The Exam Situation

Primus84 said:
How can you possibly say that the teacher assessments are "over inflated" with absolutely zero evidence as to what attainment was this year?
Click to expand...
not only that, but only downgrade students if the school isn't very good, but not downgrade the Eton's and Harrow of this world because their teachers get it right do they?
 
1finny said:
Headmaster today on BBC saying in normal Circumstances they appeal around 1% of their results.
This year - 50%

Andy Burnham believes Ofqual are in breach of equalities act as the algorithm discriminated against those inner city schools and people on lower incomes. Considering legal action.

The reality - 260000 kids affected - emotionally for a very long time.

This year, of all years, the risK to cutting them some slack and going with teacher assessments was what exactly?
Click to expand...
Finny there are a couple of legal actions afoot already, GDPR legislation has been breached, the whole thing stinks.
 
Primus84 said:
I think this is the problem with the world right now - to say everyone's opinion is equal sounds great and fair but it's simply not true, as said there are informed opinions and uninformed opinions.
Click to expand...
spot on Primus, this attitude was weaponsied during the brexit referendum to disregard expert opinions, education and experience in a subject and allow Daft Barry from the pub to feel an equal to a London School of Economics Professor with 40 years experience and a PHd.
 
1finny said:
Headmaster today on BBC saying in normal Circumstances they appeal around 1% of their results.
This year - 50%

Andy Burnham believes Ofqual are in breach of equalities act as the algorithm discriminated against those inner city schools and people on lower incomes. Considering legal action.

The reality - 260000 kids affected - emotionally for a very long time.

This year, of all years, the risK to cutting them some slack and going with teacher assessments was what exactly?
Click to expand...
there should absolutely be a class action lawsuit for reparations for a year of their lives lost before they can get into a decent Uni
 
BoroMart said:
there should absolutely be a class action lawsuit for reparations for a year of their lives lost before they can get into a decent Uni
Click to expand...

The Good Law Project are asking for those who have been downgraded 2 or more grades from their CAG assessment.
 
I am dreading my eldest getting her gcse results next week just heard they are sticking with flawed algorithm its an absolute disgrace. Its going to be carnage with larger class sizes for gcses i expect the algorithm will be even more brutal and unfair to many.
 
Poet, author and educator Michael Rosen, nails it

First they said they needed data
about the children
to find out what they’re learning.
Then they said they needed data
about the children
to make sure they are learning.
Then the children only learnt
what could be turned into data.
Then the children became data.
 
Ziggy said:
Poet, author and educator Michael Rosen, nails it

First they said they needed data
about the children
to find out what they’re learning.
Then they said they needed data
about the children
to make sure they are learning.
Then the children only learnt
what could be turned into data.
Then the children became data.
Click to expand...

The real worry is we appear to be numb to the sheer incompetence of this self serving government.
Oh, how we used to laugh at Americans
 
Glover_elbow said:
I am dreading my eldest getting her gcse results next week just heard they are sticking with flawed algorithm its an absolute disgrace. Its going to be carnage with larger class sizes for gcses i expect the algorithm will be even more brutal and unfair to many.
Click to expand...

Larger classes should actually help. It is smaller classes that are affected most. I think I have mostly understood the way it works now, someone can correct me if it's not right but it seems to be the consensus online:

Last year a school had 20 people sitting A-Level maths. They got 4 As, 10 Bs, 3 Cs 2 Ds 1 U. This year the 20 people sitting in A-Level maths have received an internal ranking by the school. The top 4 (no matter what predicted grade they have been given) get an A, the next 10 get a B, the next 3 a C, the next 2 a D and the last one gets a U. The class this year might have people predicted A* but they can't have an A* because the class didn't get one last year. They might have 10 total predicted A/A* but only 4 to give out, 6 of them end up with Bs. They might have nobody worse than a C this year but because of last year the lower ranked people get Ds and U. It's not quite that simple but it's the gist. That's why people have been dropped multiple grades, it's based on previous performance of the school.

At GCSE then chances are that the school has more than 20 people, especially if it's a core subject. That means it is more likely to have a more even distribution of grades. I presume there will still be people downgraded but the chances of dropping multiple grades should be lower.

A low scoring cohort last year will badly affect this year or an exceptional cohort this year won't get the grades they deserve. Conversely, an exceptional cohort last year means this year's don't have to be as exceptional to get a decent grade.
 
What would the government do if every kid in the country appealed every grade they have been given.
I think they have a legal right to do that.
Might make Boris have a rethink.
 
