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

Your answer was that you spend a huge amount of time on MN criticizing other teachers and schools.

No it wasn't. It must totally baffle you how many posters came on this thread to say they find my posts helpful, but then they've actually read them.

incredibly disparaging of so many of your colleagues

Teachers usually don't have much of a choice and have to follow school policy. I have to do this sort of stuff myself, see the thread I linked to 'I make up sublevels'. My thinking on reporting to parents has partly been informed by the vast numbers of posts I've made over the years explaining stuff to parents who don't understand how their DC are doing and have asked for help interpreting reports.

do you ever get out of your own department

Teachers have 5 days INSET per year, what do you think they do in it? In addition I spend lots of time on twitter reading the latest thinking on e.g. Assessment by writers such as Daisy Christodoulou. Also, I attend education conferences in my own time and out of my own pocket because my school doesn't have any budget for CPD.

What do you do?

less prone to saying fuck and fucking

So fucking what?

It means fuck all I guess, just that you seem to resort to it quite a lot, for Education threads.

I meant beyond the INSET days. Perhaps your school is fairly inward looking so doesn't collaborate very much and perhaps the staff aren't staff who are open to others coming in to watch their lessons - I know that in more unionized schools that can be the case. I didn't mean twitter!

I'm not in the least surprised that people have found your posts helpful although I don't think our paths have crossed very often, so I'm not conscious of your posts, or barely at all. What does surprise me a lot is how you seem to think it ok to slate so many other teachers in the profession and to adopt the approach that the only way is yours, and that everyone else in the profession knows nothing (unless they agree with you).

Perhaps your school is fairly inward looking

Nope, it is part of a MAT.

I didn't mean twitter!

You probably don't realise how Twitter is the best source of teacher CPD out there.

ok to slate so many other teachers

Slating methods or bad information isn't slating teachers. As I said before teachers have to follow school policy.

You seem to have a problem with me having opinions and expressing and defending them. Just stop reading my posts because it's getting pretty fucking tedious having to correct your misinterpretations all the time.

Goodbye,

How much CPD do you have that relates specifically to the non-selective sector? I appreciate that you have an in-depth knowledge of, and great confidence in, a single school within the superselective sector, but how much of your own - and your children's teachers' CPD enables them to contribute to and learn from the wider environment?

A few years ago, i was lucky enough to be involved in an extended course that involved teachers from primary and secondary, and from both non-selective and super-selective schools. One of the activities was observing and discussing what were considered 'outstanding' lessons in the superselective. The results were .. interesting .. and not quite what the superselective expected.

STEPs still exist

Only the STEP maths papers still exist. STEP was offered in a wider range of subjects in the 90s.

I'm sympathetic to goodbyestranger's perspective. Yes, the grades are changing and there is an uncertainty where the boundaries will be. But if you have taught GCSE/A level for many years you can still advise students on whether they are suited for A level. You can also have a sense of where top students are likely to fall within the 7/8/9 range, particularly when you work in a school with a lot of A/A star students. (Strong A star -> 8/9 prediction, weak A star -> 7/8 prediction). Teachers in both my DC's selective school and goodbyestranger's simply aren't making that much fuss about the uncertainties in grade boundaries.

I also agree that it is unnecessary to use swear words so frequently. It doesn't strengthen arguments.

It doesn't strengthen arguments.

Neither does it weaken them. What it does do is flush out idiots. The sort who correct grammar rather than say anything useful.

weak A star -> 7/8 prediction

Oh look, someone else who doesn't understand how the new grades are going to work.

Teachers in both my DC's selective school and goodbyestranger's simply aren't making that much fuss about the uncertainties in grade boundaries.

I think we're all agreed that in selective schools generally teachers can assume that at the top of that cohort students are likely to be getting 9s, although I think that there will be more room for individual surprises, since the top mark will be more vulnerable to a student having an off day.

But Noble is right to be concerned about the effects of grading in a way that appears to be precise but really isn't. I'm having to translate marks that DD gets in order to make some kind of judgement as to how well she's doing. I'm not sure why the system needs to be so complicated in Years 7-9. Is it all to do with accountability for Ofsted?

Cambridge tutors who deal in admissions and teach in a maths related field probably have a shrewd idea noble.

Your swearing absolutely does not flush out idiots, don't delude yourself!

I do sometimes correct my own grammar because I type too fast without ever reading back and then sometimes (depends on the phase of the moon) get slightly irritated with myself. I never correct other people's and agree that's just petty, unless it's humorous.

Underestimating other people is a significant flaw noble, but you're excellent at it!

Cambridge tutors know all the nuances about the new Maths GCSE better than those delivering it! Lol - funniest thing you've said on this thread goodbye!

