A-level Results 2020

[ABB125]

Congratulations. In particular can I thank you for your honesty with Physics. There will be winners and losers. Your teachers obviously had confidence in you.

Thanks very much. Yes there will be winners and losers, but realistically that happens for various reasons with normal exams as well.

 

[ABB125]

Congratulations on your results - very impressive!

Thanks very much.
The highest we had was A*A*A*A, a friend of mine who's going to study medicine at Oxford.

 

[Richard Scott]

Welsh minister said their results were going to be fair and with no issues, already back tracked as saying no-one will get an A-level grade lower than AS (students in Wales still do AS).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not really been following this much but I did read a story earlier of a student who'd obtained A-A-A in their mocks, were given predicted grades of A*-A*-A* by their teachers and got results (via this strange system I can't get my head around) of B-B-C. Really can't see how that can make any sense whatsoever

The system is called mark moderation - Universities do it all the time. What you do is take the "bell curve" of results one year, and adjust the results the following year based on rankings to give you the same "bell curve" every year. This means you don't have issues with "the exams were easier this year" or "the exams were harder this year" - you will always get the same "bell curve" every time. That's why it's nigh-on impossible to get 100% on a University exam (and why you should be more interested in which range it comes in, i.e. 1st/2.1/2.2/3rd/pass/fail, in that case than the actual mark - you might have got everything spot on and got say 79%).

This tends to work reasonably well at Universities that have strict entry criteria, because it means every year you tend to get the same sort of spread of abilities because of those criteria. Where it fails is in non-selective school systems, specifically in the case of schools that tend towards lower marks, e.g. in deprived areas. So if you get a very bright kid at Rathole-on-the-Mire County Comp (or Secondary Modern because they stuffed up their 11+), because you normally don't get high achievers there any actual high achiever gets adjusted down quite heavily. This seems to be the root of these specific cases where someone predicted A*s has got Bs and Cs.

Most notably the Open University don't do it at all, because with no entry criteria at all they have no basis on which to do it. That should be the same as a comp.

Personally, I don't think they should have used this, and should just have gone with teacher estimates (with an appeal process and the opportunity to retake) and accepted that it would cause a slightly high set of results this year. But those who have had this happen can, and should, appeal.

Where it's a real problem is Wales where that appeal appears not to be offered, and I can't for a minute understand why.

 

[eMeS]

I'm happy with what I got today (A*AAB), particularly with getting an A in physics as I'm not sure I would have had I sat proper exams! ...

Well done! I trust you're planning to take up physics on a demanding course, otherwise your hard work will have been wasted.

 

[The_Train]

Thanks very much.
The highest we had was A*A*A*A, a friend of mine who's going to study medicine at Oxford.

Best to avoid your friend on University Challenge

 

[The_Train]

The system is called mark moderation - Universities do it all the time. What you do is take the "bell curve" of results one year, and adjust the results the following year based on rankings to give you the same "bell curve" every year. This means you don't have issues with "the exams were easier this year" or "the exams were harder this year" - you will always get the same "bell curve" every time. That's why it's nigh-on impossible to get 100% on a University exam (and why you should be more interested in which range it comes in, i.e. 1st/2.1/2.2/3rd/pass/fail, in that case than the actual mark - you might have got everything spot on and got say 79%).

This tends to work reasonably well at Universities that have strict entry criteria, because it means every year you tend to get the same sort of spread of abilities because of those criteria. Where it fails is in non-selective school systems, specifically in the case of schools that tend towards lower marks, e.g. in deprived areas. So if you get a very bright kid at Rathole-on-the-Mire County Comp (or Secondary Modern because they stuffed up their 11+), because you normally don't get high achievers there any actual high achiever gets adjusted down quite heavily. This seems to be the root of these specific cases where someone predicted A*s has got Bs and Cs.

Most notably the Open University don't do it at all, because with no entry criteria at all they have no basis on which to do it. That should be the same as a comp.

Personally, I don't think they should have used this, and should just have gone with teacher estimates (with an appeal process and the opportunity to retake) and accepted that it would cause a slightly high set of results this year. But those who have had this happen can, and should, appeal.

Where it's a real problem is Wales where that appeal appears not to be offered, and I can't for a minute understand why.

Thanks for the explanation - makes a bit more sense now.
Your point about the bright kid at a regular standard comprehensive is interesting as I have just been watching a news report on this and it was interesting to hear that where classes only consist of 15 or less students, teacher grading has not been touched. Therefore, most (if not all) of the privileged at private colleges, where classes are generally lesser in numbers, have received the grades that their teachers gave them. But those in mainstream 6th forms/colleges where classes are more akin to a Secondary School classes are the ones who suffer the most in all of this. Not like a Tory government to look after the already privileged

 

[ABB125]

Well done! I trust you're planning to take up physics on a demanding course, otherwise your hard work will have been wasted.

