2020 A Level Results
Discussion
Like, I suspect, many parents, I was under the impression that teachers' assessments and predicted grades would be the most significant factor in the results that my twin sons are going to be given for their A Levels this week.
Turns out that isn't the case at all, and, in effect, except where classes are very small, the scheme that has been put in place allocates grades to students based on:
1. the average number of students achieving each grade in that subject at that school over the past three years
2. the teachers' ranking of the students in their class this year
So if you are in a class of 25 doing A Level maths, your school has seen an average of 1 A*, 3 A, 7 B etc and you're predicted an A but ranked 5th in the class then you're going to get a B, regardless of how good your mock results have been.
For smaller classes the predicted grades will be used. It will be interesting to see how this impacts 'grade inflation' differentially in private and state schools.
Not sure how I feel about this, except, perhaps, that a little more transparency wouldn't have gone amiss - although I suspect an awful lot of teachers are going to get abuse from disappointed students and parents for something over which they had zero influence.
https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2020/08/10/a-levels-2020-wh...
Turns out that isn't the case at all, and, in effect, except where classes are very small, the scheme that has been put in place allocates grades to students based on:
1. the average number of students achieving each grade in that subject at that school over the past three years
2. the teachers' ranking of the students in their class this year
So if you are in a class of 25 doing A Level maths, your school has seen an average of 1 A*, 3 A, 7 B etc and you're predicted an A but ranked 5th in the class then you're going to get a B, regardless of how good your mock results have been.
For smaller classes the predicted grades will be used. It will be interesting to see how this impacts 'grade inflation' differentially in private and state schools.
Not sure how I feel about this, except, perhaps, that a little more transparency wouldn't have gone amiss - although I suspect an awful lot of teachers are going to get abuse from disappointed students and parents for something over which they had zero influence.
https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2020/08/10/a-levels-2020-wh...
article said:
Most grades are not based on teacher assessments
This seems to be bullshine.It will be the teachers ranking students in their classes. One presumes based on merit through assessment rather than who brought in the shiniest apples.
Normalisation happens even in normal years. And it's even more important that it's done now to avoid unconscious bias. Remember this has to balance off "fairness" within the year, but also with the previous and subsequent years too (especially the latter).
The example given in the OP of grades isn't going to be representative of most areas and is more akin to the smaller schools that are noted as being adjusted differently anyway. There will be groups of people in each band. And as ever, there will be winners and losers at the band boundaries.
My understanding of the system in England (at least) is that if someone is really unhappy they can take the actual exam. They even then get a choice of which grade they take (which IMO is overly generous!).
Finding some means of allowing the exams to be taken would have been the better approach IMO. Even if it meant normalisation upwards if the lack of on site teaching in the last few months was considered impactful. And even if it meant a delayed resumption to the next level of education.
But sadly that hasn't happened. And there was never going to be a universally accepted solution (even the taking of exams!).
(My alarm bells were ringing on this one when I started to feel a very small amount of sympathy for WJK! Tells me just how messed up the country is
I guess the solution will now be that everyone gets an A*...).Murph7355 said:
This seems to be bullshine.
It will be the teachers ranking students in their classes. One presumes based on merit through assessment rather than who brought in the shiniest apples.
Normalisation happens even in normal years. And it's even more important that it's done now to avoid unconscious bias. Remember this has to balance off "fairness" within the year, but also with the previous and subsequent years too (especially the latter).
The example given in the OP of grades isn't going to be representative of most areas and is more akin to the smaller schools that are noted as being adjusted differently anyway. There will be groups of people in each band. And as ever, there will be winners and losers at the band boundaries.
My understanding of the system in England (at least) is that if someone is really unhappy they can take the actual exam. They even then get a choice of which grade they take (which IMO is overly generous!).
Finding some means of allowing the exams to be taken would have been the better approach IMO. Even if it meant normalisation upwards if the lack of on site teaching in the last few months was considered impactful. And even if it meant a delayed resumption to the next level of education.
But sadly that hasn't happened. And there was never going to be a universally accepted solution (even the taking of exams!).
