A*...overrated?

Scroll to see replies

KnightRider

Why?

Because nobody really appreciates the difference between A and A* that much. If you actually complain and make a huge fuss then revise again and retake the exam then frankly you're a bit sad.

Reply 41

lil_miss_rapunzel

KnightRider

Why?

Just what I was going to say- if you are aiming for A* then obviously you are going to be disappointed with an A. What grades you are aiming for is everyone's own, personal target. If someone was aiming for a B and they got a C, then naturally they would be disappointed, and this is no different from aiming for an A* and being disappointed if you get an A.

Reply 42

Fishermanspie

FieryIce

what do you guys think? Its not as if getting 10+ A*s will automatically get you into Oxbridge is it, so how come people make such a big deal out of it? Getting straight A's is just as good and yet you see some people here on tsr feeling actually disappointed with (great results) something like 8 A's and 2 A*'s.

Not exactly.
But I do agree it is overrated

Reply 43

lil_miss_rapunzel

Tallon

Because nobody really appreciates the difference between A and A* that much. If you actually complain and make a huge fuss then revise again and retake the exam then frankly you're a bit sad.

That's a ridiculous thing to say. If someone is determined enough to put in the work to try again and get the grade that they are aiming for and think they can achieve, whether that be a D to a C, a B to an A or an A to an A* then good luck to them.

There may not be a huge difference between an A and an A* in the grand scheme of things, but if someones personal target is an A* and that's what they want to get then why shouldn't they do everything they can to achieve it?

Reply 44

M15T3R CH4RL35

I worked and got 12 A*z because at my school i was an outcast and insecure and the only way i felt any significance was to be top of the class at everything.

Reply 45

m8nmina0h4

Tallon

Because nobody really appreciates the difference between A and A* that much. If you actually complain and make a huge fuss then revise again and retake the exam then frankly you're a bit sad.

So what your saying is nobody thinks there is any difference between an A and an A*. If that was the case (it isn't) that surely there is no difference between an A and a B, or a B and a C etc..

Idiot.

Reply 46

lil_miss_rapunzel

My opinion exactly Knight Rider

Reply 47

Shask

Tallon

People who complain about getting A need to get a life tbh.

As KnightRider said, why?

Say you're well deserving of an A* in maths. You know all the correct formula and have a great grasp of everything your curriculum requires you to know. In past papers you've reached an easy A*. Does this person not have the right to complain about an A?

Reply 48

Ethelred the Unready

Angelil

Tbh I think they should do away with the A* grade altogether and I think introducing it into A Levels is/will be a huge mistake.
Why? Because it devalues the A grade. People now think of an A grade as 'second best' because of the existence of the A*, and that in my mind is just plain wrong.

I concur.

Reply 49

Shask

Getting rid of A* would be ridiculous. People who get the top grades should have that fact appreciated! There is a difference between someone who gets full marks and who barely scrapes an A. Don't you think this difference should be represented?

Reply 50

m8nmina0h4

So basically people who have achieved A*s are for A*s and those that haven't are against them?

Reply 51

weet_ABI_x

Tsovehr

Say you're well deserving of an A* in maths. You know all the correct formula and have a great grasp of everything your curriculum requires you to know. In past papers you've reached an easy A*. Does this person not have the right to complain about an A?

My exact situation, am still bitter :frown:

I think it depends a lot on what other people you know got as well - I like to be one of the best in my year and THE best of my friends - and I got that with my 3A*'s but obviously that is pretty rubbish on TSR. However I don't really care on TSR because I don't know anyone and I know most of the people that did well worked really hard - and I treated my GCSE's as a bit of a joke, like everyone else in my school, and to be honest (in my opinion anyway) I think most people in most schools don't take GCSE's very seriously...

Reply 52

Ashes_to_Ashes

It distinguishes particular apptitude, gives really good students something to aim for and makes you feel good about yourself if you manage to get one, so why not?

At the end of the day getting A* or not can just depend on whether the paper goes your way, and remember, TSR isn't an accurate depiction of real life, thank God :p:

Reply 53

m8nmina0h4

Keep_it_Unreal

Well said. :smile:

Repped.

Reply 54

History Lost in Physics

GCSE's are not a good measure of intelligence, as you can get an A* simply from having a good memory and working hard, or even having a bad memory and working slightly harder. Aka, you can get equal grades to someone with a much higher IQ than yourself by memorising stuff. This is irritating when people who cannot answer questions outside exams (for toffee naturally), do incredibly well in exams and everyone goes on about what a genius they are.

God I sound insecure - maybe I should learn to be like them and work more....he says while supposed to be doing coursework...

Btw I did get better GCSE's than the people i'm moaning about so it's all good for me :smile:

Reply 55

death.drop

History Lost in Physics

or by having a bad memory, doing no work and just having common sense.
or even by having a bad memory, doing no work and having a particular skill.

I got A*s in English because it's just what I'm good at, same with art. I got 2 other A*s i think but I can't remember what they were in.

anyway, my boyfriend got like, 5 GCSEs at grade C and he's just as intelligent as me so you're right, GCSE's are not a measure of intelligence.

they're not really a measure of anything since some people try hard and some don't for equivalent grades.

Reply 56

m8nmina0h4

History Lost in Physics

Yeah I do know what you mean.. That's probably be in my Sciences, which is why with the new specification this year being based all on "how science works" I'm finding it more difficult to the older specification, which I would have much rather to have taken, as I would have just been able to memorise it all! I don't think that is wrong though, for people who don't understand Sciences well, then better memorise it than just not bother, but obviously you'd struggle at AS, hence you shouldn't be taking those subjects!

Reply 57

Naranoc

Hmmm, sort of. I wouldn't discourage anyone from aiming to get as many as they can (I was obsessed with them too at 16), but you begin to release after a while that it's really nothing more than collecting brownie badges. Still useful for uni applications though.

Reply 58

death.drop

ScottyDawgUk

Yes they are a measure of something... intelligence. How can you say its all memory work and working hard, isnt that what A level is then? If you dont work hard you cant possibly expect to get anywhere.

They are most certainly not a measure of intelligence. if everyone worked their hardest they would measure of academic ability, but not everyone does work their hardest so they aren't.

I didn't say it's all memory and working hard. but with those 2 things you could definitely do well at GCSE, and A level for that matter. actually, A level even more because that's basically spouting information you should have absorbed.

I barely did any work at all at GCSE, and I have a **** memory. but I still got mostly A*s and A's.

If GCSEs are a measure of intelligence how do explain that some of the most successful business people have no qualifications?

Reply 59

death.drop

ScottyDawgUk

I get some of ur points but u cant just discredit a whole qualification just because 'some people dont try hard enough' thats just silly. If Gcses werent a measure of intelligence then how comes there's an underlying trend of 'those smart ppl in the year' getting all the good grades - because they are in fact intelligent people.

i'm just saying you can't say someone's stupid because they don't have great GCSEs, or say someone is intelligent because they have good GCSEs. so it's not really a good measure.

I know one girl (who shall remain nameless) who got straight A*s (except one B in RE) and she is really, really dumb in a real world sense.

My friend jack is a smart guy, he's far more knowledgeable than me about things that really go on in the world, how to get what he wants. things that are useful in the real world. that's real world intelligence.
so he's not great at maths, and doesn't know the chemical equation for photosynthesis....doesn't mean he's not highly intelligent.

I'm not discrediting the qualifications, the qualifications mean something. I'm just saying it's not a good measure of intelligence.