Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

A’Level disasters 😔😣

999 replies

OverTheRainbow88 · 13/08/2020 11:17

Any other schools been majorly hit?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
desertcoffeeyoga · 14/08/2020 15:07

@SmileEachDay really hope they do -

itsgettingweird · 14/08/2020 15:15

@SmileEachDay

The Equalities Commission has warned it will step in if Ofqual can’t “remove bias”...
🤞
SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:18

I mean obvs blah blah Guardian journalism and all those caveats, but assuming it’s not made up I think this is news.

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:18

FFS *GOOD news

Baaaahhhhh · 14/08/2020 15:23

The main thing which I find completely inexplicable is the range of downgrades. Everyone might reasonably expect one grade reduction in one subject, but there seem to be so many A/B's to C/D's or straight A's to straight C's. Some students ACE from a proposed AAB.

Surely, surely, there should have been a "what the fuck is going on here" brake on downgrades by two or three grades. Even just a real person getting a list and doing a reality check.

Coffeeandbeans · 14/08/2020 15:25

You would think that the resulting spreadsheet would have a check column that said if column C is different to column A “Check”. For each subject with a column for CAG and then a column for the allocated grade. Simple.

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:28

Coffeeandbeans

CAGs didn’t even make the spreadsheet for groups over 15...

Toptotoeunicolour · 14/08/2020 15:29

I think the bias may be due to class size. Private schools have smaller class sizes, large cohort groups were hurt more. But it's really only for the obscure subjects - Sanskrit at Eton or something like that. Maths and Physics at Eton will have been hurt just as badly as every other large class (Eton is huge), on that parameter alone.

desertcoffeeyoga · 14/08/2020 15:30

@Baaaahhhhh that's brilliant ! Yes a " what the f is going on here" brake would have been brilliant .. all these bright minds and not one thought "hang on a sec"....

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:36

all these bright minds

Sorry, I’m puzzled...which ones?

Mistigri · 14/08/2020 15:36

The main thing which I find completely inexplicable is the range of downgrades. Everyone might reasonably expect one grade reduction in one subject, but there seem to be so many A/B's to C/D's or straight A's to straight C's. Some students ACE from a proposed AAB.

There have been some explanations on twitter. The main thing is that the algorithm takes no account of the students' CAGs only their rank in the subject group. Grades are allocated according to the "expected" % of students in each grade, and once the permitted number of A grades have been allocated the next highest ranked student cannot get higher than a B, once all the B grades are allocated the next student cannot get more than a C ... etc. Worst case I've seen on twitter is a candidate with a CAG of AAB and awarded grades of EED Confused.

Baaaahhhhh · 14/08/2020 15:37

Also, and this is not the current narrative, because it doesn't play out in the total stats, so controversial, but there have been some previous very under-performing colleges who have never had a A grade student, proudly presenting their best ever results, with for example, 30% of their students being awarded an A. I can't understand how that could have happened either. Again, let's have a "what the fuck is going on here" look.

desertcoffeeyoga · 14/08/2020 15:41

@SmileEachDay at ofqual

lifeafter50 · 14/08/2020 15:42

Given that there was no marking or moderation to do, I don't understand why they stuck to the normal results timetable. They could easily have released these results to schools only a month ago and then had a month investigate and correct egregious anomalies. Then if the kid complained they could deflect back to the school.
Meanwhile Nicola has played a blinder and got a whole load of first time voters and grateful parents on her side...

lifeafter50 · 14/08/2020 15:44

Or maybe they could have supplied each school with a tariff based on previous performance to share out again it would be down to the school.
Or they could have guaranteed that every Uni applicant got at least their main or insurance offer.

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:44

@SmileEachDay at ofqual

I know. I was making a joke. Suggesting that maybe they aren’t that bright 😊

itsgettingweird · 14/08/2020 15:46
"These results are proof we are very quickly moving in the right direction"

Well they aren't wrong about the quick! They managed to teach, assess and grade a whole cohort of students to A*/A in just 2 months when they hadn't managed to get any students to that level over 2 years previously. WinkHmm

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 15:47

Baaaahhhhh

I’d love to know the detail behind that one. Tiny classes maybe if it was inadequate?

desertcoffeeyoga · 14/08/2020 15:54

@SmileEachDay oh gosh sorry .. I'm losing it !!

Coffeeandbeans · 14/08/2020 15:56

@SmileEachDay - I didn’t realise that. Explains my child’s physics and economics results then.

