The point is that is wasn't a couple of questions, it was about 60% of the exam!(Original post by LowRider)
If you look at any exam from biology or many other subjects there will be questions someone who hasn't done the subject can answer by looking at the it and analysing.
You've worked hard for 6 months but saying it (the paper) isnt relevant to biology is stupid. If what youre saying is correct all papers going back for years are not relevant and you who has been studying 'hard for 6 months' are correct and everyone else including people those who have studied this at university have written a non biology exam.
Turn on thread page Beta
Pupils complaining about "Unfair" exam paper watch
- 27-01-2010 17:11
(Original post by shadowplay1991)
- 27-01-2010 17:13
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?
Facebook and bandwaggoning - there are people complaining it's irrelevant, people complaining it's too easy, people complaining it's too hard and people wondering why Miss didn't teach them about snow geese (!). If there was one clear coherent complaint then this would appear less farcical.
It is also not 'unprecedented' in anything other than numbers visible in one place (due to students being able to hold exam post-mortems with the entire nation rather than just their peers in the exam hall). I had questions in my A-level (05/06) chemistry overlooked in marking as they didn't appear in the course spec and were complained about. I also remember leaving a AS or A-level biology exam in a daze due to the difficulty of one question (and I was an A grade student). We went straight to our Biology teacher who gave us the v long and convoluted explanation of how we were to strip the question down to A-level standard and gave us an answer that we should have known. It was 'the most difficult question he'd seen on an A-level paper in years' and we all just had to accept that it was difficult due to the amount of confounding detail given, there were no concessions made in marking it.
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
- Thread Starter
- 27-01-2010 17:13
I'm closing this thread. It's getting a bit offhand, people are throwing insults and not realising this is a discussion and voice of opinions, not a shouting match.
The point has been made- and I'm sure AQA know best how to handle said complaint. I'm still in the view that the paper reflected and examined what is needed of A2 level students and is related to the specification, and the campaign has very little grounds to stand on.
However some other good points have been made, about the ratio of questions answered- too much statistics, and whether it truly reflects a persons ability. Either way, not everyone is going to be happy about an exam and it is a true testament to the power of social networking people are joining together to complain- something inwhich 3/4 years ago wouldn't be fully possible.
- 27-01-2010 17:14
I agree. I think some people are just so used to learning fact after fact, that when they actualy have to use their mind and are given a question that they have to really think about, they just can't do it.
- 27-01-2010 17:14
I hope someone has said this in the last 11 pages, but:
I think these kids are in for a culture shock when they reach University. If they expect to be spoonfed the exam answers by their teachers, they have a long way to go.
From a languages point of view, you can go into a GCSE/A-level language exam and play off what you've been taught. You can literally walk in and regurgitate set phrase after set phrase, ad infinitum, until you think you've got enough for the grade you need. Then, when you get to University, there's some absurd thing that lecturers and tutorial fellows have that make them think you know it all (referring to languages, not any other subject), so you get exam papers that say "Translate this passage" which happens to be full of verbs, nouns and other syntactical things that you have no clue on (because you don't know the verb for "to be trapped" or something like that).
Okay, with Sciences or even other Humanities and such it's a different kettle of fish, but lecturers will still set exams where they expect students to have done *some* of the recommended reading that was set in September.
It's the whole reason I'm going out of my way right now to read T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land, and Carlo Levi's Cristo Si E' Fermato A Eboli. I don't need them to pass my Italian Culture course, but they've been recommended as useful. I didn't need to take out a huge tome on Catalan grammar before Christmas, neither do I need to buy a copy of Italo Calvino's Le Citta Invisibili because I have it in English (but having it in Italian means I will improve with my language).
Kids these days expect things to be handed to them on a plate, honestly. If they think the exam board is a 'disgrace' or the exam was a 'disgrace' (or whatever they called whichever of the two), they should just not bother with University and drop out now with a few Ds and Cs at best. Not everything in life is going to go their way, so it's best to learn that now - and boo-hoo if it happens that they had Cs or Ds in this JANUARY exam - they can always resit in the summer, and complain to the teachers who can take it to the chief examiners, without the kids looking like spoilt brats.