The Great American Flaw

[Sean]

Sean--I googled and found this article among a number; it looks like it occurred in 2002 (might some of the reforms happened later?):

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Exam+grad ... a092406156

The article I read in the times went further into where the downgrading occurred, etc., but I don't recall all the details.

Sorry Big RR, the article in question is nothing to do with students living in certain areas. I remember that particular scandal well. There were fuck-ups on the criteria sheets for some exam modules leading to re-grading of a lot of papers. Nothing to do with where students went to school. If you read the article through you will see that Tony Blair's son was affected by it too. He was at The London Oratory which is not exactly inner-city Loserville...

[Sean]

Oh and the marking system used has been around virtually unchanged since the '80s...

[Big RR]

Sean--I googled and found this article among a number; it looks like it occurred in 2002 (might some of the reforms happened later?):

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Exam+grad ... a092406156

The article I read in the times went further into where the downgrading occurred, etc., but I don't recall all the details.

Sorry Big RR, the article in question is nothing to do with students living in certain areas. I remember that particular scandal well. There were fuck-ups on the criteria sheets for some exam modules leading to re-grading of a lot of papers. Nothing to do with where students went to school. If you read the article through you will see that Tony Blair's son was affected by it too. He was at The London Oratory which is not exactly inner-city Loserville...

Well Sean, I'll admit it was a long time ago since I read the article, or looked at anything related to the scandal, but I do recall the allegation that certain areas and/or schools were over-represented in the screwed up grading; perhaps this didn't prove to be true, I really don't know (I also recall an allegation that the improper failures were given because they did not want too many people to pass the A levels that year, which may or my not have proven to be true). But my point was that the British system generally was (and is) not without its problems, and basing one's future on grades which can be easily screwed up (accidentally or on purpose).

[Sean]

No worries Big RR. It's just that I was teaching and marking A-levels from 1999-2005 and never heard of any such scandal. Could your memory be playing tricks?

[Gob]

BgRR & Sean, this perhaps?

In the week that followed, The Observer was deluged with emails and letters from pupils and teachers, relieved they were not alone in believing there had been a 'slash and burn' exercise with A-level grades. It soon became clear that the order had come down from the highest level at the OCR board, chief executive Ron McLone, who felt under pressure to bring this year's A-level results in line with last year's and the GCSE results of the candidates involved. When examiners began revealing exactly what had gone on this summer, the full scale of the scandal beggared belief.

The exam boards and exam regulator QCA should have seen it coming. This group of students was the first to take the new two-part A-level introduced by the Government's Curriculum 2000 reforms. The first part, the A/S-level, was completed in the first year of the sixth form and intended to be easier. It was therefore no surprise when large numbers of students scored high grades in the exam last year. The problem for the boards came when the A/S was added to the more difficult part of the exam taken this year and they discovered that large numbers of students had scored extremely well.

Shockingly, in order to avoid a massive hike in the pass rate and the number of students getting an 'A' grade, McLone ordered a fix of the most crude and brutal kind at the very end of the marking process. With the full knowledge of QCA, McLone simply shifted the pass mark for a whole series of exams and with it the marks needed to attain a particular grade. In some subjects, the shift was so huge that students who had been awarded high grades in exams and coursework - by teachers, markers and even chief examiners who had checked the work and assigned the grades - were suddenly failed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002 ... evels20022

[Sean]

That's the one I remember!

[oldr_n_wsr]

Only problem was I funded her's expecting an in-state school tuition, then she went out of state. But I had some money left over from the sons fund as he dropped out. Used some savings money for the rest. She's graduates this may, and we paid our final tuition bill last week. WOOO HOOOO!!!!

[Big RR]

Well Sean, based on my further research, it does seem that the original allegation that some areas or schools were targeted for additional failures was unfounded (or at least dropped); but I do recall some independent public schools (those are privately funded schools, right?) and some state funded schools were among the biggest complainers; I apologize for the misunderstanding. But IMHO this is what happens when one allows a single exam grade to have so much weight on a student's future.

[oldr_n_wsr]

But IMHO this is what happens when one allows a single exam grade to have so much weight on a student's future.

We have the SAT's. While not the only criteria schools look at, if they aren't above a certain level, the prospective student won't even be looked at even if they happened to be a straight A student.

[dgs49]

I think the criticism of SAT's is that it is an APTITUDE test (by definition), while a student's knowledge and work habits are sometimes better predictors of college performance.

Not surprisingly, the people who whine most about over-emphasis on SAT scores are people who got bad ones - mainly school teachers.

I was in the perverse group who got good SAT scores coupled with mediocre grades in HS, thus (accurately) predicting poor performance in college - at least the first time around.

[oldr_n_wsr]

I was in the perverse group who got good SAT scores coupled with mediocre grades in HS, thus (accurately) predicting poor performance in college - at least the first time around.

Sounds like my story. 580 in Math, 520 in English (I think 600 in each was max at the time) B to C grades in HS (I was not motivated and did as little as needed preffering sports, partying and girls to school work). Two years of college then dropped out. Went back after a few years and graduated summe cum laude with a BSEE.

[Gob]

I did bugger all in school, left with no qualifications at the age of 15. Not a damn thing.

It took some years and some rude awakenings for me to realise that I needed to learn.

Fortunately for me the State funded both my degrees, and my employers funded my night school to get the qualifications to get into college.

[Sean]

Well Sean, based on my further research, it does seem that the original allegation that some areas or schools were targeted for additional failures was unfounded (or at least dropped); but I do recall some independent public schools (those are privately funded schools, right?) and some state funded schools were among the biggest complainers; I apologize for the misunderstanding. But IMHO this is what happens when one allows a single exam grade to have so much weight on a student's future.

(My bold)

That's the bit I'd like to see as I can remember no such allegations ever being made and I can't find anything on it... Can you link me mate?

Cheers!

[Big RR]

Unfortunately no.

Sorry.