A’Level disasters 😔😣

[OverTheRainbow88]

Any other schools been majorly hit?

Just want to add my voice to say how sorry I am for your DC.
They have every right to be very angry.

There are other things at play, @sussexman

Whatever might have been the case historically, Eton is now very academically competitive. Once the boys are there, they are taught by mindblowingly good teachers. I can't speak for all of them, but that has been my son's experience. A cohort of very decidedly bright pupils plus spectacular teaching is likely to produce good results, however they are calculated.

That said, there have been some anomalies this year among my DS's friends' results.

Devastating comments from Headteachers here. (You have to register to read but free and only takes a minute)

www.tes.com/news/i-have-never-seen-such-car-crash-set-results

Seems impossible that a school can have its worst results in eight years. Weren't the results supposed to be based on the last three years? And I'm sure many Heads made sure their submissions were in line with what was reasonable for their school.

It just concerns me that looking on an individual level it's possible for an algorithm to bring a student down from a CAG of CCC to a grade of EEU. I hope this algorithm gets thoroughly shredded by experts.

HPFA

That article shows a really difficult picture.

@Toptotoeunicolour

I've just had a very interesting conversation with son's headmaster (Top 10 public school). The algorithm is seriously flawed, they have it now and the head of maths is pulling it to pieces. He has spoken to the schools minister. Public school heads are FUMING. This is not going to go away. Would be interested to hear if anyone else has spoken to headmaster and what is being done? He also urged us to write to MPs which we've already done - please do think about this.

It'll be interesting to see how it's flawed.

I can see that many students have been well below what they were acheiving in assessments but I can also see that overall results are in line with previous years percentage wise.

In fact 2019 results were lower than 2018 and 2020 are slightly above 2018.

Because it seems at a national level it has worked but then it has possibly created issues at an individual level due to some variable.

Mh son gets his gcse results best week.

I've taken all his exam grade since beginning of year 10, mock results and what I know he was acheiving. Therefore I can know where a grade is perhaps slightly harsh but a realistic possibly and where a grade is harsh and makes no sense on prior performance in subject.

He is in a state mainstream secondary that normally achieves above NA for pass rate above 4/5 in maths and English and also a positive progress 8.

Peaseblosson22 and ChloeCrocodile

😡😡 Wow, no need to be so pompous and rude. A lot of posters are talking about predicted grades as well as CAGs. I think the data in the UCAS End of Cycle report from last year is interesting and I thought others might think so too.

There is no call for you to police other people posts especially when you are arsey about it.

pointythings

I can see it happening if the cohort size was such that the algorithm was used, but the cohort was differently distributed in different years.

Just as a crude approximation, let us suppose that you have a school in which, historically, you have had 45 students in a ratio of 2 As: 3 Bs: 5 Cs,:3 Ds :2 Es. The overall 'average ability' is the same this year, but instead, they are all Cs.

The school is asked to rank all pupils, which it does, and submits CAGs, all Cs [these are ignored, as the cohort is large enough for standardisation]. When the algorithm is applied, the lowest 6 students in the ranking will all be given Es, because in a typical year, that is what the lowest pupils get.

The same, with an extended range of grades, could also result in a U rather than a C - the 'lowest pupil' in the cohort will get the 'lowest mark of the usual annual average', regardless of their CAG.

@DayB1Day

What about the kids who were away in mocks or had a breakdown/ wobble as first time in proper exam conditions which is what they’re used for. They’re screwed aren’t they.

IME kids do formal exams every year now in secondary. This is why. So it's part of schooling and not a massive deal.

Those parents who complain about this hopefully can now see why constant formal testing can be beneficial

Absolute disgrace, these poor kids, I can’t tell you how sad I feel for them & their parents, so much upset, just when you think 2020 can’t get much worse, it does.

@PatriciaPerch

I'm not sure why someone has told me their children's school is in a red light district but is a selective independent on here. Is it supposed to be a joke? to paint some kind of utopia inside an urban jungle? Am I supposed to retaliate by telling you my sons school has a waitrose opposite but the woods are littered with used condoms?

Patricia, you may laugh, but I believe that a very selective grammar school (built in a very unsalubrious part of the town when it needed to move out of a town centre site) did once get quite a prestigious award for 'schools doing exceptionally well in areas of high economic deprivation'...while bussing in its pupils from 60+ miles away.

Not ideal I know but surely the answer to this for them to actually take the exams in the autumn.
That way there can be no controversy over the result.

The algorithm is seriously flawed, they have it now and the head of maths is pulling it to pieces. He has spoken to the schools minister. Public school heads are FUMING

Has it been made available to all schools? Its plainly flawed but if its been made available to one school with connections then it should be made available to all.

Not ideal I know but surely the answer to this for them to actually take the exams in the autumn
That way there can be no controversy over the result

Who will teach them?

@Pixxie7

Not ideal I know but surely the answer to this for them to actually take the exams in the autumn. That way there can be no controversy over the result.

But what about those who perhaps have missed out on their first choice university but have a place for October elsewhere? Do they try to get the 'right' results [and after all this time would their results be fair?] but miss out on university this year as a result?

@WombatChocolate I teach in a school where most entries are A*/A every year. They are significantly down and not in line with CAG or rolling average. I don't know why you seem to not be believing this. The system has not worked as they said it would.

So for me, schools are to blame, for submitting results saying their students would achieve thirty percent more than the school has ever achieved. Forcing the downgrading and impacting the individual

Yes lets blame the teachers, god forbid we criticise and incompetent government.

An algorithm which downgrades a school's results significantly lower than any of their three previous years, moreover a school where the exam manager can evidence the accuracy of their predictions going back a decade is little more than useless.

An algorithm which penalises small cohorts of bright and high achieving pupils in schools with disadvantaged intakes is discriminatory.

An education minister bleating that its "only 1 grade in most cases" is incompetent or doesn't know how university entrance works particularly at the premium label universities. Or he simply doesn't care.

Even if you took the view that all predictions are inflated, the algorithm would favour schools with small cohorts (disproportionately private) as they were not rated against previous years' results but went on teacher prediction.

There is no way of looking at this algorithm and pretending its all the teachers' fault.

They could have saved the money they spent on it and bunged the names in a lottery.

“Ofqual has disclosed very little about its process, but has very recently let slip that for larger schools, teachers’ predicted grades don’t count at all: “Where a subject has more than 15 entries in a school, teachers’ predicted grades will not be used as part of the final grade calculation.” In practice, then, what matters is the school’s prior results. Millions of kids’ life chances hang on a statistical estimate based on their school’s previous performance compared to other schools“

Whereas:

Ofqual have said they will factor in teachers’ assessments for schools with smaller classes where under 5 students have grades submitted in a topic. These will tend to be better-resourced, often private schools

The first quote perhaps goes some way to explaining why some of the results seem so random on an individual level.

The second highlights a real unfairness.

The schools near me are reporting their best ever grades. I don't understand how someone can get a B in their mocks and be given an E now. That's just not fair

[quote GrammarTeacher]**@WombatChocolate* I teach in a school where most entries are A/A every year. They are significantly down and not in line with CAG or rolling average. I don't know why you seem to not be believing this. The system has not worked as they said it would.[/quote]
I think it is this type of example that really shows that something is properly wrong.

If the algorithm worked as described, this situation simply couldn't happen. It should be a situation that checking would pick up, because it is an obvious quality check - do any schools fall below their 3/5 year average without a significant change in cohort?

It would only happen if e.g. a blanket downgrade has been applied - either to a single type of school, or all large cohorts - in order to avoid grade inflation.

[quote GrammarTeacher]**@WombatChocolate* I teach in a school where most entries are A/A every year. They are significantly down and not in line with CAG or rolling average. I don't know why you seem to not be believing this. The system has not worked as they said it would.[/quote]
Yes, that is what has happened in the grammar schools by me. Meanwhile the "comprehensive" schools have received a higher proportion of A*/A than usual.

Yes, that is what has happened in the grammar schools by me. Meanwhile the "comprehensive" schools have received a higher proportion of A/A than usual.*

I wonder whether this is what happens when the last 3 years' average gives a very small percentage for, say, A*, equating to e.g. 0.5 of a pupil each year, or perhaps 1.5 pupils

It may be that the algorithm 'rounded up' such scenarios. In the same way as for the 'small cohort' examples, to avoid grade inflation, the much larger numbers of A* pupils in selective schools had to be 'rounded down' for each 'rounded up' one elsewhere.