A-level exam facebook protest
- Thread starter Nitefly
- Start date
Hah, low-scoring mock exams, I remember that tactic - an English teacher did that to us once, no one scored above a B.
It was supposed to kick us into action I think... We all did well but I think it was more that he was an excellent teacher rather than any tricks he played...
It was supposed to kick us into action I think... We all did well but I think it was more that he was an excellent teacher rather than any tricks he played...
I have actually read the exam paper now and the AQA specification for the exam they sat and I can't see the problem.
The whole exam specification is about using statistics to analyse population and the effect including CO2 on growth and factors affecting population as well as how you would carry out experiments. It also includes ecology and conservation in that section.
I never even did O level Biology never mind A level biology and I could answer most of the questions.
To me the exam matches the specification very well. If people are whinging that the exam wasn't what they were taught, then it's not the exam boards fault but the school/teachers for teaching them the wrong things IMO.
The whole exam specification is about using statistics to analyse population and the effect including CO2 on growth and factors affecting population as well as how you would carry out experiments. It also includes ecology and conservation in that section.
I never even did O level Biology never mind A level biology and I could answer most of the questions.
To me the exam matches the specification very well. If people are whinging that the exam wasn't what they were taught, then it's not the exam boards fault but the school/teachers for teaching them the wrong things IMO.
Swings and roundabouts really. When I did my A-Levels I revised a broader range if subjects rather than those covered in the lessons and as such did quite badly. The problem was that my lecturers concentrated on one or two subjects and I felt putting more effort in to revising topics not covered would help me in the exam. I was wrong. Turns out trying to learn different areas was a waste of time and by not pushing myself in to a corner I dropped 2 grades.
Exams should be about a wide range of topics and should not serve as a place to jot down pre-prepared answers. I can't see why this "protest" or whatever is justified. Apply what you know to a situation, don't have a paddy about the fact you want to be spoon fed a qualification.
Exams should be about a wide range of topics and should not serve as a place to jot down pre-prepared answers. I can't see why this "protest" or whatever is justified. Apply what you know to a situation, don't have a paddy about the fact you want to be spoon fed a qualification.
I think some of you are being a bit harsh...
Why don't you put yourself in their shoes, if you worked for the last 6months and then the exam wasn't relevant to what you did, wouldn't you be annoyed? Now I know you all think A-levels are too easy, I do too and I just finished mine last year, but it's hardly our fault as that is how we are taught. Don't go blaming the kids, blame the adults that taught us. Why is it every thread like this its always the kids being blamed when in reality it's not even their fault, they dont know any different.
Also seeing as I've finished my A-levels I can now continue to be like every other adult. 'HAHA I'M OLDER THAN YOU SO I AM BETTER THAN YOU.' (OK so not every adult is like that but try telling any newspaper company that
)
Why don't you put yourself in their shoes, if you worked for the last 6months and then the exam wasn't relevant to what you did, wouldn't you be annoyed? Now I know you all think A-levels are too easy, I do too and I just finished mine last year, but it's hardly our fault as that is how we are taught. Don't go blaming the kids, blame the adults that taught us. Why is it every thread like this its always the kids being blamed when in reality it's not even their fault, they dont know any different.
Also seeing as I've finished my A-levels I can now continue to be like every other adult. 'HAHA I'M OLDER THAN YOU SO I AM BETTER THAN YOU.' (OK so not every adult is like that but try telling any newspaper company that
)
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 9,303
- Location
- United Kingdom
I remember when I did A-level biology about 7 years ago. We were always told that the AS-Level (1st year of the A-level course) is TWO thirds regurgitation and in the second year (full A-Level year) is only ONE third and most of the paper is applying principles you should have learnt!
Not sure that exams are getting easier... to be honest I think schools and teachers are just so aware of whats going to come up in these papers that they spend most of the year concentrating on these fine topics, so when something unexpected comes up their outraged!
Not sure that exams are getting easier... to be honest I think schools and teachers are just so aware of whats going to come up in these papers that they spend most of the year concentrating on these fine topics, so when something unexpected comes up their outraged!
I sat the OCR biology exam, and the feeling seems to be the same.
We were given specemin papers, which they said would mirror the TYPE of question that would be presented in the actual exam.
They are complete liars. The questions were purely suggest type questions and were based on minute little details that are easy to overlook due to teachers stressing us to learn the main cycles (Calvin, Krebs, Link reaction, photophosphorylation and what not) but none of this came up.
The books have these 'learning objectives' and more or less gaurantee that you will pass if you can do all of these objectives.
They lied again.
It is unfair for you to pass judgment on the students who are moaning when you don't really know the full story yourself.
