A level grade leak

4allweknow. Sadly I have several friends who have left because of this same reason. I am sorry to say there really is a dumbing down in standards. Even Goldsmiths' College, a College of London University, over ten years ago had to drop the apostrophe at the end of Goldsmiths' because people simply couldn't understand what it meant or use it in the correct place.

I am a bit older than you Suziewoozie as I graduated the year you took your A-levels.

It is true that getting 90% of something simple is easy, but if a student with the ability to study A level maths for two years and pass the exam only gets 14% (minimum mark for a pass) I would say that the exam is too hard or the students have been taught very badly. A maths exam could surely be pitched at a level where the most able students could achieve between 90% and 100% and the pass mark set at 50%.

It is also true that I sat Higher Maths a very long time ago and we were aware that Higher Maths (which we sat at sixteen or seventeen) was slightly below the level of the A-level (which English students generally sat at eighteen), but Lower Maths, the alternative for less able students, was actually pitched at a higher level than the English O-level. Many pupils left school at fifteen with only a school leaving certificate. There was nothing equivalent to GCSEs.

In Scotland at that time some pupils returned to school after doing their Highers and Lowers for the sixth year where they could resit exams they'd failed or passed with a low grade, or do Highers which were only available in the sixth year, one of which was Additional Maths.

I went to evening classes during the summer after sitting my highers to do Additional Maths (analysis, dynamics and geometry) which meant that I could go to university at sixteen and not be behind Scottish students who had done
Additional Maths or English students with A level.

I am aware that a lot has changed since then. I did not study statistics, one of the most useful branches of mathematics, until I was in my second year at university, and was only able to do computer science after two years of maths. The year before computer science had only been offered as a post-graduate course to Maths, Physics or Engineering graduates. Both statistics and IT are now routinely taught at primary school!

I have three gcs in the throes of gcses and a levels. In the opinion of their parents the exams are far more difficult and extensive than they were in the 80s at least. A lot of the stuff now is what would have been AS or A level before.

I agree Rosina at Thu 15-Aug-19 15:35:18

There is no place in our discussion for saying others do not know what they are talking about or for saying that they are censured because of others who apparently "do know what they are talking about''. Trying to squash a person by saying they do not know what they are taking about, imho is a personal attack. It does not build on the discussion.

If somebody's view differs from the view expressed by another, then they should express their different view, not say spiteful and nasty things to the other person that makes that person feel upset and crushed and have to defend their very integrity. I am glad you made this observation.

I would like to have your comment;
We each have our experiences and opinions written large above each forum, coupled with each have their right to express their thoughts without condemnation or put-downs from another

Our forums in which people ask for help are filled with the most wonderfully kind and caring and wise responses from Gransnetters. There is no reason why, in a subject such as this, we cannot give our views, listen to each other and learn from each other. No matter how different our view or how wrong we may feel another person is, we must always respect each other. There is no place on Gransnet for spiteful put-downs and irrelevant sarcasm and making personal attacks on somebody.

It’s not used as an absolute figure, it’s a comparable one. That means if it’s a difficult paper and no candidates achieved more than 55%, they will be awarded the top grade A.
The media reports are deliberately mis reporting.

fluttERBY123. To demonstrate how fickle I am how difficult this subject is, You have just reminded me of a conversation with a friend that I had about a year ago. I only see her occasionally. She graduated in Chemistry and taught it for a while. Her husband is a Gp (doctor not grandP!) she was saying that she can hardly help her daughter now studying Chemistry A level as the syllabus contains much higher material that she had not studied until her 2nd university year.

I wonder whether there is a discrepancy across the whole field of subjects? Maybe the advances in science have led to such demands on A level content that the actual pass level has to be adjusted? I suspect that the content of the science exams is very different today compared with my day - 1968. It really is hard to know. Maybe we can no longer compare between our exams and those of today?

I am aware that young people today are under a lot more pressure than we were. Many work to earn money to support themselves through their degree, as did my children. My friend's daughter very graciously said she would have been unable to gain a 1st if her grandad had not paid her fees and she had had to take a job. Times have changed so much it is difficult to make comparisons.

