A-level Reforms are unfair IMO.

I'm not quite sure, but if there's a student with the new spec they'll have to state some kind of predicted grades or the grade they got at the end of year 12.
Also consider that universities don't require one to have AS grades due to the changes. I know UCL don't. (it's on pg 30 of the 2017 undergrad prospectus)

This is a stupid thread tbh.
You are only in a worse situation that somebody who didn't do the ASs if you do badly.
If you do well you can still put it on the UCAS form, the unis will still see it and make offers on it and your predicted grades will still be made from it.
It is irksome that they dont count for some subjects next year but that is just life. Anyway if you did well this year hopefully you have the right revision strategy etc to do well next year and if you didnt well its a second chance isnt it that previous years didnt have.
IF you got AAAA or something at AS and had the same GCSEs as another candidate with no AS im pretty sure the unis would pick the first one lol as it is more representative of an A level.
Just suck it up like the rest of us, get your head down and do well at A2.

Yes all students have to state all their AS levels as well as predicted grades on their UCAS forms :/

Universities ask referees for people without AS grades to list mock grades or results within the reference text.

There's no advantage or disadvantage to taking reformed or unreformed A/AS levels. https://www.ucas.com/advisers/guides-and-resources/qualification-reform/applying-he-reformed-qualifications

If you don't like it then campaign and complain to your MP to get the system changed. Or take the IB or BTECs instead of A levels.

Predicted grades for reformed A levels are now EXPECTED to vary from AS results - that means universities will no longer be paying much attention to AS achievement because they know that the only exams that will matter will be at the end of Yr 13....good or bad performance in AS results has far less weight in admissions decision making that it did in the past. Predicted grades (and the commentary from referees about how those predictions were made) will matter much more.

I think you're completely misunderstanding how selection takes place at most universities. The majority will offer to 80%+ of applicants, those that are more selective wont be filtering on AS grades.

You know how school get your exams early, like your actual AS exams delivered early?

So one school in my area opened them to do the mocks for their year 12s because they decided they weren't going to submit the paper for marking, and the year 12s realised in was the actual 2016 OCR science paper, and so they told all their friends at my school what was on the paper.

So basically some people saw their AS papers before sitting them, and they all got As.

Not really. It's not a stupid thread. It's underlining potential bias when Universities make university offers. "You're only in a worse situation.. if you do badly"... Talk about stating the obvious. That's not the point of this thread. I didn't do badly. I'm talking about making a fair system because it's not fair that someone who DID do badly should have to suffer (not get an offer) due to one bad exam.
You make a fair point but again, universities are trying to "avoid bias", they know a third of their applicants do not have AS levels... they're bound to make an offer based solely on previous academic achievement.

Also your last line "suck it up like the rest of us"... that's part of the problem. We're all too complacent when it comes to the education system. I took the AS levels and I got AAAA, but I'll still underline what I think is wrong instead of staying quiet about it. It's not about me at the end of the day. Its about whats right.

Referees are under no obligation to put Mock Results in their references.
I don't think you read the OP... there is a potential for bias and people should know about it. We can't pretend like University Admission tutors are robots, they're people too. They see grades on a sheet and they will make their judgement based on that.
I do understand what you're saying and I get that AS levels have less weighting... but they still have weight. and that's what matters.
We can't pretend like AS levels are the end all of your offer but we can't pretend like they don't have weighting either. Especially when applying to top end universities.

if they did badly it could be for a number of reasons, extenuating circumstances, grief, illness all of which i sympathise with, however if they did badly because they didnt work them im sorry i have no sympathy to give and i dont see why they should be entitled to a uni place like people who worked hard.
and fundamentally what is even the point of a grading system if everyone is on a level playing field? how would unis differentiate between good and poor candidates?
The bottom line is that if you bomb at AS now you were always going to be in a **** position even under the old course, at least with this one you have next year to retake.
And lol i say that because why moan? what will that achieve? the government wont listen and why should they listen? just so people with 3 Us or whatever can be considered against someone who did well?
get on with it, that isnt complacency that is the honest truth, stop whining.

Referees are under no obligation to put Mock Results in their references.
I don't think you read the OP... there is a potential for bias and people should know about it. We can't pretend like University Admission tutors are robots, they're people too. They see grades on a sheet and they will make their judgement based on that.
I do understand what you're saying and I get that AS levels have less weighting... but they still have weight. and that's what matters.
We can't pretend like AS levels are the end all of your offer but we can't pretend like they don't have weighting either. Especially when applying to top end universities.

"Top" universities - for your subject (CS) -
Cambridge interview 80% of applicants - all those applicants will now be taking an admissions test at interview,
Oxford interview around 50% and decide on that 50% based on MAT results.
Imperial offer to 50% of applicants based on reference, predicted grades, academic history (mainly GCSEs) and PS

If a referee doesn't include sufficient information on the basis for predictions then universities can and WILL contact them for more details.

All universities have been managing to offer fair admissions to applicants with A levels, IB, BTECs, Pre-U, IOC, Highers/Advanced Highers, French Bacc, Apolytariate, APs, CIE A levels, etc etc etc qualifications for decades. A vanishingly small number relied on AS grades to filter applicants (mainly Cambridge - who have now introduced additional testing to allow a level playing field) - the changes to A levels have almost no impact on admissions decision making for universities (with the exception of Cambridge as explained)....because we simply didn't give a **** what your AS grades were unless they were wildly out of kilter with your predictions with no explanation for the deviation in your reference.

And that's exactly what I'm arguing for... exactly what you just said. I don't see why they should be entitled to a uni place if they didnt work for it, all they did was request their teacher to predict them an A despite not working their asses of in the AS year.
Okay I think you went off-topic there. This isn't about the grading system. A level-playing field that does allow you to differentiate between good and poor candidates is what we need. And the first step to doing that is to have EVERYONE take the AS-level exams.
I think you're kind of missing the point. This has nothing to do with failing your AS year. This is about between taking mocks and taking AS-level exams, two very different things.
This "moaning" is raising awareness. That's the only purpose this serves. And I'm expressing my opinion. If you think this is whining then you're wrong because I got 4 A's at AS and next year I'm going to smash my A-levels. Why would I whine about anything?
I think you've completely missed the point of my OP. What you've said here is that... its unfair. deal with it.... I feel like if you told that to Nelson Mandela you'd definitely get a response that you wouldn't like. If I believe something is wrong I will express my opinion and I have every right to do so.

Okay, just to clarify, so what you're saying is AS-levels do jack-all to your UCAS? So if I was to go ahead and get 4U's and apply to Oxbridge they'd be perfectly fine with that and that would be the same as another applicant without any AS levels? A bit of an exaggeration yes but what you're basically saying is that AS-levels mean nothing to an admissions tutor, such as yourself?

Stop crying lmao, our generation is so ****ing self entitled.

AS-Reforms make everything easier, because most people mess up their first year.

As an A-Level teacher, I agree with OP.

There's a difference between 4Us and B/C grades.

I'm not an admissions tutor - most people who work in admissions aren't academic staff. By the time an application reaches academic staff (if they even do) they will have been past admissions staff who are experts in comparing qualifications and the academic, PS and reference profile of a successful student (note STUDENT not applicant - we're looking for people who will excel on our courses NOT for people who meet a specific generic tick box list of qualifications - admissions is not a computer game where you rack up XP and get an automatic offer, there is considerable capacity to make exceptions and give aspirational or additional offers to borderline applicants)