Civil engineering, so not quite the same, but lots of physics contained within it!

Best to avoid your friend on University Challenge

Perhaps not on the railway round though (if such a thing exists)!

 

[ABB125]

BBC News - A-levels: Growing anger over 'unfair' results this year

There is growing anger among schools, colleges and students, after nearly 40% of A-level grades awarded on Thursday were lower than teachers' predictions.

(Apologies, the BBC news app won't let me copy any more)

Discontent seems to be brewing...

 

[mmh]

Personally, I don't think they should have used this, and should just have gone with teacher estimates (with an appeal process and the opportunity to retake) and accepted that it would cause a slightly high set of results this year. But those who have had this happen can, and should, appeal.

Where it's a real problem is Wales where that appeal appears not to be offered, and I can't for a minute understand why.

What are you basing that on? The appeals are handled by the exam board, not a country. Not all exams sat in Wales are set and marked by the WJEC. My own A-Levels are from a mix of boards.

There isn't the appeals process you describe in England, check the AQA website for example. The same appeal process is there as last year (and at the WJEC) - process and data mistakes. The difference is that in England the government has said that students will be able to receive their mock result if they wish, but it appears there's no actual process in place for this yet. Predictable farce after knee jerk policies. I don't think anybody has suggested an appeal meaning a resit other than you. If you want to resit, you can any time they actually allow somebody to sit an exam again.

 

[GatwickDepress]

Unfortunately, I fear luck probably has had too much influence; it would be pleasing if it was down to ability.
But I echo your sentiments, the vast majority will have worked very hard!

It would be indeed. I can only imagine how frustrating it is to have your results decided seemingly by a dice roll rather than your own achievement - especially if you performed well in your mocks.

Either way, I'm off to Manchester this September so I'm happy enough.

 

[cactustwirly]

The system is called mark moderation - Universities do it all the time. What you do is take the "bell curve" of results one year, and adjust the results the following year based on rankings to give you the same "bell curve" every year. This means you don't have issues with "the exams were easier this year" or "the exams were harder this year" - you will always get the same "bell curve" every time. That's why it's nigh-on impossible to get 100% on a University exam (and why you should be more interested in which range it comes in, i.e. 1st/2.1/2.2/3rd/pass/fail, in that case than the actual mark - you might have got everything spot on and got say 79%).

This tends to work reasonably well at Universities that have strict entry criteria, because it means every year you tend to get the same sort of spread of abilities because of those criteria. Where it fails is in non-selective school systems, specifically in the case of schools that tend towards lower marks, e.g. in deprived areas. So if you get a very bright kid at Rathole-on-the-Mire County Comp (or Secondary Modern because they stuffed up their 11+), because you normally don't get high achievers there any actual high achiever gets adjusted down quite heavily. This seems to be the root of these specific cases where someone predicted A*s has got Bs and Cs.

Most notably the Open University don't do it at all, because with no entry criteria at all they have no basis on which to do it. That should be the same as a comp.

Personally, I don't think they should have used this, and should just have gone with teacher estimates (with an appeal process and the opportunity to retake) and accepted that it would cause a slightly high set of results this year. But those who have had this happen can, and should, appeal.

Where it's a real problem is Wales where that appeal appears not to be offered, and I can't for a minute understand why.

Not quite right the exam boards don't adjust the marks, just the boundaries at which a grade is achieved. In cases with hard exams you get low boundaries.
The papers are moderated but this has nothing to do with this, it's checking whether the examiners are marking fairly.

 

[westv]

So have I got this right?
Teachers have given their estimate as to what their pupils should achieve. The examining body has said "You having a laugh?!" and have adjusted the results?

 

[mmh]

It would be indeed. I can only imagine how frustrating it is to have your results decided seemingly by a dice roll rather than your own achievement - especially if you performed well in your mocks.

Either way, I'm off to Manchester this September so I'm happy enough.

Congratulations. I was doing the same 30 years ago so know how good a feeling it is! It's a great university in a great city, have a marvellous time.

The talk of mock results makes me think how fortunate I was. I didn't take them seriously at all, in fact I'm not sure I even did them. What a different time we're in!

 

[mmh]

So have I got this right?
Teachers have given their estimate as to what their pupils should achieve. The examining body has said "You having a laugh?!" and have adjusted the results?

Estimation was always going to be fraught. Teachers aren't the universal unbiased body some think. In the era of league tables and obsession with assessment how would they be? I remember a teacher aiding me in a German oral exam. Our voices were being recorded, what she had on the table and was pointing at wasn't. Some would call that encouragement, some would call it cheating, or worse.

 

[scotrail158713]

So have I got this right?
Teachers have given their estimate as to what their pupils should achieve. The examining body has said "You having a laugh?!" and have adjusted the results?

It’s a very simplified view of it, but yes.

 

[Typhoon]

Not quite right the exam boards don't adjust the marks, just the boundaries at which a grade is achieved. In cases with hard exams you get low boundaries.
The papers are moderated but this has nothing to do with this, it's checking whether the examiners are marking fairly.

Exactly. All Assistant Examiners (markers) have to provide a report on the examination, this includes indicating whether the paper is easier/harder than previous years with reasons. No report, no pay!

 

[si404]

Estimation was always going to be fraught. Teachers aren't the universal unbiased body some think.

Indeed. But having acknowledged a different standard of assessment to other years, you don't then decide to change it to yet another different system...

Take, for instance, the nonsense of using the previous years' results at the school as a guide - schools can improve. Cohorts can be better (eg my cohort at my school did better, especially in league tables, than the cohorts either side of it - teachers don't suddenly get better then worse).

Then there's SATs results and the like - while seemingly confirming merit, some people are late bloomers, others are not. And aren't they ranking people in their year groups by these past results? So, for science, having come what was almost certainly top of the year in the level 5-7 paper at KS3, would either be demoted in the pecking order because I chose to stay at primary school to the end rather than leave a year early (those who formed the first year 7 class for years at my secondary school got to sit the level 8 paper, which the rest of us weren't - so others would have level 8s), or my dropping down from top of the year to a middle of top-set would be ignored and people would be denied A*s because I was only A-grade in Chemistry and Biology. Likewise, I came bottom in English in year 9, so my hard-worked for C-grade might have been dropped to a D-grade (which I think 1 or 2 people got) due to the rankings. Either way, it's a distortion that make teacher-given grades look sensible.

A massive mess was made when it was decided to use a different standard of assessment. The last two weeks (and I'm sure next week too with GCSEs) have been exercises in exacerbating the mess.

the opportunity to retake

Not picking on you, but the wider conversion. 'take', not 'retake'. 'sit' not 'resit'. It's not a second chance, but the first attempt at the exam.

 

[The_Train]

So have I got this right?
Teachers have given their estimate as to what their pupils should achieve. The examining body has said "You having a laugh?!" and have adjusted the results?

With the added caveat that students in classes of 15 or less haven't had their teachers estimate grades downgraded just to make sure the whole process disproportionately impacts on those not fortunate or privileged enough to go to a private college

 

[johntea]

It is strange looking back at how stressed I got over GCSE/A Level results now...I never wanted to go to University which in some respects made A Levels utterly pointless for me personally

The college seemed to think every student and their dog was off there next rather than a career

I even had a full time job interview whilst at college which didn’t work out - only because it was at my old high school and the head had a dislike of me the team itself had me as their top pick it later emerged!!!

The main problem I found at job interviews after leaving college was not so much grades but having no work experience - apprenticeships weren’t really a big thing back then as they are these days so in the end it just came down to an employer willing to take a chance on me and it has been plain sailing ever since

 

[Bayum]

I’m absolutely gutted for so many students and my colleagues. The latter having to deal with a double whammy of neither the government nor Ofqual recognising and accepting teacher judgement in any way shape or form, and having to console many students who will have missed out on grades and their eligibility to access their first choices. It truly shows the disparity between what the government thinks of teachers and those in the education community. The fact that we have seen top results rise far higher and more sharply in independent and private places and those in less fortunate areas who have received the brunt of the fiasco.

 

[ABB125]

With the added caveat that students in classes of 15 or less haven't had their teachers estimate grades downgraded just to make sure the whole process disproportionately impacts on those not fortunate or privileged enough to go to a private college

I wasn't aware of that; it seems at first glance to be a questionable approach, but perhaps there is a "legitimate" reason for it?

 

[Bayum]

Estimation was always going to be fraught. Teachers aren't the universal unbiased body some think. In the era of league tables and obsession with assessment how would they be? I remember a teacher aiding me in a German oral exam. Our voices were being recorded, what she had on the table and was pointing at wasn't. Some would call that encouragement, some would call it cheating, or worse.

Correct. That is why so many of us have moderations within and out of school and locality. Teachers won’t have rocked up and said, “Dear old Brenda deserves an A because she works so hard and wouldn’t get an A academically’ - we moderate. We look at past assessments, we anonymise and swap work, sometimes even double marking assignments etc. You’re absolutely correct - teachers are not the unbiased beings people believe we are, but, as with medicine, there is a multitude of safety nets put into place to ensure that students are being assessed and progressing as they should be.

 

[mmh]

With the added caveat that students in classes of 15 or less haven't had their teachers estimate grades downgraded just to make sure the whole process disproportionately impacts on those not fortunate or privileged enough to go to a private college

I did my A-Levels at one of the largest secondary schools in North Wales. I'm finding the idea that only private colleges have A-Level classes of 15 or less quite amusing given all mine would have been.

