Can some one explain to me what the situation with the A- levels is?

[AnaadiNitya]

I’ve tried to have a look at other threads but it’s not very clear ( to me)

Are the exams results being downgraded due to what the school normally achieved? What the lock down anything to do with it?
If a pupil actually achieved a A would it actually be down graded anyway?

Sorry I know I sound dense on the matter.

The catch is that for the majority of students mocks are much lower than what they would have got had they sat the exam.

@Comefromaway

The catch is that for the majority of students mocks are much lower than what they would have got had they sat the exam.

I'm pleased as it means two of mine go up to what we predicted for them anyway. Disappointed for a few, but the two that will change were the ones I thought were outrageous, so glad it can be fixed (I hope it is as straightforward as it seems).

@itsgettingweird

Actually seeing how simple a process appeals is and criteria for valid mock i was quite surprised.and have been searching for the catch

It screams to me that they realise they've made a huge fuck up and are saving face by now making out they will do their best for students.

Which they wouldn't have to do if they didn't made such a pigs ear of it in the first place!

I think someone must have found the catch as Ofqual have already suspended the appeals policy and are "reviewing" it.

What an absolute car crash.

A lot of the kids complaining need a reality check. Just because they were predicted 4 A and got 3A and an A is not a reason to take legal action.

A lot of the kids complaining need a reality check. Just because they were predicted 4 A and got 3A and an A is not a reason to take legal action

That’s not the case for the majority though is it.
You appear to be lacking in empathy.

Don’t get me wrong, i feel sorry for many if the kids, not all these kids taking legal action for reasons like I stated is wrong. It takes the focus away from those kids genuinely affected who have lost out and been tested unfairly.

This only o saw that this morning these poor students.

And using the postcode in the algorithm benefits private schools kids and is extremely harsh in those kids from worse off areas. There algorithm doesn’t seem to be able to compute that a kid in poor town can’t get AAA. These are the kids who should have someone fighting their corner.

@AlwaysCheddar - the algorithm does not use the postcode. Where did you get that idea from?

I'm pleased as it means two of mine go up to what we predicted for them anyway. Disappointed for a few, but the two that will change were the ones I thought were outrageous, so glad it can be fixed (I hope it is as straightforward as it seems).

Nothing seems to be as straightforward as it seems any more, @Marlboroughdreams. I cannot believe Ofqual are now releasing changes to their 5pm announcement at 11pm on a Saturday night!

@Letseatgrandma

I'm pleased as it means two of mine go up to what we predicted for them anyway. Disappointed for a few, but the two that will change were the ones I thought were outrageous, so glad it can be fixed (I hope it is as straightforward as it seems).

Nothing seems to be as straightforward as it seems any more, @Marlboroughdreams. I cannot believe Ofqual are now releasing changes to their 5pm announcement at 11pm on a Saturday night!

🤬😭🤯

Frankly, there is no fair way of assigning grades without an exam, unless this was a course based subject known about for the previous 2 years. (But I understand that course work element was removed some years ago)

As I understand it, the grades were based originally on teacher predicted grades, which are used every year for students to choose universities to apply for. Predicted grades, themselves are often based on mock exams (usually set by the teacher, but could also be past papers), assignments over the previous year, and I imagine also the teacher may include participation in the classroom, but this last is speculation.

The problem is that lots of students put more effort into the actual exam. I think it possible the bias will favour girls, who tend to work more consistently throughout the year, but the sudden dropping of exams must feel really unfair.

Teacher bias works both ways, and they can predict a lower mark than obtained, but usually is higher.

I understand the teachers were also asked to rank the students in order. Then the algorithm included past years on how well the school performed, and how accurate past predictions were compared to grades.

So, if there is a very bright student in a poor performing school, the student is likely to be downgraded by this moderated algorithm.

These Govt quangos are really useless aren't they? Didn't Ofqual take a moment to check things over? Same with the Scottish results the week before. All this back-tracking to correct their mistakes. It's nothing new. HMRC have been making mistakes for the entire 35 years I've been an accountant. Local councils constantly do it. As have the passport agency, driving standards agency, etc. There's a massive shortfall in common sense throughout the civil service, quangos, etc. Politicians get the blame, but it's the same whichever govt is in power. HMRC were equally useless when Brown was in charge.

The thing is that the numbers achieving each grade are similar to previous years, but to do that, 40% have had to be downgraded, so the teacher/school declarations must have been massively over-stated for some reason. If they'd been allowed to stand, we'd have seen massive increases in numbers achieving the higher grades which would cause knock on effects for Uni offers etc as too many people would have met the Uni requirement meaning too many people on courses so Unis would have had to reject some to whom they'd given offers.

