Record A Level results again
Discussion
Not sure about the A levels, but I've just looked up some of the GCSE "ICT" papers.
Half the questions are nothing to do with IT. Some of them have absolutely no bearing whatsoever in the real world.
Heck, the level of the questions seems akin to a maths paper asking someone to add 1 & 1.
Half the questions are nothing to do with IT. Some of them have absolutely no bearing whatsoever in the real world.
Heck, the level of the questions seems akin to a maths paper asking someone to add 1 & 1.
When I was doing A-levels (back in 1989-1991) we were told that the best preparation for the exam was to look at past papers 1980-1985 as these were often harder than the more recent ones.
Fair enough, in some cases there was content that you hadn't covered in the syllabus, which then clearly looks harder, but generally earlier papers seemed to require a deeper understanding and gave more differentiation between candidates.
When interviewing graduates it's blatantly obvious in many cases that they've been taught to pass exams rather then been given a good understanding of the subject.
Making is hard to differentiate between candidates hurst the better candidates who would achieve the best marks if the exams were more testing....
Sidicks
Fair enough, in some cases there was content that you hadn't covered in the syllabus, which then clearly looks harder, but generally earlier papers seemed to require a deeper understanding and gave more differentiation between candidates.
When interviewing graduates it's blatantly obvious in many cases that they've been taught to pass exams rather then been given a good understanding of the subject.
Making is hard to differentiate between candidates hurst the better candidates who would achieve the best marks if the exams were more testing....
Sidicks
I'm a science teacher and can confirm that A-level and GCSE exams have been getting easier for many years. We have archives of exam papers in our school, out of interest we looked at the last 25 years and found they have steadily got easier. Pupils are now doing topics in GCSE's and A-levels which they would have been doing two years sooner.
Just think about it though, what government wouldn't want exam results to improve year on year? If they don't improve its seen as a poor reflection on the government's education policies. How else can you you guarantee improved results?
The pass rate is getting to the point now where the results are meaningless. The only way out of this is to replace GCSE's and A-levels with new courses so that the pass rate can have step change downwards and the results can then rise year on year again.
Just think about it though, what government wouldn't want exam results to improve year on year? If they don't improve its seen as a poor reflection on the government's education policies. How else can you you guarantee improved results?
The pass rate is getting to the point now where the results are meaningless. The only way out of this is to replace GCSE's and A-levels with new courses so that the pass rate can have step change downwards and the results can then rise year on year again.
Edited by yak541973 on Thursday 19th August 11:41
Edited by yak541973 on Thursday 19th August 11:43
F i F said:
The conclusion I have come to is that exams are different, I know they do some things that tbh I find hard at first but things do move on, but they are taught to pass them better. This might mean a narrower knowledge.
The difference now from when I was at school is that pupils are no longer taught "the subject", rather they are taught what is required to pass the exam. That way, the school gets a better rating in the league tables and reports. Targets are the problem.
Granted sid. I was talking with reference to programming.
With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
Edited by TuxRacer on Thursday 19th August 11:56
TuxRacer said:
Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
I suppose the problem is that if a student did well in the exam and got more than say 80%, then they should be awarded an A irrespective of how easy or difficult the exam was. At an extreme, if everyone got 95% or more, should the bell curve be moved to cover the 95-100 area to ensure a decent distribution of grades? The only way to ensure comparable grades is to design the questions such that they are not easier than previous years' exams. Or as above, scrap the system and start again (ie rename them but make the exams tougher).Well, yes, I do think they should move the bell curve around. If a student gets 80% and everyone else gets more than 90% I don't think he should be given an A. In that situation I think the examiners have set an exceptionally poor exam that doesn't differentiate students, but I still don't think he would deserve an A.
Edited by TuxRacer on Thursday 19th August 12:13
It's all very well saying that knowledge is only a Google away, but you have to be able to get people who can hold enough knowledge and facts in their brain to have a face to face sensible discussion about the subject in hand. They also have to have enough knowledge and common sense to know when they are out of their depth and, more importantly, say so. Then the knowledge where to go and get it, either from research or experts.
