Tonight:
4°c
Ministers ignored warning on 'soft' science GCSEs
Tim Ross, Education Correspondent27 Mar 2009
MINISTERS ignored warnings over the quality of the discredited new science GCSEs and introduced the exams before the results of trials were known, the Standard can reveal.
The qualifications regulator, Ofqual, ordered exam boards to make urgent changes to GCSEs after investigations found problems with new courses, which were brought in to make science "more relevant" to teenagers.
Many multiple choice questions were too easy for the brightest pupils, some marking was too lenient, and grades could not be properly compared between exam boards, the watchdog found.
But the Standard has learned that major concerns were raised over the courses three years ago. The House of Lords science and technology committee warned that "hard science" was at risk in the new exams. The Lords' report, published in autumn 2006, said it was "unfortunate that the Government opted to roll out the new courses before the results of the Twenty First Century Science pilot could be fully evaluated, and before the other, unpiloted courses had been sufficiently scrutinised".
Experts told the committee that while the OCR exam board's Twenty First Century Science course was undergoing trials, courses at the other two exam boards - AQA and Edexcel - had not been piloted and contained "errors and uncertainties" which there was no time to rectify. They expressed fears that the new courses - including revised A levels - were being rushed in.
Publishing today's report, Ofqual chair Kathleen Tattersall said the science GCSEs were "clearly a cause for concern".
She said the exam boards and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority had been working on changes to correct the mistakes from this year.
But 538,000 teenagers who took the new GCSEs for the first time last year will fear that their qualifications have been discredited.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Children said: "Ofqual has raised a range of important issues, but what is most important is that it has set out clearly the action that needs to be taken."
Questions from new exam
1. Our moon seems to disappear during an eclipse. Some people say this is because an old lady covers the moon with her cloak. She does this so that thieves cannot steal the shiny coins on the surface. Which of these would help scientists to prove or disprove this idea?
A) Collect evidence from people who believe the lady sees the thieves; B) Shout to the lady that the thieves are coming; C) Send a probe to the moon to search for coins; D) look for fingerprints
2. The female nurse leaves the room while the X-ray photograph is being taken. Why must she leave the room?
A) to avoid being in the X ray image; B) to avoid the X ray damaging her cells; C) to avoid the X rays melting her mobile phone; D) to avoid the X rays giving her a tan
Reader views (14)
i doint blieve that the 21st century science is easy yes for the founadiaton cos they are too damp to do the higter they have to do the easy question cos they find it hard to answer harder questions foul!!!!!!!!!!!
- Mikieyala, london uk, 26/12/2009 13:58
Report abuse
I am 16 years old, studying the triple science GCSE.....(meaning I get a seperate GCSE for Biology, Chemistry and Physics).
I have to say out of all the subjects I am taking for GCSE, science is a piece of cake. And yes I do sit the higher papers. I often think after an exam for science, 'I could have done that in year 7'. They are pathetic....almost insulting to peoples intelligence. I stumbled across a GCSE biology textbook from 1986 the other day, and I have to say it was much much much harder than the content covered in the textbooks that we use today.
There's far too much easy multiple choice which we can re-sit as many times as we want it feels like. The short answer papers aren't that much harder either, and it's almost as though you could sit a science exam without even revising and still get a top end B or possibly an A.
As well as this, there's an absolute lack of content, I feel as though I could cover all the content in the syllabuses in less than a year. This lack of content makes science seem boring and dry as we just sit on our stools all lesson listening to the teacher repeat themselves for maybe a few lessons.
They say the new syllabuses are getting more children to study science at A level. This is because it's so darn easy, they are tricked into thinking A level science will be the same. It's not because the lessons are 'inspiring' or children get a real sense that science is 'related to the real world' at all. The lessons are BORING.
BORING AND EASY
- Brandon, York, 26/11/2009 17:55
Report abuse
Labours policy of dumbing down in full flow.
- Frank, Home Counties, England., 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Gosh, if this is the reality of the question set for an exam - i'm going to suggest that my son aged ten sits it straight away - you certainly dont need any knowledge of the subject to pass!
- Raminber Bhalla, Isleworth, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
I ran the 2000 Science Year investigation (hosted by the Science Museum) into Science teaching in schools. The findings were ignored by the Government despite the Parliamentary Committee fully taking on board the findings, as well as the Royal Society and the London University Institute of Education.
These new comments completely and totally validate the original findings and emphasise the lost decade. Its shocking really.
- Ian M, Kew, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Of course Ministers ignored the survey. They dont want disturbing facts they want statistics to show that there are more passes, stupid. Quality is not in their Lexicon.
They want pupils to be stupid and ignorant and then they can recruit them to the Labour Party and make them Ministers just like themselves.
- Peter French, Orihuela Costa Spain, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
The questions are too hard. What about: "What's your name?" or "How old are you?". Wonder what the pass rate on that would be. How many would get 'F's?
- Phil Jones, London UK, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Questions from my 11 year old son's Year 6 recent Science exam.
Five common laboratory techniques are chromatography, dissolving, evaporation and filtration. Which one is used when:
a) salt crystals are made from sea water ......?
b) pure water is obtained from sea water ......?
c) sugar solution is made from sugar and water ......?
d) the different dyes in blackberry juice are separated....?
e) ethonal is obtained from wine......?
Complete the equation
hydrochloric acid + sodium hydroxide - sodium chloride + .........?
What type of reaction is this? .........?
What type of substance is sodium hydroxide? .........?
What type of substance is sodium chloride? ..........?
These are a sample of the easier questions
Final questions.......Guess which type of school my son goes to.........?
- Sara Griffiths, Twickenham, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
What about all those students who now do not have a proper science education? And the sin is we teachers ALL warned them, they would not listen. Many people should resign over this it is a national disaster and also for all those kids!!
- Gary Skinner, halifax UK, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
"Education, education, education" sounds rather hollow now.
- Jeremy E, London, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
just 2 let know im in yr 10 and doing my science GCSE
and them questions must be from foundation because i am doing highertier and them questions arent that easy at all some are quite challenging and i got good grades. the minister should only have a problem with foundation.
- Noreen, Leeds, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Now I know why Labour ministers get their children educated privately.It's a real shame that they treat working class children with such contempt.
- Ted, London, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Keep them thick, fill their heads with religion, east enders, football and of course plenty of alcohol and you have got them on a plate. This government will drag down everyone to the lowest common denominator just to prove that everyone can pass exams that are virtually useless in the real world and especially in a laboratory environment. I see students doing science courses that back in the 60s, 70s and 80s would never have been allowed into the college. I spoke recently to two student doctors of medicine who did not believe in evolution and could not explain how bacteria evolve their immunity to specific drugs. I realise that medics are not scientists but much of their work relies heavily on what scientists like biologist’s, geneticists, chemists and physicists come up with. The standards are dropping and we will suffer in the long run with poorer quality science graduates coming through. Having said that there is still a small core of excellent medic’s, scientists and engineers still working out there and hopefully some of their qualities will rub off onto the new intakes (like what Noreen is).
- Stephend, London, England, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
Noreen from Leeds
How did you get on in your English exams?
- George, London, 26/11/2009 16:55
Report abuse
