No wonder A-Levels mean and are worth squat

starfighter · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:11

It doesn't prove the system is being manipulated.

I think the fact that at 15 you can drop major subjects is silly. atleast they still have to do maths, science and english.

I would like to see maths, science and english continue until 18 and perhaps students only choose 2 specialised subjects for Alevel

that way people can't simply pick easy subjects.

It is hard to stop teachers teaching towards the test as this is the best way to get results. either the exams need to be more random or students forced to take a wider range of subjects and unis would still have to accept.

aiming for 50% in higher education isn't apparently much different to other places in the wrold.

Nitefly · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:16

starfighter said:
that way people can't simply pick easy subjects.

The public and employers already know that some A-level subjects are 'easier' than others. If people want to do general studies or media studies, then good for them. They are hardly cheating people who take more traditional subjects.

TheCenturion · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:18

I'm sitting on the fence for this argument.

I feel that the introduction of the A* will give universities a bit of an easier time distinguishing the clever from the extremely clever. Only Cambridge have so far adopted a minimum offer of A*AA, but if A levels continue like this, I'm sure other places will follow suit.

In terms of GCSEs, my school had 95% of all results A*-B and 80% were A*-A.

45 out of the 109 got all A* or A grades. 3 got 13 A*s, 1 got 12 A*s, and 2 got 11A*s.

And they're called A levels, that's why everyone gets As!

I'll get my coat

Seft · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:20

thephantom114 said:
I don't think exams as they currently stand are easier.

Instead, teaching has, unquestionably, improved, using enhanced psychology and behavioural studies to better techniques and kids naturally get smarter because there is much more information to expose them to especially with the internet as well as tv channels.

Perhaps the problem isn't that the exams are easier per se, it's that the exams aren't a sufficient test of ability as kids get better at them.

How do you explain the fact that International Baccalaureate pass rates have remained stable for the past couple of decades?

etom · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:27

i did a levels 2 years ago, got to laugh at people saying teaching has improved, improved by what exactly they are just looking at past exam papers and cheeseing there way through as year on year the exams were the same questions for my subjects law, english and history (easy subjects but beside the point)

Hatter The Mad · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:32

thephantom114 said:
I don't think exams as they currently stand are easier.

Just compare the papers yourself.

Instead, teaching has, unquestionably, improved, using enhanced psychology and behavioural studies to better techniques and kids naturally get smarter because there is much more information to expose them to especially with the internet as well as tv channels.

Uhh, what

Perhaps the problem isn't that the exams are easier per se, it's that the exams aren't a sufficient test of ability as kids get better at them.

Exams may be easier for children today but not because of a dumbing down of the exam but rather just the general intellectual increase.

As I said, compare the papers yourself. You'll see that they have been dumbed down.

Nitefly · 28 Aug 2009 at 11:33

anant_shah94 said:
In terms of GCSEs, my school had 95% of all results A*-B and 80% were A*-A.

They all got As because you clearly went to a good school in a privileged area. At my secondary school this year, only 50% got 5 Cs or above (217 pupils).

DominicStar · 28 Aug 2009 at 13:21

Chimerical said:
Maltese isn't used by anyone though. Plus, people in Malta all speak English.

Wish I knew some Maltese though, getting married there next Autumn.

OzyOly · 28 Aug 2009 at 13:28

Hatter The Mad said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/09/exam_results/a_levels/html/all_subjects.stm

I don't know how anyone can look at this and think that the results are normal, or in any way represent a good qualification system. A-Levels are just too easy, it is a fact. If this was a fair or useful qualification system (to filter the best from the worst), we'd see a bell curve.

GCSE results are distributed normally: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/09/exam_results/gcse_fc/html/all_subjects.stm

So why not A-levels?

Is it a problem with over specialisation? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/09/exam_results/a_levels/html/mathematics.stm

Perhaps it is: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/education/09/exam_results/a_levels/html/critical_thinking.stm - the majority of school kids don't know if they are "good" at critical thinking (the A-Level subject) before picking it, so we see a more normal distribution.

I got AAB at maths, physics and chemistry and they weren't easy. :mad:

Killerkebab · 28 Aug 2009 at 13:29

OzyOly said:
I got AAB at maths, physics and chemistry and they weren't easy.

You're being told it is easy for you because you didn't have to work out the cubed root of 2744 in your head like these guys did - even though by and large you know roughly as much as they do

OzyOly · 28 Aug 2009 at 13:30

anant_shah94 said:
I'm sitting on the fence for this argument.

