A Level Results....guess what :-)

[turbobloke]

As far as I can tell the numbers game at A-level isn't quite so extreme, not least as the 'talent pool' is a bit narrower. Even so it's painfully obvious that a similar situation applies, and it's also easy to see how Oxbridge will reject applicants offering a handful of A* grades when the percentage scores of people holding those grades can be poles apart. Even after the introduction of the A* grade, the problem won't go away completely as we've moved on a bit from all-must-have-glittering-prizes, but only as far as nearly all.

The next time a newspaper article criticises Oxbridge for rejecting somebody with 4 or 5 A* grades, remember that the percentage score attached can vary so widely that some other form of distinguishing between the very best applicants really is needed.

ETA just looked at grade boundaries for some AQA A-level maths papers where the A* grade covered 59% and up, a bizarre situation. On that basis two students arriving for a uni interview with predicted A* grades could still vary by 40 percentage points in round figures. Time for an A** and A*** then. Or...whatever happened to S-level papers where a Distinction meant that the student was likely to be in the top 0.1% of the year group? Probably not around now, somebody might find them a bit tricky and get upset, think of the compo.

Edited by turbobloke on Wednesday 13th June 16:20

[mondeoman]

Sample GCSE maths paper:
http://store.aqa.org.uk/resourceZone/pdf/maths/AQA...

[intrepid44]

I think some of you's don't quite understand the grade boundaries here, those boundaries are not in terms of percentage afaik.

Also I'm not entirely sure of the relevance of posting foundation papers as a representive paper, they are limited to a maximum of a grade C.

Edit: Just checked and it appears that some are indeed 68% for A* and 52% for A... That's unbelieveable!

Certainly a contrast to what happens at my Uni, where we generally get moderated to a Gaussian curve, with the average of 61% being applied, not that I agree with that either however.

Edited by intrepid44 on Wednesday 13th June 17:55

[XCP]

Thats the trouble with not having a university education. Sorry but I have no idea what you mean

[turbobloke]

intrepid44 said:

I think some of you's don't quite understand the grade boundaries here, those boundaries are not in terms of percentage afaik.

Edit: Just checked and it appears that some are indeed 68% for A* and 52% for A... That's unbelieveable!

It's not so much understanding as knowing, i.e. what the numbers are when listed, but you have a point

Looking at the AQA A-level archives there is definitely an A-level maths A* grade boundary at 67% so a spread of 33 percentage marks between the lowest and highest possible A* student. Also a physics paper with 67% and an English paper at 66%, better but hardly discriminating. Other subjects such as Economics are up around 80%.

In terms of GCSE, there have been some curious decisions on grade boundaries, again here illustrated by maths.

maths pass mark cut to avoid mass failure

[turbobloke]

"In his interview, Michael Gove says that the standards for exams for 16-year-olds is too low. He indicates that he wants the pass mark to rise from 20 per cent in some cases to closer to 40 per cent, saying it was common sense."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservat...

Pass means the Grade C boundary.

From information I've got on file somewhere for maths I suspect Gove is rounding up.

[MG CHRIS]

turbobloke said:

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*?

Unfortunately not, that was the A* grade boundary for that maths paper i.e. the score, and the corresponding percentage for an A* in the physics paper was 31%.

Add up the numbers for A*-C and the maths total exceeds 100% so it couldn't be percentage of candidates.

Amazing and appalling!

I can say that when i took my gcse maths back in 2009 we had a expermental paper that only 3 other schoold did in wales and due to it being 'too hard' the pass mark for A grade was dropped from 70% to 40% and a C grade was no kidding 25% no guesing what i had yes an A with the same for the rest of other 24 people in the class.

Shocking really but by that time i had enough of education and school going on about uni bla bla bla even had someone come in saying without a university degree you would not be able to get a job full stop.
So i said bks to this walked out and within 4 weeks of finishing school i went into an apprentership 3 years later didn't regreat it and earn more than anybody else in my year apart from my mate who works for british gas.

[Engineer1]

Odie said:

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.

Seriously, what? get more than 41% right and get an A*? Thats not even half right.

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%

There are papers out there aimed at the higher marks, the easiest questions will be at grade C/B level as there are equally papers aimed at lower levels where 100% would only net you a C as the exam is not assessing above that level

[mondeoman]

intrepid44 said:

I think some of you's don't quite understand the grade boundaries here, those boundaries are not in terms of percentage afaik.

