This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Are my IGSCEs good enough for Oxford
- Biochemistry at Oxford, GCSE and AS grades
- can i still do my a levels if i did not get my ideal gcse grades?
- gcse results med/dentistry
- Sat 1450
- Are gcse grades good enough for LSE
- Age-old question: Can I get into Cambridge with these grades?
- A* grade Maths achieved, would I only need AA in French and Further Maths?
- A*s in A level with average GCSEs
- Do I need grade 9s (A**) in all my gccses to go to places like Oxford?
- Applying for competitive UNIS (ALEVELS/SIXTH FORM SCHOOL CHOICE)
- Career Police
- Oxford with 9 GCSEs
- do i have a chance at law at bristol
- Predicted Grades and Cambridge
- how to get all A*s in my a levels
- 5 A Levels too much?
- oxford
- Atomic Structure - Shapes of S and P orbitals AQA a level chem
- PPE Oxford
There should be A*s at A Level
Scroll to see replies
"Stuart Williams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q1]> Replying to both your posts, your independent school is nothing whatever like mine. What makes you[/q1]
[q1]> think you can generalise so sweepingly?[/q1]
Sorry if I generalised too much. I merely wished to point out that independent schools can't be held
up to be the holy educational establishments some people believe them to be!
Andrew H
news:[email protected]...
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q1]> Replying to both your posts, your independent school is nothing whatever like mine. What makes you[/q1]
[q1]> think you can generalise so sweepingly?[/q1]
Sorry if I generalised too much. I merely wished to point out that independent schools can't be held
up to be the holy educational establishments some people believe them to be!
Andrew H
"Ian/Cath Ford" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
[q1]> On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 20:29:25 GMT, "Peter Lloyd" <[email protected]> wrote:[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >"Ian/Cath Ford" <[email protected]> wrote:[/q2]
[q2]> >> Who has no A*s at all - although, clearly, that's only because they didn't exist in those days[/q2]
[q2]> >> and nothing to do with me being a right lazy bastard at school....[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >But I've had people approach me in the past and ask me why I didn't get[/q2]
any
[q2]> >A*s at AS Level........ so the reverse can apply too...[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Sorry - I wasn't really trying to make any point with that other than to take the piss a little[/q1]
[q1]> more :-)[/q1]
Had a feeling that was the case - cartainly made me smile. Personally if they want to do something I
don't mind - as long as they don't keep changing things around.
Peter
[q1]> On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 20:29:25 GMT, "Peter Lloyd" <[email protected]> wrote:[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >"Ian/Cath Ford" <[email protected]> wrote:[/q2]
[q2]> >> Who has no A*s at all - although, clearly, that's only because they didn't exist in those days[/q2]
[q2]> >> and nothing to do with me being a right lazy bastard at school....[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >But I've had people approach me in the past and ask me why I didn't get[/q2]
any
[q2]> >A*s at AS Level........ so the reverse can apply too...[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Sorry - I wasn't really trying to make any point with that other than to take the piss a little[/q1]
[q1]> more :-)[/q1]
Had a feeling that was the case - cartainly made me smile. Personally if they want to do something I
don't mind - as long as they don't keep changing things around.
Peter
[q1]> You're in a very different position to me. You're a lecturer, and presumably have a degree. I on[/q1]
[q1]> the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to acheive[/q1]
[q1]> a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to the intense[/q1]
[q1]> pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really see as a failure.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Don't think of me as one of these people who has a history of all A's and is worrying over[/q1]
[q1]> nothing. I have as much chance of ending up at Warrington Collegiate doing a HND in something as I[/q1]
[q1]> do at Cambridge.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Rich[/q1]
Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College? You are clearly exaggerating.
What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The world doesn't begin and end with Cambridge, or even
Oxbridge. John
[q1]> the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to acheive[/q1]
[q1]> a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to the intense[/q1]
[q1]> pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really see as a failure.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Don't think of me as one of these people who has a history of all A's and is worrying over[/q1]
[q1]> nothing. I have as much chance of ending up at Warrington Collegiate doing a HND in something as I[/q1]
[q1]> do at Cambridge.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Rich[/q1]
Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College? You are clearly exaggerating.
What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The world doesn't begin and end with Cambridge, or even
Oxbridge. John
On Wed, 19 Jun 2002 07:10:30 +0100, "Ginnie Redston" <[email protected]> wrote:
[q1]>I've done this with my various classes, though not always consistently. I think I tend to do it[/q1]
[q1]>when I feel there are enough people in the group who are confident enough to evaluate the material[/q1]
[q1]>without getting worried if they disagree with the examiners' comments.[/q1]
That's a good point I think - I don't do the same things with every class because of this. Sometimes
it's simply because there may not be the brain power to deal with it, others won't speak at all :-(
I really do think that there's mileage in it. As a way into the standards being expected at AS, for
example, I think it's a great strategy - particularly for us as we have lots of very short questions
and skills based things to kick off with. It's at least partially about showing people what they
have to do with the information we're giving them and how best to do that.
Good stuff though.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles
Support clubs against Carlton & Granada: Boycott ITV world cup coverage.
You know what to do: delete the dots but leave the .s to reply to us.
[q1]>I've done this with my various classes, though not always consistently. I think I tend to do it[/q1]
[q1]>when I feel there are enough people in the group who are confident enough to evaluate the material[/q1]
[q1]>without getting worried if they disagree with the examiners' comments.[/q1]
That's a good point I think - I don't do the same things with every class because of this. Sometimes
it's simply because there may not be the brain power to deal with it, others won't speak at all :-(
I really do think that there's mileage in it. As a way into the standards being expected at AS, for
example, I think it's a great strategy - particularly for us as we have lots of very short questions
and skills based things to kick off with. It's at least partially about showing people what they
have to do with the information we're giving them and how best to do that.
Good stuff though.
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles
Support clubs against Carlton & Granada: Boycott ITV world cup coverage.
You know what to do: delete the dots but leave the .s to reply to us.
On 19 Jun 2002 16:59:34 GMT, [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote:
[q1]>But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no midway[/q1]
[q1]>point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get into[/q1]
[q1]>Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of very good[/q1]
[q1]>university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level to get into.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q1]
[q1]>offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q1]
[q1]>but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do feel[/q1]
[q1]>insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q1]
[q1]>department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>Matthew Huntbach[/q1]
I agree. What is it with people that think you must get into oxford or cambridge or you are not
worthy or something? Maybe not always through fault of their own, these people are probably
arogant and snooty because they must have their head stuck up their arse. No offense to people at
these 'best' universities of course, you have probably worked hard to get there. If you are a
little down to earth though, can I ask the question, do you find your fellow students with this
arogant attitude? This is precisely why I wouldn't like to go to oxford or cambridge, even if I
could get in.
