A-level and GCSE results fiasco.

[Hom3r]

This affects both my nephew and niece

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

I wonder how many students with inflated grades will drop out after finding the uni courses too demanding?

Are you saying teachers give inflated grades?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Maggy

Are you saying teachers give inflated grades?

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.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

U turning is getting a habit for Boris and incompetent rabble. His only ministerial criteria was ' are you up for Brexit ? We'll work out which is your arse and elbow later..' (after Bozza works it out)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9568956.html

It was the Ofqual algorythm that was faulty. They need to take the blame for that, and appeared to have done so. The government was right to recognise this problem and rectify it quickly.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It was the Ofqual algorythm that was faulty. They need to take the blame for that, and appeared to have done so. The government was right to recognise this problem and rectify it quickly.

And if you don't believe it was monitored and approved by the Department of Education (and the Ministers in charge), I've got a bridge you might be interested in buying...

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It was the Ofqual algorythm that was faulty. They need to take the blame for that, and appeared to have done so. The government was right to recognise this problem and rectify it quickly.

Ah, the blame everyone else and take no responsibility again. There's a pattern from this Govt.

As for quickly rectifying, that's a bit of a joke. Weeks ago when they were aware of the issue and before results were published might have been better. Not wait for public outcry and their own MPs to tell them to change it 'or else'.

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.

Well I'm a retired teacher and I can tell you that the grading that teachers give are rigorously checked and rechecked by a whole department.It's never one teacher alone.But then why not slur a whole profession while you are about it..

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Ah, the blame everyone else and take no responsibility again. There's a pattern from this Govt.

As for quickly rectifying, that's a bit of a joke. Weeks ago when they were aware of the issue and before results were published might have been better. Not wait for public outcry and their own MPs to tell them to change it 'or else'.

Exactly you name it and this government absolves itself of any blame and passes the blame on to someone else.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Maggy

Well I'm a retired teacher and I can tell you that the grading that teachers give are rigorously checked and rechecked by a whole department.It's never one teacher alone.But then why not slur a whole profession while you are about it..

It's a fact Maggy.

From the link I provided, and you probably didn't bother reading.

We asked schools and colleges to submit centre assessment grades (CAGs) ..........In general, the CAGs submitted were optimistic. This is understandable and in line with the evidence from previous research. Our recent interviews with teachers who’ve been through the process this summer confirms that – they told us that they tended to think about how each student would perform on a good day, while knowing that every year some students have bad days. This was particularly the case for borderline students.

Teachers are humans and they have feelings for their students, and they would always give them the BoD. That is totally understandable.

But it also inflated the results.

Unless you think class of 2019 if 40% better than previous years?

I still the Gov, played it badly. They tried to do the right thing the wrong way.

It can work both ways. Class of '19 may be considered as having an advantage over other years, or their grades may be considered with suspicion for years to come.

[Taf]

I believe this entire fiasco is to support Universities who are desperate for cash now that many foreign students have decided not to come here.

Very little to do with actual education of all ages.

[Sephiroth]

You couldn't make it up. You should have heard Williamson on LBC!

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presente...e-ofqual-boss/

Originally Posted by denphone

Exactly you name it and this government absolves itself of any blame and passes the blame on to someone else.

Perhaps because they are no more to blame than you.

I could equeally say, you name it, and you blame "the government".

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

And if you don't believe it was monitored and approved by the Department of Education (and the Ministers in charge), I've got a bridge you might be interested in buying...

Oh, yeah, you seriously believe that Gavin Williamson was given a demo of the algorythm? Even the Ofqual lot couldn't have tested that out. Had they done so, even those bozos would have seen that downgrading As to Ds would not be acceptable.

GW would have been reassured that the algorithym would produce a fair reflection of the actual grades deserved based on past teacher assessments compared with actual results. There was no reason for him to disbelieve his advisors in the Civil Service - after all, they are meant to be professionals in their respective fields.

Does anyone wonder why BJ wants to reform the Civil Service?

---------- Post added at 16:20 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Exactly you name it and this government absolves itself of any blame and passes the blame on to someone else.

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.

I have been saying for some time on various subjects - Brexit, coronavirus, healthy eating experts advising government, privatisation contracts you name it. The Civil Service has a lot to answer for and has caused no end of problems for the government. The Civil Service appears not fit for purpose to me, if I may quote a phrase used by a former Labour minister who was similarly frustrated.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Oh, yeah, you seriously believe that Gavin Williamson was given a demo of the algorythm? Even the Ofqual lot couldn't have tested that out. Had they done so, even those bozos would have seen that downgrading As to Ds would not be acceptable.

GW would have been reassured that the algorithym would produce a fair reflection of the actual grades deserved based on past teacher assessments compared with actual results. There was no reason for him to disbelieve his advisors in the Civil Service - after all, they are meant to be professionals in their respective fields.

Does anyone wonder why BJ wants to reform the Civil Service?

---------- Post added at 16:20 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------



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.

I have been saying for some time on various subjects - Brexit, coronavirus, healthy eating experts advising government, privatisation contracts you name it. The Civil Service has a lot to answer for and has caused no end of problems for the government. The Civil Service appears not fit for purpose to me, if I may quote a phrase used by a former Labour minister who was similarly frustrated.

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.

[Sephiroth]

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

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

The normal way to test a predictive algorithm is to see how good it is at predicting the past. That is, you run the program for the previous year and see how well its predictions match what happened in real life. OfQual did that for 2019, but because teachers in previous years were not asked to rank students, OfQual could not use 2019’s teacher-generated rank orders for a test run.

Instead, it used the rank order that emerged from the 2019 exam results. Which is like showing you can predict the results of a horse race by including data about the order in which the horses crossed the finish line in that same race. “If a test uses aspects of the same data that it is trying to predict, then it results in a false sense of security,” says Nason.

Even by including some of the data they were trying to predict, OfQual found their accuracy in predicting exact grades ranged from two thirds for History to one in four for Italian. For most non-language subjects, over nine in 10 students would be within one grade of the true result, but 3% of Maths students (for example) missing a fair result by two grades or more adds up to a lot of teenagers. Over 10% of Further Maths students, ironically the only ones who can understand the tortuous workings of the algorithm that betrayed them, would be over a grade away from a fair result.

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.