If you have someone who does not have a thorough grounding in the basics, yet knows a few bits and pieces, some of which may be quite advanced, in a sort of Bluffer's Guide way, then you can actually be wasting your time as most of the discussion is just noise to them.
Very frustrating.
See it on here a lot one suspects, but then you can't do the check test questions in real time.
If you have someone who does not have a thorough grounding in the basics, yet knows a few bits and pieces, some of which may be quite advanced, in a sort of Bluffer's Guide way, then you can actually be wasting your time as most of the discussion is just noise to them.
Very frustrating.
See it on here a lot one suspects, but then you can't do the check test questions in real time.
Edited by F i F on Thursday 19th August 12:15
TuxRacer said:
Granted sid. I was talking with reference to programming.
With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
But there's a huge difference between a programmer who can just copy code from the web (or elsewhere in the app being developed) and one who can create from the ground up.With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
Edited by TuxRacer on Thursday 19th August 11:56
There is roughly zero coding in the ICT. Which isn't really a computing course of any kind. From the looks of it, its more of a "what is a database/spreadsheet/wordprocessor" and when best to apply each.
clonmult said:
TuxRacer said:
Granted sid. I was talking with reference to programming.
With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
But there's a huge difference between a programmer who can just copy code from the web (or elsewhere in the app being developed) and one who can create from the ground up.With Maths though I'm sure the syllabus will have changed - logarithms replaced by calculators or more focus on applied maths perhaps. So I suspect papers of yesteryear aren't really comparable to today's. Why they can't keep the same distribution of grades across them though, as I say, is beyond me.
Edited by TuxRacer on Thursday 19th August 11:56
There is roughly zero coding in the ICT. Which isn't really a computing course of any kind. From the looks of it, its more of a "what is a database/spreadsheet/wordprocessor" and when best to apply each.
It's an ever decreasing circle that started in the late 80's.
I took my GCSEs in '91 and A Levels in '93. Some of the practice papers from the 80's were a lot harder than the more recent ones. We're now seeing many of the teachers being educated in the 90's and later and as such their standards are being passed on to their students.
I think everyone will be in denial in this country whilst the skilled industry sectors slowly slip away from us towards the East. The population is ageing and the benefits culture is at an all time high, we're doomed I tell you, doomed!
eta
Any Daily Mail editors reading this, I'm open to offers!
I took my GCSEs in '91 and A Levels in '93. Some of the practice papers from the 80's were a lot harder than the more recent ones. We're now seeing many of the teachers being educated in the 90's and later and as such their standards are being passed on to their students.
I think everyone will be in denial in this country whilst the skilled industry sectors slowly slip away from us towards the East. The population is ageing and the benefits culture is at an all time high, we're doomed I tell you, doomed!
eta
Any Daily Mail editors reading this, I'm open to offers!
Edited by CaptainSlow on Thursday 19th August 12:49
All the college courses I did were pointless.
In e-media I knew more about the software we were using than the teachers did. So much so that they found it hard to mark my work since they didn't know how I did it.
All my work was distinction level but I found it tedious writing up a step by step process for everything I did (Hundreds of actions). I'd been doing it for 2 years before I got to college. Talk about boring me s
tless.
As such I scraped a pass even though all my finished products were double distinctions.
In computing I was taught pretty pointless access database bks so I just stopped turning up.
Visual basic? Lol. I'd done that 3 years before reaching college and already figured out how much of a steaming pile of turd it is.
I'm quite certain that further education as a whole is a joke.
I doubt there's much you can't learn using the internet and a library (And with google books, soon just the internet.)
In e-media I knew more about the software we were using than the teachers did. So much so that they found it hard to mark my work since they didn't know how I did it.
All my work was distinction level but I found it tedious writing up a step by step process for everything I did (Hundreds of actions). I'd been doing it for 2 years before I got to college. Talk about boring me s
tless. As such I scraped a pass even though all my finished products were double distinctions.
In computing I was taught pretty pointless access database b
ks so I just stopped turning up. Visual basic? Lol. I'd done that 3 years before reaching college and already figured out how much of a steaming pile of turd it is.
I'm quite certain that further education as a whole is a joke.
I doubt there's much you can't learn using the internet and a library (And with google books, soon just the internet.)
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff