GCSE results 2012: grades drop for first time in history.

Idk whether to put this here or education (Education seems more sensible.. but meh ;l). I'm surprised that they dropped tbh after it had been improving for so many years;

Quote:

---

Figures published by exam boards showed that the number of teenagers awarded good grades in a range of academic subjects including English, maths and science dropped sharply.

In all, the proportion of test papers marked at least an A fell by 0.8 percentage points to 22.4 per cent - the first annual drop since GCSE exams were first sat in 1988.

Elite A* grades also fell by 0.5 percentage points to 7.3 per cent.

Data released by the Joint Council for Qualifications showed that the overall proportion of tests awarded at least a C - considered a "good" pass - was down by 0.4 percentage points to 69.4 per cent. Girls again stretched their lead over boys at C grade.

The disclosure is likely to place huge pressure on state schools in England which have been threatened with closure or take-over if they fail to hit basic GCSE floor targets.

Schools must ensure at least four-in-10 pupils gain five good passes, with more than 250 secondaries falling short of the mark last summer.
But it also prompted outrage from head teachers' leaders today who claimed that pass-rates had been artificially held down to satisfy Government demands to contain "grade inflation".
It is likely to lead to a sharp increase in the number of schools lodging official appeals against results.
The proportion of GCSE papers awarded an A or C grade had increased for 23 years in a row before today's fall.
According to today's figures for around 700,000 schoolchildren in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the overall drop in grades was driven by sharp declines in pass-rates in a series of traditional academic disciplines.
Figures showed that:
• The proportion of exams awarded C grades in English literature fell by more than two percentage points to 76.3 per cent;
• English language C grades dropped by 1.5 percentage points to 63.9 per cent;
• C grades in mathematics fell by 0.4 percentage points to 58.4 per cent;
• Grades in chemistry, biology and physics all fell, while the proportion of pupils awarded Cs in combined science papers plummeted by almost two percentage points to 60.7 per cent.
The fall will particularly damage schools' league table standings as rankings are calculated based on the proportion of pupils gaining A* to C grades, including the key subjects of English and maths.

---

Moved by efq (Trialist Forum Moderator): Felt it was better suited here, thanks.

Good to see really, in-line with A-Levels. Personally I felt it was a bit silly that they'd increase year on year.

I think the whole English system is far too confusing imo, definitely needs a reform in general.

GG this generation, you disappoint us all.

The idea that grades have been improving every year for the last 30 years non-stop (especially with our education system which has undergone steep decline since the abolition of the grammar schools in the 1960s and 1970s) is worthy of of a Soviet medal in statistics.

GOOD. They cannot rise EVERY year, that's preposterous. Well done to those who still got good grades, although my old school put up entry requirements due to this exact issue - now there's not the number of passers they expected! O well, was too crowded anyway.

Listened to a Radio 4 interview earlier where a head teacher was screaming conspiracy because his school had had a sharp of a drop in those achieving C grades at GCSE. Clearly didn't want to entertain the fact that his teachers had been teaching a new english curriculum wrong.

I'm sure I heard somewhere they were marking things like English more harshly this year?

They are deffinatly decreasing. In our mocks in the music exam a few people got a's and a*'s and this was overall in the rreal thing, no one got a a or a* and there was some of the best musicians in there and some of the best at the listening test. only 2 people with a B, its not on. i agree complaints should be made

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ardemax

I'm sure I heard somewhere they were marking things like English more harshly this year?

---

Yes, mainly English but quite a lot of other subjects as well :P.

I'm in support of them trying to stop grades continuously rising, but the timing that they raise the boundaries is ridiculous. The usually do it after students have been informed of their final predicted/expected grades, thus meaning quite a lot of students end up a grade lower than expected (which, in all honesty, isn't great for people who are expected Cs in stuff like English and end up with a D). I don't find that very fair upon students who feel comfortable that they're going to get into College with their Cs, then get a huge shock with a D.

I think it jeapodises (I CAN'T SPELL THAT WORD?) so many young people's lives in all honesty, if they decide to bump up the boundary at such a late point in time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Yes, mainly English but quite a lot of other subjects as well :P.