=*Disclaimer*=
I realise not everyone at oxbridge is the same, which is why I'm posting this thread to find out
what people are like there. O.K. ?
Dan
[q1]>But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no midway[/q1]
[q1]>point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get into[/q1]
[q1]>Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of very good[/q1]
[q1]>university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level to get into.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q1]
[q1]>offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q1]
[q1]>but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do feel[/q1]
[q1]>insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q1]
[q1]>department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>Matthew Huntbach[/q1]
I agree. What is it with people that think you must get into oxford or cambridge or you are not
worthy or something? Maybe not always through fault of their own, these people are probably
arogant and snooty because they must have their head stuck up their arse. No offense to people at
these 'best' universities of course, you have probably worked hard to get there. If you are a
little down to earth though, can I ask the question, do you find your fellow students with this
arogant attitude? This is precisely why I wouldn't like to go to oxford or cambridge, even if I
could get in.
=*Disclaimer*=
I realise not everyone at oxbridge is the same, which is why I'm posting this thread to find out
what people are like there. O.K. ?
Dan
[email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > You're in a very different position to me. You're a lecturer, and presumably have a degree. I on[/q2]
[q2]> > the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to[/q2]
[q2]> > acheive a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to the[/q2]
[q2]> > intense pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really see as a[/q2]
[q2]> > failure.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no midway[/q1]
[q1]> point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get into[/q1]
[q1]> Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of very good[/q1]
[q1]> university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level to get into.[/q1]
"JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]> Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College? You are clearly[/q1]
[q1]> exaggerating. What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The world doesn't begin and end with[/q1]
[q1]> Cambridge, or even Oxbridge. John[/q1]
My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do
English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far
off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA. None of them can seem to guarantee a place in my subject either, even
if I already had taken the exams and gotten those grades. I don't see Cambridge as vastly different
from the other universities (though I wouldn't deny it would be my first choice) - a well known,
very old uni which requires top grades and an excellent personal statement on top of that. So I was
using Cambridge to symbolise that whole strata of HE. I thought I'd mentioned that.
Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer. Additionally,
I haven't gotten my AS results back yet, so I have no idea how well I've done (I didn't do any
modules in January 2002). Again, there's a good chance I'm one of those A-level candidates who do
far worse at A-level than they did at GCSE (I certainly don't feel as comfortable with my work and
knowledge as I was at GCSE). Maybe I'm not - I don't know. Maybe I've done very well. But there is a
*chance* that I have done badly, not *badly* I mean, but not well enough to get into my carefully
designed UCAS choices. But since my teachers have promised me projected grades of 'A', I'd apply
anyway, and probably not get in because my actual AS results don't pass muster, or whatever. It only
then takes for my two insurance-type places not to give me an offer, and then I'm automatically in
clearing, and if so, as I've heard not many English places become availible I'll probably take
something local because at the time it'll seem more of a safe bet.
The thing is, I can see what you think I'm saying - "Oh no! If I don't get my three As I can't apply
to Oxford, and if that happened I would just die!" when really I'm just saying that there's (very
roughly) as much chance of me ending up somewhere local and quite poor than at Cambridge or another
similar university.
Of course (and the fact that I didn't emphasise this was probably my downfall), since the chance of
either would be quite small, therefore there is a much larger chance that I will end up at a good
solid university such as Stirling (though, as I mentioned above, I'm not complacent about being
simply handed a Stirling offer on a platter). I'm sure I'd be very happy there, but I'd like a crack
at the Cambridge/Bristol/Edinburgh/UCL universities all the same.
[q1]> [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...[/q1]
[q1]> I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q1]
[q1]> offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q1]
[q1]> but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do feel[/q1]
[q1]> insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q1]
[q1]> department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q1]
BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my
local college". I remember hearing you say that most of your students live nearby, so maybe you're
thinking I mean something like that, whereas I'm really referring to somewhere a lot less like a
(flicking through a copy of The Equitable Student Guide) an independent federal college, and more
like a real local college - somewhere which specialises in vocational-type subjects. I once spent a
few weeks there a year or so ago (after the GCSEs, I think it was) on a taster course for a BA in TV
production, and various people still think that I want to apply there, though I do not.
If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway
because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I
discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting
several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science!
But only because I don't like maths...
Rich
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > You're in a very different position to me. You're a lecturer, and presumably have a degree. I on[/q2]
[q2]> > the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to[/q2]
[q2]> > acheive a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to the[/q2]
[q2]> > intense pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really see as a[/q2]
[q2]> > failure.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no midway[/q1]
[q1]> point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get into[/q1]
[q1]> Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of very good[/q1]
[q1]> university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level to get into.[/q1]
"JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]> Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College? You are clearly[/q1]
[q1]> exaggerating. What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The world doesn't begin and end with[/q1]
[q1]> Cambridge, or even Oxbridge. John[/q1]
My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do
English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far
off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA. None of them can seem to guarantee a place in my subject either, even
if I already had taken the exams and gotten those grades. I don't see Cambridge as vastly different
from the other universities (though I wouldn't deny it would be my first choice) - a well known,
very old uni which requires top grades and an excellent personal statement on top of that. So I was
using Cambridge to symbolise that whole strata of HE. I thought I'd mentioned that.
Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer. Additionally,
I haven't gotten my AS results back yet, so I have no idea how well I've done (I didn't do any
modules in January 2002). Again, there's a good chance I'm one of those A-level candidates who do
far worse at A-level than they did at GCSE (I certainly don't feel as comfortable with my work and
knowledge as I was at GCSE). Maybe I'm not - I don't know. Maybe I've done very well. But there is a
*chance* that I have done badly, not *badly* I mean, but not well enough to get into my carefully
designed UCAS choices. But since my teachers have promised me projected grades of 'A', I'd apply
anyway, and probably not get in because my actual AS results don't pass muster, or whatever. It only
then takes for my two insurance-type places not to give me an offer, and then I'm automatically in
clearing, and if so, as I've heard not many English places become availible I'll probably take
something local because at the time it'll seem more of a safe bet.
The thing is, I can see what you think I'm saying - "Oh no! If I don't get my three As I can't apply
to Oxford, and if that happened I would just die!" when really I'm just saying that there's (very
roughly) as much chance of me ending up somewhere local and quite poor than at Cambridge or another
similar university.
