DfE Data Cruncher predicts number of students who will get straight 9s

[noblegiraffe]

His guess is.... 2

Not 2%,

2 kids in the whole country will get all 9s in their GCSEs.

So that's the new challenge for the MN boaster.

Ofqual reckon 0 kids will manage it. They clearly haven't met any MNetters' kids.

twitter.com/timleunig/status/845699774754017280

10 x A wasn't -> 10 x A was

sendsummer that's far too reasonable an approach to sustain on a thread where the wisdom seems to be that no-one can be predicted a 9, because no-one has taken the new specification yet (and no-one has ever scored higher than an A - that argument is a sophisticated supplementary one), therefore all teachers who reckon they're capable of seeing which students are at the very top of a cohort which has regularly has students scoring top A are 'fucking stupid' (even if they've been teaching in excess of 11 years) and all parents who believe their lies and nonsense are 'sending coded messages' which when decoded means that their DC are.... clever. No, it appears that nothing which hasn't been tested before can ever succeed, even if common sense could be deployed to compensate for a lack of data. I think people just can't bear the inability to demand a link or shout for 'evidence'. I don't think we have many ground breaking nobel prize winners on this thread although apologies if you are one yourself, which you might well be.

Piqueaboo "I'm hoping there will be lots of melt-downs leading to less competition for DD " do you think adding a wink makes that comment funny? Wishing mental illness on 15-16 year old girls is despicable

regularly had, not has.

The quality of the A at GCSE is used to put into the mix to give an initial prediction for A at A2, so the quality of A has been looked at carefully for each cohort since the advent of A at A2.

Whether predictions are accurate will not make an iota of difference to performance and results for a DC

This seems to be coming from someone who has the luxury not to have to worry about next steps. Predictions matter a huge deal in some cases.

Whether predictions are accurate will not make an iota of difference to performance

Yup.

Except in DD's world they're currently more 'targets' than 'predictions' and they are motivators for her kind of up-to-a-challenge character. She will go for the 9s, but deep down she'll enjoy that challenge and knowing that she worked hard and did her best, will cope with lesser outcomes. She's a bit of a luxury child in this respect.

which students are at the very top of a cohort

That argument only makes sense if you are supporting only predicting 9s for students who are at the very top of the cohort, the ones who are going to get 100%. You said that your school is also assigning 8s, which ruins that argument as that suggests you believe that they know where the cut-off is. This is nonsense.

Oh and the suggestion that it is ok to give unrealistic predictions that children most likely won't meet (e.g. All 9s) is fine because 'my kid would be pragmatic and take it on the chin' is ignoring the fact that not every child is able to do that, and that it is not reasonable to expect them to.

Noble not for GCSEs. The results will count for sixth form and university entry.

PiqueABoo You can motiivate pupils telling them that they can attempt hardest questions and have the potential to get them right.

I asked DD - Year 9 - what it means if she gets a '9' in a test.

'I did better than someone in the same class who got an 8.'

Is it linked to 9s at GCSE?
'No of course not, [rolls eyes] no-one has taken 9-1 GCSEs yet. They're just using it to get us used to the idea that 9s are at the top and 1 is at the bottom.'

' So a bit like when we were given A- or B+ on a piece of work, and it just meant 'pretty good' or 'around average for the class' and wasn't linked to actual O-level results.'
'Yes, mum.'

So she seems to have a pretty good grasp of it. What I wonder is what will happen for e.g. selective 6th forms, who currently select those who will get an offer on an algorithm based on PREDICTED GCSE grades, and then set a minimum set of ACTUAL grades which is lower. With the multiple feeder schools all predicting with a wet finger in the air, the selection process is going to become virtually random.

send Of course predictions count at GCSE. I've got kids who have applied for college/sixth form courses on the assumption that they will get a certain grade in maths. Higher or lower predictions would have made a difference to their choices.

Students are being put off taking maths A-level because their confidence is being knocked by low grades on mocks. Teachers are not confident in their predictions and you can see a variety of grades being assigned to the same mock results just from reading threads here. Once they get their results, even if they do well, it may be too late to persuade them otherwise.

Good for your DD, can't. Unfortunately it does appear to be confusing some people who think that this is related to GCSE grades and accurate in some way.

I can see, by the way, that if you are the parent of a child who has been objectively measured as a very high outlier in terms of ability, then you might be able to say 'well, my child OUGHT to get a 9, because if they don't, then who will?'. But for the majority of 'bright' children who 'might well have got an A* in the past', it's in no way a safe or sensible prediction.

noble the fact that the school is also predicting 8s doesn't 'ruin' any argument. No school worth its salt is portraying predictions as an exact science and never has done. I hope it doesn't irk you even further to know that the school is predicting 7s as well.

Selective schools in the state sector don't set their entry bars especially high for the sixth form, so the grades required shouldn't be a particular problem.

At our school getting a 9 in a test is related to the new GCSE. But other school evidently differ, which is fine.

Wishing mental illness on 15-16 year old girls is despicable

I had Violet Elizabeths in mind, but it's your prerogative to signal your virtue and imagine me wishing whatever you want.

I suggest you read up on the meaning of the the word meltdown - it's the description of what autistic people go through, not Violet Elizabeth. Ignorant as well as despicable.
I speak as someone who knows lots of autistic Year 11s who may well have meltdowns over their GCSEs and I'm sure you will be glad

And the meltdowns that result in teen suicides around GCSE time are not much fun either.

I don't agree that the new 9 grade will take pressure off. I would love to agree, but what I know up till now about society, expectations and human psychology contradict it. The child that is A* material will be dreaming of a 9, not an 8. Universities will prioritize those with 9s above 8s. People will be asking how many 9s you got. Schools will be publicizing their percentage of 9s. Etc, etc. Just wait and see.

I agree, but if it's true that 9s will be rare as hens' teeth, then I presume people will adjust their expectations based on the real world around them and start asking about the 8s. In the end, all this new regime does is "spread the field" at the top and allow for universities to distinguish more finely amongst the top students. I don't have any principled complaint about provide universities more information on the "top" students. I don't think changing the grading scale matters much as long as the regime is applied consistently. If all are in the same boat, it doesn't really matter. However, if the transition period is handled so badly that there are inconsistencies and some years' cohorts are disadvantaged, then that is a problem.

I didn't know "meltdown" was a technical, psychological term. I have been using it in the vernacular to describe a "hissy fit."

Perhaps it's my age with big inter-generational gaps and influential parents and grand-parents who got to experience worlds-wars on the front-line, but the perspectives and sensitivity of this generation definitely suggests western civilisation is stuffed.

Autism came well after 'melt-down' and if people want to redefine it with a specific sense then go ahead, but I'm not for being bullied into changing. Perhaps you can go be terribly offended at some more timid parents with infants because it's still quite a common term there for temper-tantrums etc.

Suicide attempts are fairly common among high-fliers in school, unfortunately, so it's definitely something to be aware of when suggesting that a little extra pressure won't harm anyone, and failure can be easily shrugged off.

The problem is that it will take time to change ambitious kids' perspective from the current "anything less than an A is a failure" to something more like my day's "Blimey, Mary got 5 As out of 10! Isn't that incredible!" And by the time the mind set has changed, parents, tutors, schools and kids will have worked out how to get all 9s again. So it will all start again.

Fairly common? I sincerely hope that's you now being loose with language noble.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36380910