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

[santa-my-nana]

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

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

[Kardan]

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

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.

[MKR&*42]

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.

[Kardan]

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.

[MKR&*42]

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.

[Kardan]

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.

[MKR&*42]

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.

[Kardan]

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 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.

[MKR&*42]

But the example you gave isn't "strict" marking, if they ask for a literal translation, you have to give one 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.

[Kardan]

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.