[bbfan1991]

The government's plan to scrap GCSEs in key subjects in England has been strongly criticised by MPs.

The Education Select Committee voiced concerns about the timetable for change, saying changing "too much, too fast" could threaten exam quality.

The cross-party committee has been examining plans to replace GCSEs with English Baccalaureate certificates.

The government said it was "making major changes to ensure we have world class exams that raise standards".

'Damaged brand'

The committee's report raises doubts about the pace and direction of the shake-up planned for GCSEs.

It said there were so many worries, it should act as a "red light" to the government.

The government says it wants to abolish GCSEs for core subjects and introduce English Baccalaureate certificates from 2015. There will also be only one exam board for each subject.

Education Select Committee chairman

But the committee said the government had failed to prove such a change was necessary.

It also raised concerns about introducing English Baccalaureate certificates in English, maths and science while still running "discredited" GCSEs for other subjects.

The committee's report said it agreed with many of the plans to overhaul GCSEs - such as moving exams to the end of a course and limiting the culture of excessive resits.

But it rejected the idea that GCSEs were such a "damaged brand" that they needed to be abolished.

The committee also questioned the "coherence" of introducing changes to GCSEs before deciding the accompanying national curriculum.

It called on the government to publish its plans for the secondary curriculum "as soon as possible".

"No sensible reform of assessment can take place without clarity as to what is to be taught. Coherence is not achieved by accident but by design," said Graham Stuart, the committee chairman and Conservative MP.

There are also strong concerns about the speed of so many proposed changes - and the pressures that it will place on the exam system.

The report pointed to the controversy of last summer's English GCSE results as an example of the "turbulence" that could be caused by changes to the exam system.

The timetable was "not merely challenging but so tight that it may risk endangering the quality", it said.

'Untenable'

The report said the government should consider Ofqual's recommendation that moving to a single exam board for each subject should be "decoupled" from the overhaul of qualifications.

The MPs urged caution when considering upheavals in exams.

"We recommend that the government takes time for careful consideration and slows down the pace of change," the committee's report concluded.

The report also highlighted the opposition of "stakeholders" in education to the reforms - and the responses from teachers' union reflected this hostility.

The National Union of Teachers' leader, Christine Blower, said the government's position on exam reform was "now surely untenable".

"The education secretary is totally isolated in his view that the English Baccalaureate certificates are a suitable measure to replace GCSEs," she said.

Chris Keates, of the NASUWT teachers union, accused the government of displaying "arrogant disregard for the impact on the lives of young people".

Labour leader Ed Miliband told ITV1's Daybreak programme there was "a groundswell against Michael Gove's plan" because he was "squeezing creativity out of the curriculum".

'Thorough overhaul'

He added: "Also he's not really focusing on those kids who maybe aren't going to go to university but need high quality vocational qualifications.

"That is what I'm talking about today. If you are a 14-year-old today you might know that you're going to do A-levels and then go to university, but what if you're going a different path? What if you're not academic? I think you or I would probably find it hard to say what young people will be doing at 18."

Dr Mary Bousted, head of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: "This is a devastating critique of the government's policy. Michael Gove will lack any credibility if his response is 'I know best; carry on.'

"The parliamentary committee now joins a long list of those who publicly oppose the plans."

But the Department for Education said the report accepted the need for major improvements.

"We have been clear that the secondary education system is in desperate need of a thorough overhaul - an objective with which the committee agrees," said an education department spokeswoman.

"That why we are making major changes to ensure we have world class exams that raise standards."

[Livia]

Around 40% of kids leave school in England with no qualifications, so it's clear the current system isn't working. I see this as a positive move.

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Livia

Around 40% of kids leave school in England with no qualifications, so it's clear the current system isn't working. I see this as a positive move.

I agree there are numerous reports from employers that even basic levels of literacy and numeracy from youngsters with "qualifications" are well below the expected minimum levels. Clearly something isn't working and it looks like the examinations themselves have evolved into a mish mash of modules/practicals/coursework etc... so much so that one could even fail the actual final exam but still pass the overall GCSE.

Perhaps a more formalised examination which sets the bar a bit higher may lead to improvements in education standards.

[Niall]

I don't really understand the need to overhaul the entire qualification system that's in place at the moment. I mean there is problems with it, but the entire removal in favour of the baccalaureate seems like needless work on the part of everyone involved. I think the same of the planned A-Level changes too, I mean they're more than tough at the moment.

I remember listening to a Radio 4 programme with my Dad about this a few months ago. A lot of respected teachers etc were on there critiquing all the problems with the baccalaureate. I'll have to find it..

[Kizzy]

There isn't that much difference between GCSE and the old O levels, we were the first to do them in 88 and we were told that higher A-C is O level grade and foundation D-below CSE.
Any changes made would be to improve prospects for ESOL students, this may be where the baccalaureate comes in?