Could we be thinking differently about GCSE English in colleges?

By Caroline Dunstan, Research Further Scholar and Lead Learning and Development Practitioner at Riverside College

GCSE English and maths in Further Education (FE) continue to be a contentious issue for both students and teachers. This blog concentrates on GCSE English as it is the subject I taught for 5 years but similar questions could be asked around maths.

GCSE English as it currently exists is not working for FE students. The statistics speak for themselves. In 2024, for students aged 17 and over, the pass rate for GCSE English was 20.9%. In our college, like in many others across the country, GCSE English teachers work tirelessly to create a supportive classroom environment, apply varied, evidence informed pedagogical strategies and work closely with curriculum teachers. But despite the efforts they put into their planning and teaching, the pass rate has remained consistently low over the past 10 years with many students having made no grade progress during their 16-19 studies (Curriculum Review, 2025).

For the students who don’t pass GCSE English at school, resits can be demoralising and demotivating, and issues with attendance can impact on the main course they are studying (a survey by AoC found that learners attendance rates in 16-19 maths and English were just over 9% lower than that of their main qualification (2024, pg. 37)). They also find themselves limited in the courses they can access when they don’t have their English and maths. We know that studying at L3 has a positive impact on learners and on their future wages but a grade 4 in maths and English GCSE is typically required for entry to level 3 study, removing that option for many.

We also know there is a link between pass rate of GCSE English and deprivation, as well as special educational needs. “ ‘Young people who don’t secure strong L2 qualifications including English and maths do not have the clear pathway that others do, and this includes a disproportionate amount of students from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds and with SEND”’ (Curriculum and Assessment review, 2025 p. 8). Not achieving English and /or maths GCSE for these communities of learners exacerbates existing inequalities and reduces opportunity for them.

To get a little current informal feedback I asked students in two of our GCSE English classes (using Mentimeter) to share with me their feelings about resitting their GCSE in English. I specifically asked them to think about how it made them feel not achieving their English at school and resitting it now, not about their classes or their teachers. Students couldn’t see what others had written and it was anonymous. The two word clouds they made are below:

The questions we are struggling with around the teaching of English in schools and colleges are not new. English as a subject to be taught in schools came into being after the Newbolt Report (1921). This is an extensive 379-page report, looking at the position of English teaching in the educational system of England and makes for a fascinating read. Some of the many enlightening comments in it linked to the present-day vocational education, taken from the chapter on English in Technical Education are:

“Have you found difficulty in obtaining employees who can speak and write English clearly and correctly?' was answered with an emphatic affirmative by all but a few firms (pg.132).

“Literary power is not a certain sign of commercial acumen; but the power to say what has to be said in an effective, finished, and even graceful way is, nevertheless, a great asset in commercial life.”

Newbolt’s committee wrote:

“There is a danger that a true instinct for humanism may be smothered by the demand for measurable results, especially the passing of examinations.” (cited in Aldridge and Green, 2019 pg.195)

Interestingly, the report valued regional dialects and emphasised the importance of reading at all levels, including technical and adult education. We face the same issues with employability skills over a century after this report was published. Halton Chamber of Commerce suggest that the skills employers value in young people are the ability to articulate thoughts, to communicate, demonstrate understanding or empathy, hold a conversation and the confidence to present information and pick up the phone. They also identify that ‘frequently businesses and organisations ask for maths and English to be better aligned to the actual business need, making learning more relevant’.

There is also the issue of the Covid pandemic, which continues to impact on students in schools and FE. Those students who were at home during the pandemic in what should have been years 7 and 8 are now in their first year in FE. When they should have been dealing with the move from primary to secondary school and developing their communication and social skills they were learning at home and communicating through social media.

The interim report of the Curriculum and Assessment Review (2025) highlights that education should equip young people to meet challenges and adapt and thrive in the workplaces of the future, and that we should be breaking down barriers to opportunity. Some of the skills the review identifies to support this include media literacy, the ability to navigate misinformation, analytical skills, interview and communication skills (for example debating and public speaking) and stretching and challenging their horizons. Does the current GCSE English in any way support this?

To deal with the resit ‘problem’ the government policy seems to be to fund more research to improve teaching, essentially placing the responsibility for the low pass rates on to teachers. Over the past 10 years, there have been various projects delivered, all with good intentions of improving English and maths GCSE grades in FE but with very little impact on the wider cohort. In November 2024 two new resit research programmes were awarded nearly £1.3 million: Get Further trialling small tuition groups at a subsidised rate and the ETF Can-do maths programme aiming to improve engagement and resilience in learners resitting maths.

Instead of putting more money into researching how to improve the teaching (which I would argue is, in the majority of cases, already very good) whilst asking our young people to repeat the same exam time and time again and expecting different results (Einstein’s definition of madness) could we rethink the English curriculum to encompass the challenges of the future, break down barriers and provide a bridge to education and/or training rather than a brick wall. Could we give young people a place and a voice in society rather than a feeling of failure and disengagement? It seems to me that the subject of English is ideally placed to support this through encompassing the desired skills laid out in the curriculum review within an English subject framework.

This doesn’t mean getting rid of the GCSE English as it is. It provides a valuable link to A Level English and should remain as an option for students who enjoy studying English in its present form. Nor does it mean ‘dumbing down’ the qualification so more students can pass. What if the current English GCSE became the choice for those who wish to continue with the subjects after year 11 just like choosing history or French in Year 9, and there was an alternative, a new qualification for students in year 10 (or earlier) based on skills such as:

• Reading for pleasure
• Communication including oracy, debating, public speaking
• Drama including theatre, television, social media
• Critical analysis
• Identifying fact from fiction

What if the assessment of this was through alternative methods (which could include an examined component if necessary) such as recorded debate, conversation or coursework rather than five, six or seven years’ work being measured in 3,5 hours of exam? I am not claiming this is the definitive answer to the GCSE resit question but suggesting that looking at it in a different way might benefit our young people.

We know that metacognitive practice such as deliberate practice, repetition and spacing can support learning, all of these are embedded in GCSE English lessons but the statistics evidence that this still isn’t working. The government believes in using evidence-based practice in education, could they look at the evidence base of the last 10 years of low achievement through the same positive lens for our young people and take the brave decision to offer an alternative to the GCSE English that not only engenders a like (if not love!) of reading but also prepares our young people for what is looking like a very different future to ours? It might be we find that those students who are currently dismissed as failures at the age of 16 because they can’t get a grade 4 in English actually have value and voices and opinions that deserve to be heard.

References

Aldridge, D. and Green, A. (2019) Newbolt and the construction of subject English, English in Education Vol 53 No. 3 195-198 Available at: Newbolt and the construction of subject English (Accessed 29^th March 2025)

AOC (2024) College Attendance Survey Report Available at: College attendance rates surveys | Association of Colleges (Accessed: 24^th March 2025)

Curriculum and Assessment Review Interim Report (2025) Available at: Curriculum and Assessment Review: interim report - GOV.UK (Accessed: 20^th March 2025)

Education Policy Institute (2019) ‘The Forgotten Third’ A rapid review of the evidence. Available at: EPI-report-The-Forgotten-Third-A-rapid-review-of-the-evidence.pdf (Accessed: 24^th March 2025)

Newbolt Report (1921) Available at: Newbolt Report (1921) (Accessed: 29^th March 2025)