 

[Bayum]

I did my A-Levels at one of the largest secondary schools in North Wales. I'm finding the idea that only private colleges have A-Level classes of 15 or less quite amusing given all mine would have been.

Depends on the course and how colleges and sixth forms are setup. Some will have entry criteria from GCSE, some may only have a small cohort wanting to study a particular subject whereas others are over subscribed. My psychology cohort was one of four separate groups, whereas drama was 14 to begin with and dwindled down when people realised how much more demanding it was than they expected. Some institutions will be able to afford to have smaller cohorts because they have smaller intakes, whereas others will have no worries of cash flow and the ability to provide numerous teachers in a particular subject, reducing student numbers further.

 

[158756]

Correct. That is why so many of us have moderations within and out of school and locality. Teachers won’t have rocked up and said, “Dear old Brenda deserves an A because she works so hard and wouldn’t get an A academically’ - we moderate. We look at past assessments, we anonymise and swap work, sometimes even double marking assignments etc. You’re absolutely correct - teachers are not the unbiased beings people believe we are, but, as with medicine, there is a multitude of safety nets put into place to ensure that students are being assessed and progressing as they should be.

I don't think (many) teachers have intentionally inflated grades. What's probably more likely to have happened is that if you have a group of borderline students who could pass the exam on a good day, realistically in an exam perhaps only half of them will pass, but teachers will be inclined to give all of them the benefit of the doubt. There's no doubt the grades estimated by teachers were far higher than anything likely to have been achieved had the exams gone ahead.

 

[Typhoon]

I don't think (many) teachers have intentionally inflated grades. What's probably more likely to have happened is that if you have a group of borderline students who could pass the exam on a good day, realistically in an exam perhaps only half of them will pass, but teachers will be inclined to give all of them the benefit of the doubt. There's no doubt the grades estimated by teachers were far higher than anything likely to have been achieved had the exams gone ahead.

You are right. The teacher cannot anticipate the student who gets flustered at the start of the exam/ is faced with their 'nightmare' question/ gets their timings wrong/ misunderstands what the question is asking especially at A levels with fewer questions. The estimated grade can only be what the teacher thinks the student is capable of. Such is the nature of exams and the pitfalls they contain that more students fail to meet expectations than exceed them. How Ofqual is supposed to build that into their modelling to avoid politicians and their cries of 'grade inflation' I don't know!

 

[BJames]

I really sympathise with people in this year group. I'm only a year ahead so know a fair few people who got their results yesterday. A few were genuinely happy with their grades, some not so happy but they got into their university anyway so don't see it as a problem, but more than I was expecting are intending on appealing. This includes one person who has already accepted their firm university offer but had considerably higher results in her mocks - by appealing she will likely be given these grades, which are two grades higher than what she received yesterday.

It may be a hard year, and none of the options were really good options, but a lot of stories I've heard make absolutely no sense. Students being interviewed on the news having expected AAB and getting BDD or similar having not got a single grade D throughout the year. It doesn't add up.

GCSEs next week will be interesting.

 

[Typhoon]

There was an explanation of the algorithm used to calculate the results by Timandra Harkness (Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society) on The World at One today (14/08) (interview starts at 15' 17").

Apparently the past records of that school for each subject over several years is taking into account to calculate the number of each grade to award; this is then adjusted to take into account that year's GCSE performance compared to that of previous years. The adjusted number of A*, A, B, etc are then allocated by the rank order for that subject that the teachers have placed them in. No use is made of the estimated grade.

There would appear to several weaknesses in this. How does this system allocate grades for a subject never taught before at that institution? What about subjects where the general GCSE scores would not necessarily indicate aptitude (like creative arts)? What happens in subjects which attract low numbers of students?

There was a very distressed young lady on Any Questions? who had been downgraded in every subject, and by three grades in one. She went to an FE College, GCSE results are usually poor (as they are usually resits, or students taking a two-year course in one); she wanted to become a vet so her GCSE results were probably excellent - I bet they were not transferred across. The HoC Education Select Committee pushed two representatives about this over a month ago; the chair, and two others, Jonathan Gullis and Tom Hunt, pushed the two Ofqual representatives for assurances that everything was OK. This mess should have been sorted out before the last minute, ask for results of mocks before schools broke up, flag up sharp differences between estimates and final results, its fairly easy to program. Just don't put people through the wringer.

I must admit its turned out much worse than I had expected.

 

[JamesT]

I wasn't aware of that; it seems at first glance to be a questionable approach, but perhaps there is a "legitimate" reason for it?

The statistical methods work reasonably on larger groups of students, but when you get down to smaller numbers, (I had heard sizes more like 5-6 than 15), an individual result in a previous year would have a disproportionate effect on the results. So the only thing they have to fall back on is the predicted grade, which as previously mentioned are possibly over-optimistic.