I'm in support of them trying to stop grades continuously rising, but the timing that they raise the boundaries is ridiculous. The usually do it after students have been informed of their final predicted/expected grades, thus meaning quite a lot of students end up a grade lower than expected (which, in all honesty, isn't great for people who are expected Cs in stuff like English and end up with a D). I don't find that very fair upon students who feel comfortable that they're going to get into College with their Cs, then get a huge shock with a D.

I think it jeapodises (I CAN'T SPELL THAT WORD?) so many young people's lives in all honesty, if they decide to bump up the boundary at such a late point in time.

---

I think there possibly doing it because next year all post 16 have to stay in full time education so they can mark it as strict as possible now. But they could of waited until we had gone to college, I was chuffed with my results as i didnt think id get that but I did expect better in some subjects. Im glad i got my c in english

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Yes, mainly English but quite a lot of other subjects as well :P.

I'm in support of them trying to stop grades continuously rising, but the timing that they raise the boundaries is ridiculous. The usually do it after students have been informed of their final predicted/expected grades, thus meaning quite a lot of students end up a grade lower than expected (which, in all honesty, isn't great for people who are expected Cs in stuff like English and end up with a D). I don't find that very fair upon students who feel comfortable that they're going to get into College with their Cs, then get a huge shock with a D.

I think it jeapodises (I CAN'T SPELL THAT WORD?) so many young people's lives in all honesty, if they decide to bump up the boundary at such a late point in time.

---

But predicted grades are just that, predictions. At the end of the day, you could have a really bad exam and go way below your predicted and vice versa. Grade boundries change every single year and they're always done at this point in time. Assuming that no foul play has gone on with the exam boards, then students that got a D don't have many people to blame if they really wanted the C.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

But predicted grades are just that, predictions. At the end of the day, you could have a really bad exam and go way below your predicted and vice versa. Grade boundries change every single year and they're always done at this point in time. Assuming that no foul play has gone on with the exam boards, then students that got a D don't have many people to blame if they really wanted the C.

---

I suppose predictions are predictions (I have had some really wrong predictions placed upon me before, I believe I got 3 grades higher than predicted in an exam before :S) but ultimately, it's what the colleges all have to go off to start with. Predictions don't do any wonders at all because they offer "false hope" really, and I would happily have them removed if it weren't for colleges requiring them to see if you're likely to be eligible for a certain course.

I don't like how people say "if they really wanted a C". Some people genuinely struggle to attain Cs in certain subjects and with the harsh marking, it's near enough impossible. English Language is the only exam I revised my arse off for (apart from maths) and I was 3 UMS away from a B, I imagine if it had not been harshly marked I would have gotten that B - my friend was in the same situation (not 3 UMS idk how many) but with a science and she was in school revising every day on Study Leave. People who really strongly desire and revise to get Cs don't always necessarily get them, no matter how hard they try.

Of course, no-one is to blame if the student simply can't reach C/B/A whatever level and if the school tries their best, but raising the grade boundary does no wonders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

I suppose predictions are predictions (I have had some really wrong predictions placed upon me before, I believe I got 3 grades higher than predicted in an exam before :S) but ultimately, it's what the colleges all have to go off to start with. Predictions don't do any wonders at all because they offer "false hope" really, and I would happily have them removed if it weren't for colleges requiring them to see if you're likely to be eligible for a certain course.

I don't like how people say "if they really wanted a C". Some people genuinely struggle to attain Cs in certain subjects and with the harsh marking, it's near enough impossible. English Language is the only exam I revised my arse off for (apart from maths) and I was 3 UMS away from a B, I imagine if it had not been harshly marked I would have gotten that B - my friend was in the same situation (not 3 UMS idk how many) but with a science and she was in school revising every day on Study Leave. People who really strongly desire and revise to get Cs don't always necessarily get them, no matter how hard they try.

Of course, no-one is to blame if the student simply can't reach C/B/A whatever level and if the school tries their best, but raising the grade boundary does no wonders.

