‘A’level results, not a level playing field.

So now the government who blamed firemen for Grenfell and careworkers for care home deaths are blaming teachers for the A level fiasco, rather than their shamefully elitist aglorithm?

#ToryShambles

Precisely Grany.

It is a complete shambles as so many things have been . The Government , including the P.M. are so incompetent . So many mistakes.So many cover ups .

Nandalot
That’s because based on algorithms from previous years, the independent sector always does well with grades ( over the state sector) .
You can cave in completely, like the Scottish government, and pretend you believe everything that teachers ‘predict’ is true
( the SNP have their eye on election) or try and do something rational and allow schools to appeal.
It’s been a very sad year for the students all round, but boosting grades in a dishonest way isn’t the best thing to do.
Universities are being very understanding ( and want to keep their numbers up anyway) and making sure that those who had already been accepted prior to grades would still get a place.

Yes,*lemongove*, but a 4.7% increase? Surely if the algorithm was fair, there would a be a similar increase in good grades across the board not just in the independent sector.

An algorithm can’t be unfair by it’s very nature.
What is shows is how state schools are dropping behind the independent sector, sadly.

And of course many independent schools are selective in intake and are teaching bright children from supportive homes. Not comparing like with like really.

Jo Maugham QC

More details of our legal challenge to the A Level tragi-shambles (which compliments that brought by our friends, the brilliant
Here it is thread reader

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1294205171027902464.html

It has been very hard for pupils taking exams this year and no doubt the GCSEs next week will be the same.

I did read somewhere that the teaching unions had a say in using the algorithm and were in favour (will try and find the article), mind you that was before the results came out.

Being able to appeal is now going to be free, which is good.

I heard an Oxford college spokeswoman say today they were going to honour all the offers they had made on the basis that as no exams had been taken, nothing had in fact changed since they had made the offers.
This seems a persuasive logic to me.

It's a pity other universities haven't just followed suit - would have caused much less stress and less chaos.

lemongrove That's not the whole truth.

State grammar schools and academic state sixth form colleges have comparable results to the best independent schools, but they have been downgraded harshly.

The difference is that they tend to have bigger entries per subject. The algorithm used by Ofqual hasn't adjusted small entries (fewer than five), has taken teacher assessments into account with entries between six and 15, but has used a computer algorithm without even considering teacher assessments for entries of 16 and over.

It doesn't show that state schools are dropping behind the independent sector at all!! Independent school pupils have been awarded higher grades without even sitting an exam, so it shows the exact opposite!

Therefore, minority subjects, which tend to have very small numbers, haven't been downgraded. That includes subjects such as Latin, which tend to be taught more in private schools. Private schools tend to have small entries, so they haven't been adjusted or at least teacher assessments have at least been taken into account.

Pupils have been discriminated against because their school/college has high numbers of entries. That's how the algorithm has worked - nothing at all to do with higher standards in privates schools.

Inner city pupils tend to take A levels at sixth form and FE colleges, which have been particularly badly affected.

Interestingly, Westminster School, which is independent but also has large entries, hasn't announced its results and is waiting for appeals. Hills Road Sixth Form College in Cambridge, which has some of the best A level results in the country, has also been affected, just because it has big entries.

It is also not true that universities have been understanding about grades. A handful have been, but the vast majority of Russell Group universities haven't shown any leniency. Some have already informed candidates that even if grades are upgraded on appeal, which is unlikely given the criteria needed for appeals, their places are already full and there won't be any further vacancies.

NotSpaghetti

I heard an Oxford college spokeswoman say today they were going to honour all the offers they had made on the basis that as no exams had been taken, nothing had in fact changed since they had made the offers.
This seems a persuasive logic to me.

It's a pity other universities haven't just followed suit - would have caused much less stress and less chaos.

Yes, one college has said that. Others have stated they won't/can't.

lemongrove

Being able to appeal is now going to be free, which is good.

No, it's not because the appeals will be almost meaningless.

lemongrove

An algorithm can’t be unfair by it’s very nature.
What is shows is how state schools are dropping behind the independent sector, sadly.

How on earth do you work out that an algorithm can't be unfair? Of course, it can be. It can be used to skew almost anything.

