Michael Gove poised to unveil sweeping GCSE reforms - which might never happen

Changes planned for 2015, according to the Mail on Sunday.

In today's Mail on Sunday, Simon Walters claims that Michael Gove will announce sweeping changes to the GCSE system on Tuesday. Among the reported proposals are:

  • "Grade 1" to replace A*, with only 10 per cent of children getting this mark
  • Partial resits to be banned
  • Continuous assessment to be replaced with three-hour final exams
  • Algebra in maths exams, and essays in English papers
  • A single exam board, to address concerns that competition has led to a "race to the bottom"

It appears that Liberal Democrat protests over the return to a two-tier O-Level/CSE system have been heeded, as the new exams are being described as "single tier". Walters reports that the reforms will be announced in a joint press conference between Gove and Nick Clegg.

There is, however, one final noteworthy point. According to the MoS report, the proposed changes would not come in until September 2015, with the first candidates sitting the new exams in 2017. The next general election will be held in the summer of 2015, so if the Conservatives lose power, any proposed changes could be scrapped.

The Department of Education has not commented on the reports today.

Michael Gove, who is poised to announce GCSE changes. Photo: Getty

Helen Lewis is deputy editor of the New Statesman. She has presented BBC Radio 4’s Week in Westminster and is a regular panellist on BBC1’s Sunday Politics.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.