I am delighted to read about the Labour government's plan to allow for GSCE resits. I am furious to read that the shadow schools minister is against it. GCSE and A-level examinations are the most stressful times of a persons life. Allowing modular resits would be a great relief to this stress. The comments made by the shadow schools minister Nick Gebb about GCSE and A-level resits show how out of touch the Tories are about issues that affect ordinary people.

The Tories have clearly not changed. In 2004 the then shadow education secretary Tim Collins wanted to end A-level resits. When Nick Gibb said that "resits are not going to help them properly for further studying or getting a job", he was talking utter rubbish. GSCEs are a one-off lifetime opportunity, whereas job promotions and so on can be aquired at any stage in a person's working career. Allowing pupils to resit GCSE modules will help them improve their academic and vocational skills.

Wayland, London, UK

What a joke! There are far too many mickey mouse courses that teenagers can take nowadays. As a University student I'm continuously surrounded by pretencious know-it-alls who boast about their 5 A's. Ask them which subjects they took and you hear all the usual rubbish, "dance, social skills, fashion" etc etc. No wonder half of them can't write an essay or spell.

Gillian Murray, Dundee,

The Government introduced the 'Aim Higher' campaign to schools a number of years ago and ever since they have simply lowered the bar, there really is no need to aim higher what with abolishing the compulsory language and all of these mickey mouse GCSEs they're replacing them with.

John, London, UK

I am in year 9 and will soon be taking my SATS, and then my GCSEs. I feel that this whole idea of taking modular tests etc. is a load of rubbish, as the people who are willing to try as hard as they can and will do the work should get high marks in their exama anyway. Those who are going to doss around and waste everybody else's time aren't going suddenly become geniuses because they've taken a test so many times that they know the questions off by heart! As someone who might be influenced by these absurd plans, I feel that people should think again before changing the way things run - the current structures work well enough, don't they? It's just a fix by the government and schools to make British students appear smarter - but it won't be us who's laughing when 70% of university graduates write down 2+2=5

Holly, Uttoxeter, England

Why don't they hand these things out for turning up and get it over and done with?

judy, Liverpool, England

Why dont we simply give every kid leaving school 10 A grade GCSE's? That way, all kids are 'equal', there are no high flyers, and the stupid ones dont need to feel bad, oh, and parents can pretty much send their kid to any school, as they will come away with 10 A grades, thus it will solve the whole league table culture. While we're at it, we may aswell give 4 A grade A levels to anyone who's 18 or above, and maybe a degree or two (first ofcourse), and even a Phd for those who want one? That way, we're all equal, and no-one needs to feel stupid.

Arthur, Newcastle,

The GCSE exam separates out to 50% who go on to A levels and university from the 50% who will take vocational courses.

There is enormous pressure on children to be within the top 50%, and allowing two attempts at the exam will do nothing to reduce it. All it will mean is that pupils who are already marginal sit more exams, taking time away from new work, and pushing them further behind, whilst the top 50% still get those coveted university places.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

This is already the case.
http://www.ocr.org.uk/Data/publications/key_documents/GCSE_TFC_Science_A_Specification.pdf

Page 69 Grading
"In modular schemes candidates can take units across several different sessions. They can also
re-sit units or choose from optional units available."

Eddie, Cheshunt, Herts

The current GCSE system already greatly overstates students' ability: the shift towards modular GCSEs will make the situation far worse. I teach students at a sixth form college, and we know that having 5 grade Cs proves absolutely nothing.

The real problem is that schools are under such pressure to get a prescribed percentage of students through with 5+ grade Cs tha they resort to any tactic that will allow them to achieve this. The nett result is that we receive students who know next to nothing, and expect to do almost nothing for themselves; they tell us that at their previous schools their teachers did all the dfficult bits for them (teachers, you note, not their parents), or told them what to write, and they frequently become angry when we refuse to do the same.

This is the government's idea of schools having improved massively over the past ten years! Well, possibly - but wouldn't it be cheaper just to give out the certificates when the child's birth is registered?

