A*A*A*A*A* student

I did new GCSEs, and a mix of old and new A levels. They're not any harder. It's something the kids today are saying because they want to seem like big men.

So did I, and statistically it is easier to get higher grades doing modular GCSEs and A Levels than it is linear. If you didn't find it any harder that's good for you, but I'm not talking specifically about you. They require different revision techniques and exam techniques, which is what OP is offering advice for, so it's important that OP specifies.

The revision techniques are honestly not that different. It's just more content required at once, so you have to work smart, not hard.

Even then. A Levels can be revised for by just bashing out past papers for 3 months. You don't need to do real revision.

Ask me any questions you like with regards to grades, studying, University. I am really quite bored of my studies at the moment and need a small break. I feel I might be able to help some people so ask away

Yes modular. Perhaps, though you do sit fewer papers and if like my school you sat all the modular papers at the end of the year, first of AS and then A2 you could argue it is harder. That meant in my A2 year I sat: 2 history papers, 3 maths papers, 2 biology papers and 2 chemistry papers in the space of less than a month.

I don't agree the exam technique differs but yes arguably you have more content to learn. Having said that though if it is objectively more difficult this is usually reflected in lower grade boundaries. So whilst you might want to dismiss my grades as lucky or a product of the exam system, I am not sure the logic holds strongly.

Do you think that doing the 5 a levels was worth it or would you have preferred to do 3 or 4?

The OP did 4 A levels and an EPQ - misleading title.

oh, whats an EPQ lol?

Even then. A Levels can be revised for by just bashing out past papers for 3 months. You don't need to do real revision.

The OP did 4 A levels and an EPQ - misleading title.

Sorry, they are very different - having AS meant not everything was reliant on Year 13. FAR less content too and you knew exactly what to revise for each Maths paper. As a teacher I can assure you that the two systems are VERY different.

Sorry, they are very different - having AS meant not everything was reliant on Year 13. FAR less content too and you knew exactly what to revise for each Maths paper. As a teacher I can assure you that the two systems are VERY different.

Maybe for the sciences but not for humanities. My year was also the first year to do the linear A-levels so there were no past papers only about two specimen ones.

content is very similar though. It definitely is a different challenge, but I don't know if it actually does make it drastically harder since the percentage of As to A* hasn't changed at all dramatically

Maybe for the sciences but not for humanities. My year was also the first year to do the linear A-levels so there were no past papers only about two specimen ones.

Yes true, it's just more content which did feel rather unfair at the time, for instance the year above us in history only had to remember half the time period we did at the end of year 13. However someone has to be the first year and it just happened to be us that time.
Congratulations for your grades my measly 1 A* and 2 As don't look amazing in comparison
I was flirting with the idea of doing an EPQ but decided against it as I needed to work on a portfolio for my uni interview. For medicine and sciences things like EPQs seem to give you an edge if you do well in it.

God you seem very bitter for some reason. I have stated multiple times that I did an EPQ and that it should have been a small case A* but I don't see how it is misleading to quote my grades.


as for this - I have tutored students the new syllabus and fair enough if your experience is, that they are harder, but content wise it is exactly the same, if like my school you sat all your papers in the summer.

But either way even if it were the case that it was marginally more difficult you make two assumptions: a) that my grades would have been different and b) that I therefore didn't deserve to get my grades because I was at an unfair advantage. Both are plausible but by no means certain. Especially since for Biology I overall dropped 4 UMS across my 4 papers (90/90, 148/150, 88/90, 150/150). Chemistry and Maths were similar. Indeed, I even know students who do coursework for their A-level sciences. But I don't see why it is an argument really. I was only offering people advice if they wanted it. You seem to want to spend your time criticising others. I have no idea why you'd want to do that.

You are giving advice on revising on an exam system you've never experienced. I am commenting that your advice may not be a helpful as you think; if you interpret that as criticism then that's your choice.

UMS did not equal raw marks either so even full UMS did not equate to full marks.

What made you choose medicine compared to other subjects (e.g biomed, natsci etc)?