And that would be a) really unfair on the year before and year after's cohort and b) the students in schools where teachers were less optimistic.

They needed to either have the exams (like much of the rest of Europe have managed) or accept that grades this year would be higher, as no one was going to mess up their exam.

In which case, they needed a system similar to France's, where they actually used human beings (!) to look into anomalies, rather than just doing things at a macro level 'computer says no' type situation. Then you can account for the bright student in an otherwise mediocre school etc, while still reigning in overly optimistic predictions (of which I am sure there were some, just far fewer than the government etc are now claiming).

@user1497207191

The thing is that the numbers achieving each grade are similar to previous years, but to do that, 40% have had to be downgraded, so the teacher/school declarations must have been massively over-stated for some reason. If they'd been allowed to stand, we'd have seen massive increases in numbers achieving the higher grades which would cause knock on effects for Uni offers etc as too many people would have met the Uni requirement meaning too many people on courses so Unis would have had to reject some to whom they'd given offers.

It that's not how it's worked.

There are students who been consistently a D throughout the course. D in mocks. Lowest ranked student in class. Teacher puts forward a D rather than trying for a C which most assume they would.

But an algorithm takes previous 3 years results. There may have been a U at some point or nah have never been a U in that subject in that school. But the computer decides everywhere must have 2% students getting a U. Therefore 1 student must get a U.

The D student who is actually a solid D gets that U.

Then C students. Lowest gets an E because computer says so and next 2 lowest get a D because computer says so.

This is what people are arguing is unfair. Which is why they are asking for re considerations where it can be evidenced.

The issue seems to be that in RL each year a percentage of students miss their grade because of circumstances. Of course that happens.

But a computer system has assumed those at bottom will do this and lowered them and those at top of rankings who could just have likely been ill, had a death in family or split up with boyfriend aren't affected.

Hence why too results have follows trend.

It isn't fair to make an assumption which students will have an issue in the day and do badly. That's what cause the rise in grades through CAGs. It was based on what each student individually would have got if exam went well on day.

@Hercwasonaroll Could you also explain the other table you posted? What does it show? Relating to A and A* grades and category of school, independent, state, etc..

@milveycrohn

‘As I understand it, the grades were based originally on teacher predicted grades, which are used every year for students to choose universities to apply for. Predicted grades, themselves are often based on mock exams (usually set by the teacher, but could also be past papers), assignments over the previous year, and I imagine also the teacher may include participation in the classroom, but this last is speculation’

No that’s not how it worked . The UCAS predictions are nothing to do with this process . The grades which people are referring to are Centre Assessed Grades which were submitted by the school to the exam boards approximately 12 weeks ago. The calculation is based on approximately 40 data points and should form the best estimate of how candidates would have performed in the exam. So based on a lot of information about the candidates. These are the grades which have been downgraded

So based on a lot of information about the candidates

The CAGs had a lot of information about the candidate. The algorithm ofqual used had nothing about the actual candidate and lots about the previous 3 years of candidates.

@ChateauMargaux

The table shows the proportion of A* and A grades awarded by school type each year. The 2018-19 change shows a decrease in those grades to independent schools. In 2020 there is a 4.7% increase. This is well above any other type of school.

Thanks again @Hercwasonaroll. Th3 4.7 is not a percentage but the absolute difference between the 2019 and 2020 number and given that those numbers are not percentages either, I can only assume that it is something that approximates to the total number of A and A* grades, in thousands?

If that is the case, in 2019, independents accounted for 26.1% of those high grades and in 2020 they account for 26.75% of those grades. The 'Other' category moved from 14.5% to 15.4% which is actually the biggest increase. Secondary selective is where the biggest decrease seems to have been.

What is in 'other'?

Based on this, independents got approximately 1,200 A and A grades that perhaps should have been allocated to other categories, this is less than 1% of the total A and A grades. This does not tell the story that is being passed around that the readjustment so vastly skewed.

Is there more evidence that I am missing or am I seeing this 1% or what could be 500 students as less significant than it really is?

Could other be things like online tutorial type colleges?

@Hercwasonaroll Forget my last post, I have found a TES article that says the table is the percentage of total grades that were A and A*. I misunderstood, it makes sense now.

teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2020/08/16/the-tragedy-of-grades-based-on-predictions/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

This is a really good article to explain the issues.