WombatChocolate · 14/08/2020 15:58

In the end the CAG didn’t make any difference. The key think was rank order and the proportions of students who had got each grade over the previous 3 year average in the school.

So if historically a class of 20 averaged 2 *s, 2As, 4Bs, 3Cs, 9 Es then if you were this year ranked at no 12, no matter if your CAG was A, B, C, D or E you would get an E. it was about using the tank order to maintain the historic ratios - where it was fully applied. It can explain why some students might be downgraded by 1 grade and others by several.

Students mostly don’t know the rank order they were put in, plus they often don’t realise how many students historically get low grades in their school. This explains it on a macro level.

The more the CAGs didn’t fit with the a schools historic averages, the more likely significant downgrading was.

It felt even worse for many students too, because their point of reference and expectation wasn’t the CAG which they didn’t know until yesterday, even if then, but their ucas grade which wasn’t involved in the process. Many CAGs will have been lower than ucas predictions because schools know only 16% achieve those grades - they are wildly optimistic - partly to help students get offers and partly because although schools often know roughly x% will get certain grades they don’t know exactly who, so need to be generous. So the CAGs from most schools were too generous (and it seems even more generous in relation to historic averages) in non selective schools, so downgrading happened and needed to happen even more strongly than in schools which had only been slightly generous in relation to historic averages.

But for the students, the heart of the disappointment lies in the gap that they think about being the one between ucas and what the boards awarded ——even bigger a gap than the CAG and awarded grade.

Students often don’t realise how few students achieve their ucas prediction. Taking exMs and realising they didn’t go brilliantly helps calibrate expectations down a bit, but there was none of that this year. Gov kept saying students would get what they deserved and in student minds this was the ucas prediction. No wonder there was disappointment.

And clearly errors have been made on an individual school basis with historic averages not being delivered this year.

But even if historic averages had been delivered to each school, or slightly better (and overall grades are up this year and the disadvantaged into uni in higher numbers more than ever) there was always going to be huge disappointment because students had in mind their inflated ucas grades and the system could never deliver those without grade inflation of probably over 25%. Even if the CAGs had been used the inflation would have been over 10%.

Government knows we can’t have inflation of 10% and schools know too, but parents and students don’t see the bigger picture or even have enough info to understand that the A grade predicted to ucas was extremely optimistic, the child was ranked 10/30 and given a CAG of B, but that in that school students below the top 25% haven’t got above a C for the last 3 years, so the system will deliver a C. If they had taken the exam, actually a C is what they probably would have got....but we don’t know for sure. But the key is that in their mind, they thought the government were saying they would get the grade they deserved and it was an A. A massive gap in understanding and expectation.

And the Press are disingenuous. They know how the system worked and that more have got higher grades than ever, that schools in disadvantaged areas were more likely to inflate their CAGs even more, so that’s why they were downgraded and they know that ucas grades are achieved by less than 20% of students....but they are feeding the rage and that students have been cheated.
Most people when they think about it realise this year group weren’t 10% cleverer than previous years. But it’s hard to think about the bigger picture when students have had 6 months to feel they will get their ucas grades, plus vitally have lost all control over the final grade. Even though most in an exam would have got their CAG or below, if taking an e am there was still the POSSIBILITY of better, and that loss of possibility however remote, is hard to come to terms with, because for many it didn’t feel remote but a massive improvement they were going to make.

lyralalala · 14/08/2020 16:01

Well they aren't wrong about the quick! They managed to teach, assess and grade a whole cohort of students to A/A in just 2 months when they hadn't managed to get any students to that level over 2 years previously. winkhmm*

I wonder if they could be persuaded to take over DD's school

In the same period they managed to get a third less A*'s and A's and doubled their number of U's.

They also managed to turn a pupil who has had straight results the whole way through into a CCC pupil

All in the same period of time. Amazing

SmileEachDay · 14/08/2020 16:01

Coffee

This thread on Twitter explains it quite clearly:

The CAGs weren’t used, just the rank order.

twitter.com/a_weatherall/status/1294012623776817158?s=21

lyralalala · 14/08/2020 16:05

DD's school has in the past received a lot of stick from parents about not being ambitious/generous enough with their UCAS predictions and I think we're all mighty relieved of that this year.

The CAG and UCAS scores match up very, very closely here so at least there hasn't been kids expecting a raft of A* when C's were more likley.

It hasn't helped the disappointment in the downgrades they've pretty much all had.

Swipe left for the next trending thread