A Level Results....guess what :-)
Discussion
I'm not sure the papers are easier; different certainly. The subjects are taught today to a much broader and 'obviously-relevant' end-point. The sciences at least are taught to an end-point that can be related to - nanotechnology, the environment, biotechnology, clean fuels, etc. To get this far, there has to be some dilution of the basics. For students that finish at GCSE and A-level this is OK, but for those that go on to University, this is a problem. But what is even more of an issue is that the exams are marked to a strict rigid marking scheme to the extent that the students are told what words they must include in their answers. Marking schemes are published, model answers are given, and the students are taught that to pass this exam, you must answer it 'this' way. Again, for many that go on to University, the change from being taught how to answer questions to learning how to learn, comes as a shock.
The papers are considerably easier in terms of GCSE as a comparison to O-level. Different too but that's a smokescreen more than an excuse.
At A-level, the science syllabuses were pruned in time for GCSE pupils working through the system as otherwise there would have been carnage.
Previously it was end-of-course exams, not coursework and bit-at-a-time modules and module re-sits, not to mention multiple choice papers with assertion-reason and other challenging item formats which quickly vanished.
Chalk and cheese.
At A-level, the science syllabuses were pruned in time for GCSE pupils working through the system as otherwise there would have been carnage.
Previously it was end-of-course exams, not coursework and bit-at-a-time modules and module re-sits, not to mention multiple choice papers with assertion-reason and other challenging item formats which quickly vanished.
Chalk and cheese.
XCP said:
Of course all the Poles romp through the Polish exam, likewise the Chinese in Chinese!
To be fair the rest of their exams should be harder as they are all being taken in a foreign language.Also Multiple choice are valid provided there is a reasonable difficulty, hell in maths or science a multiple choice can be worse as you get all the possible answers so a factor of ten out, the right formula but x in the place of y, etc with the last option of none of the above. Those are evil as you either know the formula and can do the maths or you don't get a mark unlike a real exam where you get marks for knowing the formula and being able to use it even if you get the wrong result. Basicly not the channel Five TV quiz, of what lives in the sea A) a bird, B) a car, C) a fish or D) a dog.
Does anybody dare mention the good old bad old days where, in multiple choice exams, you got two marks for a correct response but had a mark deducted if you got the wrong answer, better to leave an item blank rather than just guess. Ooops I just did mention it. Negative total marks...hmmm...imagine the apoplexy in people currently whining about teachers using red pens and correcting mistakes.
All must have glittering prizes
All must have glittering prizes
martin84 said:
AstonZagato said:
Perhaps you ought to read the comments of Glenys Stacey, the chief executive of Ofqual (the body that regulates qualifications, exams and tests in the UK) who talks of more than a decade of “persistent grade inflation” in exams, which was “impossible to justify”, the value of A-levels and GCSEs have been undermined.
But what do you expect the kids to do? They can only pass the exam you put in front of them.AstonZagato said:
It is NOT the kids' fault in any way shape or form. The enemy here is the system. Grading according to centiles (as used to happen) seems to be some of the answer - as it stops the system being manipulated
But that still leaves parents and the country with a dilemma. Do we praise the kids for passing the only exam we put in front of them or not? If we tell them they mean nothing then what happens?
turbobloke said:
Does anybody dare mention the good old bad old days where, in multiple choice exams, you got two marks for a correct response but had a mark deducted if you got the wrong answer, better to leave an item blank rather than just guess. Ooops I just did mention it. Negative total marks...hmmm...imagine the apoplexy in people currently whining about teachers using red pens and correcting mistakes.
All must have glittering prizes
Caught me out on an 'interim' year test in what would now be year 9, trying to be a clever dick and having bragged to others of my defiant strategy of answering "B" is correct to every multiple choice question of the French exam - bound to be some "B"s right? So a canny way to avoid having done no revision and guarantee some correct answers...All must have glittering prizes
Not so many it seems! I still remember the HT announcing with revengeful glee my shameful 27% (3rd from bottom of the year) in front of the whole form. A salutary lesson learned. Mind you that would have got me a grade B these days!
martin84 said:
But that still leaves parents and the country with a dilemma. Do we praise the kids for passing the only exam we put in front of them or not? If we tell them they mean nothing then what happens?
There is nothing that would prevent grades going back to centiles immediately.Longer term, I think we might need to move to the IB. Take the politics out of education.
Lost_BMW said:
Mind you that would have got me a grade B these days!
A* for sure 
martin84 said:
But that still leaves parents and the country with a dilemma. Do we praise the kids for passing the only exam we put in front of them or not? If we tell them they mean nothing then what happens?