---

Predicted grades are silly, but they are needed for colleges/universities - of course they accept you on your actual grades, but they need to make sure you're at least able to attain the grades.

And there has to be harsh marking in exams, that's what exams are for really. I mean, if the English exam wasn't harshly marked, and you got your 3 marks, and your friend got her 3 marks, and on average everyone got 3 more marks, the grade boundry would just got up by 3 marks.

If the marking isn't harsh, everyone will do well, and there will be less to seperate the good from the bad.

And grade boundries have to rise and fall, I mean, imagine if the grade boundries had never risen, everyone would get A*'s and A's, how then would colleges and universities decide who gets a place?

UMS is already based on how well you did with everyone else. 100 UMS means you were within the top 1% of participants, 99 UMS means you were in the top 2% (assuming the UMS is out of 100).

For you to get those extra 3 marks in UMS, you've got to overtake 3% of people that took the exam, that's thousands of students.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Predicted grades are silly, but they are needed for colleges/universities - of course they accept you on your actual grades, but they need to make sure you're at least able to attain the grades.

And there has to be harsh marking in exams, that's what exams are for really. I mean, if the English exam wasn't harshly marked, and you got your 3 marks, and your friend got her 3 marks, and on average everyone got 3 more marks, the grade boundry would just got up by 3 marks.

If the marking isn't harsh, everyone will do well, and there will be less to seperate the good from the bad.

And grade boundries have to rise and fall, I mean, imagine if the grade boundries had never risen, everyone would get A*'s and A's, how then would colleges and universities decide who gets a place?

UMS is already based on how well you did with everyone else. 100 UMS means you were within the top 1% of participants, 99 UMS means you were in the top 2% (assuming the UMS is out of 100).

For you to get those extra 3 marks in UMS, you've got to overtake 3% of people that took the exam, that's thousands of students.

---

Think I have UMS confused with something else :hmm: Our system is too confusing, sigh.

Can I alter my last sentence? I should have said "Extremely strict marking does no wonders". I would rather have it so the grade boundary is pushed up (year by year if needed) dramatically and announced BEFORE students undertake their final exams for each subject as opposed to them being subjected to extremely harsh marking from exams. That way students know what is expected of them in order to get a high/decent grade and isn't going to provide as much false hope really - of course, as I said, not everyone can be "good" at one subject and many struggle to get a C, but if the grade boundary is simply raised a lot higher as opposed to strict marking, students will know more is expected of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Think I have UMS confused with something else :hmm: Our system is too confusing, sigh.

Can I alter my last sentence? I should have said "Extremely strict marking does no wonders". I would rather have it so the grade boundary is pushed up (year by year if needed) dramatically and announced BEFORE students undertake their final exams for each subject as opposed to them being subjected to extremely harsh marking from exams. That way students know what is expected of them in order to get a high/decent grade and isn't going to provide as much false hope really - of course, as I said, not everyone can be "good" at one subject and many struggle to get a C, but if the grade boundary is simply raised a lot higher as opposed to strict marking, students will know more is expected of them.

---

There is no such thing as "strict marking", exams are marked pretty much the same each year, it's the grade boundaries that make it "harsh". The grade boundaries are changed based on how well people did in that years exam, this means they can only decide the grade boundary once they know everyone's results.

They literally get numbers of how many people scored each mark, and go, "Ok, the 12,593 people that got 45/60 and above can have an A..."

It's impossible for them to announce grade boundaries before the exam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

There is no such thing as "strict marking", exams are marked pretty much the same each year, it's the grade boundaries that make it "harsh". The grade boundaries are changed based on how well people did in that years exam, this means they can only decide the grade boundary once they know everyone's results.

They literally get numbers of how many people scored each mark, and go, "Ok, the 12,593 people that got 45/60 and above can have an A..."

It's impossible for them to announce grade boundaries before the exam.

