97 % pass rate for A-Levels ; how did that happen?

[m1m1rie]

I took my A-levels in 1989 and passed all three, and was in the minority amongst my peers. Most people failed at least one and only the really, really clever ones could achieve A-grades. Now, with so many passing and record numbers achieving A-grades how do we differentiate between those who are genuinely talented and those who are not? A girl I know has just passed 3 A-levels. She spends her days chatting on her mobile, obsessing about herself and often didn't bother going into college if she didn't feel like it. She even turned up late for one of her exams. As far as being 'clever' is concerned, she couldn't hold a conversation with you unless it was about celebrities or herself, and yet she has managed to pass all three A-levels. I am dumbstruck. I find it demeans those who do put effort into learning as they will all just be lumped in together now and treated with disdain by those who think that all kids are thick and only have A-levels because the exams are easier to pass now. Whatever is going on with the current system, it's not doing anyone any favours, it only serves to make Government stats look good.

My sister is a teacher, My Uncle is a Headmaster and my Aunt a Deputy Head. Not one of them do it for the long holidays and all are passionate about what they do. I would never succumb to the Daily Mail's theories on anything. It is known as the Daily Paranoia in my house.

Well that would be because you are a wonderfull intelligent woman who would not believe such claptrap, others are not so smart

Message withdrawn

yep the dull repetitive stuff, you can see their knees knocking with excitment in the staffroom as we get to the and of spring term and they go to that folder to get out those worksheets again.

"Well that would be because you are a wonderfull intelligent woman who would not believe such claptrap, others are not so smart"

I think we've come full circle TSAP

The thing I find refreshingly honest about my headmaster is that he says he id take up teaching for the holidays and his early career was a breeze as it consisted of turning up at 10 to nine and getting out the text books. He left ten minutes after the bell went and his whole summer holiday was spent on the continent without a thought for school. He is very different now and very dedicated but he is always saying how much more deamnding the job is now and how you ahve to do the job because you love it and for no other reason.

Oh, I had teachers like that...

Work through the book from page blah to page zzzzzzzzz.

We had one science teacher who used to go into the prep room to read the text book then come and tell us what it said. God, she was a SHIT teacher. We used to put retort stands (were they really called that or did I misremember?!) onto her lab coat as she was wearing it and she never noticed till she stood up. But only because she was shit, not before we discovered it

The head of science came in to observe a lesson of hers, but she'd been warned and had prepared so it was a good one. She was just fucking lazy.

Meant teachers like the knees knocking at worksheets...

Socci, I am not being unkind to this girl, she is actually quite a nice girl. But I am offering what I consider to be a fairly accurate observation of her personality and her own admission that she is not academic. I feel you misunderstand what I am trying to say. She would be my yardstick to measure how effective a guide this year's A-Level results offered as to a person's suitability for further education. She is not academically gifted and, not to put too fine a point on it, an out and out slacker. Admittedly, her grades were not spectacular, but she still passed three A-levels. I think it's unfair that her 'achievements' can demean the results of others who continued their education because they want to learn, not because it meant deferring having to go out to work for a few more years, as in her case.

I didn't know it was called 'norm referencing' edam - but I thought there were pre-agreed percentages of grades when I did my 'A' levels.
This is the 24th year results have risen apparently!
Doesn't make sense.
WELL DONE TO EVERYONE WHO'S WORKED HARD AND GOT THE RESULTS THEY DESERVED!

I noticed that no one started a thread yesterday saying lets all congratulate our children on their A level results..maybe this thread explains why! There wouyld be a backlash

Students are taught to respond to the problem set by the exam. They are coached in the passing of exams and provided with the information necessary to do so, much more so than we were when doing O-Levels in the 1980s. I'm sure they all work very hard to do so - nobody would dispute that. But there's a bit of a jump when they get to university and realise that they're expected to understand the subject in more depth rather than as a series of discrete pieces of information.

(Evidence for this? Well, I have a DW and several friends who are schoolteachers, and a couple of friends who are university lecturers.)

Coursework also has a lot to answer for - DW had a colleague who couldn't spell and didn't know the difference between 'there' and 'their', and didn't know how to use apostrophes correctly. She got a B in English GCSE by (she admitted) getting her dad to check and correct her coursework.

C/W is an all round nightmare. You have (as a teacher) the constant worry about kids being 'coached' outside of class and downright plagiarism. We now only allow the kids to work on C/W in the lesson.

Marking it is another nightmare. I marked a set of 72 experiments 4 times each! At the end kids were still asking for a chance to re-write and me to re-mark. Then you have to mark each others marking etc etc.

And as a one time 'real' scientist I can tell you that GCSE coursework has nothing in common with 'real' research at all.

