An A/A* student is not a ‘smart’ person Watch

atiduy
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
Couldn't be less true. Pre-degree exams especially do not reflect anything other than regurgitating information, even in essay based subjects. It's not even a case of memory its just a case of how well someone can complete a specific exam. GCSE/A-Levels are entirely geared towards exams and grades and are not there as a marker of intelligence or to encourage learning at all.
1
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
(Original post by _gcx)
This is far too strong. It's just nonsense to say a lower ability person is just as likely to get a high grade than a higher ability student.
i didnt say that. i said that how clever you are is not reflected on the grades you get. never denied the fact that a lower ability student would get a lower grade than a higher ability student, i was talking about intelligence in real life.
0
reply
Future Physics
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
I disagree. When it comes to maths and physics, your ability is being assessed and if you can't do the calculations you won't get a high grade. Though are you talking about GCSEs or A Levels since the 2 qualifications are quite different and I didn't study the new 9-1 GCSEs and I'm self studying the new spec a levels?
(Original post by Ratchet Hoe)
I don’t believe that because you get an A (or being academically ‘smart’h means that you are ‘intelligent’. Because in order to get an A in most cases, it’s not your ability that is being assessed but the criteria that you have to follow to get that grade. In subjects such as science and maths, it’s all the case of remembering. Essay subjects have to follow a structure that must follow a point, evidence and explain it in depth. In subjects such as art it is very subjective so grading can be very awkward and may vary depending on who marks it. Essay and practical subjects do limit the ability that someone has on a certificate too. What is your view?
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by atiduy)
Couldn't be less true. Pre-degree exams especially do not reflect anything other than regurgitating information, even in essay based subjects. It's not even a case of memory its just a case of how well someone can complete a specific exam. GCSE/A-Levels are entirely geared towards exams and grades and are not there as a marker of intelligence or to encourage learning at all.
I disagree with this. To an extent, you're right but it's not just 'regurgitating information'. There's a lot of (perhaps, on the easy side) problem-solving which differentiates top students.
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by Gent2324)
i didnt say that. i said that how clever you are is not reflected on the grades you get. never denied the fact that a lower ability student would get a lower grade than a higher ability student, i was talking about intelligence in real life.
Well, it obviously reflects academic intelligence which is what's being addressed? Not intelligence in real life...?
0
reply
_gcx
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Gent2324)
correlation does not mean causation.
it might be that a larger vocabulary could be an indication that you have higher intelligence but its not a fact but rather speculation. i could be good at maths, doesnt determine whether im smart or not, same with most things.
if you were referring languages to the language a levels, my answer would be that you dont need to do a language a level to prove you know a language, so saying people are smarter because they did well in a language A level would be unfair considering there are people who are also very good at languages that havent done a level languages
Personally, I would consider someone who displays a good handle in any field as smart. Smart people are not necessarily good at everything. They might only be good in one specific area. (eg. savants)
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by Gent2324)
correlation does not mean causation.
it might be that a larger vocabulary could be an indication that you have higher intelligence but its not a fact but rather speculation. i could be good at maths, doesnt determine whether im smart or not, same with most things.
if you were referring languages to the language a levels, my answer would be that you dont need to do a language a level to prove you know a language, so saying people are smarter because they did well in a language A level would be unfair considering there are people who are also very good at languages that havent done a level languages
I just meant knowing languages in general, like if you met someone who could speak loads and loads of languages (a poly-something) wouldn't you be really impressed and think they are really smart?
1
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
(Original post by jnkkjnkjhn)
Average is the keyword here.... Although I'll comment anyway. Money factors into it but method of making it is extremely important. My NW is at approx 250k at 23 but 175k of was earned through such a braindead way (cryptocurrency) it means nothing. The 75k means a bit cause it was earned conventionally. If fba is reselling on amazon it doesn't really show anything about intelligence, just like me being loaded from cryptocurrency.
you didnt say average
you said that you are more intelligent than people who didnt get 3 A*s, i can name plenty of people who are probably smarter than you and didnt get all A*s
0
reply
_gcx
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by black1blade)
Probably because a lot of people can coast through GCSEs without learning what hard work is.

At the very least people who achieve high grades are generally pragmatic, they know what they need to do to score a high mark (mention an equal number of substantive points to marks in question with key words/make sure to have the correct balance of different types of content in an essay) and do it.