I was very struck by what GagaJo said about her subject. As someone who both teaches and marks she should know what is going on! I wish you could tell us your subject please Gaga.

Actually you don't need an A level in maths at all to study medicine. My son's friend is a medical student and he did nought take maths A level.

Thank you Tillybelle- I am not timid or easily insulted but some people are, and then feel that they don't want to share their experiences or thoughts in case they get a scathing response. I have always found GN to be a friendly site and would like to see it stay that way!

Mathematics is almost unique amongst A level subjects in that an exceptionally able student can score 100%, so it is, or it should be, easier to set an exam at the appropriate level, than it is for subjects like English or History where the marking can be more subjective and more difficult to standardise.

I agree that we just cannot make comparisons - the world is so different. A much bigger % do A levels, go to university, theories of teaching and learning, assessment have radically changed. When I studied A level history for example, there was zilch discussion about sources and how the source influenced content. Now this is discussed at primary school and quite right too. It’s a very sterile debate that assumes things in the past were better in a whole variety of ways and anyway we are here now.

Well that might be true in theory varian but it’s much more complex in practice.

travelsafar
I'm a bit behind in saying that you make a good point and I agree it is unfair that those who work hard get the same A grade as those who do not work so hard because of the low level at which the A grad is attained.
As suziewoozie explained, the very clever people are actually awarded their A as the top percentage of the candidates, rather than the actual percentage grade mark. She also makes the right point that to get a A* you really do have to work hard so this is a just reward for hard work.
Degrees are assessed in the same way. The percentage of First Class awards being roughly the same each year. The actual way these things are calculated and balanced from year to year is too comlplicated for me to understand or explain, but a lot of trouble is gone to in order to establish that fairness prevails from year to year, between each group of students.
You most certainly should never have received a scathing comment about your observation. I am shocked that this kind of cutting remark is allowed on Gransnet. You made a perfectly sensible comment. The press report these marks as the level for an A grade without reporting that there are other checks and balances put in place. The press like to make you think that these checks and balances do not happen so they can make people unhappy about the pass marks and so on. It is just a few of us from an education background who are more aware of how it works and maybe some people read it somewhere. But to be so rude to you because you didn't know, shows the appalling ignorance of the attacker and can only come from a mean desire to hurt someone. Why should you know? You are clearly intelligent and thoughtful. You have every right to make a comment. Your comment was actually helpful because it led to others explaining about the system and I, for one, learned a lot from them.

Rosina. Thank you! I didn't think you were timid or easily put off by rude comments. I entirely agree that some people are. I was the first time I posted. Out of the blue, while others were talking about the topic, came this dagger in my back suggesting I was stupid. It was not talking about the topic at all. I will never forget the pain of it or the way it took my breath away.

I have been messaged by so many people who have been attacked in this way and are who subsequently are very guarded about what they say. It really should not be like this. Nobody should be scared to speak. Only the obvious things should be forbidden. But this scathing habit of putting a person down in a spiteful way has to to be brought to a stop. It is like a cunning crocodile lurking to snap us in our beautiful discussions and wonderfully helpful supportive threads.

Like you I find Gransnet a very kind and caring place. I will fight to keep it so!

Varian You reminded me of a girl my husband taught, she was a Scholarship student. After one A level maths paper she came to our door (we lived in the School) and my husband asked her how the paper went. She said, "I should get 98%, I missed one bit." She was one of my favourite girls, a Turkish Cypriot who was so gentle and kind and who often had migraines. I was extremely fond of her. When she left, I, an English teacher then, said "How does she know?" He just said simply, "Oh she will be right. She will have been keeping a score as she worked through the paper." That was in approx. 1980.
and Suziewoozie. I know what you mean, It isn't that simple! It is so difficult to explain in an ordinary conversation. My second career was Psychology. Everything we do is founded on Statistical probability. I love Stats! But trying to explain why we say/do what we do and why we measure the data thus is so difficult! Especially if someone has a prejudice about a particular issue!
I am guessing you're a mathematician (did you say so?,... my brain!) Has Maths changed enormously since you were at school? I'm guessing YES! Statistics for a start....

