Is the 2% increase in grades as good as it seems?

Watch
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 months ago
#1
Ofqual released data yesterday which said that A Level results will be 2% higher than last year. This seems good on paper, however, last year's results were actually lower than normal. In fact, the number of top grades dropped to its lowest level since 2007. (Source
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49290421)

Is Ofqual really being as generous as they seem or is part of it due to last year's results being lower than normal?

(I am ignoring the fact that going from 12% from the CAGs to 2% will still lead to some unfair results)
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#2
Report 3 months ago
#2
They should have allowed the teacher predicted grades. Its also unfair that pupils werent able to suggest their own grades to look after their human rights. 2020 will be the loss of a golden generation of geniuses, who were smarter than any students in history and in the future.
11
reply
laurawatt
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 months ago
#3
I think the spec changes (2016/2017 onwards) will make it harder for students to get the top grades anyway, so comparing 2007 to now probably won’t be fully representative - and the removal of coursework for many subjects will also naturally lower the grades.

It’s still an increase, and I would be happy about it - if anything, it brings it more in line with previous year’s results which is fairer
2
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 3 months ago
#4
(Original post by 999tigger)
They should have allowed the teacher predicted grades. Its also unfair that pupils werent able to suggest their own grades to look after their human rights. 2020 will be the loss of a golden generation of geniuses, who were smarter than any students in history and in the future.
Wow. You really contributed something there...
3
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#5
(Original post by laurawatt)
I think the spec changes (2016/2017 onwards) will make it harder for students to get the top grades anyway, so comparing 2007 to now probably won’t be fully representative - and the removal of coursework for many subjects will also naturally lower the grades.

It’s still an increase, and I would be happy about it - if anything, it brings it more in line with previous year’s results which is fairer
Ofqual still picked a year with lower results to compare with this year's grades. Why not compare it with an average taking into account multiple years?
0
reply
Compost
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 months ago
#6
(Original post by Lightning720)
Ofqual still picked a year with lower results to compare with this year's grades. Why not compare it with an average taking into account multiple years?
It depends how many years you go for. Back in the 80s you could get into medicine with CCC - or even lower - because getting top grades was really rare.
1
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#7
(Original post by Compost)
It depends how many years you go for. Back in the 80s you could get into medicine with CCC - or even lower - because getting top grades was really rare.
Why not the past 2 or 3 years? That is clearly better than just choosing 2019's lower results.
0
reply
laurawatt
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 months ago
#8
(Original post by Lightning720)
Ofqual still picked a year with lower results to compare with this year's grades. Why not compare it with an average taking into account multiple years?
How do you know they haven't?
The 2% increase probably brings it back in line withnother years discountng the anomaly last year
0
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#9
(Original post by laurawatt)
How do you know they haven't?
The 2% increase probably brings it back in line withnother years discountng the anomaly last year
Because it's 2% higher than last year's results. Last year's results were lower than normal.
0
reply
Compost
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 months ago
#10
(Original post by Lightning720)
Because it's 2% higher than last year's results. Last year's results were lower than normal.
But it could be the same as the average of the past 3 years.
Last edited by Compost; 2 months ago
0
reply
harrysbar
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 months ago
#11
(Original post by 999tigger)
They should have allowed the teacher predicted grades. Its also unfair that pupils werent able to suggest their own grades to look after their human rights. 2020 will be the loss of a golden generation of geniuses, who were smarter than any students in history and in the future.
Your sacrasm is killing me lately
2
reply
EierVonSatan
Badges: 21
#12
Report 2 months ago
#12
(Original post by Lightning720)
Because it's 2% higher than last year's results. Last year's results were lower than normal.
They used the last 3 years data, I believe, to model the results. They're just commenting that the results are up 2% on last year.
1
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#13
(Original post by EierVonSatan)
They used the last 3 years data, I believe, to model the results. They're just commenting that the results are up 2% on last year.
Yes, I know that.

What I'm asking is why are they focusing on the fact they are 2% higher than last year. Is it to make themselves seem more generous than they really are?
0
reply
EierVonSatan
Badges: 21
#14
Report 2 months ago
#14
(Original post by Lightning720)
Yes, I know that.

What I'm asking is why are they focusing on the fact they are 2% higher than last year. Is it to make themselves seem more generous than they really are?
They always compare the current result cycle to the previous one, it's nothing new.
0
reply
chocolate_fan
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 months ago
#15
(Original post by Lightning720)
Yes, I know that.

What I'm asking is why are they focusing on the fact they are 2% higher than last year. Is it to make themselves seem more generous than they really are?
Considering last year was a dip of around .1, .2%, I'm gonna say a 2% increase from last year is massively higher and unproprtional
0
reply
Compost
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 months ago
#16
(Original post by Lightning720)
Yes, I know that.

What I'm asking is why are they focusing on the fact they are 2% higher than last year. Is it to make themselves seem more generous than they really are?
They're just doing it to annoy last year's A level students who had to take exams and will have worse results than people who've just had the last 3 months off.

Honestly, relax. Ofqual know this whole thing is an absolute minefield, particularly given the number of people who are going to feel seen-off regardless of the facts, and they are doing their best to achieve a system which is as fair to everyone* as it can be. It's not going to work 100% but no complex system ever does.

(*and that includes those who took exams in previous years and who will take exams in the future.)
Last edited by Compost; 2 months ago
5
reply
username5243714
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 2 months ago
#17
(Original post by chocolate_fan)
Considering last year was a dip of around .1, .2%, I'm gonna say a 2% increase from last year is massively higher and unproprtional
If that is true, there was still a much greater decrease in the top grades.

"Overall in maths, the top grades fell by just 1.2% across the UK - which is slightly higher than the decline for all exams." (from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49290421).

The decline of the top grades for all exams will therefore be only slightly less than 1.2%.
0
reply
laurawatt
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 months ago
#18
(Original post by Lightning720)
Because it's 2% higher than last year's results. Last year's results were lower than normal.
They used data from the last few years, and anyway, some of last year's papers were notoriously difficult, what's to say that your year group wouldn't have performed worse than last years but are getting higher grades anyway?

There's not way for ofqual to properly regulate who is deserving of a particular grade or not anyway in this circumstance and there's always the opportunity to take the exams in Autumn.
0
reply
Compost
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 months ago
#19
(Original post by Lightning720)
"Overall in maths, the top grades fell by just 1.2% across the UK - which is slightly higher than the decline for all exams." (from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49290421).
That was a results day statistic. By the time all the post results enquiries are done there can be a noticeable difference - several percent one year for GCSE English Language.
0
reply
Banshee123
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 months ago
#20
(Original post by Lightning720)
Ofqual released data yesterday which said that A Level results will be 2% higher than last year. This seems good on paper, however, last year's results were actually lower than normal. In fact, the number of top grades dropped to its lowest level since 2007. (Source
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-49290421)

Is Ofqual really being as generous as they seem or is part of it due to last year's results being lower than normal?

(I am ignoring the fact that going from 12% from the CAGs to 2% will still lead to some unfair results)
2% is quite a large amount, but idk what it means. Is is 2% increase in top grades, or all grades and there will be less people with Us?

Also how does increase compare with 2018 results. Is it better than 2018 results .
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (68)
14.85%
I'm not sure (16)
3.49%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (154)
33.62%
I have already dropped out (8)
1.75%
I'm not a current university student (212)
46.29%

Watched Threads

View All