
Jonathan Simons is a former head of education in the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit under Gordon Brown and David Cameron
@PXEducation