(My alarm bells were ringing on this one when I started to feel a very small amount of sympathy for WJK! Tells me just how messed up the country is I guess the solution will now be that everyone gets an A*...).
I believe the option to take an exam is there - but since Year 13 has essentially been ignored by the entire education system since April that's likely to require a pretty herculean effort on the student's part in getting themselves back up to speed. It also means deferring University until next year.It will be the teachers ranking students in their classes. One presumes based on merit through assessment rather than who brought in the shiniest apples.
Normalisation happens even in normal years. And it's even more important that it's done now to avoid unconscious bias. Remember this has to balance off "fairness" within the year, but also with the previous and subsequent years too (especially the latter).
The example given in the OP of grades isn't going to be representative of most areas and is more akin to the smaller schools that are noted as being adjusted differently anyway. There will be groups of people in each band. And as ever, there will be winners and losers at the band boundaries.
My understanding of the system in England (at least) is that if someone is really unhappy they can take the actual exam. They even then get a choice of which grade they take (which IMO is overly generous!).
Finding some means of allowing the exams to be taken would have been the better approach IMO. Even if it meant normalisation upwards if the lack of on site teaching in the last few months was considered impactful. And even if it meant a delayed resumption to the next level of education.
But sadly that hasn't happened. And there was never going to be a universally accepted solution (even the taking of exams!).
(My alarm bells were ringing on this one when I started to feel a very small amount of sympathy for WJK! Tells me just how messed up the country is
I guess the solution will now be that everyone gets an A*...).It is a tough one.
The theory that schools generally follow a standardised curve in their results is a decent starting point, hence the use of rankings to plot on that curve.
Then, add into the mix the predicted grade to detect where anomalies exist (if all students are predicted one grade higher, then it is probably over-prediction, if one student is predicted three grades higher, they may be unusually gifted) and they should get most of them right.
The media saying x00,000 pupils have been downgraded means nothing - that is simply down to predicted grades and may well be sensible. The useful stat is to compare the proportion of each grade so that we can compare with previous years.
There was a good suggestion that unused examiners could visit schools to look at past work if there are appeals - that would be a good idea, but if the whole system is subjective, not everyone can appeal, so I think this should only be where there is more than one grade variation from prediction. This would particularly protect from underestimation in improving schools and where there are exceptional students.
Needless to say, with a daughter waiting to see if her allocated grades are sufficient for medical school, I shall be watching with interest...
As a teacher, I have to say anyone who read the info from Ofqual in detail could see this was how it was going to play out. If the grades you entered represented a marked deviation from past achievement in your school they would be moderated down.
This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
I'm in too, eldest hoping for predicted grade BCC at A level which would match her offer. She has also taken a summer course at Uni this year which is worth 20 UCAS points (two grades) so CCD will be good enough.
Coupled with a small birth year and what seems like a significant number planning on deferring for a year, we are hopeful that even something short of that will be good enough.
My youngest is waiting on GCSE as well so it is very stressed here.
Coupled with a small birth year and what seems like a significant number planning on deferring for a year, we are hopeful that even something short of that will be good enough.
My youngest is waiting on GCSE as well so it is very stressed here.
TomTheTyke said:
As a teacher, I have to say anyone who read the info from Ofqual in detail could see this was how it was going to play out. If the grades you entered represented a marked deviation from past achievement in your school they would be moderated down.
This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
Now if you could write in to the BBC to explain this please This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
Genuine outliers will be picked up, boundary cases assessed. It's always been thus. But as with many things, the pandemic gives excuses.
I hope to god we avoid a knee jerk the other way.
If one assumes that one cohort of kids is the same intellectually as any other (at a macro scale), then the proportions of the grades should be roughly similar. This certainly applies at the country level, and probably applies at the school level. For example, a school which demands As at GCSE to do that A level subject will probably have a slightly better A level score than one that doesn't.
What they're saying is that if for the last 3 years, a school has got 10As, 20Bs and 50Cs in an A level subject, it is likely that the proportions of these would be the same this year. So the school needs to ladder its pupils, and work out who gets what. If a pupil is in the top 10, they get an A.
The alternative is that teachers have the final say and simply define the grades. This will lead to massive grade inflation this year - making this years grades a complete travesty.