Curriculum, as I understand it has changed considerably in the last 15 years! Many people who put a lot of store on high exam resultsas a status symbol get very exercised if they feel it has " got easier". It somehow threatens their own exam status! Exam content moves on to meet current societal requirements. I got awful A level results in 1969..but I have had a full life & rewarding career! Don't sweat it.. it is only important for students & schools!

Tillybelle, my subject is English. I've taught it here, in Spain, and China. I've taught GCSE, IGCSE, A Level and International Baccalaureate; AQA, Edexcel, OCR.

A Level English and Literature now are so hard, the students are working at a level I only reached at uni. It's good, because it means UK students are working at a level that is (ironically) only equalled by Asian students.

For example, I had no idea what a semantic field or a morpheme were, probably until my MA. Standard stuff for A level Eng Lang tho. A Level Lit students have to cover social and historical context, as well as critical literary theory AND language analysis and audience impact. And this is all in closed text exams.

Please don't devalue what our students achieve. I wish we could be proud that our qualifications are world class standard.

I've never understood why there are so many different exam boards in England. I suspect schools chose the boards on the basis of which exams they judge to be the easiest option. Should there not be national exams for England and Wales?

Tillybelle, in what way is it easier to become a doctor today than it was 30 years ago?

My youngest is a trainee medic. She had to plan years ahead to even get a chance to apply for medical school and universities are asking for absolute top marks.

My oldest child began university in 1993. One of his school pals did unexpectedly well in his Higher exams so applied through clearing for medicine and got in, having never expressed any interest in medicine before. There's no way a university would accept a student like that now.

Thank you to those who supported my right to express an opinion on this subject.

I am aware that not every one may feel the same way and accept they are entitled to their opinion also.

Having said that, it has not gone unnoticed that there are ways of expressing your opinion with out causing upset to others.

GagaJo

Thank you so much. I had two careers. My first was as a teacher. My subject English! I taught the whole age range. But it was a long time ago as I studied again and became a Psychologist. I agree that the content of the syllabus is very different today. The children in Primary school learn what a morpheme is now. In fact I believe the primary school curriculum in English grammar is too advanced for their age and puts them off a wonderful subject by taking the pleasure out of it and forcing them into a kind of rote learning. But that's another story!

I am so grateful to you for giving this information and explaining the enormous demands on our A level students. You definitely are at the cutting edge and in a position to give us the up to date facts. It is lovely to be told these without being derided for making mistakes for being out of date. I am always glad to learn from those who have the actual experience. Indeed that is one of the great pleasures of GN where we can express our feelings and receive explanations that put our minds at rest. Thank you.

I have always supported my students. I have said earlier that I believe they are under far more pressure than any time previously. Ironically, there was a time when, if asked, I advised students not to choose A level Psychology if that was what they were planning to read at university. It was such a huge subject with so much to get through and they would revisit it in their 1st year at uni anyway. I used to suggest Maths, Biology and English or History or three of these. When I taught in the University I was in admiration of the students, as I said earlier. There were some shockers I ought to be honest, but the majority were amazing young people.

Thank you for saying
Please don't devalue what our students achieve
and
I wish we could be proud that our qualifications are world class standard

SueDonim

I think I have upset you and I sincerely apologise.

I congratulate your youngest and wish her well.

The answer is not straight forward. To become a Doctor is an enormous commitment, takes years of study and exams and working under pressure at all hours. It is no holiday! I did say earlier how much i admire my two neighbours now doing their GP training and still doing exams while they are nearly thirty. They are not sure when they will be able to start a family.

The "easier to become" was not the best way of expressing the situation that came about when there was a shortage of Doctors, and I sincerely apologise. I used to know several people teaching in the Medical School and I taught the students on the Medicine path too. I am a retired Neuropsychologist. There was a move encouraging other Professionals, such as qualified Dentists to convert to being Doctors. Even I, who was quite old at that time, was asked if I would consider doing the extra top up and become a Medical Doctor! There was an expansion in the intake of Medical students, an opening of new Medical Schools, and even I noticed the drop in educational level and ability to discuss among my students on my part of their course. It looks as if that may have been before your daughter's time, possibly around or just after the time your eldest's pal was accepted. To be accepted through clearing suggests it was the time the medical schools were expanded.

