Annual 'a' Level Results Slating Thread

[Chinahand]

Well done to all the pupils who have got the grades they wanted - and there's always clearing and re=sits if you didn't!

 

This is a perennial debate; my view the past was different - one 3 hour exam isn't a particularly good way of seeing how competent a person is at a particular subject. So I approve of the broader emphasis nowadays.

 

I am sure the best kids work just as hard, get just as stressed out and deserve to be congratulated for their efforts just as much as when I was a youngster.

 

BUT ... my understanding is that it is getting increasingly difficult to differentiate the real top students as more and more people are getting good grades. There are only 5% or whatever places in the really top universities and they are having great difficulty selecting them from the 25% who are getting As.

 

The result: they have to use other selection techniques which can be unfair - extra curricular activities, charity work etc etc. Firstly its wrong for a geeky mathematician with superb ability to loose his place to a pupil who isn't as good, but still got an A, and also had a gap year looking after orphans in Lesotho.

 

Plus pure and simply what allows some kids to be able to do all these extra curricular things is very strongly correlated with the wealth of their parents - which perpetuates inequality.

 

Oxbridge is introducing its own enterance exams to really differentiate pupils right at the top of the ability range - its sad that A levels are no longer able to do that and I don't think the A* will do enough - having its own exam puts these great institutions at risk of cries of elitism.

 

That really pisses me off - of course they are elitist - they are there to educate the best to the fullest of their ability - but what is vital is that they do this to the best from all social backgrounds. Poverty or whatever must not stop the most academically able from getting the best education.

 

I don't think the system we've got does this at the moment - which as Jimcalagon intimates does affect the technological and social development of a country.

[When Skies Are Grey]

Exactly....life is what happens after your exams. Students and the media get far too het up about this...we should be encouraging the sportsmen, the artists, the entrepreneurial spirits, not just the eggheads who can regurgitate under exam conditions.

 

If we didn't have "eggheads", you wouldn't be typing on a messageboard, you'd be scratching on a cave wall - the only sport would be running, the artists would be painting with their own dung (and how we've come full circle on that one!) and the entrepreneurial spirits would be going into business selling caves with a view.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of stupidity and ignorance.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of completely missing the point.

[Jimcalagon]

Exactly....life is what happens after your exams. Students and the media get far too het up about this...we should be encouraging the sportsmen, the artists, the entrepreneurial spirits, not just the eggheads who can regurgitate under exam conditions.

 

If we didn't have "eggheads", you wouldn't be typing on a messageboard, you'd be scratching on a cave wall - the only sport would be running, the artists would be painting with their own dung (and how we've come full circle on that one!) and the entrepreneurial spirits would be going into business selling caves with a view.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of stupidity and ignorance.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of completely missing the point.

 

I understand that doing well in an exam does not equate with doing well in real life. What I was taking exception to was the fact that the three 'professions' that you think we should be encouraging would be nothing without the people who have given us the real benefits of civilisation, you know, farming, power, communications, reading and writing.

 

The so-called 'eggheads' - engineers and scientists - are the people who should be encouraged, not bone-headed sportsmen, pseudo-intellectual artists or get-rich-quick by fucking people over entrepreneurs.

 

Please remind me - which sportsman, artist or entrepreneur designed the computer, communications network and software which allow you to post messages on manxforums?

[GD4ELI]

It's funny how people make a virtue of stupidity and ignorance.

It's a very British thing that.

[When Skies Are Grey]

Exactly....life is what happens after your exams. Students and the media get far too het up about this...we should be encouraging the sportsmen, the artists, the entrepreneurial spirits, not just the eggheads who can regurgitate under exam conditions.

 

If we didn't have "eggheads", you wouldn't be typing on a messageboard, you'd be scratching on a cave wall - the only sport would be running, the artists would be painting with their own dung (and how we've come full circle on that one!) and the entrepreneurial spirits would be going into business selling caves with a view.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of stupidity and ignorance.

 

It's funny how people make a virtue of completely missing the point.

 

I understand that doing well in an exam does not equate with doing well in real life. What I was taking exception to was the fact that the three 'professions' that you think we should be encouraging would be nothing without the people who have given us the real benefits of civilisation, you know, farming, power, communications, reading and writing.

 

The so-called 'eggheads' - engineers and scientists - are the people who should be encouraged, not bone-headed sportsmen, pseudo-intellectual artists or get-rich-quick by fucking people over entrepreneurs.

 

Please remind me - which sportsman, artist or entrepreneur designed the computer, communications network and software which allow you to post messages on manxforums?

 

I am not denegrating the acheivements of the scientists etc and I can see that you like to knock one off over pictures of Bill Gates....but I am merely trying to promote the idea that "classic" educational subjects are not the be all and end all of society.

 

Whilst I appreciate the advent of the micro chip and all that comes with it, I also appreciate the rich tapestry of life that is created by clothes designers, musicians, artists, photographers, sports men and women etc...you may enjoy your life in one and zeros...I however prefer a little something in between.

 

Thanks now.

[Keith brief]

im ded chuffed got 9 passes at a grade's icludin english!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

among the 7 other's i got maths to.

[GD4ELI]

im ded chuffed got 9 passes at a grade's icludin english!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

among the 7 other's i got maths to.