What they're saying is that if for the last 3 years, a school has got 10As, 20Bs and 50Cs in an A level subject, it is likely that the proportions of these would be the same this year. So the school needs to ladder its pupils, and work out who gets what. If a pupil is in the top 10, they get an A.
The alternative is that teachers have the final say and simply define the grades. This will lead to massive grade inflation this year - making this years grades a complete travesty.
TomTheTyke said:
As a teacher, I have to say anyone who read the info from Ofqual in detail could see this was how it was going to play out. If the grades you entered represented a marked deviation from past achievement in your school they would be moderated down.
This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
I agree; it’s far from perfect but it’s the least worst solution. Sometimes life is just horribly unfair - for most of us, school children included - Covid19 has just been a classic example of that.This is somewhat unfair as it penalised outliers who would've done well in a poor school, and helps outliers who would've done poorly inactive good school. However, given that we know this is the case, I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to. I noted last week a Scottish student who 'hadn't got the grades' to do her course at uni didnt seem to have actually asked the uni if she could come.
I still think this is the least worst option. Moreover, for all the noise about disadvantaged students being marked down further in Scotland, those students actually saw a greater increase in eventual results than their more affluent peers. This reflects two things: that there was more over prediction for these students and that predicting for these students is just harder as there is more variance.
chemistry said:
I agree; it’s far from perfect but it’s the least worst solution. Sometimes life is just horribly unfair - for most of us, school children included - Covid19 has just been a classic example of that.
Exactly, and what's more I think beyond the personal dissatisfaction of getting a 7 when you and your teacher thought you could get an 8, for the vast majority it won't actually affect the next stage of their lives, due to the process outlined above,The one area this possibly doesn't apply is the 3/4 borderline for maths and English, where students who potentially would've passed will have to resit them next year because they've now failed. The problem is that, without sitting the exam there isn't much of a fairer way to do it.
Also worth noting, that relatively few people even within education seem to know, is the inherent variability of exams. Essentially for 'subjective' subjects they are only accurate to within one grade either way. By that I mean in only about 2/3 of cases do the grades eventually awarded by examiners actually match that of a senior examiner marking the same paper. So as an individual teacher I could be 100% right with my predictions, judge the ability of students perfectly, nothing upsets them on the morning of the exam, but still about 1/3 would come in wrong due to this.
Nobody is really wrong in this exercise, it's just that for English, history etc there will always be this degree of subjectivity.
worsy said:
Breaking News - Well it looks like Scotland have accepted that the Teacher Assessments are the agreed grades.
Well that is interesting because presumably English schools had the same system?Does that mean universities will have to discount somehow the higher Scottish grades?
worsy said:
Breaking News - Well it looks like Scotland have accepted that the Teacher Assessments are the agreed grades.
That is appalling! Totally cowardly and unfair on the 2019 and (presumably) 2021 classes. Effectively they have agreed a 10% to 14% grade uplift this year https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53636296The SNP is a joke...
Edited by chemistry on Tuesday 11th August 15:49
chemistry said:
worsy said:
Breaking News - Well it looks like Scotland have accepted that the Teacher Assessments are the agreed grades.
That is appalling! Totally cowardly and unfair on the 2019 and (presumably) 2021 classes.The SNP is a joke...
As for this specifically, it's been said above but there was no 'good option.' They had the least worst and have now just got the worst. It's exactly the same as monetary inflation BUT actually more unfair on students from other cohorts. A higher grade is no good to you if everyone else has gone up as well (15% increase in the pass rate now, this cohort officially the brightest ever by a long way...) but obviously if you come up against someone who left school in 2019 or 2021 they will have had to be considerably better to achieve the same grade as you.
TomTheTyke said:
I expect schools and colleges will be more flexible with those they've offered places to.
I was discussing this last night with a friend who is in charge of recruitment for a university department. Only skimmed the surface, but it was clear from what he was saying that there are limits on how flexible they can be, for instance course accreditation requiring they only accept a certain minimum standard and so on.Certainly seems like it could be quite messy. Universities are also going to feel a lot of pain this year from low foreign student intake, he said.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff