[Flyteryder]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to complain about one of the questions asked in the F215 Biology paper I sat on 15th June 2012. Two sections of a question, worth 10 marks collectively, were directly copied word for word from question 4a and 4b of the 'Mammalian Physiology and Behaviour' 2805/05 paper from June 19th 2003, which can be seen here: http://pastpapers.org/A2/biology/mam...0June%20QP.pdf

This question was copied word for word into F215 June 2012, with the Figure, marks allocated and wording of the question being exactly the same. This will have given an advantage to anybody who saw the 2805/5 2003 paper and its mark scheme, which will result in some students being awarded marks for simply remembering what they have read on the past paper and mark scheme, and not for applying their knowledge of GCE Biology to the question asked.

As a student who is depending on the result of this exam to secure my university place, I am very disappointed with OCR. Inevitably, the grade boundaries will be raised for the F215 paper, as every student who saw the 2805/5 paper of June 2003 will have secured the 10 marks allocated to this question in F215 June 2012. This will make it harder for me, and every other student who did not see the 2805/5 paper, to secure their places at university, with students possibly losing out on their university place due to OCR's exact repetition of a question from a previous year.

I understand that many questions are reworded over the years, using different content and different scenarios, but the exact repetition of a question is unacceptable. I would like a response from somebody who is responsible for setting this paper, not a generic computer automated reply. I would like to know how OCR will set the grade boundaries for F215 June 2012, due to the fact that some candidates will have had an advantage over others, due to OCR's inability to set a fair and original question.

Yours faithfully,

My name

----------------------

Did anybody else notice this? I would like more people to complain to maximise the chance of action being taken by OCR.

[AlexandraRose]

I do kinda agree with you that some may have had an unfair advantage, but then I think OCR's argument will be that they do recycle questions a lot, even if it is word for word, it was first asked 9 years ago.
I really don't think they will change the grade boundaries drastically due to this though, that is if they take it into consideration at all. :\ Which I find quite unfortunate, because I took this paper too. But honestly, I didn't even realise it had come up before until everybody began mentioning it.

[Flyteryder]

(Original post by AlexandraRose)
I do kinda agree with you that some may have had an unfair advantage, but then I think OCR's argument will be that they do recycle questions a lot, even if it is word for word, it was first asked 9 years ago.
I really don't think they will change the grade boundaries drastically due to this though, that is if they take it into consideration at all. :\ Which I find quite unfortunate, because I took this paper too. But honestly, I didn't even realise it had come up before until everybody began mentioning it.

No question in any of their exam papers has ever been recycled word for word; usually its using a different scenario with different content, but similar in a few ways.

[AlexandraRose]

(Original post by Flyteryder)
No question in any of their exam papers has ever been recycled word for word; usually its using a different scenario with different content, but similar in a few ways.

That's fair enough, I just wonder how many people had viewed that past paper then, because the only ones my teacher ever made us aware of were the current ones on OCR's website.

[Clare~Bear]

They've done this before for OCR a-level biology, but I'm not sure precisely which paper. But they had two different answers on the two different years!

[As_Dust_Dances_]

OCR are just complete idiots regardless of any subject, they screwed my D1 Maths paper up last year too

[Barkziee]

Oh my! How dare OCR use a question thats related to the syllabus twice?! If you didn't look at the past papers then you probably spent your time learning the content anyway, so you'd get the marks regardless.

[Groat]

(Original post by Barkziee)
Oh my! How dare OCR use a question thats related to the syllabus twice?! If you didn't look at the past papers then you probably spent your time learning the content anyway, so you'd get the marks regardless.

There's a difference between testing the same topic and using exactly the same question.

[Helloworld_95]

I think they were well in there right to do so, the paper was not only 9 years old but was also on a different specification so very few people would have seen it let alone done the paper, a low enough number to the point that it will make little to no difference to the grade boundaries.

[Tateco]

(Original post by Flyteryder)
This question was copied word for word into F215 June 2012, with the Figure, marks allocated and wording of the question being exactly the same. This will have given an advantage to anybody who saw the 2805/5 2003 paper and its mark scheme, which will result in some students being awarded marks for simply remembering what they have read on the past paper and mark scheme, and not for applying their knowledge of GCE Biology to the question asked.

A lot of Biology questions are down to memory. And this is a good example, with most of the marks from the regurgitated question coming from 1 word, 1 mark answers which are nothing to do with your application of biology, and completely to do with memory (whether it was from the textbook or the mark scheme). I think it is wrong they have regurgitated questions without even bothering to reword them, but I think by saying it is a bad thing that candidates will be rewarded for going back 9 years when doing past papers and being able to memorise the mark scheme is not a good way of contesting their methods.

[spooks1]

I also complained to OCR about this - I completely agree!
Have you had a reply yet?