[wibletg]

(Original post by MoneyOverEverythin)
So surely it will barely affect us? People saying goodbye to their university placed seems a little extreme as if they do want to conclude that this change will suddenly make them miss their offer, then technically they were only scrapping their offer originally..

It'll barely affect us

If it does, it'll affect everyone and if that is the case Uni's will be more lenient and let people in if they slightly miss their offer

[The Unique Bloke]

"If exam boards can ensure that pupils who sit an exam this year won't get lower grades than they deserve then we welcome it," he said. "However, if as a consequence of tougher rules on grade boundaries, pupils are denied the opportunity to gain the highest grade of which they are capable and which they would have got in another year, then they will be unfairly disadvantaged. In these tough economic circumstances, that will hit pupils' future chances hard."

^
I agree with this.

[mathsclown]

Wait so are these boundaries in effect for the total specification? So an 80% total ie. 480/600 will no longer be an A grade, just the range of marks for the highest 27%/600 = A grade? If so then maybe the highest 27% could lead to the range of marks for an A being lower than the original 80% mark for an A?

I'm confused...arrgh damn it.

[ilcb]

even though i think this idea is appalling and obviously outdated, it's not the system i'm annoyed about, its the fact that candidates were told of this 10 DAYS before they receive their results.
the government pushes people to consider university and subsequently, to cater to the demand that creates, teachers teach for the exam for a large percentage of the two years of a level study rather than teach students to think for themselves, which is what uni's are complaining about as the correlation between higher grades and student capability is not as it should be.
the government is just using this as a shoddy and frankly lazy facade to try and prove they are moving away from this system. really if they wanted a better correlation between results and capability they would restructure the entire education system to encourage students to think for themselves rather than depend on their teachers every word.
it's like when teachers tell you to do past papers. yes you are going over certain content you might not have known so well before, but ultimately you are conditioning yourself for the exam, not the subject. the more used to the exam you are, the better you're likely to do.
by putting up fees you'd think the government would be aiding the universities to accept students, but really this is just a demonstration of cameron and goves lack of common sense and distancing from reality

[A.J10]

(Original post by TurboCretin)
Fixing the results won't fix the problem, it will simply make its effects impossible to measure.

Don't know why we didn't think of it before.

This, no problems are solved, just swept under the carpet.

(Original post by Theoneoranro)
Does it actually say in the article that they're going to predict a levels based on gcses and gcses based on some sats? WTF I find that to be the most disturbing thing about this.

A level predictions based on gcse seems fairly based in reality, but there's obviously gonna be a tonne of smaller issues. Predicting gcses on year 6 sats is bat**** insane, there's such a large gap between year 6 and 11, not just educationally but developmentally as well.

(Original post by ilcb)
even though i think this idea is appalling and obviously outdated, it's not the system i'm annoyed about, its the fact that candidates were told of this 10 DAYS before they receive their results.
the government pushes people to consider university and subsequently, to cater to the demand that creates, teachers teach for the exam for a large percentage of the two years of a level study rather than teach students to think for themselves, which is what uni's are complaining about as the correlation between higher grades and student capability is not as it should be.
the government is just using this as a shoddy and frankly lazy facade to try and prove they are moving away from this system. really if they wanted a better correlation between results and capability they would restructure the entire education system to encourage students to think for themselves rather than depend on their teachers every word.
it's like when teachers tell you to do past papers. yes you are going over certain content you might not have known so well before, but ultimately you are conditioning yourself for the exam, not the subject. the more used to the exam you are, the better you're likely to do.
by putting up fees you'd think the government would be aiding the universities to accept students, but really this is just a demonstration of cameron and goves lack of common sense and distancing from reality

This is what is annoying me, they've announced it so late. Surely they could've either announced it last year, or announced it for all exams starting next academic year?

I reckon it's mainly a ploy to placate the public just before we get the usual "RAWR IT'S EASIER EVERY YEAR" in the newspapers.

[Rough Silk]

I don't know what I'm talking about so could someone help me. Isn't the reason grade boundaries fluctuate year on year to keep the same X% from getting the same grade?

Year on year grade boundaries seem to be increasing. I thought this was to stop the increase in the number of a certain grade being given out? (not that it is working obviously)

[Theoneoranro]

(Original post by A.J10)

A level predictions based on gcse seems fairly based in reality, but there's obviously gonna be a tonne of smaller issues. Predicting gcses on year 6 sats is bat**** insane, there's such a large gap between year 6 and 11, not just educationally but developmentally as well.