My God this is a shambles rapidly becoming a crisis. Everything that has come out in the last 24 hours is shocking. Subjects such as Latin and The Classics - almost exclusively taught in independent schools see huge grade inflation. A School or College that has assessed grades showing improvement on previous years , reflective of the actual cohort this year, are seeing A Level outcomes deflated to the worst performance in the last 3 years. The government asked schools to provide a professional assessment of their students performance. A teacher who knew the people and taught them carried out that assessment. This was moderated by the Head of that subject Department and these were further moderates by a schools Senior Leadership Team. Nobody submitted back of the fag packet assessments that sought to deliberately inflate grades. The government openly said they do not trust this professional assessment and grade inflation would happen so they depressed these assessments using a discredited algorithm. In essence rather than grade inflation we got grade deflation. How is this any better? The algorithm has been openly proven to punish the most disadvantaged students as it simply can’t be sophisticated enough to asses the performance of individual young people, only teachers who teach them can do that. The government either trust the profession or they don’t - they can’t have it both ways. Grade deflation is no better than grade inflation . The government must delay GCSE results which will be downloaded by schools on Wednesday and given to students on Thursday as they are known to be equally fundamentally floored. The government must accept the only fair way out of this is to withdraw the A Level results from last week and the GCSE’s due out this week and replace them with teacher assessed outcomes. Will that see outcomes improve, yes as it takes out the unpredictability of how young people perform in terminal examinations but that seems in the extraordinary circumstances we face as close to a fair resolution as we are going to get.
 
Last edited:
Steve_Wilkos said:
Here is my summary:

The tory party, and its braindead voters, are a disgrace.
Click to expand...

Chatting to a mate of mine on Saturday who voted Tory. Openly telling me how disappointed he has been with Johnson et al. He didn’t have much to say when I said - ‘what on earth were you expecting from his track record’.

He likes Starmer tho ;)
 
How much do exams measure the practical and intellectual capabilities of young people and how useful are they in measuring "common sense"?
This emphasis on exam acheivement = enhanced job and life prospects is, in essence, no different to the Victorian sausage factory that was used to filter boys and girls as commodities.
The rich have their exclusive grammar school. The rest have varying levels of achievement [if that is the word] according to socio-economic groups and relative deprivation.
Shame on this or any Government who can ruin young peoples futures at tyhe flick of a pen.(n)
 
boromike85 said:
Larger classes should actually help. It is smaller classes that are affected most. I think I have mostly understood the way it works now, someone can correct me if it's not right but it seems to be the consensus online:

Last year a school had 20 people sitting A-Level maths. They got 4 As, 10 Bs, 3 Cs 2 Ds 1 U. This year the 20 people sitting in A-Level maths have received an internal ranking by the school. The top 4 (no matter what predicted grade they have been given) get an A, the next 10 get a B, the next 3 a C, the next 2 a D and the last one gets a U. The class this year might have people predicted A* but they can't have an A* because the class didn't get one last year. They might have 10 total predicted A/A* but only 4 to give out, 6 of them end up with Bs. They might have nobody worse than a C this year but because of last year the lower ranked people get Ds and U. It's not quite that simple but it's the gist. That's why people have been dropped multiple grades, it's based on previous performance of the school.

At GCSE then chances are that the school has more than 20 people, especially if it's a core subject. That means it is more likely to have a more even distribution of grades. I presume there will still be people downgraded but the chances of dropping multiple grades should be lower.

A low scoring cohort last year will badly affect this year or an exceptional cohort this year won't get the grades they deserve. Conversely, an exceptional cohort last year means this year's don't have to be as exceptional to get a decent grade.
Click to expand...
Boromike you are right as far as it goes, I think. What would happen in a usual year is marks are normalised based on averages across the country, so if 10% get an A* last year across the whole country, then the top 10% define where A* ends and an A begins, and so on.

The problem with the algorithm is it is used on a school by school basis not an average across the country. This, as you say unfairly disadvantages a school that performed poorly in recent years, irrespective of how good the class of 2020 is.

I think the disparity could be larger in smaller class sizes just because they have a small representative sample, but that could also overestimate pupils achievements. The smaller the sample size the bigger the margin of error.

My belief is the algorithm was deliberately constructed to help private schools, and by default disadvantaged the government funded school system. The decision makers at OfQual may well have kids in private education and were biased, probably intentionally towards these institutions.

The main thing that is missed in all this, is what the government have done is illegal, there is no foundation to allow this to happen, other than an 80 seat majority, of course. GDPR specifically forbids this to happen, and does so clearly and unequivocally. The government do not have a legal leg to stand on.

This will result in many legal challenges and the government will, I think, do a U-Turn when they realize the scale of the issue they are facing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top