---

There is in certain exams. I'll grab language exams for example - marking is much stricter because students have to use the exact "words" if the question requires translation from french/german/spanish whatever > English. If "she is wearing a black coat" is the correct answer and a student puts "She has put on a black coat", they don't receive a mark anymore even though they have gathered the "jist/gist?" of the sentence. Of course, if someone puts "She threw away a green jacket" then I'd understand not giving a mark then. And before the point of "but translation would need to be accurate if you went abroad" comes up, GCSE German/French/Spanish will not help you that much when speaking abroad - bits and bobs.

There can be strict marking in other subjects as well. Stuff like maths where there's one straightforward answer, of course not. But in Literature/Language exams there can be strict marking. I remember we were told not to go into the context in "Of Mice & Men" in 1 of the exams, because we wouldn't get a mark for it at all. Even if it was an astounding point, you just wouldn't gain a mark.

I also don't see how they can suddenly decide that X amount of people and above, fit into the A category and alter that willy nilly really. The students have done the exams to the standard of an A that the exam boards expected, and then to go and alter it makes little to no sense at all because they did the work to the standard the exam board expected... unless "exam grades inflation" is literally the biggest issue around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

There is in certain exams. I'll grab language exams for example - marking is much stricter because students have to use the exact "words" if the question requires translation from french/german/spanish whatever > English. If "she is wearing a black coat" is the correct answer and a student puts "She has put on a black coat", they don't receive a mark anymore even though they have gathered the "jist/gist?" of the sentence. Of course, if someone puts "She threw away a green jacket" then I'd understand not giving a mark then. And before the point of "but translation would need to be accurate if you went abroad" comes up, GCSE German/French/Spanish will not help you that much when speaking abroad - bits and bobs.

There can be strict marking in other subjects as well. Stuff like maths where this one straightforward answer, of course not. But in Literature/Language exams there can be strict marking. I remember we were told not to go into the context in "Of Mice & Men" in 1 of the exams, because we wouldn't get a mark for it at all. Even if it was an astounding point, you just wouldn't gain a mark.

I also don't see how they can suddenly decide that X amount of people and above, fit into the A category and alter that willy nilly really. The students have done the exams to the standard of an A that the exam boards expected, and then to go and alter it makes little to no sense at all because they did the work to the standard the exam board expected... unless "exam grades inflation" is literally the biggest issue around.

---

But the example you gave isn't "strict" marking, if they ask for a literal translation, you have to give one :P If the answers say you need a specific answer, if you don't have it, no mark.

Strict marking would be not having a nice marker, and constantly marking you down for things you should have been marked for.

And that's how exam boards work, it's to make sure that my GCSE grades of 3 years ago are equivalent to people's GCSEs today despite them having an harder/easier paper than I did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

But the example you gave isn't "strict" marking, if they ask for a literal translation, you have to give one :P If the answers say you need a specific answer, if you don't have it, no mark.

Strict marking would be not having a nice marker, and constantly marking you down for things you should have been marked for.

And that's how exam boards work, it's to make sure that my GCSE grades of 3 years ago are equivalent to people's GCSEs today despite them having an harder/easier paper than I did.

---

Only just realised that you can get marked down on papers. I don't understand how you could be marked down? There is very little you could do in an exam to lose "points" that I can think of.

Still trying to get around my head how it makes it equivalent really. I literally don't understand how :I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intersocial

Only just realised that you can get marked down on papers. I don't understand how you could be marked down? There is very little you could do in an exam to lose "points" that I can think of.

Still trying to get around my head how it makes it equivalent really. I literally don't understand how :I.

---

Some exam boards may mark down, I know I can certainly be marked down in Maths at University, although Uni exam boards are individual to each University and so are different to GCSE boards.

And imagine it like this, I took my Maths GCSE exam in 2008, and imagine it was a super hard paper, but I got the best in my class, and at 70% I got an A*

Imagine Bob took his Maths GCSE exam in 2012, and imagine it was super easy, he got 73% but everyone in his class got higher than him. Bob would get a B for example.

Of course it's not based on everyone in the class, but everyone that took the exam nationally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Some exam boards may mark down, I know I can certainly be marked down in Maths at University, although Uni exam boards are individual to each University and so are different to GCSE boards.

