Don't you think that the new 'A*' system hasn't been thought out thoroughly enough?

It's someone jumped from a C in As to 100% in A2...then they'd fully deserve an A*

For some people, yes. For a lot of people whose school/college don't predict A*s, no.

I suppose we'll have to see how it goes this year though.

From what I understand, to get an A* requires a student to:

- Achieve at an 'A' grade in AS modules (so at least 80% of ums)
- Average at least 90% of ums in A2 modules

So if you are aiming for an A*, anything above 80% in your AS modules is effectively meaningless as it doesn't even count towards the 'A*'

Example

person 1: Achieved 100% of ums in AS modules and 89% of ums in A2 modules. This candidate will get an 'A' grade for his/her overall A-level.



person 2: Achieved 80% of ums in AS modules and 90% of ums in A2 modules. This canidate will get an 'A*' grade for his/her overall A-level.


From that example, person 1 would have a higher total number of ums for his/her full A-level than person 2. So isn't it unfair that person 1gets an 'A' whereas person 2 gets an 'A*'. Don't tell me that A2 modules are more difficult because I know for some subjects, that is true but others they're about the same. Also, the exam boards usually gives AS-modules the same weighting as A2-modules in terms of their total ums, so technically they are equal in their difficulty and quantity of work.

Many people have not even seen the difficulty of the new A2 papers. People seem to be forgetting the stretch and challenge component that wasn't there before. This goes further than a synoptic assessment too.

And your argument isn't very good. Taking art as an example, I can tell you that the A2 is harder than the AS. It's one thing to take a list of example artists and techniques that revolve around a certain topic, and build a personal response which you can compare with classmates at AS, while it is another thing entirely to research your own topic with relevant artists, completely different to anyone elses, and write an essay around it at A2.

There are some skills required at A2 that just aren't examined at AS.
The awarding bodies have decided that A* students must have these skills; the skills which were examined in the AEAs.

totally agree completely stupid. A person with less ums can get an A* than someone with an A. Doesn't add up. Excuse the pun.

I agree.
People who do exceptionally well at AS get no extra recognition.

Well if you're particularly proud of your good AS marks you can always put them down on your UCAS form.

What would you like? An A*-?

AS (compared to A2) is very easy.

I agree with you for subjects like maths and maybe sciences. However the difference in difficulty between AS and A2 is debatable for subjects like Art, DT, History, Economics, English etc. Also, the fact that the exam boards give equal weighting in total 'ums' for both AS and A2 modules would mean that they are indeed the same in terms of difficulty.

Is getting an A* predicition based on how well you do in As. Say you get 90% average you get predicted A* for A2, but if you got an 80% average in As you get predicted an A?

I agree with you for subjects like maths and maybe sciences. However the difference in difficulty between AS and A2 is debatable for subjects like Art, DT, History, Economics, English etc. Also, the fact that the exam boards give equal weighting in total 'ums' for both AS and A2 modules would mean that they are indeed the same in terms of difficulty.

I'm another one who thinks they should not have ditched the AEA on the basis that the new A* would replace it; the content and style of the two qualifications are TOTALLY DIFFERENT and I don't personally believe that the A* holds the same kudos as a distinction or merit at AEA level as a result. I also think that the AEA was a better preparation for Oxbridge than A Levels.

Do you seriously know what you're talking about, especially concerning the latter three subjects? English A2 is considerably harder than AS, with a lot more emphasis on self-learning, and my friends have found History A2 a lot harder with the emphasis being on "thinking like a historian" or something along those lines. They give equal weighting because you really should be better one year along the line, and often different skills are tested anyway.

I don't agree with it, I think it'll undermine the A grade.

What they should have done is created more content that qualifies for the A* instead of awarding the A* using what content there is right now or they should just make the UMS for the a-levels clear on UCAS forms and the A-level certifiates.

and did you properly read what I wrote?

I simply said that the difference in difficulty for those subjects between AS and A2 is 'debatable'. Some people may find that the topics in A2 to be far more enjoyable and therefore easier to learn. As you have said, 'different skills are tested'; but since when does something being 'different' also mean that its 'difficult'?

and did you properly read what I wrote?

I simply said that the difference in difficulty for those subjects between AS and A2 is 'debatable'. Some people may find that the topics in A2 to be far more enjoyable and therefore easier to learn. As you have said, 'different skills are tested'; but since when does something being 'different' also mean that its 'difficult'?

Actually they have. The new specifications include opportunity for "stretch and challenge" aimed at A* candidates.


And did you read what I wrote, detailing exactly how A2 English and Psychology are harder than AS?