Yeah but a lot of people mature after they take GCSE's and realise the importance, they're going to miss out. And plus A levels are a completely different game to GCSE's, you can't possibly predict A levels on them. If someone gets an A for GCSE biology, it doesn't mean they're going to get an A for A levels. A lot of people are going to have to complete their A levels and then apply for a course because of bad predictions. Predictions should only come from AS levels. I don't think they meant what we think in the article because it would be ridiculous if they did.

[ilcb]

(Original post by Rough Silk)
I don't know what I'm talking about so could someone help me. Isn't the reason grade boundaries fluctuate year on year to keep the same X% from getting the same grade?

Year on year grade boundaries seem to be increasing. I thought this was to stop the increase in the number of a certain grade being given out? (not that it is working obviously)

yeah a primary reason for fluctuating grade boundaries is that it allows a leeway if the paper was evidently harder than the previous paper, and because on the whole teachers will teach to a similar standard every year, if one paper is harder than the previous and a majority of students do badly then it is a fair representation of the difficulty of the paper. but i think the issue debated here is the grades are being normalised with last years, which is what makes it unfair

[A.J10]

(Original post by Theoneoranro)
Yeah but a lot of people mature after they take GCSE's and realise the importance, they're going to miss out. And plus A levels are a completely different game to GCSE's, you can't possibly predict A levels on them. If someone gets an A for GCSE biology, it doesn't mean they're going to get an A for A levels. A lot of people are going to have to complete their A levels and then apply for a course because of bad predictions. Predictions should only come from AS levels. I don't think they meant what we think in the article because it would be ridiculous if they did.

I think you've misinterpreted the article. If I've gotten it right, you're individual predicted grades are unaffected, they make predictions for the whole year so they can tweak the percentages that get certain grades to reduce the unfairness inherent in such a system. You're still being judged by how well others in your year do however.

I reckon, when a system like this requires an intervention into its core aspect like this, the system is probably better off being replaced by one more suited to the task.

[mathsclown]

(Original post by Rough Silk)
I don't know what I'm talking about so could someone help me. Isn't the reason grade boundaries fluctuate year on year to keep the same X% from getting the same grade?

Year on year grade boundaries seem to be increasing. I thought this was to stop the increase in the number of a certain grade being given out? (not that it is working obviously)

From previous years all I remember is people saying that UNIT grade boundaries are based on how the country does as a whole and then managing them in a way so that a certain % achieves each grade. If your results add up to 80% of the total of all the UMS marks then you get an A.

I just find this whole thing confusing, especially with results a week a way. New systems should always be introduced and applied to only the new academic years, not to those already in the old/current system.

[Theoneoranro]

(Original post by ilcb)
even though i think this idea is appalling and obviously outdated, it's not the system i'm annoyed about, its the fact that candidates were told of this 10 DAYS before they receive their results.
the government pushes people to consider university and subsequently, to cater to the demand that creates, teachers teach for the exam for a large percentage of the two years of a level study rather than teach students to think for themselves, which is what uni's are complaining about as the correlation between higher grades and student capability is not as it should be.
the government is just using this as a shoddy and frankly lazy facade to try and prove they are moving away from this system. really if they wanted a better correlation between results and capability they would restructure the entire education system to encourage students to think for themselves rather than depend on their teachers every word.
it's like when teachers tell you to do past papers. yes you are going over certain content you might not have known so well before, but ultimately you are conditioning yourself for the exam, not the subject. the more used to the exam you are, the better you're likely to do.
by putting up fees you'd think the government would be aiding the universities to accept students, but really this is just a demonstration of cameron and goves lack of common sense and distancing from reality

I know WTF, this is actually a BIG change. people changed the way they revised by looking at grade boundaries etc. You have to tell people about big changes in exams BEFORE they do the exams not after. They shouldn't even be allowed to do this.

[Miryo]

(Original post by emilie18)
Of course you can. If grade boundaries haven't changed and yet you miss out on a top grade simply because of a limit set on how many can achieve that grade, then you will have missed out on a grade you deserve - surely?
Does it not bother you in the slightest that they're fixing the results to stop people achieving their best?



