A-Levels

I wonder about how much manipulation there is of the final grade.

Probably entirely different here, but to give you an idea of what I am talking about... When I did Y12 it was 5 subjects each worth 20 points. Half the grade came from the years work and the other half from the final grade. Due to differences with teachers and grading the years grades were adjusted around some statistical magical number (median?) adjusted to a particular spread of grades to even things across the state. Due to differences in exams from year to year these were also manipulated in a similar fashion. It was quite possible to score say a 16 in the final paper and receive a 12 or a 20 as a final grade depending on which side of the magical line the student is on and how compact the spread is. I cannot even pretend to understand it although it was explained to me in a lot of detail (foggy memory) by a teacher who sat on the board of examiners.

I remember at Uni you couldn't score 100% in a multiple choice. If there were 5 choices, the best you could get was 80% as theoretically you could score 20% by answering 'A' to each question.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by simesb

I remember at Uni you couldn't score 100% in a multiple choice. If there were 5 choices, the best you could get was 80% as theoretically you could score 20% by answering 'A' to each question.

Erm, if you get all the answers correct through knowledge rather than guesswork then 100% is guaranteed, surely?

On topic, I struggle to understand how we can see this continuously improving trend of A level results year on year - what sort of statistical distribution are we ending up with? Is anyone mapping it and comparing?

At the end of the day it's all relative.

Originally Posted by Ruffy

At the end of the day it's all relative.

Exactly. How many students were taking 6 A-levels 20 years ago?

Students don't have time to learn 6 subjects to A* level so they have to find shortcuts through exam technique. The most able students will always do the best.

Originally Posted by MattCollins

I wonder about how much manipulation there is of the final grade.

Probably entirely different here, but to give you an idea of what I am talking about... ........

I'm not sure if this is what you're asking, but nowadays, they use something called UMS, which takes the highest-scoring student that did the exam, and gives them 100%, then each succesive number of marks works downwards, so if the highest mark was 95/100, this would be classed as 100%.

Theoretically speaking, if all students agreed to answer no questions in the paper, they'd all get 100%, be unintelligent, and studying in London.

Got my AS results yesterday. Extremely pleased with some, not so happy with others.

General Studies - A (Doesn't really count)
Politics - A
History - B
Biology - C
Phy Ed - C

It's enough to get me through to next year, but I'd have preferred an A in History... I only missed it by two UMS points.

Originally Posted by Jamesy D

Got my AS results yesterday. Extremely pleased with some, not so happy with others.

General Studies - A (Doesn't really count)
Politics - A
History - B
Biology - C
Phy Ed - C

It's enough to get me through to next year, but I'd have preferred an A in History... I only missed it by two UMS points.

Congrats mate! Them be some good grades!

Just get them finished into A2 level with those grades and your laughing.

Originally Posted by allantheboss

First time I got 1 mark off an A, secondly a low B or C, then thirdly a high A

But why did you retake the exam when you got an A first time? And why were you allowed to retake the exam?

I did my highers a few years ago.

The younger teachers teach you to pass you're exam.

The older old-school style teachers teach you everything in the course, teach you about things that aren't even in the course but are worthwhile in their opinion and are generally worth their weight in gold.

My results for highers were;

Physics: A
Chemistry: B
Maths: B
Technological Studies: B

I didn't find them easy, but I actually worked for them, unlike some people.

All were taught by proper old school teachers, proper teaching methods, weren't afraid to give you a mouthful and put you in you're place.

The problem with teaching nowadays (and most things that are sh!te) is the red tape holding them back from installing some order into their classes.

All this treats, special allowances, helpers for kids who don't have learning difficulties but are badly behaved little cants is a bag o sh!te.

Also since we are education bashing, the fact that everyone is expected to go onto further education after school is absolute b0llocks, I was seen as stupid for wanting to get a job rather than go to uni. We can't have everyone who leaves school going to uni or college, but thats what the school pushes you to do.

/Rant

Originally Posted by kellyjo

+1 My ex can tell you everything there is to know about quantum physics but you wouldnt put him in a room of nice people, he'd end up being rude and derogatory cos he doesnt know how to get along woth folk.

Intelligence doesn't give you common sense.

I've worked with some very clever blokes. Could read a book from front to back, then renounce every word.

Ask them anything to do with common sense though, they couldn't find their way out of a paper bag.