Does anyone fail these exams any more (NB)

A

AlexL

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Jan 2003
Messages
846
Location
East Coast
Visit site
Blimey, just seen the bbc.co.uk report on a levels. I feel sorry for the university entrance people - 24% of A-levels are Grade A! how the hell do you chose the top 2% of candidates when 24% of them have A's.
One Top uni said it had 3000 applicants for law, of which 1500 got straight A's, so an entrance exam will be required to select a hundred or so from the 1500.
I've no doubt all the students worked bloody hard for their A-levels, just as we did 15 years ago, but surely its not fair on anyone (least of all the students who will now probably have to sit another raft of exams for university entry) to have such a flat grading system with no differentiation between the entire top quartile of results.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Remedy is simple, but....

politically undesireable. Competition and failure are two tabboo words in education these days.

Publish the actual marks achieved and the number of re-dos taken for re-presentable modules. Grades are just too vague and it seems that universities either don'y have the time to read or don't trust the school's written report on the UCAS form.

Steve Cronin



Steve cronin

<hr width=100% size=1>The above is, like any other post here, only a personal opinion
 
Yes my son!

If only they did A levels in sailing, fishing and computer games - he'd be MSc potential.

<hr width=100% size=1>If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
 
There is still differentiation, it comes from the combination of grades that you get and the subjects you get them in. Like I said in another thread, only 1% get 3 A's. People seem to think that 20% getting an A on average means 20% of candidates have straight A's!

A subject like law or is always going to be tricky, because the best people apply for it. I have no problem with releasing actual marks for areas where you can't decide between people, but I don't think its necessary for most subjects

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

The only people who are interrested in comparrisons to previous years are Tony Blur and Co. What does it matter? This years students and this years University entry are only grading this years results.

The fact is that the results are only a percent or so better than last year. So why has a university got 1500 qualifying candidates for 100 places? If they had done their sums right they should only be a small percentage of candidates over subscribed!

Universities basically get paid by filling courses and putting 'bums on seats'. It is surely the fault of the universities for being gready and unrealistic in the place offers (to ensure they are full next year) and less the fault of the difficulty (or otherwise) of passing A levels.

<hr width=100% size=1>If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

"So why has a university got 1500 qualifying candidates for 100 places?"

I expect that whatever was said has been taken totally out of context to suit the annual "A-Levels are easy" media stories that get bashed around again and again.

People don't seem to realise that exams being easier or harder doesn't actually effect the number of people with an A-grade because of *standardisation*. Anybody who thinks that a higher % of high grades means that the exam has got easier has completely missed the point and obviously didn't get A-Level maths!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Shouldn't we be celebrating rather than moaning it must be getting too easy?

From my limited experience I got my A's and went to Uni at Newcastle upon Tyne. I most catagorically would not have liked to sit this years Maths or Geology papers. Both were very much more difficult than in '78

Perhaps we're actually teaching our kids to pass exams! Whatever you think of the national curriculum, if A levels are the benchmark, then improving results are an indication of progress and success. Congratulations to our 18 year olds!

<hr width=100% size=1>If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Maybe in 25 years the old grey matter has slowed doen a touch. Also external aids have increased significantly to say nothing of various modules of course work that are retaken/remarked if the pupils, sorry students, don't like the mark, sorry grade.

<hr width=100% size=1>Real men do it 2handed.
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Since the time I did my A Levels the proportion of people failing has dropped by a factor of five, and the proportion of passes that are at a "A" grade has doubled. Are today's children really that much brighter than my generation?

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Your so right on the first count........

However, with regards to props and facilities, good for us! It demonstrates the evolving and improving process of education. A large contribution towards improving results.

Regards handing in drafts and resubmitting papers...you've made the point nicely.

<hr width=100% size=1>If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Retaking, and coursework are both valid as far as I'm concerned. Coursework allows the pupil's much deeper ability to be assessed in a way that it can't be in an exam by requiring them to do an extended piece of work taking many hours. The modular system is definitely a good thing, as it allows again, much deeper assessment. How are you supposed to evaluate 2 years of knowledge in a 3 hour exam exactly?

With regards to your grey matter slowing down, the subject matter has kept up with the times, and in doing so, I'm afraid its got more complicated.

I could use physics as an example. In the 70's you had to understand einstiens relativity to get your physics A-level. I had to understand relativity AND quantum physics to get mine in 2001.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

No it doesn't necessarily, but you don't seem to realise that grades are awarded for your performance relative to everyone else. If more A-grades are being awarded, it means that the exam boards have awarded more A-grades, not that the exam or course is any easier. And guess what, if more people get A's then University entrance requirements go up! So its all meaningless anyway!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

Course work is fine if it is the pupils work which is being assessed!

I work in a school and some work handed in is of a higher standard than you would expect from that pupil. How could this be! Also, coursework in some subjects is done in pairs or groups. How can this be assessed back to an individual level? (perhaps A levels for pairs or mixed doubles)

I agree that the depth of learning can be demonstrated in coursework and projects but it must be better controlled and monitored - or carry less weighting.

Not to mention the inevitable introduction of performance related pay for teachers - hard bucks for better results..........then we'll have something to talk about.

<hr width=100% size=1>If you're not confused, you're not paying attention.
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

But that is not what they say. Exam boards and Ministers keep saying that the standards are absolute, not relative, and that the standards now required for an A grade are the same as that required 20 years ago (which is when they abolished the cap on the number of A grades).



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

results are not standardized -that is the whole point of my origonal post - a quater of all grades are A's. In other countries where bell-curve, or watever you want to call it, grading is used then the difficulty of the exam is irrelevant as all the results are put together and the top 2% or 5% or whatever, get a grade A, the next 10% a B and so on. That way the universities know that a grade A means someone in the top 2% - which is the whole point of the exam.
and BTW yes I have A-level maths, and a bachelors degree and a Masters degree in a mathematical subject.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
that is not correct as to just multiply the probabilities, you are assuming there is no correlation between any of the results, i.e someone who gets an A in one subject is equally likely to get and A or an E in the others. In reality the sort of person who is capable of getting an A in one subject is more likely to get an A in the others, so the proportion of people with all A's will be more than your 1.25 cubed (or is it four or five these days!), but obviously less than the overall 25%

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

I've never heard anyone specifically say that the standards are absolute, they just say that it hasn't got any easier. Do provide me with an example if I'm wrong.
When they say that the standard needed to get an A is the same, they mean that it is artificially so. How can you measure it considering that both the subject matter and the method of teaching has changed so much?

Like I've said before it doesn't matter if its got easier (even though it quite clearly hasn't), because you're still evaluated by a university relative to your peers. If more people get an A, then you'd better have 2!


<hr width=100% size=1>
 
I am well aware that its not strictly correct, but it was an estimation based on the numbers available. You've then done exaclty what I did, and had a stab, as how do you know what if you get one A, you're more likely to get another? It could be completely the opposite, and I could easily give anecdotal evidence to support that!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Remedy is simple, but....

unfortunately that was the case but is no longer sustainable - you are correct, univesties want the top x% of the year, and a long time ago maybe 3 B's or whatever put you in the top 2%, and as the grades changed the universities changed their requirements, but they have now reached the point where it is now no longer possible to determine as "Saturation" has occured at the top end - you can't ask for more than 3A's and more people have 3A's than there are top places, so universites can now not determine the difference between candidates. In statistical terms the data is censored, so meaningful analysis is imposible.

Isn't Quantum a bugger eh! Unfortunately I did Electronics at Uni which is full of Quantumy Phisics, There was also an uncertainty principle, but I'm not sure what that was /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top