They are already, hence why there are grade boundary fluctuations every year. That's fine, but norm-referencing is a completely different approach which doesn't simply increase competition, it sets an unfair barrier for hard-working students to achieve the grade they deserve. The government realised this way back in 1983 which is why the system was abandoned then. I cannot understand what's made them think it's a good idea to use it again!!

Well, I think A-levels are used mainly for admission into university.

It's a way to distinguish between students, to distinguish between students, there needs to be this competition where only a set number of people get certain grades.

I'm not saying its better than the method we have now but I certainly don't see anything wrong with it.

If it had been done this way all along, we wouldn't have the introduction of the A* grade

[Theoneoranro]

This is the f*cker who is ruining all our lives:


I want to punch the screen lol.

[ambrin ox]

(Original post by lightburns)
Any other time of year, TSR would be in support of this due to the necessity of preventing grade inflation. The alternative would, of course, to keep bringing in higher grade levels. Now we have A*, later we could have A** and A*** etc.

At this time of year... The news makes everyone scared and unhappy. Actually quite mean to publicise it.

Edit: I'll also add that it's really a bit of a non-issue (although it hardly feels like that to current year 13 students). The top universities aren't changing. They still take in the same number of people. The grade boundaries are just to aid them to know where the cut-off point is. If you're in the top 1% or 10% or 90%, your position in comparison to everyone else hasn't changed.
If there are significantly less A's and A*'s, then you know what they'll do? They'll let in a bunch of people who missed their grades. Because, as I say, positions in comparison to everyone else hasn't changed.

Im sorry but im just confused by this whole thing, does that mean for all the exams the grade boundaries are pretty much staying the same??

[A.J10]

(Original post by ambrin ox)
Im sorry but im just confused by this whole thing, does that mean for all the exams the grade boundaries are pretty much staying the same??

What happens is that the same percentage of people who got an A last year will get an A this year, and the same with every grade. The grade boundaries don't matter any more, just how well you did compared to everyone else this year.

That said, the numbers rarely change by much, so unless you're very borderline you won't have your grade changed.

I also don't see why they're taking last years results to be the standard, surely they'd look at the trends over the last few years and do something with that? Seems all very last minute and rushed to me.

[Kya]

Surely this is just stupid?
A Level boundaries would be the same if all exams were of a same standard set by exam boards.
This is very rare to happen due to so many different exam boards and the fact that some years exam boards set easier papers than others, thus they ensure everything is of the same standard by using the bell curve.

I also don't understand why they can't acknowledge that the standard of teaching nowadays is simply higher than 20-30 years ago. In this day and time we have so many more resources which helps us learn better... Okay some subjects/courses are BS at times but still.

[The Assassin]

I'm really slow today and can't really absorb any of the info the article is saying - does anyone have a brief summary of what's going to happen? I'd really appreciate it lol.

[ambrin ox]

(Original post by A.J10)
What happens is that the same percentage of people who got an A last year will get an A this year, and the same with every grade. The grade boundaries don't matter any more, just how well you did compared to everyone else this year.

That said, the numbers rarely change by much, so unless you're very borderline you won't have your grade changed.

I also don't see why they're taking last years results to be the standard, surely they'd look at the trends over the last few years and do something with that? Seems all very last minute and rushed to me.

oh woow, this is horrible, so does this mean what an A was last year, its the same this year?, i just cant believe this is happening, not a week before!! ;(

[A.J10]

(Original post by The Assassin)
I'm really slow today and can't really absorb any of the info the article is saying - does anyone have a brief summary of what's going to happen? I'd really appreciate it lol.

Say that last year, 24.3% of students taking A level maths got a B. This year, 24.3% of students taking A level maths will get a B, regardless of whether they gained the marks that ordinarily would have gotten them an A or C.

They'll try to alleviate this by tweaking the percentage depending on how well your year did in GCSEs.

[A.J10]

(Original post by ambrin ox)
oh woow, this is horrible, so does this mean what an A was last year, its the same this year?, i just cant believe this is happening, not a week before!! ;(

It might not be the 80% UMS that it was last year, it may be a little off but tbh it rarely fluctuates much.

Rather than it being a certain amount of marks, it's a certain rank among the other exam sitters that determine your grade.

You probably have nothing to worry about in practice, I'm opposing it on principle of both what I believe to be an inferior system and the haste at which it has apparently been sprung on us.

Time for my snarky remark:
Less than 2 weeks notice? Well I suppose they had to outdo themselves on trebling the fees from one year to the next.