Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

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

900 replies

noblegiraffe · 25/03/2017 21:12

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 07:16

If you look at the govt link above, it gives the formula. They have already said that the proportion of 7/8/9s will be the same as previous A/A proportions - which vary by subject. Then they will set the proportion of 9s for each subject as being 7 + 0.5 x (the percentage of people getting 7 or more) % of those who are getting 7 or more. (The link explains it better!) So e.g. If 20% of people get over the grade 7 boundary, then 7 + 0.5 10 = 17% of those will get 9s. 8 will be halfway between.

So because they know the previous proportions of people getting A or above, they're predicting 3.7% (22,000) getting 9 in maths and 3.4% (21,000) getting 9 in Eng Lang.

This year anyway!

tiggytape · 27/03/2017 07:39

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HPFA · 27/03/2017 07:40

I went to a highly selective secondary and then to Oxbridge and I got 6 As and 6 Bs.

I went with 3As ,4Bs and a C. 60 girls in my year (bog standard grammar and 3 got 8 As - same number as left with 2 O-Levels. Very different days.

DD's school is giving predictions in bands - 7-9 being the top band. Seems more realistic for a Year 8. My idea that there is one subject she has a realistic chance of getting a 9 in (RE) comes from fact that teacher tells me she is in top few in her year of 240. However I don't know how that compares to other schools so it may be she doesn't have much of a chance.

I do generally like the idea of the new top grade for reasons stated earlier but I'm not sure if it really can provide much of an incentive to get all 9s. I would imagine most kids aiming at 10 A* s are working pretty well flat out already.

lottachocca · 27/03/2017 08:04

Dh was offered a 2E conditional offer for Cambridge.

lottachocca · 27/03/2017 08:07

The problem with adjusting the grades and percentages is that the Universities have not adjusted their offers. Some of the kids who are sitting these exams are getting quite demoralised - they have been brought through a system where A grades were within easy grasp, and they are having to dig deep to keep motivated. Maybe that will serve them well but it's a worrying time for many.

goodbyestranger · 27/03/2017 08:13

tiggytape I would think that teachers are capable of analyzing past data from their school and working out which students were in the category Atia has set out in her post. I can't see that it's either rocket science or hugely mystical.

HPFA I reckon the kids not only aiming for 10A* but most likely to get them are the ones who are working steadily not flat out and have other outside interests so they don't get too stale. That's my experience anyhow. Flat out has got to be bad.

I find it mildly irritating that the top grade isn't a 10. Leaving room for inflation means 9s are set to be devalued in due course.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 27/03/2017 08:55

analyzing past data from their school

Past data from the school is useless when you need past data nationally. The kids are competing against each other for the 9s so unless you know the spread of the results at the top end nationally how would you know whether your kid is in the top 3.7%? There could be a bunch of private school kids sat on 100% because their cohort profile is very different to yours.

OP posts:
HPFA · 27/03/2017 08:57

I find it mildly irritating that the top grade isn't a 10. Leaving room for inflation means 9s are set to be devalued in due course.

I seem to remember at the time that was the reasoning behind having 9 as the top grade rather than 1. That it would be easy to add a Grade 10 if it was thought to be necessary.

goodbyestranger · 27/03/2017 09:03

Yes that is the reasoning HPFA, which is why it's mildly irksome.

No I disagree noble, to an extent. If it's a very high achieving school which has seen masses and masses of top As every year for as long as there have been As, then it's quite possible to make the call, I'd have thought.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 27/03/2017 09:19

They still won't know where the boundary lies due to their cohort not being representative.

Sure you can predict a 9 if a kid is pulling 100% or close, but thinking you know what a 9 will look like is iffy.

OP posts:
AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 09:26

Yeah, surely you could compare current students with past ones - student X is working at the same level as student Y at that stage, and student Y went on to get 394/400 ums in the old GCSE ...

You could make the same argument noble about it being difficult to predict A * , surely?