Of course (and the fact that I didn't emphasise this was probably my downfall), since the chance of
either would be quite small, therefore there is a much larger chance that I will end up at a good
solid university such as Stirling (though, as I mentioned above, I'm not complacent about being
simply handed a Stirling offer on a platter). I'm sure I'd be very happy there, but I'd like a crack
at the Cambridge/Bristol/Edinburgh/UCL universities all the same.
[q1]> [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...[/q1]
[q1]> I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q1]
[q1]> offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q1]
[q1]> but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do feel[/q1]
[q1]> insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q1]
[q1]> department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q1]
BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my
local college". I remember hearing you say that most of your students live nearby, so maybe you're
thinking I mean something like that, whereas I'm really referring to somewhere a lot less like a
(flicking through a copy of The Equitable Student Guide) an independent federal college, and more
like a real local college - somewhere which specialises in vocational-type subjects. I once spent a
few weeks there a year or so ago (after the GCSEs, I think it was) on a taster course for a BA in TV
production, and various people still think that I want to apply there, though I do not.
If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway
because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I
discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting
several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science!
But only because I don't like maths...
Rich
On Fri, 21 Jun 2002 05:57:28 +0100, "Ginnie Redston" <[email protected]> wrote:
[q1]>and op very shortly - possibly next week in fact. Still, once on the ward, I'll have nothing to do[/q1]
[q1]>but read LOADSA smutty books.[/q1]
Ooh, can I have some titles that you might suggest then? Obviously, the smuttier the better,
Hope all goes well.
I trust you're not up early just for the football?
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles
Support clubs against Carlton & Granada: Boycott ITV world cup coverage.
You know what to do: delete the dots but leave the .s to reply to us.
[q1]>and op very shortly - possibly next week in fact. Still, once on the ward, I'll have nothing to do[/q1]
[q1]>but read LOADSA smutty books.[/q1]
Ooh, can I have some titles that you might suggest then? Obviously, the smuttier the better,
Hope all goes well.
I trust you're not up early just for the football?
Ian
--
Ian, Cath & Eoin Ford The view from Beccles
Support clubs against Carlton & Granada: Boycott ITV world cup coverage.
You know what to do: delete the dots but leave the .s to reply to us.
Richard Magrath <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[q1]> [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message[/q1]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q3]> > > You're in a very different position to me. You're a lecturer, and presumably have a degree. I[/q3]
[q3]> > > on the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to[/q3]
[q3]> > > acheive a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to[/q3]
[q3]> > > the intense pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really[/q3]
[q3]> > > see as a failure.[/q3]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no[/q2]
[q2]> > midway point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get[/q2]
[q2]> > into Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of[/q2]
[q2]> > very good university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level[/q2]
[q2]> > to get into.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message[/q1]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College?[/q2]
You
[q2]> > are clearly exaggerating. What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The[/q2]
world
[q2]> > doesn't begin and end with Cambridge, or even Oxbridge. John[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do[/q1]
[q1]> English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far[/q1]
[q1]> off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA. None of them can seem to guarantee a place in my subject either,[/q1]
[q1]> even if I already had taken the exams and gotten those grades. I don't see Cambridge as vastly[/q1]
[q1]> different from the other universities (though I wouldn't deny it would be my first choice) - a[/q1]
[q1]> well known, very old uni which requires top grades and an excellent personal statement on top of[/q1]
[q1]> that. So I was using Cambridge to symbolise that whole strata of HE. I thought I'd mentioned that.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q1]
[q1]> Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet, so I have no idea how well I've done (I[/q1]
[q1]> didn't do any modules in January 2002). Again, there's a good chance I'm one of those A-level[/q1]
[q1]> candidates who do far worse at A-level than they did at GCSE (I certainly don't feel as[/q1]
[q1]> comfortable with my work and knowledge as I was at GCSE). Maybe I'm not - I don't know. Maybe[/q1]
[q1]> I've done very well. But there is a *chance* that I have done badly, not *badly* I mean, but not[/q1]
[q1]> well enough to get into my carefully designed UCAS choices. But since my teachers have promised[/q1]
[q1]> me projected grades of 'A', I'd apply anyway, and probably not get in because my actual AS[/q1]
[q1]> results don't pass muster, or whatever. It only then takes for my two insurance-type places not[/q1]
[q1]> to give me an offer, and then I'm automatically in clearing, and if so, as I've heard not many[/q1]
[q1]> English places become availible I'll probably take something local because at the time it'll seem[/q1]
[q1]> more of a safe bet.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> The thing is, I can see what you think I'm saying - "Oh no! If I don't get my three As I can't[/q1]
[q1]> apply to Oxford, and if that happened I would just die!" when really I'm just saying that there's[/q1]
[q1]> (very roughly) as much chance of me ending up somewhere local and quite poor than at Cambridge or[/q1]
[q1]> another similar university.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Of course (and the fact that I didn't emphasise this was probably my downfall), since the chance[/q1]
[q1]> of either would be quite small, therefore there is a much larger chance that I will end up at a[/q1]
[q1]> good solid university such as Stirling (though, as I mentioned above, I'm not complacent about[/q1]
[q1]> being simply handed a Stirling offer on a platter). I'm sure I'd be very happy there, but I'd like[/q1]
[q1]> a crack at the Cambridge/Bristol/Edinburgh/UCL universities all the same.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message[/q2]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q2]> > I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q2]
[q2]> > offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q2]
[q2]> > but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do[/q2]
[q2]> > feel insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q2]
[q2]> > department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my[/q1]
[q1]> local college". I remember hearing you say that most of your students live nearby, so maybe you're[/q1]
[q1]> thinking I mean something like that, whereas I'm really referring to somewhere a lot less like a[/q1]
[q1]> (flicking through a copy of The Equitable Student Guide) an independent federal college, and more[/q1]
[q1]> like a real local college - somewhere which specialises in vocational-type subjects. I once spent[/q1]
[q1]> a few weeks there a year or so ago (after the GCSEs, I think it was) on a taster course for a BA[/q1]
[q1]> in TV production, and various people still think that I want to apply there, though I do not.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway[/q1]
[q1]> because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I[/q1]
[q1]> discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting[/q1]
[q1]> several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science![/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But only because I don't like maths...[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Rich[/q1]
That's very rational and clears up my misconception. Thanks. I still think you're being unduly
pessimistic.
1) If you're right about your eventual results being really poor then you're clearly going to have
to go down market and that's inevitable.
2) I don't know that much about English (Oh Ginnie!!! Where are you <looks under sofa> Stop looking
at those smutty books and get some fresh air.) You're right that Bath doesn't do it and I also
understand the relatively small difference in grades between, say Bristol and Cambridge, but
there is a world of difference between Bristol and Cambridge, not least in terms of study styles.
3) Why not look at the Scottish Universities? St Andrew's is good. What about Trinity
College Dublin?
John
news:[email protected]...
[q1]> [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message[/q1]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q3]> > > You're in a very different position to me. You're a lecturer, and presumably have a degree. I[/q3]
[q3]> > > on the other hand am a sixth former, in the precarious position of having the opportunity to[/q3]
[q3]> > > acheive a place at a top university which I have only dreamt of attending - or of falling to[/q3]
[q3]> > > the intense pressure from friends and family to go to a local college, which I would really[/q3]
[q3]> > > see as a failure.[/q3]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > But there you go - that's precisely the attitude I'm criticising. You suggest there's no[/q2]
[q2]> > midway point between "a top university" and "a local college". The hint is that unless you get[/q2]
[q2]> > into Oxbridge, you're one of life's failures. The fact is that there are a large number of[/q2]
[q2]> > very good university departments in the UK, many of which require only reasonably good A-level[/q2]
[q2]> > to get into.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message[/q1]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > Why on earth is it a choice between Cambridge and Warrington College?[/q2]
You
[q2]> > are clearly exaggerating. What about London, Bath, Bristol, etc? The[/q2]
world
[q2]> > doesn't begin and end with Cambridge, or even Oxbridge. John[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do[/q1]
[q1]> English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far[/q1]
[q1]> off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA. None of them can seem to guarantee a place in my subject either,[/q1]
[q1]> even if I already had taken the exams and gotten those grades. I don't see Cambridge as vastly[/q1]
[q1]> different from the other universities (though I wouldn't deny it would be my first choice) - a[/q1]
[q1]> well known, very old uni which requires top grades and an excellent personal statement on top of[/q1]
[q1]> that. So I was using Cambridge to symbolise that whole strata of HE. I thought I'd mentioned that.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q1]
[q1]> Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet, so I have no idea how well I've done (I[/q1]
[q1]> didn't do any modules in January 2002). Again, there's a good chance I'm one of those A-level[/q1]
[q1]> candidates who do far worse at A-level than they did at GCSE (I certainly don't feel as[/q1]
[q1]> comfortable with my work and knowledge as I was at GCSE). Maybe I'm not - I don't know. Maybe[/q1]
[q1]> I've done very well. But there is a *chance* that I have done badly, not *badly* I mean, but not[/q1]
[q1]> well enough to get into my carefully designed UCAS choices. But since my teachers have promised[/q1]
[q1]> me projected grades of 'A', I'd apply anyway, and probably not get in because my actual AS[/q1]
[q1]> results don't pass muster, or whatever. It only then takes for my two insurance-type places not[/q1]
[q1]> to give me an offer, and then I'm automatically in clearing, and if so, as I've heard not many[/q1]
[q1]> English places become availible I'll probably take something local because at the time it'll seem[/q1]
[q1]> more of a safe bet.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> The thing is, I can see what you think I'm saying - "Oh no! If I don't get my three As I can't[/q1]
[q1]> apply to Oxford, and if that happened I would just die!" when really I'm just saying that there's[/q1]
[q1]> (very roughly) as much chance of me ending up somewhere local and quite poor than at Cambridge or[/q1]
[q1]> another similar university.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Of course (and the fact that I didn't emphasise this was probably my downfall), since the chance[/q1]
[q1]> of either would be quite small, therefore there is a much larger chance that I will end up at a[/q1]
[q1]> good solid university such as Stirling (though, as I mentioned above, I'm not complacent about[/q1]
[q1]> being simply handed a Stirling offer on a platter). I'm sure I'd be very happy there, but I'd like[/q1]
[q1]> a crack at the Cambridge/Bristol/Edinburgh/UCL universities all the same.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message[/q2]
news:<[email protected]>...
[q2]> > I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q2]
[q2]> > offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q2]
[q2]> > but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do[/q2]
[q2]> > feel insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q2]
[q2]> > department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my[/q1]
[q1]> local college". I remember hearing you say that most of your students live nearby, so maybe you're[/q1]
[q1]> thinking I mean something like that, whereas I'm really referring to somewhere a lot less like a[/q1]
[q1]> (flicking through a copy of The Equitable Student Guide) an independent federal college, and more[/q1]
[q1]> like a real local college - somewhere which specialises in vocational-type subjects. I once spent[/q1]
[q1]> a few weeks there a year or so ago (after the GCSEs, I think it was) on a taster course for a BA[/q1]
[q1]> in TV production, and various people still think that I want to apply there, though I do not.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway[/q1]
[q1]> because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I[/q1]
[q1]> discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting[/q1]
[q1]> several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science![/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But only because I don't like maths...[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Rich[/q1]
That's very rational and clears up my misconception. Thanks. I still think you're being unduly
pessimistic.
1) If you're right about your eventual results being really poor then you're clearly going to have
to go down market and that's inevitable.
2) I don't know that much about English (Oh Ginnie!!! Where are you <looks under sofa> Stop looking
at those smutty books and get some fresh air.) You're right that Bath doesn't do it and I also
understand the relatively small difference in grades between, say Bristol and Cambridge, but
there is a world of difference between Bristol and Cambridge, not least in terms of study styles.
3) Why not look at the Scottish Universities? St Andrew's is good. What about Trinity
College Dublin?
John
"JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
<snip>
[q1]> 2) I don't know that much about English (Oh Ginnie!!! Where are you <looks under sofa> Stop[/q1]
[q1]> looking at those smutty books and get some fresh air.)[/q1]
<snip>
[q1]> John[/q1]
Sorry! In and around the daily excitement of our national educational system, have been having some
boring tests which indicate a hospital stay and op very shortly - possibly next week in fact. Still,
once on the ward, I'll have nothing to do but read LOADSA smutty books.
[q1]:-)[/q1]
Ginnie
PS: Richard, didn't Iain Banks read English and Philosophy at Stirling? Decent uni! But yes, have a
crack at Cambridge et al.
news:[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
<snip>
[q1]> 2) I don't know that much about English (Oh Ginnie!!! Where are you <looks under sofa> Stop[/q1]
[q1]> looking at those smutty books and get some fresh air.)[/q1]
<snip>
[q1]> John[/q1]
Sorry! In and around the daily excitement of our national educational system, have been having some
boring tests which indicate a hospital stay and op very shortly - possibly next week in fact. Still,
once on the ward, I'll have nothing to do but read LOADSA smutty books.
[q1]:-)[/q1]
Ginnie
PS: Richard, didn't Iain Banks read English and Philosophy at Stirling? Decent uni! But yes, have a
crack at Cambridge et al.
Richard Magrath ([email protected]) wrote:
[q1]> My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do[/q1]
[q1]> English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far[/q1]
[q1]> off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA.[/q1]
...
[q1]> Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q1]
[q1]> Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet,[/q1]
"Gotten"? And you want to do an English degree?
[q1]:-)[/q1]
[q2]> > [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...[/q2]
[q2]> > I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q2]
[q2]> > offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q2]
[q2]> > but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do[/q2]
[q2]> > feel insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q2]
[q2]> > department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q2]
[q1]> BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my[/q1]
[q1]> local college".[/q1]
No, I wasn't suggesting you were. I assumed by "local college" you did mean an institution giving
sub-degree vocational training, rather than a respected middle-ranking university. That was my whole
point - the idea that if you get one grade off the highest possible A-level results and don't get
into Oxbridge, then what's left is all just of the level of a place that trains you to be a
hairdresser or whatever.
My point here is that, yes, Oxford and Cambridge are very pleasant places to study, you get an
excellent education from excellent people, and the historical background and nature of the places is
an additional bonus (for most people, some don't like it). But if you don't quite make it into them,
there are still plenty of other very good university departments across the country who don't have
quite such high entry requirements. Life is not over if you don't make it into Oxbridge, and if you
end up getting in somewhere else when your first choice was Oxbridge, you should seize the
opportunity you have been given rather than sulk because you didn't get into Oxbridge.
[q1]> If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway[/q1]
[q1]> because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I[/q1]
[q1]> discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting[/q1]
[q1]> several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science![/q1]
The English department at Queen Mary is very highly regarded. On a ranking of the country's English
departments, English at Queen Mary is much higher than Computer Science at Queen Mary is on a
ranking of the country's Computer Science departments.
Matthew Huntbach
[q1]> My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't do[/q1]
[q1]> English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English, not far[/q1]
[q1]> off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA.[/q1]
...
[q1]> Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q1]
[q1]> Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet,[/q1]
"Gotten"? And you want to do an English degree?
[q1]:-)[/q1]
[q2]> > [email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...[/q2]
[q2]> > I'm in a university department which is reasonably well regarded academically, which I believe[/q2]
[q2]> > offers a good degree (and so do the external examiners, one of whom happens to be at Cambridge),[/q2]
[q2]> > but which is a place which takes many applicants for whom we were not the first choice. I do[/q2]
[q2]> > feel insulted at the not-so-veiled suggestion in your comments, that someone who ends up in my[/q2]
[q2]> > department is one of life's failures and it's no better than "the local college".[/q2]
[q1]> BTW, I don't live around the corner from Queen Mary, U of London, so I wouldn't consider that "my[/q1]
[q1]> local college".[/q1]
No, I wasn't suggesting you were. I assumed by "local college" you did mean an institution giving
sub-degree vocational training, rather than a respected middle-ranking university. That was my whole
point - the idea that if you get one grade off the highest possible A-level results and don't get
into Oxbridge, then what's left is all just of the level of a place that trains you to be a
hairdresser or whatever.
My point here is that, yes, Oxford and Cambridge are very pleasant places to study, you get an
excellent education from excellent people, and the historical background and nature of the places is
an additional bonus (for most people, some don't like it). But if you don't quite make it into them,
there are still plenty of other very good university departments across the country who don't have
quite such high entry requirements. Life is not over if you don't make it into Oxbridge, and if you
end up getting in somewhere else when your first choice was Oxbridge, you should seize the
opportunity you have been given rather than sulk because you didn't get into Oxbridge.
[q1]> If you're interested, I did consider Queen Mary, but decided in the end to opt for Royal Holloway[/q1]
[q1]> because I preferred to live outside the city centre. I'd still consider applying there if I[/q1]
[q1]> discovered that any of my other universities didn't match up with my imagination (I'm visiting[/q1]
[q1]> several of them this summer). But not for Computer Science![/q1]
The English department at Queen Mary is very highly regarded. On a ranking of the country's English
departments, English at Queen Mary is much higher than Computer Science at Queen Mary is on a
ranking of the country's Computer Science departments.
Matthew Huntbach
"JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > The problem is that Oxbridge would make offers based on A*s then - which[/q2]
I
[q2]> > really would hate![/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > I've got an AAB offer from Oxford, and having worked pretty hard I can probably manage it.[/q2]
[q2]> > However, there would be NO hope of me getting the[/q2]
two
[q2]> > A*'s in Latin and Greek they'd ask me for if that was the case![/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > Andrew H[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q1]> But that's special pleading. If one believes that the best performers[/q1]
shoud
[q1]> get into the 'best' collges a more discriminating exam is fairer. John[/q1]
But since people get their marks, then could not these be used?
--
MESSAGE ENDS. John Porcella
news:[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > The problem is that Oxbridge would make offers based on A*s then - which[/q2]
I
[q2]> > really would hate![/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > I've got an AAB offer from Oxford, and having worked pretty hard I can probably manage it.[/q2]
[q2]> > However, there would be NO hope of me getting the[/q2]
two
[q2]> > A*'s in Latin and Greek they'd ask me for if that was the case![/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > Andrew H[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q1]> But that's special pleading. If one believes that the best performers[/q1]
shoud
[q1]> get into the 'best' collges a more discriminating exam is fairer. John[/q1]
But since people get their marks, then could not these be used?
--
MESSAGE ENDS. John Porcella
[q2]> >I meant effective in the sense that it differentiates between A grade students based on their[/q2]
[q2]> >mathematical ability on the main maths topics -[/q2]
that
[q2]> >is there is no need for extra content to be taught.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> There may be no need for extra *content*, but there will be [perceived] need for extra[/q1]
[q1]> teaching; your "bright sparks" will want to see and try past papers, and will expect to be[/q1]
[q1]> coached on the techniques used to solve these harder/longer questions, while your B-graders[/q1]
[q1]> [and worse] will still be struggling with the content. I don't see it as *that* different from[/q1]
[q1]> taking an extra module.[/q1]
Inspired by this discussion I E-mailed QCa and asked for a copy of the evaluation of the AEA trial
(they had promised to post it on their website but didn't in the end).