This year is the last of the old style GCSE double science and this years y10 kids will being doing a new course. C/W no longer really exsists, we assess practical skills through the 2 years.

"I keep trying to write something well-reasoned on this thread, but what it basically boils down to is "if the pass rate keeps going up, why are there so many thick people out there?" "

Don't forget that we're talking about A levels - for which you generally need 5 GCSEs at A-C, and only about 50% of 16 year olds get those - the "thick" people you are referring to will be among the other 50%.(and no, I'm not saying everybody who didn't get 5 A-C's is thick) So when they say 10% of A level students get 3 A's, that's actually only 5% of the original year group.
I think that schools now are better at giving advice to 16 year olds about their choice of subjects - my DS certainly got more and far better focussed advice than I ever did. Also, don't forget that students can drop their weakest subject after AS level

Hmmm, I think it is a bit of both. I teach FE, and this year my students managed to get 100% A-C at AS level with 64% students getting a Grade A. I don't teach in a selective school, just a bog standard FE college.

I have to say that we are far more exam focussed than say the 90s, when I did my 'A' levels. Lots of us lecturers are also examiners and really drum home what they should be doing in the exam. We also play the system more - so if someone submits a piece of coursework that is only 3 marks below the grade boundary, we'll get them to "rewrite" it next year making minor improvements and resubmit so they go up into the next grade boundary etc. However, another aspect to it is that more students drop out of courses now than previous. I was one of those students who signed up for the wrong course and then had to spend 2 years studying a course I hated, but that doesn't happen so much now. At my place, we have 'A' level courses starting in Sept and Jan, so if a student realises by Xmas they are on the wrong course, they can change to a different one in the Jan and do it fast track (full A level in 18 months) or as an AS only. There are more options open to students these days and I think this greatly affects the reults.

However, I do at times think that perhaps some of the exams are getting easier. Previously students had to write four essays in an hour and a half, making up 2/3 of their exams... as from Sept coursework will make up 50% of their exams, and they will only be required to write on 3 essays, not 4. That will be a lot easier, I think!

Oh, OK MB, I'll give up trying to be nice about it then - I've got a teacher's word that they aren't any more hard-working. Do you think everyone who took the old style exams (over 30s) should be able to go back and get their grades inflated to match what they'd get today? I'm imagining straight As for Edam.

Btw, that sort of crashing and burning happened to me too under the old system. Got As at O-level but didn't realise that you actually had to work for A-levels. Had always coasted through exams, having that kind of exam-friendly brain and being interested in schoolwork. Not enough for A-level, I discovered...

You and me both Edam!

Naturaly there are exceptionally hard working students out there. Same as there have always been. But in general I would say that students have a shorted attention span than we had, are less prepared to 'stick ' at tasks, especialy if they are dull, and want to be 'entertained' in lessons. Sheesh, if I had had an entertaining lesson as a kid I'd have thought I had died and ended up in God's pocket!

I'm not blaming the kids for this you undertand....modern cultcha and all that.

They are used to being entertained, having things presented to them on a plate and honeslt are rather afronted if you expect them to work at something.

So for example, kids given a home work exam question will complete it if they can answer it immediatly but very few will think to research the answer. look something up? what me miss?

God I sound more like disgusted Tumbridge Wells every day!

So they will only do their homework if they already know the answer without lifting a finger?

You see, this is what comes of banning sending them up chimneys...

Again, not all of them, but many of them.

I taught 12 students last year in the lower 6th. Of those only 3 would actually work at a question. The other 9 were amazed when they got crap marks.

They were also give a detailed mark scheme for their practical work. It outlined exactly what they needed to do in the write up to get specific marks (mark scheme approved by the exam board). Most of them failed to get an E grade.

The clever ones have an intimate knowledge of the marking scheme and know exactly how much/little to do to get the marks. This means that reading around the subject, developing an interest etc are not required.

'When I did GCSE Maths (I think this is right) there were four papers - the bottom set took the bottom two papers, the middle set took the middle two and the top set took the top two (ie the hardest ones). '

Me too Hunker - they were P, Q, R and S papers!! I did R and S and even R was a piece of piss if I remember correctly. I finished teh paper feeling pretty certain I had 100%! My friend did Q and R and Q was just ridiculous. Never saw the P one - God only knows what was on that!

'I think we live in a country that doesn't celebrate intelligence, it panders to morons.'

My GOd Hunker, were we separated at birth after all?!

make that triplets, darlink!

Hehe!

GCSEs are deffo easier - well, I did do mine a long time ago - I was the 2nd year to do them and boy did I get a shock when I moved on to A level maths/martian

O level to A level was a hell of a shock.

GCSE to A level is even bigger IMHO.

I'm preparing my 'You have to work, Kiddies' chat as I type!