Sadly that's not funny

[Jimcalagon]

I am not denegrating the acheivements of the scientists etc and I can see that you like to knock one off over pictures of Bill Gates...

 

Hey, he's a good looking feller!

[VinnieK]

This is a perennial debate; my view the past was different - one 3 hour exam isn't a particularly good way of seeing how competent a person is at a particular subject. So I approve of the broader emphasis nowadays.

 

I am sure the best kids work just as hard, get just as stressed out and deserve to be congratulated for their efforts just as much as when I was a youngster.

 

If anything they work harder. I've known a few teachers who've been in the business for long enough to remember teaching back in the eighties and the general opinion I've encountered is that the A-Level reforms in 2001 increased the workload substantially. The net effect of this is that it's now largely impossible to teach a subject in depth and so they have little option but to resort to teaching "for the exam".

 

The result: they have to use other selection techniques which can be unfair - extra curricular activities, charity work etc etc. Firstly its wrong for a geeky mathematician with superb ability to loose his place to a pupil who isn't as good, but still got an A, and also had a gap year looking after orphans in Lesotho.

 

They wont. Gap years are frowned upon in mathematics and quite a few of the hard sciences - extra curricular activities and gap years count for little, and in the case of the latter sometimes count against you. Most commonly, if you want to get ahead in science or maths you sit an AEA or STEP which have the advantage of requiring little to no extra knowledge on top of what's provided in the A-Level syllabus, but have more interesting questions (I say interesting rather than challenging because they're not in any technical sense harder than the A-Level questions, but they do require a slightly more creative way of thinking about the problem).

 

That really pisses me off - of course they are elitist - they are there to educate the best to the fullest of their ability - but what is vital is that they do this to the best from all social backgrounds. Poverty or whatever must not stop the most academically able from getting the best education.

 

Slightly off topic, but I think this kind of falls into the trap of thinking that Oxbridge are still the be all and end all in education when that hasn't been true for quite a while. Both rightly increase their entry demands because they've got a very lucrative reputation to defend, but plenty of other places offer a comparable and in some cases superior education (Oxford Brookes' History department, for instance, has in the past been rated higher than that of its illustrious neighbour). The best indication of this is in fact at those universities themselves (and indeed other "elite" universities) which are only too happy to accept postgraduate candidates, even from the oft lamented ex-polytechnics, who generally acquit themselved very well up against colleagues from more traditional universities.

 

As such I'm not that bothered, and perhaps even a little cynical when it comes to universities implementing new entry requirements. Where the substance of a student's education actually counts for something (academia, the sciences, etc), the general view is that where you went isn't really as important as how you performed.

[Drdimmer]

It appears Oxford may be jumping off the bandwagon initially regarding the 'new' A* grade:

Oxford delays on A* grade offers

[P.K.]

Whilst I appreciate the advent of the micro chip and all that comes with it, I also appreciate the rich tapestry of life that is created by clothes designers, musicians, artists, photographers, sports men and women etc...you may enjoy your life in one and zeros...I however prefer a little something in between.

 

Thanks now.

The words "lying" and "bastard" spring to mind here.

 

You have posted in the past that anyone that enjoys "musicians, artists, photographers" etc etc is a "pretentious tosser". So presumably you are into self abuse? You post like someone who would be...

[When Skies Are Grey]

Whilst I appreciate the advent of the micro chip and all that comes with it, I also appreciate the rich tapestry of life that is created by clothes designers, musicians, artists, photographers, sports men and women etc...you may enjoy your life in one and zeros...I however prefer a little something in between.

 

Thanks now.

The words "lying" and "bastard" spring to mind here.

 

You have posted in the past that anyone that enjoys "musicians, artists, photographers" etc etc is a "pretentious tosser". So presumably you are into self abuse? You post like someone who would be...

 

Have I? Wow...the therapy must really be working well. Thanks for the insight......

[P.K.]

I like salad, don't you?

[When Skies Are Grey]

I'm no good at this internet lark...I am now lost but thats nothing new.

 

I am sure you are right PK...

[manshimajin]

As such I'm not that bothered, and perhaps even a little cynical when it comes to universities implementing new entry requirements. Where the substance of a student's education actually counts for something (academia, the sciences, etc), the general view is that where you went isn't really as important as how you performed.

Oxford had its own two-stage entrance exams and College interviews back in the 60's. It did not rely on the GCE results as the sole indicator of the capacity to learn at tertiary level. So doing its own thing is part of its tradition - not something new.

 

There is no doubt that today's students have more ground to cover. It is hard to compare the learning challenges for one generation against that of another. What does concern me a bit is that the 'normal distribution' of results seems now to be skewed to the high end of the scale and that in my, admittedly limited experience, basic literacy and numeracy skills seem poorer today than when I was young and it was beaten into us (literally). Maybe that is the influence of the spreadsheet and the word processor so it should be welcomed.

 

I also wonder about some of the side effects of school league tables. The son of a friend who went to a private school was deliberately pulled out of certain courses he wanted to do because the school thought he would get low pass marks in them, which in turn effects their ranking. If this is a common practice it signals a move away from education to result management. Hopefully it was a 'one off'.