To have issues about my A level grades from 25 years ago...

[Beckidewinter]

This is a non-problem: tiniest violin territory, really, and I'm only posting out of curiosity to see if anyone has advice or can empathise. I have never confessed this to anyone...

I took my A levels 25 years ago and was totally and utterly devastated when I got BBB rather than the AAA I was predicted. I wept for two weeks. The consequences were nil. My parents were delighted (they were/are of the 'whatever makes you happy, darling' school of parenting), I was accepted into my first choice of University, did well and now have an MSc and PhD. Why then do I feel a sense of failure and, yes, embarrassment at this time of year, every year when the press are full of stories of success. Why on earth would it bother me and make me feel a bit sad and queasy in 2020? It's silly, irrational and more than a bit pathetic.

Most tragically (and secretly) of all, I find myself comparing my marks to those of famous people for solace "well, David Miliband got 3 Bs and he seems pretty bright..."

To be clear, like many people in their 40s, I have experienced real loss and grief and other painful life stuff, so you'd think I would have acquired perspective or wisdom or something, but alas, no and this just keeps biting for some reason ...Does anyone relate or care to psycho-analyse, or is it a loud chorus of YABVU?

I got AAAA in 1996 and I still feel ridiculously proud when the A-level results are discussed in the press each year. I worked harder than I've ever worked in my life for those grades. A-levels are a formative experience so I think it's natural to feel some emotion so many years later.

I agree grade inflation is real and therefore BBB in the 90's was an excellent set of results. I went on to get a 2:1 at my RG university. Only five students got a first and they were all exceptional. Not just hard workers like me, truly bright.

I must admit to being surprised when a friend's daughter got a really high 2:1 recently having scrapped CDD at A-level. I know that sounds bitchy but that isn't my intention, I just don't think firsts are being reserved for the truly exceptional students now. As someone said upthread statistics don't lie.

YABU and you know it, but if that's how you feel, then that's how you feel.

I did really badly in my Alevels. So badly they have never been spoken of since by my parents. I left the country to work a minimum wage job because I was so embarrassed and obviously couldn't go to university.

However, 5 years later I was earning more than I would have if I'd gone to university (a teacher friend got very put out when she found out how much I earned as she didn't think it was fair such an educational failure should be earning much more than her).

I'm still embarrassed by the grades I got and my family still never speak of them. I'm considered the non-academic one, and it's sort of family disappointment that is always in the background even though my life (happily married,nice house and car, more children than any of my siblings, sufficient income) is better than any of my academic siblings. But I don't care, because at some point you have to let it go.

I am 60. I am in a director level role. I have never been asked for my exam certificates although always give the membership number for my professional registration. My CV reads 8 O'Levels including English and Maths, A'Level English, History and Biology, Prof Qual, Masters with Distinction. The only bit ever mentioned is that I did my professional equals with two primary school aged children and a full-time job.

I was two marks of an A* in my History GCSE. I got it remarked and it went up one mark. I am still bitter twenty years on.

@Kittywampus

I am a similar age to you and I did much better at A level than predicted (2 grades higher on average, so Bs instead of Ds) . I am still slightly annoyed that I only applied for universities with low entry criteria, and that no one suggested to me that I should apply to a better university through clearing when my grades came out. I had a great time at university and I am happy with life in general, but this still annoys me when I think about it. So YANBU.

Me too. Predicted Cs and Ds, as my college based their predictions on Uni applications on the first set of mock results - the Year 12 Christmas exams. Let’s just say I didn’t take them particularly seriously.

I came out with 2 As and a B, and went to a crap uni where I had a crap time, on the whole.

The lack of proper support still rankles. My history teacher in particular seemed pissed off that I’d done better than he expected. For some reason he really seemed to dislike me, despite the fact I never got below an A- for any of his essays. Prick.

40+ years ago I took German for a year but dropped it as I preferred French
A few years ago I temped as an exam invigilator for GCSE including German - I was surprised how easy the paper was - I would have easily got A!

I actually think that not doing as well at A levels as I knew I could pushed me on to study harder and do well at university. It may be that if you had got AAA that you wouldn't have pushed yourself as much. With BBB you had something to prove. I reckon that everyone reaches that tipping point at one stage in their academic career where they can no longer rely on their natural intelligence but they have to knuckle down and work hard. I think that it is better to do that at A levels rather than at degree level. A PhD is mainly a slog and hard work however clever you are. Imagine finding that natural intelligence was not enough when doing a PhD.

Have a look at J.K.Rowling's Harvard Speech on the fringe benefits of fallure.

I did my A levels in 1985. I only took two subjects and got two As, but I still feel a bit embarrassed about my results because I only took two.

I would agree that exam grades and education can easily become a way to doubt your self worth and successfulness even many years after they’ve been overtaken by career and other life achievements.

However I’d urge you to try very hard to be aware of it and try hard to overcome this as my FIL is 92 and still quite regularly brings up his resentments about how his education was disrupted during the war and thus he was less successful than his siblings and other friends.

No idea how much of this is even true but it’s been a ‘thing’ for him his whole life which is a pity since he had a good career and raised a lovely family.

I know it's not popular to say so on MN but they were actual exams in those days and only the really super bright students really got A's.

Same with O levels and GCSE's

Nonsense IMO.

I did GCSEs in 1989 and a levels in 1991. I have also taught at both levels up until 2006ish. I have since had a Dd go through GCSEs and A levels, as well as other friends children I know.

The content in most cases at have and a level is now increased.
The level of what is studied is, in most cases, more complex. Things that my sister did in her a level maths several years ago now appear on gcse papers.
The amount of NEA and coursework has been reduced in the majority of subjects, and there are now no modular exams or AS level exams part way through.

The pass rates have gone up - but much of this could be put down to the increased quality of teaching (more teachers are qualified to higher levels and have far greater CPD throughout their career, much greater levels of moderation, etc) and also that many students are more focused and know that the competition is hard - the university entry levels for sought after courses has increased, the number of students applying to go to university harms increased, competition is strong and this pushes students more in many cases.)

You only have to look at what children are now expected to know at the end of key stage 1 and 2 to see that standards have increased, along with a greater expectation.

I see this type of comment every year - and it's been the same argument since I did my exams many moons ago too! Every generation seems to believe they had it tougher.

It's simply not true if you actually look at the exams and the subject syllabus.

It's also incredibly unfair and dismissive of our young people today.

I am still cross about my English O level. I missed a whole page of comprehension questions worth 10 marks and got a B. Didn’t realise until the next day. Was gutted.

Could it be that this is a small enough cause that you can risk being upset about it. It's safe enough to admit to, ad nothing will change. Really big things, you have to hold it together and get on with things?

Is there anything that this is holding you back from doing? If not, it's all good.

@Aragog

I know it's not popular to say so on MN but they were actual exams in those days and only the really super bright students really got A's.

Same with O levels and GCSE's

Nonsense IMO.

I did GCSEs in 1989 and a levels in 1991. I have also taught at both levels up until 2006ish. I have since had a Dd go through GCSEs and A levels, as well as other friends children I know.

The content in most cases at have and a level is now increased.
The level of what is studied is, in most cases, more complex. Things that my sister did in her a level maths several years ago now appear on gcse papers.
The amount of NEA and coursework has been reduced in the majority of subjects, and there are now no modular exams or AS level exams part way through.

The pass rates have gone up - but much of this could be put down to the increased quality of teaching (more teachers are qualified to higher levels and have far greater CPD throughout their career, much greater levels of moderation, etc) and also that many students are more focused and know that the competition is hard - the university entry levels for sought after courses has increased, the number of students applying to go to university harms increased, competition is strong and this pushes students more in many cases.)

You only have to look at what children are now expected to know at the end of key stage 1 and 2 to see that standards have increased, along with a greater expectation.

I see this type of comment every year - and it's been the same argument since I did my exams many moons ago too! Every generation seems to believe they had it tougher.

It's simply not true if you actually look at the exams and the subject syllabus.

It's also incredibly unfair and dismissive of our young people today.

I would have to disagree with regard to the subject I teach. I would say the requirements for the same grade at A level are not as difficult to attain as when I took the A level in '91. Various parts of the exam that were perceived to be the harder parts by teachers and pupils are not in some exam boards now.(I don't want to say which subject or exam board as too outing).

Its also worth remembering that exam results do not always shape the career you will have and I am always keen to put this fact over to my eldest son. I've always have and will continue to say to my children to do their best, but don't beat themselves up over it. It doesn't mean you are a failure.

The Executive Director in our division at work is a good example of this. As he says, he hasn't got two decent qualifications he could scratch his arse with, but if you want to measure his success in life on his job and nothing else, he's on the Executive Team and earns over £200k a year, so it didn't hold back his career. On top of this, he's a bloody nice bloke, which is an added bonus.

The syllabus for a levels changed in the past few years and GCSEs changed 3 years ago. The content and level has most definitely increased.

We also forget, as adults, that we are constantly learning and maturing - for some subjects this can have a massive impact on our ability to answer certain types of essays and other questions. My maths skills have definitely developed over the years as I use general maths daily. My English skills have also as I read more, I discuss things more with other people and I am better able to get my point across. My french has developed since my gcse days as I have travelled more and used it on holidays, etc. I would definitely do better on a general studies type exam now as I am more aware of things around me, read and talk more, watch different types of programmes, etc.
This applies to many subjects.

