Changes to English GCSE grade boundaries 'ordered by Ofqual'

Scroll to see replies

not sure ont this and i might sound stupid ..but does anybody know the grade boundries for WJEC Descriptive/Narrative .. i got 18/20 which my teacher said as an A* so i left it then he left end of last year and noww my new techer says i need 19/20 for an A* :confused:

??? :/

Reply 21

placenta medicae talpae

If Ofqual thinks that its problem is with the January exams, then why are they always talking about the June ones?
Because of the stupid quota system.
They thought, oh look more people than we thought have got good grades in January, so we'll have to make sure that we award proportionally far fewer good grades in summer to balance out.
Now that's ~~fair~~ grade engineering.

Reply 22

SidneyHopcroft

Interesting that at the end of every exposé of great governmental/political cock-ups like this there's some high and mighty git with an ineffably large and undeserved salary quivering as he admits "Woops I'm an idiot sorry".

Gove, Stacey, Ofqual - sack them all. How on Earth can we stand for the shameless finger-pointing from we got from Ofqual at the start of this, where they blaming the whole scandal on the exam boards (I think it's worth pointing out that this problem does not stem from Edexcel. Or even AQA or OCR). It only so happen it's Ofqual's job to regulate, moderate and sign off the exam board's grade boundaries and exam quality... Apparently the new 2012 awards were a slightly different format to previous year, and this suggests that Ofqual, either in January or June, ****ed up big time. Either in January they were too lenient (can't fathom why - being the first exam since the overhaul it should be an extremely closely-monitored exam) meaning they marked June harshly to compensate, or they marked too harshly in June full stop and with no reason other than - without wishing to overdose on the cynicism - make the current generation of youths look less intelligent than those in government because their poor O-Level grades look pretty crap stood next to the 2011 GCSE results.

Oh, and not to mention the borderline humorous- no wait, there's nothing funny about it at all... Stacey's vitriolic incompetence when she bare-face lied to pretty much the entire nation of 16 year-olds made her a complete laughing stock and a dead limb to this already-limping system. She actually denied such a shift in the grade boundaries was made, but has since been hit by evidence upon evidence suggesting as much as ten marks were changed in the assignment of grade. Surely that questions her validity as any type of power in the Education system? She is an absolute joke and needs to be sacked.

Same with Gove. The man is an utter moron and a fraudulent coward. He's retreated from this after blaming Ofqual, who then blamed AQA/Edexcel, who have subsequently (or at least Edexcel have) proven that they tried to resist the change, and that ultimately it was Ofqual's fault, meaning it was in fact Gove and Stacey pulling the strings. Oh wait, but Gove and Stacey denied it... So it can't be them, it simply can't... "For he is an honourable man" Bill Shakespeare - 'Julius Caesar'...

I've always admired the irony of a government who has a cabinet power consisting primarily of millionaires - people who've never even had to labour once in their lives because they were born to wealth - who try to empathise with Joe Public and tell us how we should be tested for our intelligence/fitness for work/financial situations, etc., etc. They don't know a thing about us; we're just statistics and money to be saved to them.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 23

hockeyjoe

Original post by RK

The biggest shock for me about all this is that the exam boards and Ofqual set the number of people they expect to get a grade C before the exam based upon exams sat 5 years earlier and then expect there to be little difference from that measure.

Where is the allowance for significantly improved teaching or significantly more work from the students. There method allows individuals to improve their performance, but not the whole year group. It's as if a year groups future success is being set 5 years before they sit their GCSEs with limits being places on what how many people can get certain grades regardless of how well the whole year group performs when it comes to the exam.

I'm sorry but this is completely wrong. Exams should be and are fixed so that only the top X percentile of students gets a certain grade... I understand this has problems over consecutive years where a mark in one year may have earnt a grade or two higher the year before, but then it's up to universities and employers to further contextualize results isn't it? Because this is what grade inflation is... easier exams and higher teaching standards resulting in lack of differentiation between students of different calibers.

Reply 24

TSR Community Staff

Original post by hockeyjoe

What I said isn't wrong, I think it's just that you and I have different opinions on what exams should be for.

My view is what can be described as 'comparable performance' where each the standard required for the same grade should remain the same, taken to the extreme it should not limit every one from getting a grade A if everyone performs highly enough.

You view is one which could be described as 'comparable outcomes' where roughly the same percentage get the same grades each year, irrespective of how well they perform in relation to the previous years.

Our exam system, as far as my knowledge goes, has actually bee one of 'comparable performance' in recent years and as far as people knew, this was continuing. But there has been a lot of recent talk of moving to one of 'comparable outcomes' and it appears that this has definitely been a cause of the problems we've seen this year with extreme adjustment of grade boundaries and people getting lower grades than not just what they expected, but what their performance would have got them back in January this year.

This is unfair on those pupils and I personally think it's unfair for all people. But I think this comes down to what we think exams are for. I don't think they should be there to segment a year group in to success and failures (as will happen if an exam system uses 'comparative outcomes' - it sets people and schools up to fail as someone has to each year, regardless of how hard they work). Instead, I think exams should be there to measure how well a person performances against a set of skills, so you can measure progress and development of education over time, measure the effect of investment and have fair comparisons of a range of students across year groups.