And imagine it like this, I took my Maths GCSE exam in 2008, and imagine it was a super hard paper, but I got the best in my class, and at 70% I got an A*

Imagine Bob took his Maths GCSE exam in 2012, and imagine it was super easy, he got 73% but everyone in his class got higher than him. Bob would get a B for example.

Of course it's not based on everyone in the class, but everyone that took the exam nationally.

---

I'm sort of understanding it now :P Does it always have to be this confusing in England? (Or am I literally clueless :().

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

There is no such thing as "strict marking", exams are marked pretty much the same each year, it's the grade boundaries that make it "harsh". The grade boundaries are changed based on how well people did in that years exam, this means they can only decide the grade boundary once they know everyone's results.

They literally get numbers of how many people scored each mark, and go, "Ok, the 12,593 people that got 45/60 and above can have an A..."

It's impossible for them to announce grade boundaries before the exam.

---

Not strictly true. In English which is what was marked harshly anyway, grades are fixed based upon a level marking system similar to certain questions in geo. Therefore what's obviously happened is by strict.marking they have been giving lower tiers then they should have been for certzin .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

Not strictly true. In English which is what was marked harshly anyway, grades are fixed based upon a level marking system similar to certain questions in geo. Therefore what's obviously happened is by strict.marking they have been giving lower tiers then they should have been for certzin .

---

Care to explain what you mean? How are questions for geography? Last time I did geography was my geography GCSE which was mainly 'Label these features of a river [5]' and 'Describe the influences of Coca Cola in Brazil [15]'? Pretty sure I'm misunderstanding what you are saying :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Care to explain what you mean? How are questions for geography? Last time I did geography was my geography GCSE which was mainly 'Label these features of a river [5]' and 'Describe the influences of Coca Cola in Brazil [15]'? Pretty sure I'm misunderstanding what you are saying :P

---

Level marking is used in geo questions of 6 or 8 marks. In other words a standard of answer is set for each tier and a similar thing is done for English. Each grade has a detailed descrption of the standard of writing, etc. It is evident to see it has been marked harsh if u then look at mocks or even just a mark scheme after u took, as I'm sure warren would agree also having taken the exams. Taking my example grades don't drop two grades in a unit randomly from mock to paper when u felt u did even better in the paper, and have studied the marking scheme to know what you need for a*, without being marked harshly tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

Level marking is used in geo questions of 6 or 8 marks. In other words a standard of answer is set for each tier and a similar thing is done for English. Each grade has a detailed descrption of the standard of writing, etc. It is evident to see it has been marked harsh if u then look at mocks or even just a mark scheme after u took, as I'm sure warren would agree also having taken the exams. Taking my example grades don't drop two grades in a unit randomly from mock to paper when u felt u did even better in the paper, and have studied the marking scheme to know what you need for a*, without being marked harshly tbh.

---

As in, English exams have different tiers of example of answers. Such as

No structure, no clear context etc. 0-2 marks
Slight structure and context but no clear understanding 2-5 marks
etc. etc.
Fully composed structure, clear and concise context 18-20 marks?

If this is what you mean, English exams have been like this for a while, my Chemistry A-Levels also had this formatting. What I don't understand is how people can say they've been marked harshly when all they have to go on is their results, at least give people time to get their exam papers back so they can say they've been harshly marked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

As in, English exams have different tiers of example of answers. Such as

No structure, no clear context etc. 0-2 marks
Slight structure and context but no clear understanding 2-5 marks
etc. etc.
Fully composed structure, clear and concise context 18-20 marks?

If this is what you mean, English exams have been like this for a while, my Chemistry A-Levels also had this formatting. What I don't understand is how people can say they've been marked harshly when all they have to go on is their results, at least give people time to get their exam papers back so they can say they've been harshly marked.

