[Belaruce]

I saw a post on here about AQA (an English awarding body) allowing re-sits for specific subject unit's in order to increase a final grade, because that's how their system of A-Levels. GCSE's etc, works. No offence, but this seems kind of like cheating? You can resit and unlimited amount of times to build up your UMS in order to achieve a higher grade. Knowing this, i don't see why many institutions regard those qualifications so valuably, considering the way in which they're earned. Does anyone agree? Or have another opinion?

[mimx]

You can resit our qualifications too? Nothing is stopping you e.g. doing your Highers over if you want.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

I think you are slightly confused about the AQA resits. But in general the difference between SQA and AQA is minimal. A-levels and Advanced highers are roughly the same, highers and A1 are roughly the same, gcse and stadard grade are roughly the same.

[anthonyfl]

(Original post by Belaruce)
I saw a post on here about AQA (an English awarding body) allowing re-sits for specific subject unit's in order to increase a final grade, because that's how their system of A-Levels. GCSE's etc, works. No offence, but this seems kind of like cheating? You can resit and unlimited amount of times to build up your UMS in order to achieve a higher grade. Knowing this, i don't see why many institutions regard those qualifications so valuably, considering the way in which they're earned. Does anyone agree? Or have another opinion?

Each exam paper is different though? Fundamentally all you are doing is testing someone's knowledge again and again by letting them resit again and again.

Note: I've never heard of anyone resit something more than once


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Belaruce]

(Original post by mimx)
You can resit our qualifications too? Nothing is stopping you e.g. doing your Highers over if you want.

I know, but we only have the chance once.

And i know the level of knowledge is similar, its just the system doesn't seem as challenging. I know you'd aim to get your grades, but still, i prefer our system of working towards one final exam and being credited for that.

[Mr Dangermouse]

(Original post by Foghorn Leghorn)
I think you are slightly confused about the AQA resits. But in general the difference between SQA and AQA is minimal. A-levels and Advanced highers are roughly the same, highers and A1 are roughly the same, gcse and stadard grade are roughly the same.

Advanced higher is tougher than A-Level.

Maybe not the actual content, that's pretty similar, but the fact that it's 100% on the exam alone(except the science/computing subject)

[OddThings]

(Original post by Mr Dangermouse)
Advanced higher is tougher than A-Level.

Maybe not the actual content, that's pretty similar, but the fact that it's 100% on the exam alone(except the science/computing subject)

And AH Languages,I just sat AH German and the folio/speaking is worth 35%. The exam makes up the rest.

[OddThings]

Feel free to correct me,but I really envy the English system where you apparently can resit an exam,to get a better grade,rather than resitting the entire course over a year as is the norm here.

[TheUnbeliever]

(Original post by Belaruce)
I know, but we only have the chance once.

Eh, this isn't true. Granted, it takes you longer than being able to resit concurrently, but people can and do resit multiple times. Frankly, there are much more serious problems in our own system that need fixed before we start throwing stones.

Let's be clear: in no way is a resit 'cheating'. As has been pointed out, it's simply a reassessment of your knowledge. If you're on a borderline, you might be lucky and jump up a grade in a slightly easier second paper - but what makes this any less valid than the first sitting? Otherwise, the only way to improve a grade is by learning more and improving your exam technique. If you've successfully worked on the skills measured by the exam, why shouldn't you get an improved grade?

There are benefits to a modular system: it's easier to revise, specifically it's easier to cram, and you don't have to remember as much content at a given time. Then again, you may have to cope with a much larger number of exams and the stress that imposes. Individual topics can be assessed in more detail. Modular courses are increasingly popular, even at university - and there's considerable discussion about where we should draw a line in terms of rote knowledge vs. abillity.

Basically: this is something which can be reasonably argued, but I really don't think it's the greatest injustice in the world. I would start by addressing the (numerous) problems in our own system before throwing stones at others.

[Belaruce]

(Original post by TheUnbeliever)
Eh, this isn't true. Granted, it takes you longer than being able to resit concurrently, but people can and do resit multiple times. Frankly, there are much more serious problems in our own system that need fixed before we start throwing stones.

Let's be clear: in no way is a resit 'cheating'. As has been pointed out, it's simply a reassessment of your knowledge. If you're on a borderline, you might be lucky and jump up a grade in a slightly easier second paper - but what makes this any less valid than the first sitting? Otherwise, the only way to improve a grade is by learning more and improving your exam technique. If you've successfully worked on the skills measured by the exam, why shouldn't you get an improved grade?

There are benefits to a modular system: it's easier to revise, specifically it's easier to cram, and you don't have to remember as much content at a given time. Then again, you may have to cope with a much larger number of exams and the stress that imposes. Individual topics can be assessed in more detail. Modular courses are increasingly popular, even at university - and there's considerable discussion about where we should draw a line in terms of rote knowledge vs. abillity.

Basically: this is something which can be reasonably argued, but I really don't think it's the greatest injustice in the world. I would start by addressing the (numerous) problems in our own system before throwing stones at others.