Would you call someone who finds the steps needed to achieve some goal and executes those steps well smart?
Finds the steps yes. That shows an extent of initiative. I wouldn't consider someone who can follow set processes accurately (if they are told to carry something out for example and don't have to figure out what to do) necessarily smart.
0
reply
atiduy
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
(Original post by thekidwhogames)
I disagree with this. To an extent, you're right but it's not just 'regurgitating information'. There's a lot of (perhaps, on the easy side) problem-solving which differentiates top students.
I see where you're coming from but its partially to do with what constitutes intelligence or smartness as well. I don't think exams allow for everyone with intelligence to convey that very well. And while you can say someone who gets top grades is smart, it would be wrong to say others are not. And the formulaic nature of some exams allow for people who, in studying a subject which perhaps isn't their strongest, to still get good grades. Of course this does not mean they're not smart, more that the final grade doesn't reflect their ability in that specific subject necessarily.
0
reply
_gcx
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
(Original post by Aleks<3)
What A levels do you take/have taken? And what exam board?
maths/fm/phys ("did" history too)
0
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
(Original post by atiduy)
I see where you're coming from but its partially to do with what constitutes intelligence or smartness as well. I don't think exams allow for everyone with intelligence to convey that very well. And while you can say someone who gets top grades is smart, it would be wrong to say others are not. And the formulaic nature of some exams allow for people who, in studying a subject which perhaps isn't their strongest, to still get good grades. Of course this does not mean they're not smart, more that the final grade doesn't reflect their ability in that specific subject necessarily.
I kinda agree here - getting top grades means you're decent and of course, there's much better indicators as people have said (degrees etc.) but I don't personally think getting A* is very trivial. Sure, there's much better indicators and exams are quite formulaic (so doesn't differentiate the top from the clever) but it differentiates the average with the smart (above average).
0
reply
Gent2324
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by black1blade)
I just meant knowing languages in general, like if you met someone who could speak loads and loads of languages (a poly-something) wouldn't you be really impressed and think they are really smart?
if you then found out that the person who knows loads of languages got run over because they werent looking both ways, would you still be calling them smart?
you cant determine if someone is smart based off of 1 skill
(Original post by thekidwhogames)
Well, it obviously reflects academic intelligence which is what's being addressed? Not intelligence in real life...?
well no because the whole thread is debating whether students who get high grades are smart. i dont think a thread would be needed if we were debating whether people who get A*s are academicly clever.
(Original post by _gcx)
Personally, I would consider someone who displays a good handle in any field as smart. Smart people are not necessarily good at everything. They might only be good in one specific area. (eg. savants)
ok so lets assume i was amazing at programming, so good that you would say im smart.
then i get runover by a car because im too dumb to look both ways when crossing the road
you still gunna call me smart?
0
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
Also yeah the grades only mean anything within the realm of what the grades are for. So someone with 3A*s should be seen to be smart in those subjects at that level but beyond that doesn't really mean anything. Employers probs look on it favourably because it means you're able to graft which is way more important than "raw" intelligence in the vast majority of jobs.
1
reply
Aleks<3
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
(Original post by _gcx)
maths/fm/phys ("did" history too)
I did bio, chem and history. I guess maths, fm and physics mark schemes aren't specific (never seen them), but the bio AQA one, for example, is terribly specific
0
reply
jnkkjnkjhn
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by Gent2324)
you didnt say average
you said that you are more intelligent than people who didnt get 3 A*s, i can name plenty of people who are probably smarter than you and didnt get all A*s
Soz thought I did, fully agree that obviously there are loads of exceptions. The simplest way to look at it is this:

All things being equal, on average is someone with A*A*A MORE intelligent than someone with 3A*? Of course not, therefore they must be less intelligent (or absolutely precisely exactly the same).

Some people have also said about A-levels being massive memory tests which is very true but when everything else is equal than obviously better grades = more intelligent.
0
reply
MediocreSince01
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
Can we just clarify the myth that sciences and maths at A-Level are just regurgitating facts? This is 100% not true.

There's a lot of application and problem solving, particularly in the new specification.
Last edited by MediocreSince01; 1 month ago
3
reply
thekidwhogames
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by Gent2324)
if you then found out that the person who knows loads of languages got run over because they werent looking both ways, would you still be calling them smart?
you cant determine if someone is smart based off of 1 skill

well no because the whole thread is debating whether students who get high grades are smart. i dont think a thread would be needed if we were debating whether people who get A*s are academicly clever.

ok so lets assume i was amazing at programming, so good that you would say im smart.
then i get runover by a car because im too dumb to look both ways when crossing the road
you still gunna call me smart?
I don't see how looking both ways is a "dumb" thing? Obviously, everyone understands its a stupid thing to do but when people do it, it's not them being stupid but accidents or other factors etc. In that situation, I'd say the person is clever but clumsy (or similar trait).

Also you have to define clever since I and most people assumed academic intelligence. Also clever is defined as quick learning and/or applications etc and some of this fit the criteria for getting top grades.
1
reply
black1blade
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by jnkkjnkjhn)
Soz thought I did, fully agree that obviously there are loads of exceptions. The simplest way to look at it is this:

All things being equal, on average is someone with A*A*A MORE intelligent than someone with 3A*? Of course not, therefore they must be less intelligent (or absolutely precisely exactly the same).

Some people have also said about A-levels being massive memory tests which is very true but when everything else is equal than obviously better grades = more intelligent.
Only if you did the same subjects in the same year and even then ehhhh. They could literally have 1 mark less than you just because they got unlucky and a big question was on something they weren't too sure on ect. There is a pretty random element to exams on which topics come up, what questions people struggle with (definitely think on average slightly less able years exist) ect.
0
reply
atiduy
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by thekidwhogames)
I kinda agree here - getting top grades means you're decent and of course, there's much better indicators as people have said (degrees etc.) but I don't personally think getting A* is very trivial. Sure, there's much better indicators and exams are quite formulaic (so doesn't differentiate the top from the clever) but it differentiates the average with the smart (above average).
I see what you mean here, I don't doubt A* achievers are intelligent people who can apply themselves well. My concern is more with the fact that there are many others, perhaps with greater subject knowledge, who will not get these grades in an exam situation because of finding it stressful or the formatting of the exam being disadvantageous towards their abilities. So, I think I mean A* students are smart, but to see them as the only intelligent ones and/or the most intelligent isn't useful.
4
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

All the exam results help you need

1,835

people online now

225,530

students helped last year
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

Hopeful (221)
12.46%
Excited (166)
9.36%
Worried (309)
17.43%
Terrified (390)
22%
Meh (186)
10.49%
Confused (39)
2.2%
Putting on a brave face (244)
13.76%
Impatient (218)
12.3%

Watched Threads

View All