Importance of A-Levels

[Nix]

not really pal, i just made a point to clarify your obvious lack of comprehension of the issue or confusion on the topic.

seems like you are on a bit of a crusade here but simply conceding in a poor tone as you constantly do is a very poor way of countering valid points.

to summise, high a level grades are not important if you have them - once you have them you can forget the fact and work on the other aspects of your application - but you have to have them so to speak.

losing track of the debate underlines your position nix and highlights your incompetance in replyng to posts with a purpose and understansing of the issues at hand.

are you a student by any chance?

Amusing really, as I could've sworn you were the one repeating what I've already outlined.

What do you actually think this meant, if not which it quite plainly describes?

His logic is valid, sure. His point that the top employers want good A-levels is also sound, but you're completely missing his underlying pretence, which you would understand if you had debated this issue with him before.

I never lost sight of the debate, it only appears that you don't really have anything else to do but attempt to belittle myself by rehashing points already made.

Yes I am a student. Did my cryptic location give it away or is 'uni' an elaborate acronym for something else that I'm unaware?

Your whole response is something I knew far before this debate began, insomuch it wasn't even the topic I was discussing as you seem to have failed to grasp time and time again. I accept that I probably misunderstood DaveM's earlier pretense (due to prior discussions), but that's already been cleared up.

My 'crusade' is against the accuracy of A-Levels as the total means of academic ability, when it's completely obvious that it's subjective to the pupil who takes them at the time. Not everyone is fortunate to goto either a good school or perhaps be in perfect health. Yet for whatever reason, you keep attempting to sway the debate off down this tangent.

Has something been lost in the translation or have you just simply misunderstood altogether?

 

[PureAppleJuice]

When companies ask for your UCAS points for example, will they look at the grades for example? I got BBDE, but on paper that's 300 points, which looks mildly impressive

 

[DAVEM]

Amusing really, as I could've sworn you were the one repeating what I've already outlined.

What do you actually think this meant, if not which it quite plainly describes?



I never lost sight of the debate, it only appears that you don't really have anything else to do but attempt to belittle myself by rehashing points already made.

Yes I am a student. Did my cryptic location give it away or is 'uni' an elaborate acronym for something else that I'm unaware?

Your whole response is something I knew far before this debate began, insomuch it wasn't even the topic I was discussing as you seem to have failed to grasp time and time again. I accept that I probably misunderstood DaveM's earlier pretense (due to prior discussions), but that's already been cleared up.

My 'crusade' is against the accuracy of A-Levels as the total means of academic ability, when it's completely obvious that it's subjective to the pupil who takes them at the time. Not everyone is fortunate to goto either a good school or perhaps be in perfect health. Yet for whatever reason, you keep attempting to sway the debate off down this tangent.

Has something been lost in the translation or have you just simply misunderstood altogether?

Nix I don't think you're wrong and cheers that the "pretence" issue is over. I don't think Alevels are a "better" indicator than degree classification, just that Alevels are more standardised and thus are better at determining who is stronger at certain subjects (this is close to impossible comparing degree results straight from a CV). If employers truely want to recruit the best, insisting candidates take their own customised exam is the best step, but my point was that most "big" companies filter applications based on alevel results.

The problem for me is the issue with comparing degree's. Degree's (although you argue differently, with some merit) are fundamentally different and the level that students study to is diverse. Be under no mistake that a 1st from Salford is nowhere near a first from Oxford. This is primarily due to the time taken by universities accepting students with lower alevel results taking more (and in some cases rather extensive) periods refreshing students knowledge of basic facts which should have been mastered during their Alevel studies.

For my Ugrad I did economics, and I thought the standard I was taught to was excellent, arriving to study a masters in maths demonstrated just how wrong I was. I knew exactly "how" to apply certain techniques but not why they worked, but later I understood that certain of my friends (mainly at excellent universities) where taught this.

Good Alevels doesn't equal sucess, but it does certainly indicate your academic ability, and it's better than comparing degree results from different universities without context or specific company related testing.

My point was, and is that Alevels prove more consistant standard of assesing academic quality that degree classifications. And ultimately Alevels are important and should not in any way be considered unimportant.

Davem