Yeah I get what you're saying, I just find it weird that we have 2 different systems. I feel, personally, like I've achieved and learned more when I combine my knowledge at the end of a year, rather than continual assessment, despite the obvious setbacks. I don't see too many problems with our own system, just the ridiculous curriculum for excellence. my sister is doing the first wave of new exams, and from what I have seen and read, I am so glad I sat standard grades.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[anthonyfl]

(Original post by Belaruce)
Yeah I get what you're saying, I just find it weird that we have 2 different systems. I feel, personally, like I've achieved and learned more when I combine my knowledge at the end of a year, rather than continual assessment, despite the obvious setbacks. I don't see too many problems with our own system, just the ridiculous curriculum for excellence. my sister is doing the first wave of new exams, and from what I have seen and read, I am so glad I sat standard grades.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Totally agree

Curriculum for excellence = utter garbage

So glad I sat standard grades


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[anthonyfl]

(Original post by Mr Dangermouse)
Advanced higher is tougher than A-Level.

Maybe not the actual content, that's pretty similar, but the fact that it's 100% on the exam alone(except the science/computing subject)

This is a valid point. The English exam system is full of coursework and unit tests. Dumbing down the system if you ask me.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[TheUnbeliever]

(Original post by Belaruce)
just the ridiculous curriculum for excellence

A magnificent understatement! A broad-spectrum curriculum change to some of the most formative years of schooling, so widely derided as unready and unfit by the practitioners who are meant to implement it as to raise the spectre of industrial action. Personally, I would consider that a national embarrassment. Something which should be a national embarrassment but somehow manages to largely fly below the radar is the wild variation in the ability of centres to deliver and administer even our flagship qualifications. More minor issues lie in the syllabuses for individual courses. This seems like more than enough to be getting on with, to me.

(This isn't really directed at you. I just needed to get it out my system.)

[TheUnbeliever]

(Original post by anthonyfl)
The English exam system is full of coursework and unit tests. Dumbing down the system if you ask me.

Of course! Coursework dumbs down the system. That's exactly why a dissertation or thesis is typically the most important single means of assessment for final year undergraduates and master's students at universities the world over. Because, as we all know, the real world always provides us with opportunities to apply knowledge in the form of a neatly packaged 30-minute regurgitation of knowledge on a single topic. Exams are clearly the better analogue for later life.

[mimx]

There are trade-offs in every choice between one way or another really.

Continuous assessment doesn't have to dumb down anything; that would be determined by what it consists of. The main problem with it is that it's inflexible. If you're not going at the pace everyone else is going at then it's tough luck most of the time.

Speaking of flexibility I wish the Winter diet had taken off here, that's one of the nice parts about A-level.

(Original post by Belaruce)
I know, but we only have the chance once.

How so? You can resit a Higher as many times as you like the same as you can resit an A-level module as many times as you like. Some A-level units you can do once every six months which might help you do it faster but you'd still have to wait until the next entry cycle for whatever you're moving on to.

[TheUnbeliever]

Continuous assessment and coursework are not synonymous.

[anthonyfl]

(Original post by TheUnbeliever)
Of course! Coursework dumbs down the system. That's exactly why a dissertation or thesis is typically the most important single means of assessment for final year undergraduates and master's students at universities the world over. Because, as we all know, the real world always provides us with opportunities to apply knowledge in the form of a neatly packaged 30-minute regurgitation of knowledge on a single topic. Exams are clearly the better analogue for later life.

Obviously you need coursework for art, English etc. But having coursework for sciences, Maths or social subjects is unnecessary.

For example, the practical investigations in standard grade sciences where everyone gets a 1 because the teacher tells them how to do it.

The writing folio for modern languages where everyone cheats by copying their essays from a dictionary.
(2 examples of Scottish coursework which dumb things down)


And what kind of exams do you do which last 30 minutes? :P


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[mimx]

(Original post by TheUnbeliever)
Continuous assessment and coursework are not synonymous.

Continuous assessment is just being assessed throughout the duration of your course. Coursework isn't literally synonymous but coursework is surely a form of continuous assessment?

http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/handbook/...types-cont.htm

I used it interchangeably above because it's inflexible for the same reasons.

[Slumpy]

(Original post by Mr Dangermouse)
Advanced higher is tougher than A-Level.

Maybe not the actual content, that's pretty similar, but the fact that it's 100% on the exam alone(except the science/computing subject)

If you've done AH sciences, you may discover the coursework is much harder than the exam, so I'm not sure the fact that our results were based mostly on the exam means we have it harder (I would claim it's much easier.)
Personally, I also preferred the non-modular system, because it meant you didn't need to revise over Christmas.

(Original post by TheUnbeliever)
Of course! Coursework dumbs down the system. That's exactly why a dissertation or thesis is typically the most important single means of assessment for final year undergraduates and master's students at universities the world over. Because, as we all know, the real world always provides us with opportunities to apply knowledge in the form of a neatly packaged 30-minute regurgitation of knowledge on a single topic. Exams are clearly the better analogue for later life.

Is not
I do think the examining in sciences in particular is pretty silly though (although doing proper testing of the ability to do science would be next to impossible..)

[Slumpy]

(Original post by anthonyfl)
Obviously you need coursework for art, English etc. But having coursework for sciences, Maths or social subjects is unnecessary.

For example, the practical investigations in standard grade sciences where everyone gets a 1 because the teacher tells them how to do it.

The writing folio for modern languages where everyone cheats by copying their essays from a dictionary.
(2 examples of Scottish coursework which dumb things down)


And what kind of exams do you do which last 30 minutes? :P


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Well, that coursework may be easy, that doesn't mean all of it is. And frankly, if we're trying to teach science, we need decent coursework more than rote learning.

The higher maths exams could be blitzed in well under 30 mins