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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    it's not an attack, please grow up and learn the difference between and 'attack' and criticising a campaign which in my opinion has no valid evidence for complaint
    Interesting how you quote that post, but none of my others that counteract your argument :mmm:
    And I would consider it to be an attack, because you've taken it upon yourself to consider all those complaining as being halfwits who, unlike your glorious, superior intellect, are lacking in the intelligence to think during an exam, and the initiative to look at the specification - your issue seems to be not with this specific exam, but rather about how everyone apart from yourself is deficient in these things.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iapetus)
    No.


    they probably were taught it
    probably were taught
    probably were
    probably


    Telling 1000s of people to grow up? Smooth.

    go read the spec and exam paper...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    have you seen the paper and spec?

    What do you think of it- do you think the questions are irrelevant to the spec?
    I cant download the file :s: However, its not up to me to decide if the questions were relevant or not- it should be reviewed by an independent panel (IMO), otherwise its open to bias, as people have different perceptions of what is difficult and what isn't.
    However, the fact that so many people complained about it, does sound dodgy, if it was only due to lazy/spoiled students, why didnt same scandal reach OCR, or WJEC or any other board? We complained about the difficulcy of our paper last year (OCR Bio), but we never took it further, as the paper was do-able if difficult.
    But as I said, it would probably result in lower grade boundaries anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Your argument is insulting to the thousands of students like myself who revised the subject inside out for no reason. Of course we understand the need to apply knowledge to unfamiliar situations but when half of the marks are awarded for totally irrelevant questions such as explaining why a small shrew will not touch the edges of a tube coated in glue I think things have gone too far.

    I understand the problem in the past was that there was too much recall in exams and it was impossible to tell if candidates were thinking or just reciting what they knew - but the new regulations (in Biology in particular) have taken things too far.

    I'm normally a very modest person but just in case you think I am one of the students who cannot think outside of the box, I hold an offer to study Natural Sciences at Cambridge.

    My point is that if an exam board is going to produce a specification of topics to learn, they should cover those topics to credit the students who put hours of revision time in.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    *takes another deep breath*


    ...you were not asked to interpret spearmans rank or even know how to use it in research, but discuss the application of statistical tests in general Spearmans rank was used as an EXAMPLE of said test. It very clearly says in the spec, that application of statistical tests are needed to be known
    Er, maybe I misinterpreted the table of data including Spearmans rank values that we were asked to interpret then...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowplay1991)
    Your argument is insulting to the thousands of students like myself who revised the subject inside out for no reason. Of course we understand the need to apply knowledge to unfamiliar situations but when half of the marks are awarded for totally irrelevant questions such as explaining why a small shrew will not touch the edges of a tube coated in glue I think things have gone too far.


    Which question asks about the pyshcology of a shrew? Cause i can't see one



    I understand the problem in the past was that there was too much recall in exams and it was impossible to tell if candidates were thinking or just reciting what they knew - but the new regulations (in Biology in particular) have taken things too far.

    It doesn't seem drastically different to when I did a-levels 3 years 2/3 years ago

    I'm normally a very modest person but just in case you think I am one of the students who cannot think outside of the box, I hold an offer to study Natural Sciences at Cambridge.
    My point is that if an exam board is going to produce a specification of topics to learn, they should cover those topics to credit the students who put hours of revision time in.

    They did- however exams are not there to test the amount of hours of revision you can do, but what you know- and what you can do with it

    all the questions, are inline with the spec- nothing is too out of touch, or irrelevant information needed in the module
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by shadowplay1991)
    Your argument is insulting to the thousands of students like myself who revised the subject inside out for no reason. Of course we understand the need to apply knowledge to unfamiliar situations but when half of the marks are awarded for totally irrelevant questions such as explaining why a small shrew will not touch the edges of a tube coated in glue I think things have gone too far.

    I understand the problem in the past was that there was too much recall in exams and it was impossible to tell if candidates were thinking or just reciting what they knew - but the new regulations (in Biology in particular) have taken things too far.

    I'm normally a very modest person but just in case you think I am one of the students who cannot think outside of the box, I hold an offer to study Natural Sciences at Cambridge.

    My point is that if an exam board is going to produce a specification of topics to learn, they should cover those topics to credit the students who put hours of revision time in.

    I dont understand your point, its A2 what were you expecting revision was going to be enough?


