Read on Twitter
Where did it all go wrong for #alevels2020?
Timeline wise, we heard exams were cancelled (and I’ll come back to this later) and we were told “teacher assessments will be used”.
So teachers worked very hard to come up with a CAG (centre assessed grade) and a rank order.
Timeline wise, we heard exams were cancelled (and I’ll come back to this later) and we were told “teacher assessments will be used”.
So teachers worked very hard to come up with a CAG (centre assessed grade) and a rank order.
Ofqual with the exam boards looked at this data and saw that if they went on CAGs alone, there would be a 12% rise in A-levels, and 9% in GCSEs.
For grade inflation and standards over time, this is not ideal. They wanted to bring this down to 2% for A-level, and 1% for GCSE.
For grade inflation and standards over time, this is not ideal. They wanted to bring this down to 2% for A-level, and 1% for GCSE.
To do this they used a statistical model which took into account historical data of the centre.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work for cohorts under 5, so they were awarded CAGs. 5-15 had a mix of CAG and the model, 15 and above had the model.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t work for cohorts under 5, so they were awarded CAGs. 5-15 had a mix of CAG and the model, 15 and above had the model.
Now we know the CAGs are on average higher that the model produced grades, so consequently this gave an advantage to students in schools that have smaller cohorts- and those schools tend to be independent/private schools.
So now we have students who are looking at results that they feel do not reflect their ability.
And why? Were teachers too generous?
Absolutely not.
And why? Were teachers too generous?
Absolutely not.
The problem is exams are unknown. Stuff happens and it is very hard to predict which students will bomb out and get the U, or get the perfect question and be able to nail the answer and get an A*.
Teacher predictions weren’t wrong; it’s impossible to predict unpredictability.
Teacher predictions weren’t wrong; it’s impossible to predict unpredictability.
So although the overall picture is great (results are up! More A*s!) it’s like a Monet painting. From a distance it all makes sense- but get close and it’s a blurry mess.
And why can’t universities just take who they want? They’ve had caps put on their numbers.
And why can’t universities just take who they want? They’ve had caps put on their numbers.
GCSEs will have more students and more exams and more problems.
So what should have happened?
1. We should have tried to do reduced exams.
2. Looked at it centre by centre and questioned suspected inflation.
3. Not prioritised standards over time above all else.
So what should have happened?
1. We should have tried to do reduced exams.
2. Looked at it centre by centre and questioned suspected inflation.
3. Not prioritised standards over time above all else.
And what should happen now? I would love to see a move to allow CAGs. Students are seeing their options reduce by the hour.
Failing that- a proper appeals process that is quick and fair.
And the cap lifted for universities to allow them to take who they like.
Failing that- a proper appeals process that is quick and fair.
And the cap lifted for universities to allow them to take who they like.