I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who said that although no extra
content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure (from students, parents etc.)
were correct.
The feedback from teachers was that around 65% felt that they, in future, would need to have special
classes etc. to get single maths students ready for the AEA. They added that double maths candidates
would probably cope without.
Steve
[q2]> >mathematical ability on the main maths topics -[/q2]
that
[q2]> >is there is no need for extra content to be taught.[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> There may be no need for extra *content*, but there will be [perceived] need for extra[/q1]
[q1]> teaching; your "bright sparks" will want to see and try past papers, and will expect to be[/q1]
[q1]> coached on the techniques used to solve these harder/longer questions, while your B-graders[/q1]
[q1]> [and worse] will still be struggling with the content. I don't see it as *that* different from[/q1]
[q1]> taking an extra module.[/q1]
Inspired by this discussion I E-mailed QCa and asked for a copy of the evaluation of the AEA trial
(they had promised to post it on their website but didn't in the end).
I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who said that although no extra
content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure (from students, parents etc.)
were correct.
The feedback from teachers was that around 65% felt that they, in future, would need to have special
classes etc. to get single maths students ready for the AEA. They added that double maths candidates
would probably cope without.
Steve
"steve.wren" <[email protected]> wrote:
[q1]> Inspired by this discussion I E-mailed QCa and asked for a copy of the evaluation of the AEA trial[/q1]
[q1]> (they had promised to post it on their website but didn't in the end).[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q1]
said
[q1]> that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure (from[/q1]
[q1]> students, parents etc.) were correct.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> The feedback from teachers was that around 65% felt that they, in future, would need to have[/q1]
[q1]> special classes etc. to get single maths students ready for the AEA. They added that double maths[/q1]
[q1]> candidates would probably cope without.[/q1]
That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you aren't willing to post it
here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet again that the report they
sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me paper documents in response to an
email request!]
Thanks
Peter
[q1]> Inspired by this discussion I E-mailed QCa and asked for a copy of the evaluation of the AEA trial[/q1]
[q1]> (they had promised to post it on their website but didn't in the end).[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q1]
said
[q1]> that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure (from[/q1]
[q1]> students, parents etc.) were correct.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> The feedback from teachers was that around 65% felt that they, in future, would need to have[/q1]
[q1]> special classes etc. to get single maths students ready for the AEA. They added that double maths[/q1]
[q1]> candidates would probably cope without.[/q1]
That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you aren't willing to post it
here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet again that the report they
sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me paper documents in response to an
email request!]
Thanks
Peter
[email protected] (Matthew M. Huntbach) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]> Richard Magrath ([email protected]) wrote:[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't[/q2]
[q2]> > do English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English,[/q2]
[q2]> > not far off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA.[/q2]
[q1]> ...[/q1]
[q2]> > Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q2]
[q2]> > Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet,[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "Gotten"? And you want to do an English degree?[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> :-)[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
Matthew, Matthew, Matthew, I thought that of all the people here you would have picked up on my
reference to the King James bible, Genesis (chaper and verse forgotten): "I have gotten a man from
the Lord". The King James bible is held up alongside the writings of Milton and Shakespeare as one
of the greatest works of beauty and of poetry in the English Language. One wonders how great it
might have been if only the translator had access to MS Word with a spellchecker!
[q1]:-)[/q1]
Rich
[q1]> Richard Magrath ([email protected]) wrote:[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > My answer to both: I used Cambridge as an example of a top university. London, Bath (who don't[/q2]
[q2]> > do English, I believe), Bristol, etc., all require grades of around ABB-AAB to study English,[/q2]
[q2]> > not far off from Cambridge's AAB-AAA.[/q2]
[q1]> ...[/q1]
[q2]> > Therefore there is a good chance not one of these universities would give me an offer.[/q2]
[q2]> > Additionally, I haven't gotten my AS results back yet,[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "Gotten"? And you want to do an English degree?[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> :-)[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
Matthew, Matthew, Matthew, I thought that of all the people here you would have picked up on my
reference to the King James bible, Genesis (chaper and verse forgotten): "I have gotten a man from
the Lord". The King James bible is held up alongside the writings of Milton and Shakespeare as one
of the greatest works of beauty and of poetry in the English Language. One wonders how great it
might have been if only the translator had access to MS Word with a spellchecker!
[q1]:-)[/q1]
Rich
John Porcella <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message[/q1]
[q1]> news:[email protected]...[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > The problem is that Oxbridge would make offers based on A*s then -[/q3]
which
[q1]> I[/q1]
[q3]> > > really would hate![/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > I've got an AAB offer from Oxford, and having worked pretty hard I can probably manage it.[/q3]
[q3]> > > However, there would be NO hope of me getting the[/q3]
[q1]> two[/q1]
[q3]> > > A*'s in Latin and Greek they'd ask me for if that was the case![/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > Andrew H[/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q2]> > But that's special pleading. If one believes that the best performers[/q2]
[q1]> shoud[/q1]
[q2]> > get into the 'best' collges a more discriminating exam is fairer. John[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But since people get their marks, then could not these be used?[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> --[/q1]
[q1]> MESSAGE ENDS. John Porcella[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
The special pleading is from someone who said "Since I'm, going to scrape an A, it's better for me
to have a marking boundary which gives me the top grade rather than (for me) an unattainable
superior grade. John
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> "JHP" <[email protected]> wrote in message[/q1]
[q1]> news:[email protected]...[/q1]
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > The problem is that Oxbridge would make offers based on A*s then -[/q3]
which
[q1]> I[/q1]
[q3]> > > really would hate![/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > I've got an AAB offer from Oxford, and having worked pretty hard I can probably manage it.[/q3]
[q3]> > > However, there would be NO hope of me getting the[/q3]
[q1]> two[/q1]
[q3]> > > A*'s in Latin and Greek they'd ask me for if that was the case![/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > Andrew H[/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q2]> > But that's special pleading. If one believes that the best performers[/q2]
[q1]> shoud[/q1]
[q2]> > get into the 'best' collges a more discriminating exam is fairer. John[/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> But since people get their marks, then could not these be used?[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> --[/q1]
[q1]> MESSAGE ENDS. John Porcella[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
The special pleading is from someone who said "Since I'm, going to scrape an A, it's better for me
to have a marking boundary which gives me the top grade rather than (for me) an unattainable
superior grade. John
[q2]> >[/q2]
[q2]> > I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q2]
said that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure
(from students, parents etc.) were correct.
