---The main difference with GCSE's is the way they are marked. O levels were graded not just on what you had written in the exam, but on what other people had written. There were always the same percentage of passes at each grade---

Yes, it could come up with odd results.
My daughter got an A in O-Level English and a C in Latin.
Any "fule" took English because it was compulsory for many jobs and university. Latin tended to be taken by the brighter pupils and so it's likely that the A was obtained with lower marks than the C.

...and everyone has forgotten to mention the CSE - easier qualifications taken by kids not up to the O Levels. The main difference was that CSEs were coursework based, and O levels were exam based, but the qualifications weren't equivalent. A top grade CSE (CSE Grade 1) was only the equivalent of an O Level Grade C (3rd grade down). You were allocated to either CSE (not too bright kids) or O Level (the brighter kids) by your school.

To my utter shame I got a CSE Grade 4 (4!!!!!) in Art. Normally you only had to spell your name right to get a Grade 4 in anything.

The rest of my exams were O Levels with pretty good grades though :-)

So the whole point of the new GCSE was to get rid of this double system and the stigma it gave to the kids only taking CSEs. All kids take the same qualifications.

Of course, it just means that they end up with really low GCSE grades instead of a good grade CSE, so I'm doubtful how helpful that really is.

I've been lying about my O levels for so long, I don't know how many I've got. Took nine but failed a heap. (Going to class helps)

Got an A in maths which I took in the fourth year (before I started skiving)

I think it's unrealistic to expect an article that mentions the term O or A level to then give an explanation of the British grading system. If you read an article with references to a US grade of A or gradepoint average of 3.5, you don't then always read a paragraph explaining the entire US grading system (which can vary a lot between schools anyway).

I never even took the SATs as an American, and my last degree was a a master's degree from UCLA, a good university. It's not required in the US, it's a private test that is optional and just some universities or colleges require it. I didn't go to one that did. SAT is just an abbreviation of the company's name for its test (scholastic aptitude test given by the Educational Testing Service).

I always remembered hearing the most about O and A levels when I remember Princess Diana saying she never passed any O levels and didn't even take the A levels (she said that in a BBC interview).

I would have thought a practicing journalist would have looked up what those meant when first encountered, if they didn't know what they were. Especially if reading fiction and newspapers their entire life about this and never knowing what they mean. Also, a journalist should know the English language fairly well (one would hope) and that the word ordinary is not necessarily pejorative in the English language, it can simply mean "usual".

Hey friends, it was intended in a lighthearted way, please take it that way! I already acknowledged that I should have Googled the terms -- I guess my befuddlement dated from before the Google era, where we can get instant answers to every puzzle!

Back in the the way-back, in my pre-college days, SATs were almost unheard of, required only of Ivy League applicants. Most colleges had no pre-entrance test requirementa at all. That led to a small "firestorm" in my infamous newspaper career:

I was assigned to find out why so many students were being flunked out of our State's "Big Ten" University (my alma mater). I discovered it was because it admitted anyone with a high school diploma from the state...even a 1-room school up in the boonies. So the University was forced to wash out the "incapables." I wrote the obvious suggestion that the U institute an entrance test (and also that students should be required to hold a "B" average in order to have a car on campus). The world exploded! Quel Horreur!!

Numerous investigative articles later, the public still outraged, I did the sensible thing -- I packed my books and moved to NYC.

Hey! A a Scot, I did O Grades and Highers, but we STILL referred to them as O Levels.

And all of mine were As (shame I can't say the same about my Highers)

Actually we don't have SATs any more, they were dumped in 1991. We just call them SATs, they are actually National Tests.

My apologies for not mentioning the Scottish system.

Sheila, that's interesting, at my school in Edinburgh we never referred to O-grades as O-levels... I think they were marked on a scale of 1-4, too, rather than A,B,C etc.

I was at school just as the changeover to Standard grades happened, so we were the last year to take O-grades. One of our teachers had us sit a couple of Standard grade papers (French and Spanish) just to act as guinea pigs - we all agreed they were astonishingly (indeed, insultingly) easy.

Anyone who thinks exams haven't got easier needs their head testing. I reckon a modern-day GCSE (or whatever they're called now) equals about a fifteenth of an O-level. Practically every CV we got from job seekers (at my fomer workplace) had 10 A-stars - completely meaninglesss.

Did anyone else catch 'That'll teach 'em' on Channel 4? - Simultaneously eye-opening, alarming and hilarious.

Actually, travelerjan, if you're going to insist on journalistic precision, it hasn't been the Scholastic Aptitude Test for years.

It's the Scholastic Assessment Test. Check your house stylebook.

And for a journalist, your take on capitalization is a bit -- archaic.

Bluehour, that's because I AM archaic -- haven't held a paid editorial post for 6 years (blissfully retired)... and admit haven't worked in Education publications for longer than that.

As for Capitalization, when I'm doing it on Forums, I follow any rule I want -- I often capitalize Just for Emphasis. Punctuation.. same way.

Sheila

When I sat my O levels and Highers they weren't even graded! It was a straight forward pass or fail. The results were always sent in those large brown envelopes that filled you with fear.

Now I really feel my age.

bill

Oh, and do you remember the 11+ exam, or as we called it 'the qualifying'?

bill

I hate to say it, Bill, but I'm even too young for the 11+.

It was still spoken about when I was young, but we did IQs.

My Os and As weren't graded either.
In my day, the 11 plus made the difference between going to university or ending up in a dead-end job. It was nerve racking,
I can still remember walking to school and hearing running footsteps.
My mother was so out of breath that she couldn't speak but she was waving a big envelope with the news that I'd passed.
They say that children today are stressed pshaw!

"So every week I was one of those listed on the school noticeboards under "Remnants". Not that I'm bitter, or anything. "

Oh my, PatrickLondon. Visions of torn strips of discarded cloth are coming to mind....

My sister-in-law, hearing me relate our exchange, wants you to know she still....remembers, uh, fondly the elementary school teacher who segregated her class into different musical subgroups. There were the canaries, and then there were the robins, and then there were the blue jays. She was a 'blue jay'.

In case you don't have blue jays in your part of the world, this in effect announced one to the world as 'can't carry a tune in the proverbial bucket.'

Interesting explanations, now it's crystal clear.