Exam results

In that case using more data points, The best and the worst data should be discarded before using to lessen anomalies that seems to have happened

 

In Basildon you'd get 20% for spelling your name correctly, 25% if it's on the right paper

 

but that is the problem, they haven’t done any exams to get 80% in. So no one has got 80%. Teachers have predicted the grade from what they think would have happened. Then they have ordered them top to bottom.

 

The 80% was not literal it was used as an example to demonstrate the difference in awards for the same mark

 

But that is the whole point there isn’t any marks.

 

I see the private sector and independent schools have done very well from this system, No disruption for those with breeding or money

 

Yep.

No perfect way to resolve this, but the approach is skewed against those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

 

The maths is disingenuous because they've downgraded virtually all pupils in certain schools and upgraded virtually all pupils in certain schools. I don't have an answer to make it fairer but I do know that schools in England have tracking data since just after the 'Key Stage' National Curriculum was introduced and they use this data, religiously, 3 times a year to track children. If the predictions were inputted by teachers and they were wildly out of sync with the tracking data for the previous decade then something isn't right. There are a few children who make huge gains in very short periods of time but that's usually due to a huge injection of sustained intervention work.

It shouldn't be hard to spot a ridiculous prediction by a teacher either higher than probable or lower than probable. It's not an exact science but maths gives a good indicator.

 

I don't know where Simon has found those figures but I'm interested.

 

https://capx.co/grade-moderation-was-the-right-thing-to-do-until-the-snp-triggered-chaos-across-the-uk/

https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/ioe/2020/08/11/predicted-grades-what-do-we-know-and-why-does-it-matter/

 

Students get given what are known as aspirational targets. My predicted grade in Maths for example was a B. The idea being that if I attended all my lessons, put the hours in at home etc then that’s what I was capable of achieving. The reason the predicted grades are often so far out is because a lot of them are deliberately optimistic and not everyone works to their full capacity. The whole thing is obviously a farce but going to a prominently working class school where the majority of students underachieved giving everyone their predicted target grade Is not this fair, reliable alternative many would have you believe it is.

 

Aspirations or predictions=the same.

I have attended every parents evening and know what my son is capable of achieving and how his course work etc was going. He passed all his mock exams roughly in line with his teachers predictions/aspirations.

Note GCSE's will be graded 9–1, rather than A*–G, with grade 5 considered a good pass and grade 9 being the highest and set above the current A*. The government's definition of a 'good pass' will be set at grade 5

Now I am really worried after reading this from the BBC website today:

"Nina, from Peterborough, said her grades fell three grades lower than what she had been predicted. She was predicted to achieve ABB and scored As and Bs in her mock exams but was handed three D grades."

"Samantha Smith, a grammar school student from Telford, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that her results had been downgraded from As and A* grades to a B, E and U."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53787938

 

Feck me. That's astonishing. I spent the first 24 years of my life living 8 miles from Basildon. Most people I know from there are thick as mince.

 

And 20% for correctly finding your way to the exam hall.

 

The names Bond, Basildon Bond