[q1]> That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you[/q1]
aren't
[q1]> willing to post it here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet again[/q1]
[q1]> that the report they sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me paper[/q1]
[q1]> documents in response to an email request!][/q1]
Yep - that's exactly what QCA did - an e-mail to tell me they were sending a paper copy of
the report.
There are many charts in the report which prevent me getting the ideas across fully otherwise I'd be
happy to post it.
Try E-mailing [email protected]
Steve
[q2]> > I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q2]
said that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure
(from students, parents etc.) were correct.
[q1]> That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you[/q1]
aren't
[q1]> willing to post it here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet again[/q1]
[q1]> that the report they sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me paper[/q1]
[q1]> documents in response to an email request!][/q1]
Yep - that's exactly what QCA did - an e-mail to tell me they were sending a paper copy of
the report.
There are many charts in the report which prevent me getting the ideas across fully otherwise I'd be
happy to post it.
Try E-mailing [email protected]
Steve
"steve.wren" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
[q1]>[/q1]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q3]
[q1]> said that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure[/q1]
[q1]> (from students, parents etc.) were correct.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you[/q2]
[q1]> aren't[/q1]
[q2]> > willing to post it here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet[/q2]
[q2]> > again that the report they sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me[/q2]
[q2]> > paper documents in response to an email request!][/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Yep - that's exactly what QCA did - an e-mail to tell me they were sending[/q1]
a
[q1]> paper copy of the report.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> There are many charts in the report which prevent me getting the ideas across fully otherwise I'd[/q1]
[q1]> be happy to post it.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Try E-mailing [email protected][/q1]
!!! - i'll email them
thanks though,
Peter
news
[email protected]...[q1]>[/q1]
[q3]> > >[/q3]
[q3]> > > I received an edited version of the report - it appears that those who[/q3]
[q1]> said that although no extra content was involved in the exam that schools would be under pressure[/q1]
[q1]> (from students, parents etc.) were correct.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q2]> > That sounds interesting - I'd be interested to read it- assuming you[/q2]
[q1]> aren't[/q1]
[q2]> > willing to post it here, would you be willing to email me a copy please? [that assuming yet[/q2]
[q2]> > again that the report they sent you is in electronic form.. i've known companies to send me[/q2]
[q2]> > paper documents in response to an email request!][/q2]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Yep - that's exactly what QCA did - an e-mail to tell me they were sending[/q1]
a
[q1]> paper copy of the report.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> There are many charts in the report which prevent me getting the ideas across fully otherwise I'd[/q1]
[q1]> be happy to post it.[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Try E-mailing [email protected][/q1]
!!! - i'll email them
thanks though,
Peter
OK here's my original point again:
Take 2 maths students, Student X and Student Y...
....Student X...Student Y P1 100 83 P2 90 72 P3 95 79 M1 100 87 M2 95 76 S1 100 83
Student X gets an impressive 97%, student Y just scrapes 80%. Under the current system, there is no
difference between these 2 students, an A is an A. Student X gets no recognition for their great
score, employers wouldn't exactly ask for percentages...
Now take 2 chemistry students, Student C and Student D... I don't know how much each module's worth,
but just let them all be out of 100 each for this argument...
............Student C.....Student D Module 1 100 75 Module 2 95 71 COURSEWORK 100 100 Module 4 90 65
Module 5 90 69 PRACTICAL 100 100
Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80
(grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components, whilst being B/C on the
written side. But under the current system they're as good as each other, a Grade A is a Grade A...
If there was A* for 90, WITHOUT lowering the requirement for A (80), then the top students would be
recognised. At GCSE, in many subjects an A* was quite a challenge and required a decent amount of
work. At A Level, the top students may feel there's little point in doing so much work if the 80
needed for an A is attainable...
Take 2 maths students, Student X and Student Y...
....Student X...Student Y P1 100 83 P2 90 72 P3 95 79 M1 100 87 M2 95 76 S1 100 83
Student X gets an impressive 97%, student Y just scrapes 80%. Under the current system, there is no
difference between these 2 students, an A is an A. Student X gets no recognition for their great
score, employers wouldn't exactly ask for percentages...
Now take 2 chemistry students, Student C and Student D... I don't know how much each module's worth,
but just let them all be out of 100 each for this argument...
............Student C.....Student D Module 1 100 75 Module 2 95 71 COURSEWORK 100 100 Module 4 90 65
Module 5 90 69 PRACTICAL 100 100
Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80
(grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components, whilst being B/C on the
written side. But under the current system they're as good as each other, a Grade A is a Grade A...
If there was A* for 90, WITHOUT lowering the requirement for A (80), then the top students would be
recognised. At GCSE, in many subjects an A* was quite a challenge and required a decent amount of
work. At A Level, the top students may feel there's little point in doing so much work if the 80
needed for an A is attainable...
[q1]> ....Student X...Student Y P1 100 83 P2 90 72 P3 95 79 M1 100 87 M2 95 76 S1 100 83[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Student X gets an impressive 97%, student Y just scrapes 80%. Under the current system, there is[/q1]
[q1]> no difference between these 2 students, an A is an A. Student X gets no recognition for their[/q1]
[q1]> great score, employers wouldn't exactly ask for percentages...[/q1]
Then would a similar arguement begin about whether there should be an A** to discriminate between
99% and a just scrape 90%?
Would it therefore be preferable to, rather than award gardes, just award each student their mean
mark on a certificate?
This way Unis and employers could compare candidates directly - although this may lead to students
taking module choices solely to increase their mean mark as opposed to adding to their rounded maths
knowledge (eg. when i was at Uni some students picked their 3rd year modules based on what,
historically, had a reputation as easy courses in order to ensure a 2:1 or whatever rather than pick
a harder course which had a greater interest or relevence to the student.)
Alos moderation between exam boards, syllabi and module combos would have to be tightened to ensure
that a 55% (for example) was equivalent across all possible choices.
[q1]> Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80[/q1]
[q1]> (grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components, whilst being B/C on the[/q1]
[q1]> written side.[/q1]
The problem seems to be here that either
a) there is a claim that practical skills are not as important at a level and shouldn't be allowed
to influence a students grade
or b) that practical and/or coursework tasks are open to cheating by extra help from teachers.
I'm no Chemistry teacher so I'll steer clear of making any statements about
(b) but I am introducing the Coursework module for our A level Further Maths students as i feel it
allows the students to investigate areas of maths which interest them greatly but which are
outside the confines of the syllabus.