---

They are a lot more detailed than that tho, and its like all stuff thats debatable, but the way we can tell its harsh is because of this detail tbh. Ofc getting the scripts back would be able to deny/prove this but you can tell based upon how you wrote on the day tbh, but the fact is you can write to the definition itself, and therefore know what your gonna get before its even been marked, so if its lower you know its harsh realy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

They are a lot more detailed than that tho, and its like all stuff thats debatable, but the way we can tell its harsh is because of this detail tbh. Ofc getting the scripts back would be able to deny/prove this but you can tell based upon how you wrote on the day tbh, but the fact is you can write to the definition itself, and therefore know what your gonna get before its even been marked, so if its lower you know its harsh realy.

---

Trust me, it's foolish to know that you're going to get a specific grade in an exam in one which does not have definite correct answers, such as English.

For example in Maths or Physics, I knew I did well in an exaam, because many questions say 'Show that the answer is 3.672' for example. In Chemistry, I was clueless as to what grades I would recieve, because of all the long word based essay-like questions.

I mean, you can say that you've followed the guidelines, but at the end of the day, it's the examiners that mark them, and the majority of them have had 20+ years of experience of teaching and marking, the large majority of the time they know what they're doing.

I honestly don't see why everyone is complaining about the results going down, it was going to happen sooner or later, and the exam boards have explained that nothing has drastically changed.

Seriously, you're saying that examiners have decided that this year they will be harsh with the marking, that's just not the case. They do it every year, twice a year and marks get double and triple checked.

I looked around the net for a few statistics, and English C grades and above have fallen by a percent, but because more people have took the exam, the amount of people that have gotten C grades have only fallen by 4,000 people out of the 650,000 or so that took the exam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kardan

Trust me, it's foolish to know that you're going to get a specific grade in an exam in one which does not have definite correct answers, such as English.

For example in Maths or Physics, I knew I did well in an exaam, because many questions say 'Show that the answer is 3.672' for example. In Chemistry, I was clueless as to what grades I would recieve, because of all the long word based essay-like questions.

I mean, you can say that you've followed the guidelines, but at the end of the day, it's the examiners that mark them, and the majority of them have had 20+ years of experience of teaching and marking, the large majority of the time they know what they're doing.

I honestly don't see why everyone is complaining about the results going down, it was going to happen sooner or later, and the exam boards have explained that nothing has drastically changed.

Seriously, you're saying that examiners have decided that this year they will be harsh with the marking, that's just not the case. They do it every year, twice a year and marks get double and triple checked.

I looked around the net for a few statistics, and English C grades and above have fallen by a percent, but because more people have took the exam, the amount of people that have gotten C grades have only fallen by 4,000 people out of the 650,000 or so that took the exam.

---

no more people hve not taken the exam. 1996 had teh lowest birth rate for a very long time, and anyway quite frankly the conspiracy theories to do with michael gove are very believable, its like utter ** that he hasnt anything to do with it tbh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

no more people hve not taken the exam. 1996 had teh lowest birth rate for a very long time, and anyway quite frankly the conspiracy theories to do with michael gove are very believable, its like utter ** that he hasnt anything to do with it tbh.

---

What conspiracy theories, I have no idea what your on about and i was born in 1996. Tell me or ill get google :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by santa-my-nana

What conspiracy theories, I have no idea what your on about and i was born in 1996. Tell me or ill get google :P

---

that the examiners have been marking harshly because the goverment is saying that gcses are becoming too easy etc ... and ofc theres another one that michael gove is involved in it all really ;p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pipette

that the examiners have been marking harshly because the goverment is saying that gcses are becoming too easy etc ... and ofc theres another one that michael gove is involved in it all really ;p

---

This is interesting, I slightly agree with the bit in bold. I mean there were some people in my class during secondary who messed around and then a few weeks before the exams started revising really hard and passed. Some GCSE's are a case of memorising facts and repeating them during the exam.

I do think it's unfair to change the mark schemes or whatever it was that was mentioned before though.

Even with it being the top story on BBC News, I still think it's a total over reaction. I mean, grade boundaries change every single time exams come around for each subject. Ofqual says everything is okay - the only reason headteachers are complaining are because more of them have failed to meet the 40% of students getting five A*'s - C including English and Maths.

the REAL issue here is anyone getting a C in GCSE ENGLISH
really? if i got a C i'd be absolutely distraught