Saying that
FUU SEAL!
IF they didn't tell us what to prepare for THEN give us something unrelated, then moaning would not be acceptable really. But the fact that they more or less thrown us in unprepared is not a fair game!
We were given specemin papers, which they said would mirror the TYPE of question that would be presented in the actual exam.
They are complete liars. The questions were purely suggest type questions and were based on minute little details that are easy to overlook due to teachers stressing us to learn the main cycles (Calvin, Krebs, Link reaction, photophosphorylation and what not) but none of this came up.
The books have these 'learning objectives' and more or less gaurantee that you will pass if you can do all of these objectives.
They lied again.
It is unfair for you to pass judgment on the students who are moaning when you don't really know the full story yourself.
Saying that
FUU SEAL!
IF they didn't tell us what to prepare for THEN give us something unrelated, then moaning would not be acceptable really. But the fact that they more or less thrown us in unprepared is not a fair game!
You have a fair point. I manage to blag Bio papers, but I'm hoping that I was able to use the correct terminology in the questions.If my results come back less than an A, I can always take it again in June, I'm sure I'll prefer the paper. There's a trend of harder papers in January.
Although there's nothing wrong with students voicing their opinions to cover up their self-shame
One other thing, the book explicitly says we don't need to know Spearman Rank Correlation and Chi Squared. I felt glad that I knew what a Spearman Rank Correlation was for Question 4c
(Although not that hard to figure out)My only exam practice was of the past papers, and examination style questions given in the endorsed book (essentially, past papers).
I'm gonna say that we don't need to worry about it, if a retake is required, we'll definitely get a more suitable paper in June, it always is like that.
The real problem is that, instead of teaching the subject, teachers are now forced to teach to what is going to be on the exam to meet ever more ridiculous government targets on "value add" (i.e. the difference in how well the children did when they first came to the school vs how well they do at the end - which makes selective grammar schools look almost universally average to poor).
I agree with you that I would be ****** as well. But as I have said, the exam matches the specification that the exam board put out for that module exactly. So hence, if the exam didn't match what you had been taught for 6 months then it's the school/teachers fault surely and not the exam board?
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
The irony is that they're moaning the exam wasn't what they learned, and now they're moaning to the wrong people
A non revelant exam is annoying, happened with my Geography A level!
Because they could only do three exams (2 in Jan and 1 in the summer) due to government regulations; they only tested us on about 35% of what we actually studied.
We did an enormous study (including field trips and stuff) on coastal erosion, did we even get a whiff of it in the exam? Nope, waste of 6 plus months that was.
Because they could only do three exams (2 in Jan and 1 in the summer) due to government regulations; they only tested us on about 35% of what we actually studied.
We did an enormous study (including field trips and stuff) on coastal erosion, did we even get a whiff of it in the exam? Nope, waste of 6 plus months that was.
yeah I mean god forbid you actually learned anything about the subject for anything more than the exam.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 12,488
- Location
- Bath
I've seen this happen before and feel sorry for the kids.
If the teachers have taught them the wrong stuff, and the past papers they've been told to do are wrong, how is it fair? They've put the effort in but were examined on something completely different.
I've had this happen, but it was the school being 'tards rather than the exam board messing around.
If the teachers have taught them the wrong stuff, and the past papers they've been told to do are wrong, how is it fair? They've put the effort in but were examined on something completely different.
I've had this happen, but it was the school being 'tards rather than the exam board messing around.
Amusing. Tragic, but amusing nonetheless. I remember some really, really thick people in my A level biology class. Some of them wanted to be Doctors too. If any of the kids had read one of the generic biology revision guides or is capable of thinking on their feet they'd be fine with this paper.
It's a standard complaint, but I would swear that's easier than the biology papers I sat. A small sting of nostalgia for questions with clearly defined answers, none of this "justifying any assumptions you make" ********.
It's a standard complaint, but I would swear that's easier than the biology papers I sat. A small sting of nostalgia for questions with clearly defined answers, none of this "justifying any assumptions you make" ********.
But thinking on your feet is exactly your are expected to do in science at a higher level. If you think that is '********', steer well clear of science at a higher level.
Learning lists of facts does not get anyone anywhere in the world of science.
That really doesn't look to hard and I do engineering, with biology to GCSE level. A lot of it I think you can just answer by thinking logically about what's going on. The biological terminology isn't really that significant.
If I knew some actual biology things I can't see how you could complain about it; if anything I'd be happy with a paper like that since you don't need to revise as much!
If I knew some actual biology things I can't see how you could complain about it; if anything I'd be happy with a paper like that since you don't need to revise as much!