I feel that the introduction of the A* will give universities a bit of an easier time distinguishing the clever from the extremely clever. Only Cambridge have so far adopted a minimum offer of A*AA, but if A levels continue like this, I'm sure other places will follow suit.

In terms of GCSEs, my school had 95% of all results A*-B and 80% were A*-A.

45 out of the 109 got all A* or A grades. 3 got 13 A*s, 1 got 12 A*s, and 2 got 11A*s.

And they're called A levels, that's why everyone gets As!

I'll get my coat

I was annoyed about this. The two A's I got in maths and physics were 90% so should be an A*, but I'll never be awarded one.

MikeTimbers · 28 Aug 2009 at 14:35

Angilion said:
I'm not convinced that Latin is a bigger influence on English than German is. Old English was Germanic and Old English had a big influence on modern English.

Latin did give me an appreciation of another society (and ancient Rome was really quite different to modern England, far more so than modern France is). That might have been due to my brilliant Latin master, who taught Latin as a living language in the context of early imperial Rome.

According to a study of 80000 English words, 28.3% came from Old Germanic and 28.24% from Latin. Most formal language used in science or law comes from Latin. Most modern words have come from the same.

Think or these prefixes: ad- sub- pre- con- ex- de-

These come from Latin and if you can understand (ooh, another prefix) the main word in the construct you can guess the meaning.

n1kunj · 28 Aug 2009 at 14:37

OzyOly said:
I was annoyed about this. The two A's I got in maths and physics were 90% so should be an A*, but I'll never be awarded one.

Snap, both my Maths and Physics broke the 90% barrier as well, though surely it doesn't matter so long as you get into your uni of choice?

konicky · 28 Aug 2009 at 14:40

Ignore!

aslco · 28 Aug 2009 at 14:40

A-levels easy.....i wish

....must be subject specific or so i hope cos im meant to be one of the clever ones

Kreeeee · 28 Aug 2009 at 14:54

A levels are getting easier, and that's an undeniable fact!Taele maths as an example, where pure 1, 2 and 3 have been replaced with core 1-4 yet students still only need 6 modules for their qualification. That instantly made it 5/6 the difficulty and there are so many documented cases like this that to deny the difficulty decrease takes a huge among of blind belief.

Posting on an iPod so excuse any auto correcting mistakes.

Killerkebab · 28 Aug 2009 at 15:10

Kreeeee said:
A levels are getting easier, and that's an undeniable fact!Taele maths as an example, where pure 1, 2 and 3 have been replaced with core 1-4 yet students still only need 6 modules for their qualification. That instantly made it 5/6 the difficulty and there are so many documented cases like this that to deny the difficulty decrease takes a huge among of blind belief.

Posting on an iPod so excuse any auto correcting mistakes.

Not necessarily so. Who is to say C1-4 doesn't contain more relevant material than P1-3?

Nitefly · 28 Aug 2009 at 15:14

Killerkebab said:
Not necessarily so. Who is to say C1-4 doesn't contain more relevant material than P1-3?

How are you going to define relevant in terms of 'pure' maths? None of it has much use to real world applications.

I was taking P2 and P3 at the time C1 and C2 were starting in the year below at my school. The hardest material in C2 was the easiest material from P2, and the hardest content from P3 had been dropped according to our teachers, who found the move to C1-4 perplexing.

Not only are they easier, but it also meant you no longer had to do M2 or S2.

You are going to have a very tough time convincing us that the change made no difference to the difficulty of the course.

Seft · 28 Aug 2009 at 15:26

Nitefly said:
I was taking P2 and P3 at the time C1 and C2 were starting in the year below at my school. The hardest material in C2 was the easiest material from P2, and the hardest content from P3 had been dropped according to our teachers, who found the move to C1-4 perplexing.

Not only are they easier, but it also meant you no longer had to do M2 or S2.

You are going to have a very tough time convincing us that the change made no difference to the difficulty of the course.

Seconded. My thoughts and experiences exactly.

C1 was colloquially referred to as P0

Kreeeee · 28 Aug 2009 at 15:40

Killerkebab said:
Not necessarily so. Who is to say C1-4 doesn't contain more relevant material than P1-3?

Every single teacher and student I've spoken to who have looked at both groups of units support my statement, see the above posts for further evidence.