Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 29
nvm
. .
. .
Last edited:
Exams dumbed down?
- Thread starter chr1stopher11
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 952
- Location
- House
This has been debated over and over. Your news articles are from Aug 2009 and 2001!!!
There was an interesting study recently, where a bunch of moaning 'they have it so easy' adults tried modern A-level exams. They all failed.
I can't find the link, but I can say that people have always been bah-humbugging over stupid stuff like this. It's simply not true, and everyone is just being bitter instead of happy to see the next generation succeeding. We're the ones that's going to prolong your miserable existences, so shut up and put up.
I can't find the link, but I can say that people have always been bah-humbugging over stupid stuff like this. It's simply not true, and everyone is just being bitter instead of happy to see the next generation succeeding. We're the ones that's going to prolong your miserable existences, so shut up and put up.
Passing the majority of up to A-Level exams can be done with basic common sense, a good memory, a decent textbook, and a few nights revision.
Teaching plays little part in lots of results, we have truely awful physics teachers at our sixth form yet we came out of the first year with decent grades (myself 2UMS off an A, friends with As, Bs and Cs). Almost all the work was done in our own time outside of the sixth form as the teaching was *that* poor.
If you work you will pass exams, simple.
Further Maths Pure Core 4 however does not have a real textbook.... this is a problem for my revision methods!
Teaching plays little part in lots of results, we have truely awful physics teachers at our sixth form yet we came out of the first year with decent grades (myself 2UMS off an A, friends with As, Bs and Cs). Almost all the work was done in our own time outside of the sixth form as the teaching was *that* poor.
If you work you will pass exams, simple.
Further Maths Pure Core 4 however does not have a real textbook.... this is a problem for my revision methods!
Definitely agree with that!
Too many people go on about exams being dumbed down, but the reality is they probably haven't sat an exam for over 10 years, and can't remember the extreme pressure put on you. For example, I've got 2 Uni offers out of 3, and still waiting on replies from 2 more, which means I've now got something to work towards. However it also means there's a lot of pressure on me, and I don't even find exams easy, I really struggle.
Maybe those who moan should actually try sitting an A-Level exam, they might learn a thing or two...
I've actually had a kick of motivation for exams recently, down to a chance that if I get an offer from Southampton, I could have all of my tuition fees paid via scholarship if I got 4As this year in addition to last years A.... which is very tempting to the logical side of my brain, even if it wasn't meant to be my first choice!
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 3,462
- Location
- Sheffield
Indeed. Looking over my revision for GCSE's last week, everything we've learnt over a year can fit into a 30 page booklet. Seems a waste to be honest, I could have quite easily learnt all that myself in a couple of weeks. Of course, I've yet to reach A-level or further yet, so I suppose I can't comment there.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2008
- Posts
- 1,339
- Location
- UK
+1, For example each science module can be condensed into 4 sides of A4.
Although there is a difference between knowing the answer and understanding what on earth is going on
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 3,462
- Location
- Sheffield
+1, For example each science module can be condensed into 4 sides of A4.
Although there is a difference between knowing the answer and understanding what on earth is going on
Yeah, that's why I said a 30 page booklet. Includes not only the answers, but pretty detailed explanations. There are only 4-6 sections we need to know for each exam, each of which could fit in half an A4 sheet if you wanted. In fact, half the marks in the GCSE exams could probably be obtained without knowing a single thing about the subject, as most of it is just opinionated questions or answers based on information they give in the paper.
There was an interesting study recently, where a bunch of moaning 'they have it so easy' adults tried modern A-level exams. They all failed.
I can't find the link, but I can say that people have always been bah-humbugging over stupid stuff like this. It's simply not true, and everyone is just being bitter instead of happy to see the next generation succeeding. We're the ones that's going to prolong your miserable existences, so shut up and put up.
If you could find the link I might believe you.
I took my A levels 15 years ago, we revised and were trained for the exams by doing papers from 15-25 years before that. My exams were extremely easy with myself doing very little revision. The papers from previous years were very much harder, in every case. The basic distinction was that in previous years the questions were straightforward mathematical/scientific statements requiring explanation, in recent years they are very leading, and have to guide you in the correct direction.
Obviously I did sciences, and note the plural there. There was no 'science' as a subject, that was and is absurd.
