Edexcel A2 Biology Unit 4(6BIO4) 13/06/11 - OFFICIAL THREAD !

Scroll to see replies

I also took A Levels over 10 years ago and I can tell you that they are much easier today. Having to sit 1 or 2 exams at the end of 2 years study and with one shot at getting the grade you aspire is what used to happen. You accepted your result as a reflection of your work and you also accepted that the examiners knew what they were doing, after all I'm sure they are far more qualified in the subject area, teaching, course design and assessment than anyone registering complaints. Even if the exam was slightly hard, you took solace in the fact that you were in the same boat as every other student.

A Levels today are not difficult. You learn 3 months material, sit an exam and then dump the knowledge. There are numerous complaints whenever more than a token question or two examine material from past topics. Students re-sit exams numerous times in an attempt to inflate their grades without the fact that they scored an A on their third attempt ever being captured. This is why you now need straight As to get into University. This system may be seen as fair because it allows students to re-sit if they have had a bad day on a previous exam, through ill health, family trouble etc, but the system is being abused. It used to be that a B was average and an A showed real achievement. Now an A is average due to the abuse of the system and A* had to be introduced as a way of identifying the truly gifted students.

Bottom line is - there is always an element of luck when deciding where to focus your revision but we all sat the same exam, the playing field is level so stop complaining, stop setting up facebook groups and show a little maturity.

The exam had barely any actual theory. Most of them were common sense questions, and it didn't cover all of the syllabus. I want to 'dump' knowledge, but can't get the chance, as there were barely any knowledge questions. And one thing: i remarked something and it went up from a U to an A*. So don't put too much trust in the examiners today. I had a teacher in year 11, replacement, who was sacked for taking drugs at school. She was an edexcel biology examiner.
Care to reply about maturity now?

Reply 761

HannahBeth

I think that's really rude considering you didn't even sit the exam. I agree with the comment about examiners which is backed up by all the mistakes the exam board have made this year regarding A level and GCSE papers.

Reply 762

Scruffy Jack

Original post by Jabbo12

I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here, just to add a little perspective to things.
1. Examining theory in a manner such as 'Define what is meant by ...' breeds people who can reel off definitions parrot fashion. A lot of the questions in the paper examined application of knowledge. If you are able to answer them then it shows understanding of the topic so well done. The common sense that was applied was done so upon knowledge gained from the course.
2. An examination cannot cover the whole specification, it has to pick which topics it wishes to focus on. If the examination picked all of the big core topics that everyone has been revising religiously then chances are there will be a lot of high scores. The above average students will distinguish themselves by being those able to answer questions on the more minor topics (showing breadth of knowledge) and on detailed questions (showing depth of knowledge).
3. Don't get into a learn and dump mentality, it will not set you up well for University or life after University - and yes I have gone to University and now work in a professional environment so I am speaking from experience.
4. The examiners will never be perfect but the point that I was making is that they are more educated in the subject than anyone sitting the exam, they are teachers so trained in education and assessment and they have more experience of this whole process than 99% of the students sitting the exam.
5. There is no excuse for errors in exam papers but I refer to my comment above, no one is perfect. There were no errors in this exam so we were not victims of any fault.
6. HannahBeth - I did sit the exam, please see my comments on page 35. I would not be so rude as to comment without having some knowledge of what was being discussed.
Like I said above, I am not trying to antagonize anyone and I am happy to discuss this in this forum.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 763

Jabbo12

Original post by Scruffy Jack

I'm not trying to antagonize anyone here, just to add a little perspective to things.
1. Examining theory in a manner such as 'Define what is meant by ...' breeds people who can reel off definitions parrot fashion. A lot of the questions in the paper examined application of knowledge. If you are able to answer them then it shows understanding of the topic so well done. The common sense that was applied was done so upon knowledge gained from the course.
2. An examination cannot cover the whole specification, it has to pick which topics it wishes to focus on. If the examination picked all of the big core topics that everyone has been revising religiously then chances are there will be a lot of high scores. The above average students will distinguish themselves by being those able to answer questions on the more minor topics (showing breadth of knowledge) and on detailed questions (showing depth of knowledge).
3. Don't get into a learn and dump mentality, it will not set you up well for University or life after University - and yes I have gone to University and now work in a professional environment so I am speaking from experience.
4. The examiners will never be perfect but the point that I was making is that
they are more educated in the subject than anyone sitting the exam, they are teachers so trained in education and assessment and they have more experience
of this whole process than 99% of the students sitting the exam.
5. There is no excuse for errors in exam papers but I refer to my comment above, no one is perfect. There were no errors in this exam so we were not victims of any fault.
6. HannahBeth - I did sit the exam, please see my comments on page 35. I would not be so rude as to comment without having some knowledge of what was being discussed.
Like I said above, I am not trying to antagonize anyone and I am happy to discuss this in this forum.

