Which is why you do multiple subjects, and eventually only do the subjects you like / are good at ... clearly if you are applying to for a job in Accountancy but you have really back French grades it is a non-issue.
lol. Have you looked at graduate schemes for accountancy? a friend of mine has, and they are similar to those for law. i.e - A levels matter. subject does not. If you have below a B in an a-level for example, regardless of your other a levels or even uni results, a number of graduate schemes wont even look at you. So no, it is not a non-issue.
Again same as above, you do multiple subjects each has it's own grade (who looks at average grades in this country? Average grades are the Yankee system rather than our system that has subject by subject grades).
If you are doing a levels then you are only doing 3 or 4 subjects, so you get to select the ones you like
Even then though, its not just one subject. It has different modules. For example if you have an immense interest in german history, but don't care about say italian history, you are obviously going to focus on one rather than the other. You have one exam on the topic you like, and get above 90%. But then you have one in something you hate and get low marks. Overall score for that subject - pulled down.
There is NOT that much difference between one teacher and the next really
There really is. I've studied in various schools all over India as well as in London. You have certain teachers who make a boring subject interesting and make you want to study it while you have others who are just so bad they even take the fun out of a subject you used to be intersted in. And if you don't like it because of a teacher, you won't study it and then won't do well.
If you can spell, have half decent grammar and put all the needed points down you get the marks ... that is how our system works and is fairly unbias and good.
On subjective subjects even if the marker does not share your point of view you are not marked on being right or wrong, but rather on being able to support the view taken with a well reasoned argument based on the evidence presented.
Yes, but whereas one marker may think you have put down all the points, another may not. While they may even be similar, they will not be the same. The point i'm making is that it is not an absolute.
Do you need to be taught with picture cards or something? The old fashioned education system is the best thing around and has been tried and tested - where you write essays (paper or on PC) and do questions (ON PAPER). It is helpful now-a-days to have the information online but picking up a book now and then would not go amiss.
While some people learn well with books and theory, others learn better with hands on experience and actually doing something rather than just reading about it. Personally, I prefer reading etc. but others don't. If the person prefer hands on and hates theory, then even if he is of an equal intelligence, he won't do as well because he just doesn't like the way it is taught.
Because each university course is slightly different in it's content based on what the university in question does in its research and so on; and what specialist staff it has.
Yes, but that only determines what the student can study. Not whether or not he can study there. Unless his intersts are widely different from what they can teach. But thats hardly a reason to have entrance exams. They do so because of a lack of faith in the standardization of A-levels.