The exam board insist that each students topic is different (to prevent collaboration etc.). As a
teacher I am permitted to give assistance but any assistance should be recorded and taken into
account when marking the task (which is then sent for external moderation).
In any coursework task there is always the issue of parental or staff cheating - it is down to the
proffessionalism of staff to ensure this deosn't happen.
Steve
But under the current system they're as good as each other, a
[q1]> Grade A is a Grade A...[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> If there was A* for 90, WITHOUT lowering the requirement for A (80), then the top students would[/q1]
[q1]> be recognised. At GCSE, in many subjects an A* was quite a challenge and required a decent amount[/q1]
[q1]> of work. At A Level, the top students may feel there's little point in doing so much work if the[/q1]
[q1]> 80 needed for an A is attainable...[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> Student X gets an impressive 97%, student Y just scrapes 80%. Under the current system, there is[/q1]
[q1]> no difference between these 2 students, an A is an A. Student X gets no recognition for their[/q1]
[q1]> great score, employers wouldn't exactly ask for percentages...[/q1]
Then would a similar arguement begin about whether there should be an A** to discriminate between
99% and a just scrape 90%?
Would it therefore be preferable to, rather than award gardes, just award each student their mean
mark on a certificate?
This way Unis and employers could compare candidates directly - although this may lead to students
taking module choices solely to increase their mean mark as opposed to adding to their rounded maths
knowledge (eg. when i was at Uni some students picked their 3rd year modules based on what,
historically, had a reputation as easy courses in order to ensure a 2:1 or whatever rather than pick
a harder course which had a greater interest or relevence to the student.)
Alos moderation between exam boards, syllabi and module combos would have to be tightened to ensure
that a 55% (for example) was equivalent across all possible choices.
[q1]> Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80[/q1]
[q1]> (grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components, whilst being B/C on the[/q1]
[q1]> written side.[/q1]
The problem seems to be here that either
a) there is a claim that practical skills are not as important at a level and shouldn't be allowed
to influence a students grade
or b) that practical and/or coursework tasks are open to cheating by extra help from teachers.
I'm no Chemistry teacher so I'll steer clear of making any statements about
(b) but I am introducing the Coursework module for our A level Further Maths students as i feel it
allows the students to investigate areas of maths which interest them greatly but which are
outside the confines of the syllabus.
The exam board insist that each students topic is different (to prevent collaboration etc.). As a
teacher I am permitted to give assistance but any assistance should be recorded and taken into
account when marking the task (which is then sent for external moderation).
In any coursework task there is always the issue of parental or staff cheating - it is down to the
proffessionalism of staff to ensure this deosn't happen.
Steve
But under the current system they're as good as each other, a
[q1]> Grade A is a Grade A...[/q1]
[q1]>[/q1]
[q1]> If there was A* for 90, WITHOUT lowering the requirement for A (80), then the top students would[/q1]
[q1]> be recognised. At GCSE, in many subjects an A* was quite a challenge and required a decent amount[/q1]
[q1]> of work. At A Level, the top students may feel there's little point in doing so much work if the[/q1]
[q1]> 80 needed for an A is attainable...[/q1]
[email protected] (Davido) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]> Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80[/q1]
[q1]> (grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components[/q1]
What's with the coursework-bashing? You refer to chemistry which I don't know much about, but in
physics the mark scheme took into account any help you'd been given. Indeed, on one of the pieces of
coursework I lost a good few marks because of the amount of help I needed building a capacitor-based
displacement sensor (as you do...).
Surely coursework is, more than anything, good evidence of a student's actual talent? No-one said to
Einstein "this Relativity thing is all well and good, but I'm afraid we can't give you the nobel
prize because it wasn't written as part of a timed and observed examination". Actually, come to
think of it, Einstein didn't get the nobel prize for that anyway. I think it was the photoelectric
effect he got it for.
I don't mean to sound really argumentative, I haven't used a computer for a week and it's hard
getting back into the swing of things! I seem to have even forgotten how to type properly...
Rich
news:<[email protected]>...
[q1]> Student C gets 96% thanks to top marks on practical and written components. Student D scrapes 80[/q1]
[q1]> (grade A) thanks to (teacher-aided) coursework and practical components[/q1]
What's with the coursework-bashing? You refer to chemistry which I don't know much about, but in
physics the mark scheme took into account any help you'd been given. Indeed, on one of the pieces of
coursework I lost a good few marks because of the amount of help I needed building a capacitor-based
displacement sensor (as you do...).
Surely coursework is, more than anything, good evidence of a student's actual talent? No-one said to
Einstein "this Relativity thing is all well and good, but I'm afraid we can't give you the nobel
prize because it wasn't written as part of a timed and observed examination". Actually, come to
think of it, Einstein didn't get the nobel prize for that anyway. I think it was the photoelectric
effect he got it for.
I don't mean to sound really argumentative, I haven't used a computer for a week and it's hard
getting back into the swing of things! I seem to have even forgotten how to type properly...
Rich
Related discussions
- Are my IGSCEs good enough for Oxford
- Biochemistry at Oxford, GCSE and AS grades
- can i still do my a levels if i did not get my ideal gcse grades?
- gcse results med/dentistry
- Sat 1450
- Are gcse grades good enough for LSE
- Age-old question: Can I get into Cambridge with these grades?
- A* grade Maths achieved, would I only need AA in French and Further Maths?
- A*s in A level with average GCSEs
- Do I need grade 9s (A**) in all my gccses to go to places like Oxford?
- Applying for competitive UNIS (ALEVELS/SIXTH FORM SCHOOL CHOICE)
- Career Police
- Oxford with 9 GCSEs
- do i have a chance at law at bristol
- Predicted Grades and Cambridge
- how to get all A*s in my a levels
- 5 A Levels too much?
- oxford
- Atomic Structure - Shapes of S and P orbitals AQA a level chem
- PPE Oxford
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Part Time or Distance Learning Funding if I didn't complete first degreeLast reply 3 minutes ago
2024 entry A100 / A101 Medicine fastest and slowest offer sendersMedicine
862
Last reply 5 minutes ago
Jaguar (JLR) Degree apprenticeships 2024Last reply 6 minutes ago
Official University of Bath Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 7 minutes ago
Official: Aston University A100 2024 Entry Applicant threadMedical Schools
1128
Last reply 7 minutes ago
Official University of St Andrews Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 8 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 9 minutes ago
DWP EO Job Centre Work Coach - March 2024Last reply 12 minutes ago
2023 ** Borders and Enforcement, Crime & Compliance - ICE - Immigration OfficersTrending
Last reply 5 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
