15 August 2013 A-Level results: Discussion thread - results day is here!

I'm from Asian family.

You must be...no, ARE...the exception to the rule.

Grammar is very important.

Most of the people claiming to be unbearably nervous on this thread...

Well I suppose it partially tends on what you're good at, as you say if you're better with calculations and the shorter questions then it might not be for you as there's only about one calculation worth about 5 marks at A2
It is very essay orientated which is why I like it I guess, I'm much better at writing essays

Hmm, well it's just a coloured in circle for your correct answers isn't it? The examiners can figure out the difference

I think you're confusing equal opportunity with equal outcome; communism strove for the latter, not necessarily the former. A communist society may not work (of course, that is subject to opinion) but a society founded upon egalitarian principles of equal opportunity certainly might.

Cool. Best of luck.

A Levels are not harder now, grades have been increasing.

You've shown that rich people can go to Eton and not succeed academically. OK, this also disproves the point that wealth can buy education and make people succeed, the point I was arguing against. But mostly it proves jack ****. This is one example of one family. I said that wealth was correlated with intelligence. Do you not understand what correlation means? It means that on average rich people are smarter, but that not all rich people are smart and not all poor people are stupid. Your example proves nothing except that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics.

I might drop it now and I do quite enjoy the subject but I'm not that good at writing under pressure. I really wanted to drop bio but now I have to think harder about that.

I heard they put the objective test through a machine but that's good that the examiners mark them. ������


Posted from TSR Mobile

It means that on average rich people are smarter,

Firstly can this undeniable fact be backed up by more evidence than a jumped-up little toff. Secondly even if it was true (which I highly doubt), its not hard to work out why. Wealth brings more resources, meaning a better quality of all things that help academics strive like private tutors, an ability to not be taught with morons in the class, more text books as well as all the other perks that come with wealth like a stable household, less stress and more of a self-esteem boost. All of these things put rich kids at an advantage, now that is a undeniable fact, so much so that if some who comes from a poor background gets near the same grades to a rich kids, it's almost embarrassing for the one that has been given it all.

And lastly because I just don't make 'undeniable fact' countless examples can be seen that include but not limited to:

- John Prescott (deputy prime minister)
- Dr David starkey
- Anthony davis
- Alastair camball
- Andrew Neil
- Dennis skinner

ALL are highly successful and respected in there field, and all come from a solid working class background.


Posted from TSR Mobile

you don't need to get angry because I proved your point is wrong. You can also argue mathematically that the royal family is worth 10,000 rich people, seeing as they were given the best of the best in education since birth.

This is gonna sound terrible, but I feel as if we're having a competition with GCSE results day thread on the number of posts. Currently we're winning!

Most of the people claiming to be unbearably nervous on this thread...

This is gonna sound terrible, but I feel as if we're having a competition with GCSE results day thread on the number of posts. Currently we're winning!

That is literally the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Giving a single example of something does not disprove a general trend. For example, men are taller than women. Finding a tall woman does not disprove this rule, because it's a correlation, an average.

A Levels are not harder now, grades have been increasing.

You've shown that rich people can go to Eton and not succeed academically. OK, this also disproves the point that wealth can buy education and make people succeed, the point I was arguing against. But mostly it proves jack ****. This is one example of one family. I said that wealth was correlated with intelligence. Do you not understand what correlation means? It means that on average rich people are smarter, but that not all rich people are smart and not all poor people are stupid. Your example proves nothing except that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics.

Yes but still your argument that wealthy people are intrinsically more intelligent is wrong they just have better education because they went to private school. The £££ running through their veins from birth does not supply their brain with more intelligence.

Yes but still your argument that wealthy people are intrinsically more intelligent is wrong they just have better education because they went to private school. The £££ running through their veins from birth does not supply their brain with more intelligence.

I might drop it now and I do quite enjoy the subject but I'm not that good at writing under pressure. I really wanted to drop bio but now I have to think harder about that.

I heard they put the objective test through a machine but that's good that the examiners mark them. 😅


Posted from TSR Mobile