Tbh, I think schools should be very cautious about predicting 9s unless there's reasonable evidence for it. An 8 would generally be the sensible top prediction, and clearly an excellent result. But in some cases there will be justification.

goodbyestranger · 27/03/2017 09:27

I expect that is exactly what the 9 predictions are about noble - those at the very top of similar cohorts where DC with a similar profile have bagged top end A*s.

I don't see the problem, not that there's any claim to know 'what a 9 will look like'.

Anyhow, I still think predicting 8s to the very very able is a bit dreary, and I don't have a problem with the logic behind the prediction of 9s.

AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 09:33

Sometimes I wish there was a like button here, or maybe a /nodding in agreement/ emoji Grin

titchy · 27/03/2017 09:34

If the exams were the same level of difficulty it would be more straightforward to say a kid who would've been top end of A star will become a 9. But the new exams are more difficult. So no one knows what the kid who got the top of A star last year will get this year....

MumTryingHerBest · 27/03/2017 09:35

goodbyestranger - those at the very top of similar cohorts where DC with a similar profile have bagged top end As.*

So the number of DCs currently getting top end A* will be the same as the number of DCs who achieve a 9?

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 27/03/2017 09:37

about it being difficult to predict A * , surely?

No, because we know where the grade boundaries for As were on a multitude of past papers and there isn't a set number of As available.

OP posts:
AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 09:56

But titchy the kid who would have got top end of A * last year is still going to be getting amongst the best results, and the grade 7 boundary is tied to the grade A boundary, so there's an educated guess to be made at least!

BertrandRussell · 27/03/2017 10:01

The really worrying thing about these new grades is what happens at 4/5. The 7s 8s and 9s of the world will do fine.

The 4/5 boundary and what will count as a good pass this summer and in the future is a much bigger issue.

MumTryingHerBest · 27/03/2017 10:02

AtiaoftheJulii If 100 DCs get top end A* but only 20 of them will get a 9, how do you know who, out of the 100, will get a 9?

AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 10:03

Not a set number of A stars available, no, but the grade boundaries would move to keep the proportion of A stars about the same.

mum - as just a normal member of the public, I wouldn't know how to get that sort of data about the distribution of marks within grades.

AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 10:05

If 100 DCs get top end Astar but only 20 of them will get a 9, how do you know who, out of the 100, will get a 9?

Well, you're just making up numbers, so it's impossible to try to say anything sensible to answer that!

peukpokicuzo · 27/03/2017 10:07

If only 2 children in the whole country are predicted to achieve these grades then why set the bar so high in the first place?

It makes a lot of sense to me. How many times have we seen the news story that "Emma got 10 As at GCSE and is predicted 4 As at A level and yet has been denied a place at Oxford" - I'm pretty sure it comes around every year with minor variations because A*s are reasonably achievable in every subject if you are bright and work hard. For a subject where the annual intake is only 200 or so it would be entirely possible to fill every place with someone with the highest academic credentials and still leave some who have equally impressive results without a place.

With more granularity at the top end it will be easier to select the cutoff for the top 200 applicants

The problem is the norm referencing which will cause a lot of trouble when you start having to choose between someone who got a 9 in 2018 which has a reputation for having been a slightly easier year because there were a large number of badly-taught candidates who dragged down the average so the well-taught few got the 9s more easily - vs someone who got an 8 in 2019 when more teachers had got the hang of the new system which sent the average grade up and therefore made the 9 a lot tougher to achieve for the same quality of candidate.

goodbyestranger · 27/03/2017 10:09

For the same reason I didn't answer Mum's previous question.... Not that I'm always sensible mind you :)

AtiaoftheJulii · 27/03/2017 10:12
Grin
Ingles2 · 27/03/2017 10:23

I'm not even vaguely surprised... Ds2 is about to sit new Maths / Eng and it is significantly harder than last years paper..He is revising really hard in the hope of getting an 8 which he needs to take Maths & further maths A's.
Ds1 got an A* in maths last year, is taking Maths A now and is shocked at some of the questions that ds2 is revising.
I think there will be lots of disappointed dc if schools are predicting 9's at this stage.