As far as I'm aware, it's the system that has always been used in SATs over the years, as a bench mark for progress and should also be used in other exams like GCSEs and A Levels.

I'm not saying there are not other problems with a system of 'comparative performance', as it could lead to a large number of people getting the same grade. But that doesn't mean the system doesn't work. It just means our system of grading is insufficient to differentiate in an world were we (hope) education and teaching quality is improving. So we should look to other measures - do we aware people percentages, rather than one of a limit number of grades to help distinguish? Do we give grades and percentages? Use more grades? Use some other measure of success?

I don't know really what is best, but I do think that exam systems using 'comparative performance' are the only fair way to run an exam system that truly rewards teacher and student effort and allows for the measure of real improvement. I also think that this year people have been unfairly hit by bodging the system part way through the year to artificially limit the number of people getting certain grades, especially a C and that unless this is reviewed and overturned will have a negative impact on many people's futures through no fault of their own, put simple down to political interference.

Reply 25

AnonymousPenguin

I don't have any skin in the game here, but I just don't understand why the UK won't move to grading on a curve, which is what all serious standardized international exams have done for years. That way it would be much easier for unis to know how many people will get certain grades and all this uncertainty would be a thing of the past.

If the cohorts are improving in quality then this system of "comparable outcomes (see post above)" would necessitate exams getting harder to actually achieve meaningful separation based on skill, instead of exams staying the same and more and more people getting an A as it is now. The goal should definitely be an increase in average standards not an increase in everyone getting good grades and feeling good about themselves because of it. I realize that cut-throat competition between pupils is unpleasant, but it is unavoidable.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 26

mjohn1

Original post by carpe diem 123

I think they should be checking the out the OCR GCSE Maths grade boundaries. The average for an A* in first two units (50%) was around 65%. Come the summer exam (50%), this was moved up to 91%! Clearly they sought to reduce or cap the number achieving certain grades.

Yes and so they should have "sought to reduce or cap the number achieving certain grades" because 65% for an A* is ridiculous. It makes it impossible for people who are actually good at maths to prove it because almost everyone is getting an A* regardless.

Reply 27

Clip

Original post by AnonymousPenguin

I don't have any skin in the game here, but I just don't understand why the UK won't move to grading on a curve, which is what all serious standardized international exams have done for years.

That's how it used to be, before generations of bed-wetting soft/medium/hard left teachers and educators got their oars in and gave birth to the Rosemary's Baby that was the GCSE, and mutated the A-level into an extension of the former.

Reply 28

carpe diem 123

Original post by mjohn1

You have neither seen the paper nor know the figures regarding how many across the country achieved specific grades. The OCR modular maths was actually scrapped this year, due to the realising that the content of the course was entirely ridiculous, and the longer mark QWC questions were almost impossible to answer in some instances, due to poor guidance on what the marks would be awarded for. The reason that the grade boundaries were so low, was because the questions bridged more into C1 maths, and were extremely difficult to answer. Also, the final exam paper was far too long. If you have mathematical ability up "A*" grade, then you should achieve that grade. The instance with this course was that actually translating that knowledge onto the exam paper was made extremely difficult, hence the low grade boundaries.

Reply 29

Robbie242

To be completely honest after being part of this grand mess as a Y11 student I believe it should stay the same rightfully students who failed to achieve a C grade did not work to their full potential, I got my C grade because I worked hard, English isn't my specialization but I still managed to get the grade through hard work however I got my lang in January when it was more fair I was 14marks over so I would've scrapped a C if i took the June examination and my Literature was 27/50 which was a D grade but my controlled assessments and other modules brang it up. I was disappointed with maths being lower in an easier exam (March 2012) 121 for an A and then (June 2012) a harder exam and a higher mark scheme which led to my b grade in maths. So yes it was unfair but people who deal with it and take the resits if they really want the C grade.

Reply 30

ryanb97

tbh i did the exam and i do think it was fair - but thats me

ryan

Reply 31

mjohn1

Original post by carpe diem 123

I'm fairly sure all it takes is one quick look at a past paper mark scheme to find out how to answer a QWC question and maths gcse's are ?supposed? to bridge in to the beginning of a-level maths - that's the whole point

Reply 32

carpe diem 123

Original post by mjohn1

The GCSE was brand new for 2010, so there was a limited number of past papers, and the teachers were entirely new this type of questioning.

But it bridged at a disproportionate level in comparison to the other major maths exams into As Level.

Reply 33

AM1R

Lmao the June 2012 grade boundaries for the English Exam (5eh2h) was 42/96 for a C, I am taking this same exam tommorow for the January 2013 series and im worried if I don't perform as good to get a grade C pass, will they bring the boundaries slightly down because "42 marks" seems a bit demanding

Reply 34

cleveradam

42/96 is demanding for a C? Mate that's not even half!
I hope they don't mess up this exam I'm doing today because of the June's grade boundary issues...

Reply 35

MizRman

Last year in June when I did my English exam I got a U grade, the marks were so low the teachers told me a remark wouldn't be worth it - they ordered the paper back and they said it should've been a B/C! I did my resit yesturday and it was foundation tier so I can only get a C at best =[
I feel like I was robbed of my grades!