At GCSE, grades 3-1 are passing grades. This is apparently controversial.
At GCSE, grades 3-1 are passing grades. They're just Level 1 passes. Other examples of Level 1s include music grades 1, 2, and 3, some functional skills qualifications, as well as NVQ level 1s. For many students, a Level 1 qualification is sufficient for further study at Level 2, e.g., GCSE grades 4 and above, an intermediate apprenticeship, or an NVQ level 2, amongst others. Once a student has a Level 2 qualification, they can go on to study for a level 3 (e.g., A-levels and equivalent), level 4 (e.g., higher apprenticeship), level 5 (e.g.,DipHE) or even level 6 qualification (e.g., degree with honours) if they have sufficient industry experience. Of course we can argue that it would be great if all students achieved a Level 2 qualification by the time they're 16, but some don't. Some achieve a Level 1 qualification.
Considering a Level 1 qualification to be a "fail" doesn't change the fact that it exists. Arguing that it is perceived as a "fail" doesn't change that it exists. Bringing in an additional level 1 qualification called a 'Level 1' won't change the fact that a level 1 GCSE qualification exists (unless you change the GCSE itself into a Level 2-only qualification, and if you do that, you may as well get rid of grades 3-1 because who cares by how much you failed).
We have these romantic ideas that every child is fully capable of getting level 2 qualifications in every subject by the age of 16, but it just isn't true. Some children aren't very good at some subjects, some children get crappy teachers, some children have learning difficulties, some children don't have the support at home to study as much as they need in the manner they need to, some children arrive in England halfway through year 10 with only conversational English, some children move school halfway through GCSE and have to learn different set texts. It is important that these children can access a qualification. To go back to the example above of music - we don't start music grades at grade 4 because "grades 1, 2, and 3 are fails". No, we acknowledge that these are important stages in a musician's development, and offer our budding musicians the opportunity to get a certificate that shows what they can do.
There had been a lot of talk lately about vocational and technical education for young people, and in today's Times, Secretary of State for Education, Lucy Powell, writes about introducing a “new” qualification for students who are “trapped in a cycle” of resitting English and Maths. This new qualification, Powell says, will be called a Level 1. If I were appointed Secretary of State, I think I might learn about the industry for which I am now responsible before opening my mouth, but what do I know.
The issue is, of course, not the lack of qualification. The issue is that no one - Secretary of State included - knows that the GCSE is a split-level qualification, and there are too few options available for students with Level 1 qualifications who do not also have a Level 2 in English and/or Maths.
An alternative to meddling with a qualification (the grades for which are still being referred to as “new”) would be to showcase what a Level 1 qualification gets you. We are never going to get “parity of esteem” for vocational options - for everyone to be able to pass, they would have to be easier than academic equivalents, making parity of esteem impossible. We are never going to convince people that a grade 3, 2 or a 1 is just as good as a grade 9, 8, 7 and so forth because it isn't. Why bother lying? What we can do is show the doors that these qualifications open. We can show people that your Level 1 qualification - whether that is a GCSE grade 2, or a level 1 diploma, or level 1 functional skills - can get you onto a Level 2 course. Show young people studying for L2NVQs, for intermediate apprenticeships, for level 2 diplomas. In the same way that we had a public service campaign encouraging young people to pursue apprenticeships post-18, so must we have one enlightening young people on their options post-16, both Level 2 and Level 3.
The issue isn't the qualification, the issue is the perception. We cannot change perception by fluffing up the edges and pretending we've done some special. We cannot make people think a Level 1 qualification is as good as a Level 2 qualification because it simply isn't. But that doesn't mean it's worthless. A Level 1 is a stepping stone, we need to show our young people where they can step to.
If you're interested in what the qualification levels are, there's a list on GOV.UK
I wrote this at 4am after being up since 2. Apologies for any typos; I should be asleep.