A number of Cambridge tutors as well as Oxford tutors as well as other tutors have been heavily involved in the design of the new curriculum and all its associated details. The teachers at the coalface are not the only ones to have a handle on what's going on - I mean obviously they're not - and anyhow if noble is to be believed they know nothing, any of them, they (except noble) just lie and talk nonsense. So almost anyone must know as much as them, since we're starting from zero. In those circumstances it's perfectly reasonable to assume that user3615 might know more than the teachers who are completely clueless about what's going on.

A number of Cambridge tutors as well as Oxford tutors as well as other tutors have been heavily involved in the design of the new curriculum and all its associated details.

I wouldn't really say that this was true.

BTW the new Maths A level curriculum has to some extent been based on recommendations coming from a non-Oxbridge Maths department, which other university Maths departments didn't particularly agree with. There certainly wasn't comprehensive consultation with universities.

My husband teaches degree level students. He hasn't got the foggiest about the new gcse grades let alone the differences in syllabi even in his own subject.

He still thinks that getting 8 C grades is the mark of a high flyer as when he went to school getting any A's was a rarity.

He must be completely unaware of the admissions policies and incoming grade profiles of students at his own institution, then. (Which is pretty rare in higher education.)

Your swearing absolutely does not flush out idiots, don't delude yourself!

Oh it does. For example it has identified you as someone with a stick up their arse who is desperate to criticise me in any way you can. And the no-name poster who popped up to agree with you and tell me how to do my job incorrectly.

I would say that, in general, if someone regards occasional swearing (I would say that noble is, IME, not a profligate swearer - more someone who swears when there are things she feels strongly enough about to swear about) as worth mentioning as a criticism of someone on MN, then there can be little in the substance of the post by the person criticised that can reasonably be attacked.

It smacks of the playground: 'I know you're right, I can't come up with any substantive criticisms of what you have said, so I shall insult your accent / clothes / appearance / language'.

Not realy worth engaging with, tbh.

I'm not sure why the system needs to be so complicated in Years 7-9. Is it all to do with accountability for Ofsted?

Ofsted don't care how progress is reported, but they do care that progress is demonstrated. In addition, SLT will be on the case of HODs asking about progress within departments. Since levels were scrapped, schools were left on their own to come up with their own systems for measuring progress. Given that this is a complex task, some systems will not be brilliant. I suspect that in the future the government will have to step in again and implement a national system.

Goodbye may I ask - given that the sum of your experience of Maths teachers delivering the new GCSE is that you're a parent in a super-selective, do you consider it beyond the realms of possibility that your kids' teachers actually feel EXACTLY the same a Noble, but won't say so to your face because you're a parent and they're in a professional relationship with you?

Do you also recognise that being in a super-selective is far far easier for them - however fucked up an exam system is, they'll ALWAYS be ok because of the selective nature of the school.

user3615 perhaps not in maths, and I was certainly generalizing. But it has been the case in other subjects about which I know more.

noble please ask MNHQ to confirm to you that I do not ever change name - except very, very infrequently, and then stick to a name for a long sustained period - and certainly haven't on this thread. Don't bother to apologize though. Completely against the rules to make that sort of accusation incidentally.

can'tkeepawayforever you've described noble's position exactly: she had nothing to say, so resorted to fairly juvenile swearing - at me. Several times. I think if I wish to call her out on it I can. I don't much care for puerile swearing directed at me simply because someone is petulant and can't handle argument other than by slagging people off (me/ other teachers/ DfE etc).

titchy no I don't agree because that relationship isn't particularly relevant and informs me only in part.

Goodbye, can you cite the other sources, related to full-spectrum comprehensive education, from which you draw your information?

On this thread, in all your examples you have only referred to your DC's school, which you have stated to be superselective, and your own experience with your DC and their teachers?

noble we are a very large family and very free with language indeed - that doesn't mean I need to have some petulant poster swear at me and for to say it's ok. I just don't resort to swearing on MN. At home I'm happy as larry to call people cunts.

Warning - grammar correction: for me to say, not for to say.

And your own experience with full spectrum secondary education as opposed to primary years can'tkeepawayforever?

You're correct that I've restricted my comments, intentionally. I always do. It may be that posters would do well to restrict themselves to the patch they know best - the most able, the least able, primary, secondary, tertiary etc. Much better than people getting super self-important and claiming that no-one can know anything about anything except them, who knows it all.

Goodbye, I have at several points in this thread asked you direct questions, or made comments that relate to yours, which you have not responded to, instead choosing to post further comments about another poster's behaviour.

I don't swear, at home or in writing, but I am beginning to find it a little irritating.

Apologies, I have cross-posted with your latest post.

My experience with full-spectrum comprehensive education is exactly the same as you claim for super-selective education - that i have children who attend such a school.

I am also the sibling of a comprehensive head teacher, and for various reasons number a large number of comprehensive teachers amongst my friends.