I am so old, we didn't have A* as a grade when l took them!

@DorisDaisyMay

They were much harder in the 1990’s. No teacher of mine gave out previous A grade essays to read and dissect. I never saw the exam criteria. I didn’t even get an essay structure to follow- at my school we had to just do it.

As someone who once they know what to do, can usually do it well, I was not suited to the old way.

Totally agree with this. Never saw syllabus or dissected exam papers or knew how anyone else did or examined what the question really wanted to know.

You just did it.

Btw I am a secondary teacher and I do think the kids have so much more 'scaffolding' now than I ever did. Literally none.

Oh OP...this makes me laugh! I got one B in my maths GSCE and retook it after graduating from Oxbridge so I could get an A and it would match the rest of my GCSE grades which were all As and A*s. And I had a degree from Oxbridge (not saying which uni) in a pretty challenging degree, so as with you, it's not like my intelligence or academic capability was even in question. But it bugged me so much I had to do something about it.

One of my friends from uni is still steaming about the B she got in one subject when she was predicted A and got all As and A*s otherwise. You are not alone! I re-took my exam to get rid of the B which seems to me slightly ridiculous but it's also been very satisfying in all honesty.

@Fishfingersandwichplease

I am so old, we didn't have A* as a grade when l took them!

Snap. Nor for GCSEs and that's another bone of contention as kids ask me what I got and they always say "Didn't you get an A* in -subject I teach-?".

I got AAB in 1990, I had a AAA offer but still got in (which was my main concern). I was predicted AAB based on my mocks but in different subjects - I was predicted an A but got a B in History, it was always my best subject (and in my mock I got something ridiculous like 90%). Our paper was something like select 5 essay questions from 20 - but because of the way you cover the syllabus realistically there are about 10 you can answer. That paper was on Stuart England. I hated the Civil War so didn't revise it; whilst this was fine in my mocks (there were enough 'other' questions I could answer) it didn't work in the real exam, and I basically had to wing a Civil War question because 6/10 of them were Civil bloody war related.

So the reason I got a B is clearly Cromwell's fault

Tbh it doesn't play on my mind too much. I don't even feel bad about only getting a 2:2 in my degree. If I'm honest I've made so many other fuck ups in my adult life this kind of pales in comparison!

Not U.

I did my a levels around that time too, before A*s. I've intermittently been really annoyed with my grades, which were lower than I know I'm capable of, for various reasons. I've since got a degree, a postgrad degree and no one else seems to give a shit about my grades. But there's always a niggling voice in my head telling me to re-sit to do them 'properly'.

To be fair the GCSEs don't have letter grades mostly now either.

I did GCSEs in the second year so did have letters for those, though there was no A star at that point.

Hell,I know how you feel, it STILL rankles that I got a D in Chemistry A level (forecast an easy B, I was utterly convinced I could get an A). I tried so hard and really swotted for it, almost to the detriment of my Biology. Back then you just did not get things re-marked, it wasn't an option. We went over the paper after and I knew the(very few) mistakes I made but really couldn't understand when I got the result HOW I got a D, with the answers I'd given, especially compared to others in my class who had seemingly made more mistakes than me and still got a B. I will always wonder if perhaps they'd missed off adding up a section or made a mistake of 10, or not added in all the pages of one paper or something?

I knew for my GSSE I got 100% in the maths, I knew when we did it as I had so much time spare on the papers I could cover my answers and still get the right mark, and then do it backwards and arrive at the question. We also went over it later, and I and 2 others knew for sure we had not made any mistakes, no calculators allowed! But that was just an A no A* back then.

@PhilCornwall1

Its also worth remembering that exam results do not always shape the career you will have and I am always keen to put this fact over to my eldest son. I've always have and will continue to say to my children to do their best, but don't beat themselves up over it. It doesn't mean you are a failure.

The Executive Director in our division at work is a good example of this. As he says, he hasn't got two decent qualifications he could scratch his arse with, but if you want to measure his success in life on his job and nothing else, he's on the Executive Team and earns over £200k a year, so it didn't hold back his career. On top of this, he's a bloody nice bloke, which is an added bonus.

This is very true. I've got better A levels and a degree from a more prestigious institution than any of my senior colleagues, all of whom massively outearn me.

My partner has 3 GCSEs, left school at 16 and spent years working in low paid jobs. However he now contracts for £500+ a day (his next role may well be around £750). Exams are never the be all and end all.

@MarthasGinYard

To be honest 3 B's 25 years ago was awesome.

I know it's not popular to say so on MN but they were actual exams in those days and only the really super bright students really got A's.

Same with O levels and GCSE's

This, in a nutshell. It's like GCSEs now, everybody gets top grades. Meaningless.