Jill, Southampton, UK

All these things are driven by self-interest:
• QCA and the Government want ever-improving 'results'
• Exam boards want turnover and profits
• Schools want league table points
• Pupils want easy exams.

What's the problem?

(Apart from the fact that in the real world, the country will sink further and further down the world economic league tables)

MarkS, Leeds,

Some people seem to confuse the objectives of education and of examination. The objective of the former is to provide people with knowledge and skills; the objective of the latter to try and see how successful that process has been.

To those who argue that modular examinations are a good thing and that no one can object to their use, one could point out that, taken to their logical conclusion, we will arrive at a situation where, for example, students will simply be told that the battle of Hastings took place in 1066, then, immediately afterwards, tested to see if they can write down the date -- possibly, even using a sentence. Sadly, standards are now so low that many will fail.

Lee, London,

Simply inform school children that the good universities look not only at their marks, but also at whether any resits have been taken. If a paper has been sat more than once, the mark is considered less valuable. That should deter the high achievers and cause them, at least, to understand that you only get one chance in life and must learn to live with (indeed take responsibility for) your own mistakes.

John Scott, London,

I asked a GCSE student recently to say 'my name is xxxx, I live in London and I am 17 years old' in French. They couldn't. They had got an 'A' grade in French the year earlier. They could tell me all sorts of things about France, its capital city and who the president was. They just couldn't speak it. Another couldn't count to 20, and one couldn't even remember immediately what 'thankyou' was !!!! Educational standards have failed to understand what employers and the outside world want. We want employees that can, in the case of french, COMMUNICATE with french speaking people. This introspective nonsense is making us the laughing stock of Europe. When I meet French or German students of the same age as the English (I do not count Scots or Welsh in this demise) they are so much more articulate and CAPABLE. Wake up England, we are creating the 'Dumbed Down' nation.

David L, Brussels,

Many areas of life are stressful and competitive and children need to learn these valuable lessons. Has one single change to the GCSE over the last 20 years made them harder? Pass rates continue to climb, grades and expectations are inflated, but the quality continues to sink. In my line of work I regularly deal with the new graduate intake, and over the last 20 years their declining ability has been noticeable. Many are unable to write clearly and struggle with basic maths. The implications of this for the competitiveness of the UK are severe and already becoming evident.

David , London , England

Is it "reducing" exam stress to have students sitting public examinations for the last five years of their school lives (starting with KS3, then modular GCSEs for two years, AS and A2)?

ACS, Bristol,

Exams separate the educationally gifted from those who are not. therefore the educationally gifted can be taken further and those who are not can be shown other ways to make a living. The fact that PC nonsense is trying to tell us that everyone is equal when they are blatantly and historically different (our differences make us who we are). I will never be a great electrician or plumber, I know that, I accept that. People should accept that some people aren't good at school. Soon everyone will have a degree, but most will have degrees from universities that are 2nd string and will wind up wasting 3-6 years of their lives (2 at school after 16 then 3-4 more) getting a degree that allows them to work in a bar or in McDonald's. Those who are seen to be educational should be taken further. Those who are not should not stay in school, they should get an apprenticeship or be shown other things like farming, building, the army or fishing.

ITS COMMON SENSE PEOPLE! COME ON!

Graeme, Edinburgh,

If education's aim is to not just simply mass test a mass audience at an arbitary time but to provide intellectual growth and development surely this method will increase knowledge achieved by pupils over time, even if it means re-sitting modules. Who could argue that this is not beneficial to a society?

Paul, Wales,

This modular-GCSE has been going on since 2003 ????

Whats the news?

John Trent, Nottingham, UK

1) If Nicola Worlock thinks this indeed is news, she should try reading articles written by other journalists on the Times. A couple of clicks would take her to an article written by Alexanrda Frean on 21 December 2007, featured prominently on the online Education pages of this site:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article3081259.ece

2) there is no such thing as "Standard Assessment Tasks".

Kevin Newbury, London,