Some have already informed candidates that even if grades are upgraded on appeal, which is unlikely given the criteria needed for appeals, their places are already full and there won't be any further vacancies.

We have to remember that Unis make more offers than they have places because there is always a number of students who don't get the required grades. Of course, it is impossible to tell this year which students have been unfairly downgraded and which would not have made the grades. Outliers include examples like genuinely outstanding students who have been downgraded because their school has never had an A or A* in that subject before, or native speaking or bilingual students who have had their probably inevitable A or A* in their language downgraded for much the same reason (algorithms can't tell if they're native speakers or not!)

On the other hand, I think that Universities will lose so many overseas students this year, because of covid and the fact that we are handling it so badly, that it might be shortsighted of them to turn away UK students.

But they are turning them away Maizie, especially the Oxbridge colleges. They have already issued rejections. Their reason is that their accommodation is full. It's possible Cambridge might have a rethink because all its teaching is going to be online next year anyway. The government needs to relax the cap before they can go over quota.

One example of unfairness is the following:

If a school/college had a candidate with a U grade last year, the algorithm calculates that there must be a U this year.

Teachers were required to submit the names of their entries in rank order. Therefore, whichever candidate appears bottom of the list will receive a U, even if he/she is predicted to achieve a higher grade.

Candidates have received very different results across the range of their subjects. For example, they could receive a B in French because they were taught in a small class and the grade wasn't adjusted. At the same time, their grade for English, for which they would probably have been taught in a much bigger class, was downgraded.

What a mess, how long did the Government have to get this right?

From the time it cancelled this year's exams.

It did various impact assessments using averages, but didn't consider the impact at individual level.

The algorithm was flawed from the start. The government should also have communicated with universities and asked them to be flexible with those pupils whose schools/colleges were badly affected and whose grades were downgraded through no fault of their own.

The regulator responsible for moderating A-level exam results ignored offers of expert help after statisticians refused to sign a highly-restrictive non-disclosure agreement.

news.sky.com/story/a-levels-exam-regulator-ignored-expert-help-after-statisticians-wouldnt-sign-non-disclosure-agreements-12049289

Ofqual knew the algorithm was flawed, but didn't care enough to accept advice from people with real expertise. Presumably, Ofqual and the government thought they could just spin their way out of criticism.

growstuff

The regulator responsible for moderating A-level exam results ignored offers of expert help after statisticians refused to sign a highly-restrictive non-disclosure agreement.

news.sky.com/story/a-levels-exam-regulator-ignored-expert-help-after-statisticians-wouldnt-sign-non-disclosure-agreements-12049289

Ofqual knew the algorithm was flawed, but didn't care enough to accept advice from people with real expertise. Presumably, Ofqual and the government thought they could just spin their way out of criticism.

Not sure about Ofqual 'not caring enough'; I suspect that the refusal to sign an NDA was the deciding factor.

Tories have been very keen on NDAs for quite some time now. They like to keep government as secret as possible.

Remind me; who voted for this totally undemocratic way of proceeding?

Goodness knows how on earth it could have been managed fairly. With the best will in the world there are inequalities in quality of education available, social background support and just plain academic ability. Some schools admit inflating predicted grades because they knew what was likely to happen. Other more honest schools did not do that. So what do we have? A lot of youngsters with grades that may or may not be accurate. I reckon that universities and colleges should accept those who really want to go there and time will sort out those who are up to the work required or are not.
University is not the only route to a good career.

But it had nothing to do with which schools inflated grades! It had to do with the size of the entry for particular subjects. Private schools inflate grades just as much as state schools, but their pupils weren't downgraded so much solely because they tend to have smaller entries. Selective state grammar schools were downgraded more than comprehensives.

There were various improvements which could have been made to the algorithm to minimise this situation. The outcomes should have been realised anyway and the effect on university entries could have been mitigated.

A number of private school pupils have had grades upgraded, even though they didn't sit an exam and haven't proved themselves. Their results have been based on inflated grades and/or historic performance. How can that be fair?

there are inequalities in quality of education available, social background support and just plain academic ability.

Nobody's disputing that, but when pupils have worked their socks off, despite disadvantages, to be treated unfairly just because they went to a big school with historic low achievement, is totally unacceptable.

Would you tell someone who's been to Eton that university isn't the only route to a good career?