Also I'm not entirely sure of the relevance of posting[b] foundation papers as a representive paper,[b] they are limited to a maximum of a grade C.

Edit: Just checked and it appears that some are indeed 68% for A* and 52% for A... That's unbelieveable!

Certainly a contrast to what happens at my Uni, where we generally get moderated to a Gaussian curve, with the average of 61% being applied, not that I agree with that either however.

Edited by intrepid44 on Wednesday 13th June 17:55

Try this one then...
http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-43602H...

The only ones I cant do in my head are 9(b), 10, 16, 17, 18. and I'm no maths whizz by any stretch of the imagination.

I firmly believe that we have done generations of children a grave mis-service by the way both the exams have been made simpler and the pass mark has been reduced.

IIRC when I did my A levels, an E (FAIL!) was set around 40%, and a C (scraping a pass, just) was over 60%.

I'd love to see a direct, side by side comparison of, say, a 1970s O Level Maths and a current Higher Tier Maths papers.

[Otispunkmeyer]

turbobloke said:

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.

They must have made things easier for sure.... I took A level physics and found it very easy. Practically aced each exam. Sensing I was finding things a bit too easy one of my physics teachers gave me a textbook/workbook from back in the day. I have to say the questions held within, similar to those that would appear on exams at the time, were harder. Infact some of them were harder to understand full stop... The language was more complex and there were references to theories and rules I'd never heard of. And yep, I was told that you did all your exams at the end of your stay...not in bites every 6 months.

I did just as well in A level electronics... Here it seems even more silly as the welsh exam board behind the exams apparently would award you the marks if your answer gave the impression you knew what you were talking about. Didn't matter if you got the numbers right.

[mondeoman]

Have a crack at this one from 1966

http://www.freeexampapers.com/get_past_papers.php?...

[Otispunkmeyer]

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

I had one exam like this at Uni ( only a few years ago). Heh harsh but as it was multichoice they have to raise the stakes somehow and stop people just putting C.

Another of the hard exams we had was in turbo machinery. 10 questions, worth 10 marks.. Each question had 10 points to it, or sub questions. Now, part a could take you 10 minutes , then part b and c only a minute each. But you couldn't do them if you couldn't do a. Basically if you couldn't do a, that question was a write off.

It was open book exam as well but that didn't help because the formulas he wanted you to use in the questions were products of other equations, some of which were in the notes ( turbo machinery has lots of equations and lots of very awful looking ones that are either difficult to derive or have been done empirically so you just need to know them (and the rest!)). Very much the exam for someone with one of those eidetic memories and the ability to mangle formulas in your head.

He also gave us a viva style oral exam. That was difficult... He could basically ask you anything.

Very old school man, his module was pretty much the hardest thing you could choose. We were the very last year to do it as well. He retired and they didn't have anyone who knew about turbo machinery enough to teach it. Replaced with something that basically is an extension of thermodynamics and heat transfer (though HT can be a complete black art at times) and overall easier but probably more relevant.

[Lost_BMW]

Otispunkmeyer said:

They must have made things easier for sure.... I took A level physics and found it very easy. Practically aced each exam. Sensing I was finding things a bit too easy one of my physics teachers gave me a textbook/workbook from back in the day. I have to say the questions held within, similar to those that would appear on exams at the time, were harder. Infact some of them were harder to understand full stop... The language was more complex and there were references to theories and rules I'd never heard of. And yep, I was told that you did all your exams at the end of your stay...not in bites every 6 months.

I did just as well in A level electronics... Here it seems even more silly as the welsh exam board behind the exams apparently would award you the marks if your answer gave the impression you knew what you were talking about. Didn't matter if you got the numbers right.

Some may recall the TV series a few years ago (channel 4, iirc) where they took a number of current students, including those expected to achieve A and A* grades, and 'put them through (it!) a 1960s schooling and O level.

The contrast was staggering and shocking. They quickly had to take the modern students back to work from lower years to fill the gaps and help them cope with the step forwards - most having flunked badly an 11 plus test as a starter! They found the older curriculum and exams far more challenging. No surprise to someone, like me, who has worked in education for three decades, has seen the changes firsthand and was schooled back in the "good old days".