A-level and GCSE results fiasco.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You have to face facts, Den. Ofqual 'experts' designed the algorythm, not GW. Ofqual has already accepted the blame, however much some would prefer to deflect this to the government.

It's not about who designed the algorithm, it's how the situation was handled once the implications of the algorithm were known. This was in the hands of the Government. The correct response was to accept teachers' predictions and this happened in Scotland. In England, the government doubled down for four days before accepting teachers' predictions.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Ofqual, Civil Service ?? Make your mind up ! The beauty of public servants for politicians is that they can't answer back. Just like PHE are to blame for Coronavirus, any scapegoat will do, to detract from Government incompetence.

However, who is in charge, formulates policy and creates these organisations ? The buck stops with the Govt, they are responsible for the for the layers of bureaucracy who are just carrying out Gov. policy.

You mean they are expected to take care of the detail of public policy. The government set out what's required and the government expect them to do it correctly.

Are you saying the government should not be relying on these people to get it right?

Ofqual is a quango, those employed there are public servants, just like those employed in government departments. They are mostly as bad as each other.

The buck might well stop at the government, but the officers are actually responsible for the cock-ups.

---------- Post added at 17:48 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I've been digging into the way the algorithm was tested.

https://unherd.com/2020/08/how-ofqua...lgorithm-test/



Remember, the politicians called the algorithm "robust" when they either had no idea of its robustness or they were lying - most likely the former in which case someone must resign on grounds of incompetence.

Or maybe, that's how Ofqual officials described it to ministers - robust. However you look at this, our Ofqual 'experts' should have known better.

---------- Post added at 17:52 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

It's not about who designed the algorithm, it's how the situation was handled once the implications of the algorithm were known. This was in the hands of the Government. The correct response was to accept teachers' predictions and this happened in Scotland. In England, the government doubled down for four days before accepting teachers' predictions.

The government was conflicted, because it did not want to devalue the qualifications allocated this year. So it took them four days to work out a solution, big deal. I'm glad to see that out of all the options they had before them, they took the right one. Now they just need to make sure that the universities make allowances for this and agree to take on those who would have unfairly missed out.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You mean they are expected to take care of the detail of public policy. The government set out what's required and the government expect them to do it correctly.

Are you saying the government should not be relying on these people to get it right?

Ofqual is a quango, those employed there are public servants, just like those employed in government departments. They are mostly as bad as each other.

The buck might well stop at the government, but the officers are actually responsible for the cock-ups.

---------- Post added at 17:48 ---------- Previous post was at 17:44 ----------



Or maybe, that's how Ofqual officials described it to ministers - robust. However you look at this, our Ofqual 'experts' should have known better.

---------- Post added at 17:52 ---------- Previous post was at 17:48 ----------



The government was conflicted, because it did not want to devalue the qualifications allocated this year. So it took them four days to work out a solution, big deal. I'm glad to see that out of all the options they had before them, they took the right one. Now they just need to make sure that the universities make allowances for this and agree to take on those who would have unfairly missed out.

I see - make it somebody else's problem...

The Unis can't suddenly make extra labs, including lab equipment, or workshops available (in the case of science, medical, veterinary, engineering, etc. degrees), or suddenly find thousands of extra accommodation rooms in under a month, or get extra textbooks at short notice (they are often limited print runs), or get extra lecturers quickly, or upgrade the network infrastructure at short notice.

Originally Posted by Pierre

It’s a fact. Which is the whole reason behind the fiasco, teachers should look on the mirror rather than blame Gov.

The grades submitted by teachers were 40% higher than previous years averages. One teacher even submitted all their class for A & A* for two subjects.

The grades for Just A & A* would have been 12.5% Higher than 2019

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...r-england-2020

So yes, that’s exactly what is being said.

And yet you completely missed this.

Our analyses show that the majority of the grades awarded to students are the same or within one grade of the centre estimates – 96.4% at A level and 91.5% at AS – reflecting the care and professionalism with which schools and colleges have approached the task.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Maggy

And yet you completely missed this.

I didn’t miss, it didn’t seem like something that mitigated the situation to me.

within one grade

Is still a grade too high or a grade too low, but mainly high it would appear.

Within one grade still makes 4 B’s into 4 A’s and A’s into A*’s.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I didn’t miss, it didn’t seem like something that mitigated the situation to me.




Is still a grade too high or a grade too low, but mainly high it would appear.

Within one grade still makes 4 B’s into 4 A’s and A’s into A*’s.

Any evidence to support that position?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Any evidence to support that position?

Hugh, if you’re going to debate, don’t be an arse about it.

Results were downgraded 39%

And upgraded by 2%

What way round do you think it was?

There is no way this was going to end well.

The teachers grades caused an historic improvement in scores. Obviously not true. That isn't teachers giving nonsense grades to make themselves look good but seeing what they consider the true capacity of their students, at least as they see it, but exams don't test the true capacity of students. They're a one-shot moment. Some students do better than expected though talent, last moment cramming or a fortunate set of questions. More often students fall short due to stress, a bad day or a unfortunate set of questions.

The teachers grades are a best-case scenario for each students. They would therefore be inflated.

But to judge them by an algorithm is unfair too. It may in the aggregate prove to be more accurate but in doing that they ignore the individual. Students who outperform their cohort are smacked right back into line. You come from an area with underperforming students and therefore you underperformed and we do not care about your own work.

The only way to do this would be to give those children their months of education back. Then let them take the exams this winter. Bail out the Universities to miss one year of intake. Maybe do the same for the years underneath as well, offset the school year to allow everyone to catch up.

Because next year we have another problem. Another cohort of students taking their GCSEs/A-Levels having missed a large part of that education. Are we about to see the biggest drop in results in our recorded history?

The 2020 cohort are going to have great results. The 2021 will record a massive drop. This is not fair.

And every year underneath them have also missed months of education. You can't replace that with an algorithm and pretend it didn't happen.

Originally Posted by Damien

There is no way this was going to end well.

The teachers grades caused an historic improvement in scores. Obviously not true. That isn't teachers giving nonsense grades to make themselves look good but seeing what they consider the true capacity of their students, at least as they see it, but exams don't test the true capacity of students. They're a one-shot moment. Some students do better than expected though talent, last moment cramming or a fortunate set of questions. More often students fall short due to stress, a bad day or a unfortunate set of questions.

The teachers grades are a best-case scenario for each students. They would therefore be inflated.

But to judge them by an algorithm is unfair too. It may in the aggregate prove to be more accurate but in doing that they ignore the individual. Students who outperform their cohort are smacked right back into line. You come from an area with underperforming students and therefore you underperformed and we do not care about your own work.

The only way to do this would be to give those children their months of education back. Then let them take the exams this winter. Bail out the Universities to miss one year of intake. Maybe do the same for the years underneath as well, offset the school year to allow everyone to catch up.

Because next year we have another problem. Another cohort of students taking their GCSEs/A-Levels having missed a large part of that education. Are we about to see the biggest drop in results in our recorded history?

The 2020 cohort are going to have great results. The 2021 will record a massive drop. This is not fair.

And every year underneath them have also missed months of education. You can't replace that with an algorithm and pretend it didn't happen.

[Pierre]

The only way to do this would be to give those children their months of education back. Then let them take the exams this winter. Bail out the Universities to miss one year of intake. Maybe do the same for the years underneath as well, offset the school year to allow everyone to catch up.

But that would never be viable so.................

It’s all a mess, no one is really at fault, things could have been done better, hindsight is always 20:20, it was never going to please everyone, teachers are as much to blame as anyone, the Government got it wrong and then capitulated...........so why are people still whinging?

Any way, why isn’t the government ensuring the weather stays nice? They’ve had enough notice the weather was going to change and they’ve done nothing about it.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

But that would never be viable so.................

It’s all a mess, no one is really at fault, things could have been done better, hindsight is always 20:20, it was never going to please everyone, teachers are as much to blame as anyone, the Government got it wrong and then capitulated...........so why are people still whinging?

Any way, why isn’t the government ensuring the weather stays nice? They’ve had enough notice the weather was going to change and they’ve done nothing about it.

I'm not sure that whinging is an accurate term. The issues seem to be:
- Some people whose grades have now been revised upwards cannot get onto the courses they want to because they are full.
- Universities who have increased their uptake on courses will face increased costs not fully covered by fees. Who will cover this?
- Gavin Williamson has tried to pretend that the situation came as a surprise. This is adding insult to injury. The situation was predicted back in July both in The Times Education Supplement https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-w...des-may-change and the Commons Education Committee warned him as well.

And it was more than a month after the Commons Education Committee warned about the algorithm on July 10 - saying it risked "inaccuracy and bias against young people from disadvantaged backgrounds".
The damning report warned on July 10: "Ofqual’s standardisation model aims to adjust grades to ensure they are broadly in line with previous years.
"However, there are concerns about the risks of using historic data, which might not be fair for newer schools, or for improving and turnaround schools which are on an upward trajectory."

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...-only-22538255

Originally Posted by Pierre

Hugh, if you’re going to debate, don’t be an arse about it.

Results were downgraded 39%

And upgraded by 2%

What way round do you think it was?

By a crappy algorithm that "risked inaccuracy and bias against young people from disadvantaged backgrounds"

So your evidence is something was was shown to be crap -it may be you who is being an arse...

Time for both of you to stop with the snide or insulting remarks.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

By a crappy algorithm

Irrespective of the method, they were downgraded Because compared to other years the marks given were inordinately high.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I'm not sure that whinging is an accurate term. The issues seem to be:
- Some people whose grades have now been revised upwards cannot get onto the courses they want to because they are full.
- Universities who have increased their uptake on courses will face increased costs not fully covered by fees. Who will cover this?
- Gavin Williamson has tried to pretend that the situation came as a surprise. This is adding insult to injury. The situation was predicted back in July both in The Times Education Supplement https://www.tes.com/news/exclusive-w...des-may-change and the Commons Education Committee warned him as well.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politi...-only-22538255

Full of privileged kids who got their marks upgraded,this whole thing stinks ,they should rip it up and start again.