Some good points, but let me give you another example. I wrote in an exam an answer, 1 mark, so fairly short. In the mark scheme it said something else and for examiners to use their knowledge to mark an answer equivalent. I had the equivalent answer, and was marked wrong, because those words in the mark scheme were not identically used in the exam. I know this because I did a re-mark on a paper, and asked for the paper after being re-marked.

This is in addition to the many errors found in the papers in June. I mean, what a time to make errors, especially for the A2 people, whose university places are on the line. Examiners are well known to be a little intoxicated whilst marking these papers. I think that marking a paper is like driving; someone's life is always on the line. So drink driving or rather, drink marking, could ruin someone's life, indirectly, but all the same. So far, after two years of modular exams, I have only not re-marked a couple. I can tell you that the mark for every re-mark has changed, whether going up or down. Nowadays, examiners try to catch you out not to distinguish higher achieving candidates, but to just get people to lose marks, so that the grade boundaries wouldn't be high, avoiding any questions from the government.

Reply 764

Scruffy Jack

I would once again refer to my comment that no one is perfect. If you have found that having your paper re-marked is worth while then go for it. However, the comments regarding examiners being well known for being drunk whilst marking is, I'm sure, not based on any real evidence. If examiners were well known for being drunk whilst marking then I'm sure there would be huge stories in the press and there would be Ofsted reports regarding it - I have not seen anything in the press suggesting anything like this is common place. I wouldn't believe everything you hear banded around at school.
Regarding the errors this year - yes totally unacceptable but the errors, at least in the Biology paper, were found in AS papers. Those sitting the paper first time round will have the chance to re-sit the paper if they feel it broke their concentration and affected their performance. As for the likes of the student who complained to the BBC claiming that his concentration was completely shattered and he is expecting to go to Uni in September and this could have completely blown it for him, that is someone looking for a scapegoat. It was 1 mark out of something like 480 in one subject that was an issue, the remaining 479 were fair. He'd already sat the paper at least once before and been examined on a paper with no errors. It could be that this student had some problems that affected his performance last time and that he had some justification for re-sitting but I would imagine that it's more than likely someone trying to inflate their grades by re-sitting.
As for the comment regarding examiners trying to catch people out to please the government, this really isn't the case. The government wants to see grades go up so they can say they're doing a good job. For over 12 years the number of students getting high grades has gone up every year. The exam boards set their raw marks based on the distribution of students getting certain marks. Each year the standard of an A student drops a little and more people get As. Students are not smarter today, they are just in a system that allows them to put in stronger performances as they are getting examined on 3 months material as opposed to 2 years material and are re-sitting whenever they get a B rather than accepting they didn't do well. My Uni course required BBC 10 years ago, you now need AAB and relevant work experience. I have spoken to lecturers from my old Uni recently and they commented that they were disappointed with the ability of todays students to assimilate knowledge as they can't recall what was taught in the previous term, which is a direct result of the way they have been examined during A levels.
At the end of the day the big thing is: Everyone is not above average, for there to be people above average you have to have people who are average and people who are below average. Average students used to get Bs. Now everyone gets As, everyone thinks that they are above average and this is why A* is here in an attempt to distinguish those who are truly above average. I would imagine that the majority of those who feel the need to complain are the average students who are under the impression they should be grouped with the above average. The tricky questions are placed to identify the above average. If you found the whole paper easy then well done, you should get an A*, if you found elements tricky then these were the parts set to discover who is actually above average.

Reply 765

Hellokitty992

Waiting for the marking scheme.

Reply 766

Hellokitty992

The Paper can be found in

http://www.scribd.com/Raaga92

Hope you all find it helpful :smile:

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 767

Iron&Wine

I saw the paper. Why exactly were people complaining again?

LOL

Reply 768

Hellokitty992

Original post by Iron&Wine

I saw the paper. Why exactly were people complaining again?

LOL

Did you do the paper?

Reply 769

JP83

Original post by Iron&Wine

I saw the paper. Why exactly were people complaining again?

LOL

why LOL... you said u saw it but did u attempt to answer it in the time allowed? That was half the issue u fool. Very easy to judge without doing it just glancing. I challenge u to sit it and attempt in the time allowed (and mark it when mark scheme available)

I did my A levels first in 2001 and argue against the idea that they are easier. I did maths, physics and economics first time around and 2yr exams were a lot less pressure. I feel modular u end up learning (and forgetting) more. Just my opinion.

If u didn't do it then shut the f up u arrogant ****.

J x

Reply 770

Iron&Wine

Original post by JP83

I did comfortably answer all the questions in less than the allotted time. You need to calm down. I sat A Levels during the 2008-2010 period and I have noticed that people are needlessly complaining, especially since the introduction of the new specifications. This is how I have perceived things so far. If you do not agree, then please refrain for attacking me and others who challenge your views.