    This is from the legacy human biology paper from a few years ago.

    It states we would not have to use the chi-squared function in this module, yet



    Yet i don't remember uproar on facebook or in the media.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pinstripesbaby)
    Er, maybe I misinterpreted the table of data including Spearmans rank values that we were asked to interpret then...

    The question gives the students a table from a stat test, and asks you to explain the conclusion made using the data, this could be from any stat test, and the information you need to give is simply about the application and use of stat tests in research- which the specification mentions. It's not asking to you to explain how they used spearmans rank and how its done..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AutVinceriAutMori)
    I cant download the file :s: However, its not up to me to decide if the questions were relevant or not- it should be reviewed by an independent panel (IMO), otherwise its open to bias, as people have different perceptions of what is difficult and what isn't.
    However, the fact that so many people complained about it, does sound dodgy, if it was only due to lazy/spoiled students, why didnt same scandal reach OCR, or WJEC or any other board? We complained about the difficulcy of our paper last year (OCR Bio), but we never took it further, as the paper was do-able if difficult.
    But as I said, it would probably result in lower grade boundaries anyway.
    Apparently, it did hit OCR biology - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8482880.stm - to what extent I'm not sure. It isn't comparable to last year's paper simply because this year introduced the new specification - its easier to predict what type of questions would come up with a specification thats been established for some time. You'd expect them to give at least a wide variety of different specimen papers with different types of questions on them, on a new specification year.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I dont understand your point, its A2 what were you expecting revision was going to be enough?
    I didn't mention the spearman rank question.

    You must be good at analysis of information as you are able to analyse an argument I didn't make!!

    Well done!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    OP?

    Piss Off.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Subcutaneous)
    go read the spec and exam paper...
    The exam was nowhere near representative of the spec, only focusing on a very very small percentage of it. You can infer that much from the facebook page alone. Button it with the patronisation. Your arguments have no substance - every time someone has pointed out a flaw in your posts you tell them to go read the exam and the spec again.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Iapetus)
    The exam was nowhere near representative of the spec, only focusing on a very very small percentage of it. You can infer that much from the facebook page alone. Button it with the patronisation. Your arguments have no substance - every time someone has pointed out a flaw in your posts you tell them to go read the exam and the spec again.
    Which is what EVERY A2 exam does!

    EXPECIALY for Biology.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by shadowplay1991)
    I didn't mention the spearman rank question.

    You must be good at analysis of information as you are able to analyse an argument I didn't make!!

    Well done!

    You implied that hard revision alone would be enough to succeed in an A2 biology exam, which has never been the case.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The way I see it is that the problem experienced was directly related to the introduction of a new specification. As someone previously stated, A levels are not like University where it is widely accepted that exams could contain questions pertaining to anything that is related to the subject being studied. A levels have a strict specification that teachers teach and AQA are supposed to tell us roughly what could come up in the exam. Sure, if AQA had quite clearly said "this exam could be on anything related to any of the subjects in here" I would have been happy with the paper because it isn't strict. It's outrageous that AQA have focused entirely on things the textbook even said we didn't have to know and missed out large chunks of the specification that teachers have spent months teaching and us pupils have spent months learning.

    It's a wasted year in terms of biology learning.

    EDIT: This is a warzone XD everyone calm down!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This is for anyone who disagrees with the uproar about the exam:

    If the exam was normal just like any other exam, why has there been unprecdented protest about it from students and teachers?

    We are A2 students of the new spec, so we have already done a year of "tougher" AS exams on this spec, all of which had a fair balance of application and recall.

    Its not like we are complaining about the whole thing - this is a one off incident where AQA have clearly misjudged the content of the paper
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vas876)
    You implied that hard revision alone would be enough to succeed in an A2 biology exam, which has never been the case.
    No, he didn't actually if you read it properly. He's questioning the relevance of the exam, not the difficulty.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vas876)
    You implied that hard revision alone would be enough to succeed in an A2 biology exam, which has never been the case.
    I think I would know what is required to do well in exams.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by shadowplay1991)
    I think I would know what is required to do well in exams.
    Why who are you?
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by mrsdocherty)
    No, he didn't actually if you read it properly. He's questioning the relevance of the exam, not the difficulty.
    I was addressing the first sentence alone nothing else.

    Hence why i highlighted that one sentence.
 
 
 
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
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.