I trained as a maths teacher a few years after this. I decided to give the career up after hating the direction 'education' was forced into.
Knowledge seems to be a dirty word, lets do a project instead - and use that for 30%!
GCSE is an actual joke, it does get harder to be sure though at A level.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,313
The problem is that exam grades used to only have a certain % of grades available.
So for example: Only the top 10% used to get A's. Now if you get say over 90% you get an A. The problem with this is that if the vast majority get 90%, everyone still gets a A. However it used to be that if the vast majority got over 90% then you would need maybe 98% for an A grade.
The whole point of exams is to categorise you against your peers, not to reward you with a magical letter. If everyone has A's B's etc it doesn't make us any more or less clever it just makes the whole grading system useless and makes it hard for university's and employers to work out who is useful or not.
So for example: Only the top 10% used to get A's. Now if you get say over 90% you get an A. The problem with this is that if the vast majority get 90%, everyone still gets a A. However it used to be that if the vast majority got over 90% then you would need maybe 98% for an A grade.
The whole point of exams is to categorise you against your peers, not to reward you with a magical letter. If everyone has A's B's etc it doesn't make us any more or less clever it just makes the whole grading system useless and makes it hard for university's and employers to work out who is useful or not.
Incorrect. Read up fully on what UMS does. You need 80% UMS to get an A, but the actual raw score needed in order to get that UMS mark varies depending upon the performance of the entire country. If the entire country performs badly, the exam is deemed to be hard, and thus the boundry will be lowered so x amount of people get X grade in order to make it fair between different year groups, as it is assumed that no single year is massively more or less intellegent. If it's a stupidly easy exam, it is perfectly possible for the boundry for an A to be 98% raw score.
in reply to redmans post, im currently doing physics at A level and over the holidays I completed every single physics exam paper for the last 10 years on the mechanics side of the course. After doing my mechanics exam this wednesday just gone i can honestly say there has been some deviation over the years in terms of how hard the exams themselves are but they seem to be following the same genral trend in that they are actually getting a slight bit harder as the years go on...dont know how it is with maths though as i didnt take it
Maths varies constantly from what I see. Some years hard, some years not so. Stats is constantly easy, decision is constantly easy, mechanics 1 is constantly alright, mechanics 2 is very open a lot of the time and won't guide you, but is sometimes easy. FP1234 I have no idea about as I've got all of those plus Core 3 and 4 of normal maths in june.
6 maths exams in a month!
6 maths exams in a month!
Associate
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 1,293
Maths varies constantly from what I see. Some years hard, some years not so. Stats is constantly easy, decision is constantly easy, mechanics 1 is constantly alright, mechanics 2 is very open a lot of the time and won't guide you, but is sometimes easy. FP1234 I have no idea about as I've got all of those plus Core 3 and 4 of normal maths in june.
6 maths exams in a month!
Bad times!
How did you find core 3? I found it challenging, especially question 1 and 8! The boundary for an a will be 58/59 as i reckon a lot will have done bad. Its normally around 61 for the average core 3 paper, the lowest it was was 58 last year. I reckon ive got an a so its all good!
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,313
Ok, maybe I misunderstood the exact way it works/worked. However if the UMS system is applied how is it that more people get higher grades ? Surely if UMS is applied this wouldn't be possible. From what I've read the UMS system has been dumbed down by 1/3.
My point still stands that if more people get top grades the less that grade counts for. If say only 10000 jobs are available and 40000 people have all A's what's the point? The exams are too easy. The point of exams is to show who the brightest/hardest working students are. If everyone gets the top mark, how can you tell them apart ?
GCSE's and then A levels are only used for your initial job/university, after that your degree or experience count. I've never been asked at a interview what my gcse or A levels are, they don't care. Those exams are used to initially differentiate you from others as you leave school. After that, real qualifications/experience come into account.
My point still stands that if more people get top grades the less that grade counts for. If say only 10000 jobs are available and 40000 people have all A's what's the point? The exams are too easy. The point of exams is to show who the brightest/hardest working students are. If everyone gets the top mark, how can you tell them apart ?
GCSE's and then A levels are only used for your initial job/university, after that your degree or experience count. I've never been asked at a interview what my gcse or A levels are, they don't care. Those exams are used to initially differentiate you from others as you leave school. After that, real qualifications/experience come into account.