I am really sorry I did not make it clear as to when my medic teaching colleagues were complaining about the "expansion situation".

I think, however, that the profession is so rigorous, it actually has its own method of shedding those who are not going to make the standard. However, some people are capable of learning for exams and can get through to qualify when they do not have the personality and attitude that this very special career requires. There still are those who like the money and the status. I am sure, at our age on GN, we have nearly all met one of these at some point.

Anyway, whereas entry to a pathway to train as a doctor may have eased at one time, the rigorous demands of the studying are extremely tough. Also the majority of medical students are wonderful, vocation-led young people and for these people I have my unreserved admiration.

Please accept my apologies for not saying all this in the first place. There are so many aspects to this topic it is difficult to give a concise answer without hurting someone and I would never deliberately do that.

I really do admire your daughter and it is so good to hear of a highly motivated bright girl entering Medical School today, when so much negativity has been around the training and life of Junior Doctors in the not so distant past. I genuinely wish her a very rewarding career.

When I was at school taking term exams , we were told that no matter how good we were , we would never be scored higher than 45%. Term reports look abysmal but I know why.
I would guess that they do something similar A levels, doesn't mean that the student got a lot of wrong answers.

I've never understood why there are so many different exam boards in England. I suspect schools chose the boards on the basis of which exams they judge to be the easiest option. Should there not be national exams for England and Wales?

Varian historically the exam boards were linked to universities - the main boards being Oxford & Cambridge but there was also the Joint Matriculation Board, which consisted of examiners from Northern Universities - Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, Liverpool & possibly Durham.
In those days most pupils who took A Levels were aiming for a university place and the universities had an interest in specifying the curriculum and monitoring the results.
At that time, schools certainly didn’t choose boards with a reputation for easy passes, the JMB which many schools in the north took, had a reputation for difficulty, but that gave their results more value & kudos in some people’s eyes.

I know it’s very different now & have no idea if the universities have any input into A Level syllabuses - does anyone know?

You'd think OCR would really but I think they're totally separate.

Thanks Janeainsworth for your explanation.. I still think it would make more sense for tbere to be a natjonal exam board.

To me the nub of the problem lies in the commercial nature of the exam boards which are profit-based. The result is that the exam boards are in competition with each other. Can you imagine them selling to a school the line: “I want your students to sit a harder exam, which will be more difficult and make it harder for them to gain a top grade”. It is not a sales pitch that will appeal. Competitive pressure on exam boards to get more students taking their exams embeds dumbing-down in the system. This is not the case in Scotland.
So the power over standards lies with the exam boards and not with the Government, and is the ability of the boards to set grade boundaries – the mark at which certain grades will be given. Regardless of whether or not the content of the examination can be made harder, the actual results are decided by these grade boundaries, set by the boards and not mentioned on the Ofqual website. Bragging about exams being made more difficult is pure noise unless the Government has control over grade boundaries.
Another major problem is the poor status afforded to those who mark the examinations. Payment for this is verging on derisory. University lecturers have virtually vanished from the system. A terrifying number of essay-based exam results are sent back for remarking, with one estimate putting this at 40 per cent.
Advocates of the separate boards argue that competition is good for the system, and that it gives teachers a range of choices to fit the exam to the individual needs of their students. The truth is that many decent and honourable teachers will see their first priority as entering their pupils for the exam that will give them the best result. That pressure is increased by heads and governing bodies having an increasing eye on league tables, and hence their school’s standing and reputation.
If A-levels are to be saved we need a single exam board for the UK, with standards as its priority, and which is merely required to break even rather than make money. We need a carrot-and-stick approach to universities so that they reinvolve themselves in A-level setting and marking. We need to raise the status of markers and to ban the offer of unconditional places, which have been shown to have a disastrous effect on motivation. For our disadvantaged students, we do not need to lower the standard of the A-level results they need, but rather to improve the quality of teaching in their schools, so there is no need to make excuses for them.