Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tinkerbelle ♥)
    Looky!
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8482880.stm

    It's been noted!
    Finally! Lol tbh, I've never seen a facebook group against any exam before so they must have been bad papers..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    Surely part of doing a science a-level, especially one on a module such as ecology does need you to look critically anyway?
    Yup I agree and my feeling is the students on that facebook group were the ones that couldn't.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woozeybear)
    Finally! Lol tbh, I've never seen a facebook group against any exam before so they must have been bad papers..
    Read it - it's linked in the OP. Bit of an eye opener when you actually read it rather then relying on secondary sources. It's not "bad" in any sense of the term.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    Yup I agree and my feeling is the students on that facebook group were the ones that couldn't.

    Possibly, or just the current trend on FB to start a group about anything random and join it if you have any minor affiliation with it :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    Read it - it's linked in the OP. Bit of an eye opener when you actually read it rather then relying on secondary sources. It's not "bad" in any sense of the term.
    Did you do the OCR one? Plus in that exam people were under stress and running out of time so wouldn't have been able to think about what to write for a long time..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woozeybear)
    Did you do the OCR one? Plus in that exam people were under stress and running out of time so wouldn't have been able to think about what to write for a long time..
    I'm a graduate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    Surely part of doing a science a-level, especially one on a module such as ecology does need you to look critically anyway?
    exactly what i though! well said!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woozeybear)
    Did you do the OCR one? Plus in that exam people were under stress and running out of time so wouldn't have been able to think about what to write for a long time..

    everyone is under stress and with time constraints in an exam...in A2 level, a lot of papers are like this
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    everyone is under stress and with time constraints in an exam...in A2 level, a lot of papers are like this
    Yeah that's what I mean which is why it's all good to say it's an easy paper now, while your not in an exam if you get what I'm saying? Lol anyway I'm gonna be the one saying it was an easy exam when my younger brother takes a levels - it's everyones responsibility to critisise was just trying to balance views 11th of March well see how everyone did
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by woozeybear)
    Yeah that's what I mean which is why it's all good to say it's an easy paper now, while your not in an exam if you get what I'm saying? Lol anyway I'm gonna be the one saying it was an easy exam when my younger brother takes a levels - it's everyones responsibility to critisise was just trying to balance views 11th of March well see how everyone did

    I never said it was easy, but I am saying the grounds for complaint are unreasonable and lack a lot of evidence
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    I'm a graduate.
    Figures don't worry I'll say papers were easy soon to annoy everyone in my family it's just harsh when your constantly told they're easy after so much effort has gone in lol
    I can't check that paper now cos won't let me download
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkWhite)
    I see very little wrong with the paper. The complaints appear to be concerned with only two of the questions on the paper, or so I can see. One which introduces a new type of graph called a bubble graph, which students are then told how to interpret fairly easily, and with a questions which asks about the application of Spearman rank correlation test, which are both fine.

    1) The current textbook reads, "You will not be required to know tests on significance, such as Spearman rank correlation or the chi-squared test, for theory examination purposes. However, you will be required to select and apply such tests when analysing the results of experiments and investigations carried out as part of your ecological fieldwork."

    2) Evidently, a lot of people didn't do too well in this examination, and I think that the better candidates will be suitably separated from the less-able candidates. From the questions I've seen, I don't see anything wrong with them. They test knowledge and ability in the subject and in the use of statistical analysis well, but so many people are posting on the Group saying they still don't understand the questions. I think it's worked rather well?
    LOL! fail big time on those who say you dont need spearman.

    tbh if you interpreted that as "i dont need spearman" then you deserve a crap mark. i cant believe A-level students dont understand the difference between theory and application.

    (Original post by SpamBa)
    I stand corrected. But still, if it says in the book you will not be tested on something in an exam, you shouldn't be tested on it. That's just unfair.
    see above, still complaining?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    to be honest i think if there is clearly a problem if such a vast number of students have complained. and another point is that how many pupils have a copy of the specification to know what they should learn. even if they did whats the likely hood that they could interpret it to an A-level standard bearing in mind that these specifications are written for teachers that can teach it only having to look over the topic to know what it is about.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    I never said it was easy, but I am saying the grounds for complaint are unreasonable and lack a lot of evidence
    Then fair enough I would never directly complain. The facebook group I joined wasn't actually to protest at all it was just laughing at the paper - the media took it the wrong way. And I rarely join groups.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    It's totally different when you get hit by questions you were not expecting in such a time limit. People looking at the exam for the first time thinks its not bad but its totally different in the exam you have to express your answers in a way in which marks are picked up and that takes time you have to carefully examine all the data and graphs to make sure you haven't missed something then chose what answer to write. This takes time most of the queations would have had multiple amswers so it is hard to see what they are really asking which wastes time.

    Problems with the paper:
    1. Timing- wasted time with giving tables which were not needed and information not required, otherwise should have increased the time of the exam.
    2. Vague questions
    3. Missed out a question on genetics for shrews.
    4. Questions not drawing information from most fundamental aspects of the course e.g. respiration.
    5. To many graphs, I think the examiners can judge if your good at reading graphs or not no need to use them in nearly every question 1-2 questions is enough.
    6. To much emphasis on the same skills.
    7. Not compatible with teaching.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Subcutaneous
    How do you have a say? You didnt take the exam paper, i did and up till now have achieved A grades, this paper was way off the spec and aqa have even agreed it wasnt good themselves.
    So basically, dont complain when you dunno what the hell you are talking about....
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rainorshine)
    Subcutaneous
    How do you have a say? You didnt take the exam paper, i did and up till now have achieved A grades, this paper was way off the spec and aqa have even agreed it wasnt good themselves.
    So basically, dont complain when you dunno what the hell you are talking about....
    The new GCE Science examination focuses on the application of science to a greater degree than was the case with the old A-level. As with all examination question papers, the examination for Unit 4 was written to meet the assessment objectives set by QCA (now QCDA) which included this change. The assessment objectives are published in the specification and on our website. The examination paper properly reflects these assessment objectives. - Message from AQA


    I believe I have a say in this, because as a taxpayer who pays towards education, to help people recieve qualifications, if there was a concern in the exams- then yes, I should KNOW about it and also have a say into whether it was the quality of teaching, education system- whatever.


    Please go look at the paper- go look at the spec, and tell me exactly which questions were off spec and why...
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by rainorshine)
    Subcutaneous
    How do you have a say? You didnt take the exam paper, i did and up till now have achieved A grades, this paper was way off the spec and aqa have even agreed it wasnt good themselves.
    So basically, dont complain when you dunno what the hell you are talking about....

    Yes it is something new for AQA.

    But to say it was off the Spc is a blatant lie, its irrelevant and vague, but its definitely on the spec. (yes iv seen the paper)

    OCR have been doing this for years!

    (I retook the OCR biology legacy paper on Monday, and as they knew it was being taken by people who have completed their A Levels, they took liberties with the questions)
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rainorshine)
    Subcutaneous
    How do you have a say? You didnt take the exam paper, i did and up till now have achieved A grades, this paper was way off the spec and aqa have even agreed it wasnt good themselves.
    So basically, dont complain when you dunno what the hell you are talking about....
    haha! sounds like a porn star to me! and just downloaded the AQA biology paper.. so whats wrong with it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Loads of people came out some exams saying "I didn't do that in class".

    As was always the case, it was because they hadn't revised it. There is no such thing as being tested on something which you haven't done IN LESSONS. Forget the specification, you're bound to have touched on it in lessons. If all you go on is the specification, then that's pretty stupid, isn't it?
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 27, 2010
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.