If somebody runs slowly should we alter the stopwatch or lie about the elapsed time? According to the current education system, any muppet could keep up with Usain Bolt and there is paperwork to say so as any time trials would be incapable of separating the two. Does that help anybody, even those far removed from reality who devised the phoney system?No pupil should be prepared for, or expected to sit, any examination for which they are not suited. By the same token, examinations should be fit for purpose, not part of a deception just because collective egalitarian delusion decided at some point that all must have prizes.
It's time for honesty and reality to take hold again.
It seems the egalitarian disease started quite a long time ago - I've just finished watching the 2nd episode of the BBC series, "The History of The Grammar School" and one clip featured a patronising twonk (HT of a secondary modern I think) in an interview with a mother and daughter, from the 1950s iirc.
Mother said something along the lines of, "We were very disappointed that she failed the 11 plus..." to which Mr. Sanctimonious leans forward and interjects with, "Oh, I wouldn't say she has 'failed' Mrs. You-got-it-right-first-time."
Mother said something along the lines of, "We were very disappointed that she failed the 11 plus..." to which Mr. Sanctimonious leans forward and interjects with, "Oh, I wouldn't say she has 'failed' Mrs. You-got-it-right-first-time."
turbobloke said:
If somebody runs slowly should we alter the stopwatch or lie about the elapsed time? According to the current education system, any muppet could keep up with Usain Bolt and there is paperwork to say so as any time trials would be incapable of separating the two. Does that help anybody, even those far removed from reality who devised the phoney system?
No pupil should be prepared for, or expected to sit, any examination for which they are not suited. By the same token, examinations should be fit for purpose, not part of a deception just because collective egalitarian delusion decided at some point that all must have prizes.
It's time for honesty and reality to take hold again.
That's not answering the question though. Of course we should praise those who do well in the exams. Just as I would praise a runner who ran a PB, Usain Bolt or not.No pupil should be prepared for, or expected to sit, any examination for which they are not suited. By the same token, examinations should be fit for purpose, not part of a deception just because collective egalitarian delusion decided at some point that all must have prizes.
It's time for honesty and reality to take hold again.
turbobloke said:
Odie said:
anyone got a link to any of last years past exam papers, id like to give a maths or physics one a go.
No papers to hand, but if you're referring to GCSE - or even if not - these AQA Board grade boundaries for the January 2012 sitting might help to avoid exam nerves:maths A* 41%, A 33%, B24%, C16% (paper ref AQA 93002H)
physics A* 31%, A 26%, B 20%, C 14% (paper ref AQA PHY1H)
If you get to see the papers you'll notice they are not remotely difficult.
When I was at uni it was 75% for a pass 95% for an A (or what ever they called it)
Id have thought a C would have been 75% a B 85% a A 95% A* 99%
XCP said:
turbobloke said:
If somebody runs slowly should we alter the stopwatch or lie about the elapsed time? According to the current education system, any muppet could keep up with Usain Bolt and there is paperwork to say so as any time trials would be incapable of separating the two. Does that help anybody, even those far removed from reality who devised the phoney system?
No pupil should be prepared for, or expected to sit, any examination for which they are not suited. By the same token, examinations should be fit for purpose, not part of a deception just because collective egalitarian delusion decided at some point that all must have prizes.
It's time for honesty and reality to take hold again.
That's not answering the question though. Of course we should praise those who do well in the exams. Just as I would praise a runner who ran a PB, Usain Bolt or not.No pupil should be prepared for, or expected to sit, any examination for which they are not suited. By the same token, examinations should be fit for purpose, not part of a deception just because collective egalitarian delusion decided at some point that all must have prizes.
It's time for honesty and reality to take hold again.
Public exams aren't about PBs they're about national standards and these have been diluted for decades so that plodders think they're sprinters and as grades can't separate them they have paperwork to back up the illusion.
Somebody scoring 99% getting the same grade as somebody scoring 31% is a joke but a bad and very unfunny one.
SGirl said:
Odie said:
Seriously, what? get more than 41% right and get an A*? Thats not even half right.
Maybe he means 41% of candidates get an A*?Add up the numbers for A*-C and the maths total exceeds 100% so it couldn't be percentage of candidates.
Amazing and appalling!
Einion Yrth said:
turbobloke said:
Add up the numbers for A*-C and the maths total exceeds 100% so it couldn't be percentage of candidates.
Given the standard of maths education implied by the statistic, I'm not so sure. 
XCP said:
There are also lower tier papers where a very much higher percentage is required to achieve an A.
IIRC in some papers you cannot achieve an A however well you do.
Indeed, but looking at the grade boundaries for a GCSE paper which accesses all of the higher grades is a reasonable thing to do, and we're still left with a 99% candidate receiving the same grade as the 31% candidate, in terms of what the paper grade boundaries say. That's madness.IIRC in some papers you cannot achieve an A however well you do.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff