"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Pick up lines are getting really weird.
This whole discussion is definitely in the "only on PB" category. I love it. Does LadyG want to fill us in on the context?
It's a personal story. Maybe I will tell it after gin o'clock
But I once said this in a weird scenario in Mexico in Spanish (in a bizarre context) and all my Mexican friends laughed and told me I had just said "My friend is Death" so I want to recall what it was I must have enunciated, precisely
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
If the driver walks away from that, they have been very, very lucky.
The carriages look terrible. One underneath, one upside down, one precariously balanced.
Must have been quite an impact to leave them in that state.
Edit - although clearly I was wrong upthread and it did help that it wasn't all one unit. If it had been, the whole lot would have gone down the bank. Equally, you might not have had such a bad pileup on the tracks.
Looks very bad - I only visited Stonehaven station on the way to Dunnottar Castle back in January.
Christ. That's a very major rail crash with the momentum and resonance of a Potter's Bar or Hatfield.
I'd be surprised if there weren't fatalities, I'm sorry to say. I just hope it was lightly loaded.
Can only imagine what it was like in the coach thats upside down. Its a 4 car set so there's a 4th one somewhere. As for what grimly appears to be a coach demolished from the windows upwards...
I love the HST - a design classic. But construction has moved on a lot in 40 years, and the delay in bringing these refurbished trains to Scotland was that each coach was found to be a unique shape, with individual rust needing to be fixed before the bodyshell was cut to install the sliding doors. Its the same reason why I don't own a classic Mini any more - a classic, but having had a head-on in a modern (2002) car I decided I wouldn't want the same experience in a Mini...
If the driver walks away from that, they have been very, very lucky.
The carriages look terrible. One underneath, one upside down, one precariously balanced.
Must have been quite an impact to leave them in that state.
Edit - although clearly I was wrong upthread and it did help that it wasn't all one unit. If it had been, the whole lot would have gone down the bank. Equally, you might not have had such a bad pileup on the tracks.
Swings and roundabouts. It's a bit like in F1 when a wheel is ripped from the suspension. It's not supposed to happen, but there comes a point where it's preferable for it to happen as you don't want the car ripped in half.
Ultimately, though, it's just part of the Swiss Cheese model. I doubt too much will be said about the train. The focus will be on the infrastructure (assuming it was the cause).
Absolutely spot on Mike. This was the biggest political story in generations. I still wince when I think of the PB Tories' reaction at the time: 'Oh, it'll all be forgotten in a few days', 'This is just the Liberal Elite obsessing', 'All about Brexit' etc. - anything to convince themselves that their man Boris was infallible. Those of us who foresaw the enormity of the scandal have been proved right, right and right again.
Christ. That's a very major rail crash with the momentum and resonance of a Potter's Bar or Hatfield.
I'd be surprised if there weren't fatalities, I'm sorry to say. I just hope it was lightly loaded.
Can only imagine what it was like in the coach thats upside down. Its a 4 car set so there's a 4th one somewhere. As for what grimly appears to be a coach demolished from the windows upwards...
I love the HST - a design classic. But construction has moved on a lot in 40 years, and the delay in bringing these refurbished trains to Scotland was that each coach was found to be a unique shape, with individual rust needing to be fixed before the bodyshell was cut to install the sliding doors. Its the same reason why I don't own a classic Mini any more - a classic, but having had a head-on in a modern (2002) car I decided I wouldn't want the same experience in a Mini...
Those are fair points about the HST. I guess part of the problem is that because these incidents are thankfully rare, it's difficult to know how something like an IEP would have fared in such a crash.
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
I suspect the main question will be "why were trains running at all?"
Because you get bad weather all the time in Scotland and you can’t stop running trains every time ‘just in case’.
The main lesson (if it is just a land slip - catastrophic risks normally have a number of failure modes) will be to understand the type of failure mode and event sequence and then try to spot similar risks elsewhere and both overengineer mitigations in future and overmonitor them after bad weather.
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
It sounds as though there have been several.
Rumours are that the train had already passed the accident site earlier in the day, but had to stop and backtrack when it encountered a blocked track further down the line.
The pictures look grim, thankfully the train appears to have been almost empty. If it were full we'd have another Clapham Junction on our hands.
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
It sounds as though there have been several.
What seems pretty odd about the picture is that it looks as if the crash had happened at some speed. Which is really strange. I would have thought after the first landslip the train would have been tiptoeing back to the station.
"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Hmm, simple answer would be mi amiga es la muerte, but I'm guessing that there are subtleties (My friend is death vs Death is my friend) that's not getting, which probably needs more literary Spanish than mine.
Corrected for death not dead! Mi amigo/a esta la muerte - in Spanish death takes the verb estar not ser. Bizarrely the Spanish view death not as a permanent fixed state but temporary - on the way to the next life perhaps? They are good catholics.
Christ. That's a very major rail crash with the momentum and resonance of a Potter's Bar or Hatfield.
I'd be surprised if there weren't fatalities, I'm sorry to say. I just hope it was lightly loaded.
Can only imagine what it was like in the coach thats upside down. Its a 4 car set so there's a 4th one somewhere. As for what grimly appears to be a coach demolished from the windows upwards...
I love the HST - a design classic. But construction has moved on a lot in 40 years, and the delay in bringing these refurbished trains to Scotland was that each coach was found to be a unique shape, with individual rust needing to be fixed before the bodyshell was cut to install the sliding doors. Its the same reason why I don't own a classic Mini any more - a classic, but having had a head-on in a modern (2002) car I decided I wouldn't want the same experience in a Mini...
Echoes of Nimrod 2000.
It’s hard to let go of old tech that once had its glory years, but sometimes you just have to let go (and move it into preservation and heritage only).
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
It sounds as though there have been several.
What seems pretty odd about the picture is that it looks as if the crash had happened at some speed. Which is really strange. I would have thought after the first landslip the train would have been tiptoeing back to the station.
It wouldn't need to be going very fast if it hit something solid. On the rail forum thread someone thinks it's mile from the crossing (it switched from the up to down line to be running on the correct line), implying that it can't have been going all that fast as there would be speed restriction on the crossing.
"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Pick up lines are getting really weird.
This whole discussion is definitely in the "only on PB" category. I love it. Does LadyG want to fill us in on the context?
It's a personal story. Maybe I will tell it after gin o'clock
But I once said this in a weird scenario in Mexico in Spanish (in a bizarre context) and all my Mexican friends laughed and told me I had just said "My friend is Death" so I want to recall what it was I must have enunciated, precisely
Reminds me of Morty in Undercover Blues, a much underrated film.
Also my story of lusting after gold sovereigns in a very sexual way but maybe another time.
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
Are you corresponding from the Ark?
No, its really hot and sunny now. As it was for most of yesterday. It came and went in a few hours. The driver is apparently dead and possibly another. Really not good.
The weather here was truly biblical last night. A land slip would be no surprise at all.
Are you corresponding from the Ark?
No, its really hot and sunny now. As it was for most of yesterday. It came and went in a few hours. The driver is apparently dead and possibly another. Really not good.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
REally Malc? I thought Scotland's education system was the envy of the world?
It is indeed, we were talking about advantages over England which is a real laugh given that we are brilliant despite the handicap of having to beg for some of our own money back from the English parliament.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Hmm, simple answer would be mi amiga es la muerte, but I'm guessing that there are subtleties (My friend is death vs Death is my friend) that's not getting, which probably needs more literary Spanish than mine.
Corrected for death not dead! Mi amigo/a esta la muerte - in Spanish death takes the verb estar not ser. Bizarrely the Spanish view death not as a permanent fixed state but temporary - on the way to the next life perhaps? They are good catholics.
So if I had said "Mi amigo es la muerte" would that mean anything at all?
China: they detect the virus in the packaging of frozen fish. Authorities in the Chinese city of Wuhu, in the eastern province of Anhui, have found new traces of coronavirus in packages of shrimp imported from Ecuador, according to state television. The remains of the virus were detected in the outer package of some frozen shrimp. during a routine inspection by local authorities of a city restaurant. The news comes a day after traces of coronavirus were detected in the packaging of frozen fish in a port city in Shandong province, also in the east of the country, although the Chinese authorities did not specify the country of origin
"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Hmm, simple answer would be mi amiga es la muerte, but I'm guessing that there are subtleties (My friend is death vs Death is my friend) that's not getting, which probably needs more literary Spanish than mine.
Corrected for death not dead! Mi amigo/a esta la muerte - in Spanish death takes the verb estar not ser. Bizarrely the Spanish view death not as a permanent fixed state but temporary - on the way to the next life perhaps? They are good catholics.
So if I had said "Mi amigo es la muerte" would that mean anything at all?
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
Absolutely spot on Mike. This was the biggest political story in generations. I still wince when I think of the PB Tories' reaction at the time: 'Oh, it'll all be forgotten in a few days', 'This is just the Liberal Elite obsessing', 'All about Brexit' etc. - anything to convince themselves that their man Boris was infallible. Those of us who foresaw the enormity of the scandal have been proved right, right and right again.
Excellent trolling.
Indeed. I see Mr Dawning has upgraded it too from biggest story this century to the biggest story in generations. Or is that Scottish generations so it's the same thing?
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Considering the Scots get more money to spend and boast about doing so why does that leave them disadvantaged?
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Considering the Scots get more money to spend and boast about doing so why does that leave them disadvantaged?
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
The Scot Nats are too wee, too stupid to realise that.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
The Scot Nats are too wee, too stupid to realise that.
No, they know exactly what they are doing. It's all about grievance.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
This is the problem of independence in a nutshell. Those sniveling incompetents in Holyrood accept responsibility for nothing, even when it is irrefutably their own exclusive responsibility.
The likes of Malcolm on a good day will recognise this and argue that only independence will force our politicians to grow up and be held to account. Those that oppose independence look at the ever gathering evidence and shudder.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
This is the problem of independence in a nutshell. Those sniveling incompetents in Holyrood accept responsibility for nothing, even when it is irrefutably their own exclusive responsibility.
The likes of Malcolm on a good day will recognise this and argue that only independence will force our politicians to grow up and be held to account. Those that oppose independence look at the ever gathering evidence and shudder.
The same is true of the Conservative Party and Brexit you know.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
The Scot Nats are too wee, too stupid to realise that.
No, they know exactly what they are doing. It's all about grievance.
And as with stroppy teenagers eventually it's time to stop paying them pocket money and let them fend for themselves.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is Scotland would be completely and shatteringly bankrupt from the First Day of Indy. Its deficit would be huge. If it tried to default on its part of UK debt no one would even try to bail it out with food, let alone lend it more money.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The Mexican Institutional Revolutionary Party says hi.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is Scotland would be completely and shatteringly bankrupt from the First Day of Indy. Its deficit would be huge. If it tried to default on its part of UK debt no one would even try to bail it out with food, let alone lend it more money.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
Why do you think I'm so much in favour of Scottish Independence - the dreams versus actual reality would be entertaining to watch.
And give us something to watch instead of the forthcoming Brexit equivalent dream vs reality discovery.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
This is the problem of independence in a nutshell. Those sniveling incompetents in Holyrood accept responsibility for nothing, even when it is irrefutably their own exclusive responsibility.
The likes of Malcolm on a good day will recognise this and argue that only independence will force our politicians to grow up and be held to account. Those that oppose independence look at the ever gathering evidence and shudder.
The same is true of the Conservative Party and Brexit you know.
Yes, its true that one of the less compelling arguments of the Brexiteers was that the EU was used as an excuse by politicians even when it had nothing to do with them. The extra twist was that the EU Commission was not democratically elected or accountable to the people of this country. A bit like the House of Lords, I suppose.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is Scotland would be completely and shatteringly bankrupt from the First Day of Indy. Its deficit would be huge. If it tried to default on its part of UK debt no one would even try to bail it out with food, let alone lend it more money.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The Mexican Institutional Revolutionary Party says hi.
So does South Africa's ANC, or indeed Singapore's PAP......
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The Mexican Institutional Revolutionary Party says hi.
Yes, they took the 'rebrand' route - he says having no clue about this party pre wiki.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
It is and always has been the Scottish National Party, Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba, or Scots National Pairtie. No -ist about it.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is Scotland would be completely and shatteringly bankrupt from the First Day of Indy. Its deficit would be huge. If it tried to default on its part of UK debt no one would even try to bail it out with food, let alone lend it more money.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
Project Fear has no value any more.
Because we are not going to be at all fucked come January?
The irony is that it partly support's Dom Cummings' diagnosis of the nation's ill, even as it condemns him and Boris.
Britain has failed the test of the virus. Dismally. But it may- if we are lucky - give us the determination and self-awareness to finally tackle these deeper problems exposed by Covid.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
There’s such an easy Godwin I could pull there.
But I will content myself with mentioning Fianna Fáil, still calling itself a Republican Party 71 years after a Republic was achieved (ironically by their opponents).
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
The problem is Scotland would be completely and shatteringly bankrupt from the First Day of Indy. Its deficit would be huge. If it tried to default on its part of UK debt no one would even try to bail it out with food, let alone lend it more money.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
Project Fear has no value any more.
Perhaps that is true. But that doesn't make me wrong. The economic facts are unavoidable.
The irony is that it partly support's Dom Cummings' diagnosis of the nation's ill, even as it condemns him and Boris.
Britain has failed the test of the virus. Dismally. But it may- if we are lucky - give us the determination and self-awareness to finally tackle these deeper problems exposed by Covid.
The Conservative Party has been in power since 2010. It was their responsibility to ensure we were in a position to endure a crisis, and it was their responsibility to ensure the “machinery of government” was in a fit state.
They have objectively failed on both of those metrics.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The Mexican Institutional Revolutionary Party says hi.
So does South Africa's ANC, or indeed Singapore's PAP......
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
It is and always has been the Scottish National Party, Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba, or Scots National Pairtie. No -ist about it.
Yes. The Scottish National Party. But my point is that the cause of nationalism with the goal of achieving sovereign self-determination has a very different flavour to the cause of nationalism within a country that already has it - e.g. MAGA, Le Penn, the old NF and BNP here, all of that (imo) low rent stuff.
"Death is my friend" or "My friend is dead" but, specifically:
"My friend is Death"
?
Hmm, simple answer would be mi amiga es la muerte, but I'm guessing that there are subtleties (My friend is death vs Death is my friend) that's not getting, which probably needs more literary Spanish than mine.
Corrected for death not dead! Mi amigo/a esta la muerte - in Spanish death takes the verb estar not ser. Bizarrely the Spanish view death not as a permanent fixed state but temporary - on the way to the next life perhaps? They are good catholics.
So if I had said "Mi amigo es la muerte" would that mean anything at all?
Yes,of course. Don´t take any notice of Felix. He is talking rubbish. What he has come up with is how teachers used to teach Spanish in the 1950s.
There are two verbs "to be". One tells you what it is, the other tells you how it is. Not need at all to go talking in terms of temporary and permanent, and wandering off into the realm of religious speculation.
What you have said tells you what it is - therefore the verb "ser" .
Has anyone tried to estimate what these huge GDP swings have done to overall GDP rankings?
eg France must surely have overtaken us.
The weird bit is that yesterday's awful unemployment stats and todays GDP have led to a 200 point gain on the FTSE100. As an investor I am happy, but bemused. The disconnect is near total.
The irony is that it partly support's Dom Cummings' diagnosis of the nation's ill, even as it condemns him and Boris.
Britain has failed the test of the virus. Dismally. But it may- if we are lucky - give us the determination and self-awareness to finally tackle these deeper problems exposed by Covid.
The Conservative Party has been in power since 2010. It was their responsibility to ensure we were in a position to endure a crisis, and it was their responsibility to ensure the “machinery of government” was in a fit state.
They have objectively failed on both of those metrics.
I cannot argue either point.
I don't think Labour would have been better, mind you.
As the article says, the virus has exposed deep systemic problems in the British political/intellectual Establishment. Groupthink. Laziness. Cowardice. Complacency. Basic stupidity.
The entire machinery which runs the British state is rusted. From the scientists to the civil service. And our worship of the NHS does not help.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
No, the Barnett Formula is an equalisation measure - Scotland gets a reduced % of UK spending increases compared to its current share.
It was made up of two power cars and (probably) three (possibly) four passenger carriages.
So he’s not giving the facts.
I have to say I wonder about this PA claim on ‘six crew’ as well. You would need a driver, a guard and somebody to run the tea trolley. But who else?
Edit - the set was HA22, which consisted of two class 43 power cars and 4 mark three passenger units, modified to have electric doors and sewage tanks.
It was made up of two power cars and (probably) three passenger carriages.
So he’s not giving the facts.
I have to say I wonder about this PA claim on ‘six crew’ as well. You would need a driver, a guard and somebody to run the tea trolley. But who else?
As per the thread:
Set HA22 Delivered to ScotRail in May 2019 (North End) 43140 came to rest at bottom of Embankment Mk3 coaches: 40622 + 42007 + 42564 + 42145 43030 (South End)
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
This is the problem of independence in a nutshell. Those sniveling incompetents in Holyrood accept responsibility for nothing, even when it is irrefutably their own exclusive responsibility.
The likes of Malcolm on a good day will recognise this and argue that only independence will force our politicians to grow up and be held to account. Those that oppose independence look at the ever gathering evidence and shudder.
The same is true of the Conservative Party and Brexit you know.
Yes, its true that one of the less compelling arguments of the Brexiteers was that the EU was used as an excuse by politicians even when it had nothing to do with them. The extra twist was that the EU Commission was not democratically elected or accountable to the people of this country. A bit like the House of Lords, I suppose.
Whereas a more compelling argument for brexit was the admission that the eu would often be used to bring in legislation they wanted that they didn't think they could get past national parliaments.
Has anyone tried to estimate what these huge GDP swings have done to overall GDP rankings?
eg France must surely have overtaken us.
The weird bit is that yesterday's awful unemployment stats and todays GDP have led to a 200 point gain on the FTSE100. As an investor I am happy, but bemused. The disconnect is near total.
The FTSE is undervalued generally I think though. Certainly compared to the US.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Um doesn't the Barnett Formula mean that Scotland receives more per capita then England does as government spending increases to reflect Scotland's additional costs...
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
No, the Barnett Formula is an equalisation measure - Scotland gets a reduced % of UK spending increases compared to its current share.
The formulas are designed to keep everything consistent, so that whatever additional percentages was set years ago to cover the additional costs Scotland and co incur continue for ever. So if Scotland got £1.05 for every £1 in England, as England added £1, Scotland would get an extra £1.05....
Now its possible that there are areas where Scotland receives less per capita than people in England do but given that Scotland loves to complain about how badly they are treated if any such situations actually existed we would hear about it every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
It's why I would be very happy to see Scotland leave. The reality would be fascinating to watch as the SNP tore itself apart.
I think the SNP would either rebrand or dissolve after independence.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
There’s such an easy Godwin I could pull there.
But I will content myself with mentioning Fianna Fáil, still calling itself a Republican Party 71 years after a Republic was achieved (ironically by their opponents).
I suppose the word National in the party name could be deemed to be an ongoing asset. But they will need to rebrand and to choose a clearer political identity because the current one - the realization of an independent Scotland - will have become redundant.
If a student got an A in their mocks but their grade after "adjustments" is claimed to be a C, how is it unreasonable or unfair for them to be able to say "no, I deserve an A like I got in my mocks"?
It's easy to criticise the government on this, but at least a decision and way forward has been made before the results are out - unlike in other places.
Once the exams were cancelled, the situation was inevitable. I'm not sure it was possible for them to go ahead given the timing.
It could certainly be argued that the exams going ahead would have disadvantaged poorer pupils and state comprehensive schools, who didn't have the resources to operate virtually during the lockdown period.
What was wrong with Plan A - have the teachers grade their students. Based on all the work submitted. Based on their knowledge of the student. As opposed to the utter farce we have before us because Tories hate Teachers apparently. You're all trots, can't be trusted.
Its part of a "triple lock" so teachers grades are the primary input, the mocks a secondary one and actual exams a tertiary one.
Teacher grading hasn't gone away.
Incorrect. Plan A was the teacher uses coursework exams and knowledge to assign a grade. Then they planned to rinse that through an algorithm so that bright kids in poor areas get downgrades (know your station plebs). Now the offer is "mock exams". Thats only a part of what has been assessed, and on so many courses misses all of the practical work that is inherent in the qualification.
Its rampant panicked bollocks from a government who fundamentally distrusts the teaching profession and a man who has no idea what day it is never mind what lie he's told in it. But its ok, its only education, it doesn't matter.
As I understand it, the algorithm looked at a school's previous results and the SATS of this cohort to see if the predicted grades looked reasonable. That might have the effect of giving downgrades to bright kids in poor areas but it doesn't necessarily follow. In Scotland the gap between schools in poor areas and other schools is much bigger than the equivalent gap in England. Also, the evidence in Scotland strongly suggests that teachers in the schools in poor areas were more likely to overegg their predictions than teachers in other areas.
Given that the link between income and educational outcomes is much weaker in England than in Scotland there is a decent chance that the algorithm wasn't simply downgrading kids in poor areas.
My view is that the move to predicted grades in Scotland means that Scottish grades for this year no longer have any credibility - the improvement in performance compared with previous years is too much to be believable. The change that has been made in England also reduces the credibility of grades. In my view they should have stuck with the approach they were using.
To clarify the process (I hope, and with apologies to the teachers on here):
- Schools provided ranking within subject and predicted grades. The ranking was key because it was always clear that grades would be subject to moderation. - Teachers everywhere tended to over-predict grades. This is natural - most teachers are optimistic and want the best for their students. - Some schools looked at the grades they had predicted and realised they were just not realistic and they’d never get through Ofqual’s moderation process, so they revised them downwards. - Other schools submitted their higher (over-optimistic) grades. - Overall schools reported a 12% improvement in grades this year, which is unheard of. - Ofqual’s algorithm did what it was always intended to do and reduced the “inflated” grades based on data it holds about schools’ and pupils’ past performance. (For example, it would recognise if a school had an exceptionally high-performing A level cohort from its earlier GCSE results.) - It turned out that the schools predicting the biggest increases tended to be schools with lower prior results. The reasons for this have not really been explored. - The media spun this as sinister algorithms “targeting” disadvantaged children in a “postcode lottery”. - It is true that an exceptional student in a school with historically lower results might lose out. That’s also true for a school which has genuinely improved significantly in the last year.
I believe what has happened in Scotland is similar to the above.
As I said there should have been a feedback loop back to the schools saying you are x% wrong please fix or justify.
That loop was completely missed resulting in this current grade A clusterfuck.
Meanwhile I suspect a lot of bad mock papers are rapidly being shredded to allow schools to fix the problem by using the "mock" results.
The Mock results have already been communicated to OFQUAL.
Mine haven't.
I was asked for a grade based on all the evidence available. It specifically said mock results were not the only or even most important piece of evidence required.
And since then, nothing.
Oh no. That make this all even worse than I thought.
My daughter`s school supplied:
- cognitive ability tests (i.e. IQ test) - Year 10 exam results - Mock results - Teacher assess grade based on mark book evidence (inc work set while in lockdown) - And - of course - the teachers had to "rank" pupils in each subject.
Can you confirm that the centre assessed grade will be revealed to pupils/parents?
You have misunderstood the process. They didn't *provide* that because they were not permitted to actually send evidence in. They used the first four to set the grades, within which students were ranked, as the last one, and *that* is what got sent to OFQUAL. Nothing more, nothing less.
As for your second question, I have no idea. I assume it depends on the school. What we have found out is why OFQUAL were so obsessed with secrecy over the process including making bizarre legal threats.
Oh - thanks for that. Reading the letter from the school, you are correct that it doesn`t actually say that that information will be sent in, though I feel that that was what was implied.
This is ridiculous, then, because schools now have an opportunity to doctor the mock results. Let`s not be naive - some will.
INcidentally, the process used by your daughter's school sounds both rigorous and fair to me. Not very different from the one I used, although I probably had more exam data than they did.
However - how large would the entry be in each of her subjects? Because anything over 15 and that's wasted effort.
I think over 15 in every subject. Possibly less in PE and Art.
They have used the 4 factors, as discussed, to come up with a predicted grade and ranking order for each subject. So, why is it wasted effort? Ofqual are using the predicted grade and ranking ordeer in their algorithm aren`t they?
Not for groups of over 15. They are using the ranking to an extent, but the grades are set by the algorithm.
That's the reason I am calling bullshit on this system. It was sold to me as a teacher, and you as a parent, very differently.
This will end in the courts, and the government will get their arses handed to them, but that is not going to help for tomorrow and next Thursday.
I disagree with LuckyGuy - this is a catastrophe.
My daughter`s school have used the 4 factors to establish the ranking. So teacher`s assessment is still in the mix in this regard.
It is a catastrophe from a pupil self-esteem perspective for many - which will endure.
Also - Scottish pupils are being advantaged over English (and Welsh?) pupils because the inflated teacher assessed grades are being granted if higher than the algorithm. That is outrageous.
Suck it up, it must be first time ever that Scotland's pupils got any advantage. I never hear you whining and snivelling about all the disadvantaging.
But surely education is a devolved matter therefore you should be blaming holyrood for any disadvantage
They can only work with what they get from English parliament , so one hand tied behind their backs as usual.
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
The problem is we are not in control of our own destiny, we rely on crumbs from England as they choose what we get and where we have to spend most of the pittance they send back to us.
Dont generalise your assertion was scottish pupils were disadvantaged vs english ones.
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
You idiot , what can you do without funding , if you do not control funding you control ZERO. Jog on.
Has anyone tried to estimate what these huge GDP swings have done to overall GDP rankings?
eg France must surely have overtaken us.
The weird bit is that yesterday's awful unemployment stats and todays GDP have led to a 200 point gain on the FTSE100. As an investor I am happy, but bemused. The disconnect is near total.
I had read unemployment was static, which surprised me. Is the reality different?
It was made up of two power cars and (probably) three passenger carriages.
So he’s not giving the facts.
I have to say I wonder about this PA claim on ‘six crew’ as well. You would need a driver, a guard and somebody to run the tea trolley. But who else?
As per the thread:
Set HA22 Delivered to ScotRail in May 2019 (North End) 43140 came to rest at bottom of Embankment Mk3 coaches: 40622 + 42007 + 42564 + 42145 43030 (South End)
Comments
I'd be surprised if there weren't fatalities, I'm sorry to say. I just hope it was lightly loaded.
But I once said this in a weird scenario in Mexico in Spanish (in a bizarre context) and all my Mexican friends laughed and told me I had just said "My friend is Death" so I want to recall what it was I must have enunciated, precisely
Seems plausible in the circumstances.
I love the HST - a design classic. But construction has moved on a lot in 40 years, and the delay in bringing these refurbished trains to Scotland was that each coach was found to be a unique shape, with individual rust needing to be fixed before the bodyshell was cut to install the sliding doors. Its the same reason why I don't own a classic Mini any more - a classic, but having had a head-on in a modern (2002) car I decided I wouldn't want the same experience in a Mini...
Ultimately, though, it's just part of the Swiss Cheese model. I doubt too much will be said about the train. The focus will be on the infrastructure (assuming it was the cause).
The main lesson (if it is just a land slip - catastrophic risks normally have a number of failure modes) will be to understand the type of failure mode and event sequence and then try to spot similar risks elsewhere and both overengineer mitigations in future and overmonitor them after bad weather.
The pictures look grim, thankfully the train appears to have been almost empty. If it were full we'd have another Clapham Junction on our hands.
Mi amigo/a esta la muerte - in Spanish death takes the verb estar not ser. Bizarrely the Spanish view death not as a permanent fixed state but temporary - on the way to the next life perhaps? They are good catholics.
It’s hard to let go of old tech that once had its glory years, but sometimes you just have to let go (and move it into preservation and heritage only).
Also my story of lusting after gold sovereigns in a very sexual way but maybe another time.
The driver is apparently dead and possibly another. Really not good.
Headline - 6
7 days - 6
Yesterday - 1
Me ne frego
China: they detect the virus in the packaging of frozen fish. Authorities in the Chinese city of Wuhu, in the eastern province of Anhui, have found new traces of coronavirus in packages of shrimp imported from Ecuador, according to state television. The remains of the virus were detected in the outer package of some frozen shrimp. during a routine inspection by local authorities of a city restaurant. The news comes a day after traces of coronavirus were detected in the packaging of frozen fish in a port city in Shandong province, also in the east of the country, although the Chinese authorities did not specify the country of origin
Scotland also had the highest spending per pupil in 2018–19 (£6,600), followed by England (£6,000), Wales (£5,800) and Northern Ireland (£5,500).
Care to come up with another excuse why scottish pupils are disadvantaged vs english pupils or willing to accept the problem lies at holyrood as the problem certainly isn't funding.
https://www.birdseye.co.uk/recipes/fish-recipes/fish-finger-pizza
I asserted its your own fault as education is devolved and showed your funding excuse to be pure poppycock.
Everything about education except funding is a devolved matter. Given you get given higher per pupil funding that english pupils then if scottish pupils are still disadvantaged it must be down to Holyrood.
The fact instead you try to ramble proves you have no argument here. I support scottish independence but crying "Its the english" every time someone highlights an issue might just possibly be the fault of holyrood stops you scots actually trying to sort that issue out
The fact that millions are then wasted on free University education and other similar differences (prescriptions being another) doesn't mean you need more money, Scotland already receives more per capita, it just needs to be better at spending it.
The likes of Malcolm on a good day will recognise this and argue that only independence will force our politicians to grow up and be held to account. Those that oppose independence look at the ever gathering evidence and shudder.
It would have no currency and no central bank. It would be in an unprecedented nightmare.
Now, Scots might well think, Fuck it, this is a nightmare anyway, and they might even have a point.
But that is the economic fact of the matter. Indy would be a like jumping off a creaking, dodgy ship - the UK - into frigid, stormy waters with no lifebelt.
The ship was in trouble, the waters mean near-certain drowning.
And English people like you might think: Fuck it, let them do it, but the problem for England is that this would also cause severe pain in the English economy, and, indeed, as the Scots would still be using our currency, it might be the Bank of England that would, eventually, have to try and help.
As for Scottish EU membrship, that prospect would be a decade away. The EU could not by law accept a country with indy Scotland's fiscal position.
To be "nationalist" once sovereignty is achieved is no longer a good look.
And give us something to watch instead of the forthcoming Brexit equivalent dream vs reality discovery.
The irony is that it partly support's Dom Cummings' diagnosis of the nation's ill, even as it condemns him and Boris.
Britain has failed the test of the virus. Dismally. But it may- if we are lucky - give us the determination and self-awareness to finally tackle these deeper problems exposed by Covid.
But I will content myself with mentioning Fianna Fáil, still calling itself a Republican Party 71 years after a Republic was achieved (ironically by their opponents).
They have objectively failed on both of those metrics.
eg France must surely have overtaken us.
There are two verbs "to be". One tells you what it is, the other tells you how it is. Not need at all to go talking in terms of temporary and permanent, and wandering off into the realm of religious speculation.
What you have said tells you what it is - therefore the verb "ser" .
https://twitter.com/RadioForthNews/status/1293550555571396608?s=20
I don't think Labour would have been better, mind you.
As the article says, the virus has exposed deep systemic problems in the British political/intellectual Establishment. Groupthink. Laziness. Cowardice. Complacency. Basic stupidity.
The entire machinery which runs the British state is rusted. From the scientists to the civil service. And our worship of the NHS does not help.
FFS.
It was made up of two power cars and (probably) three (possibly) four passenger carriages.
So he’s not giving the facts.
I have to say I wonder about this PA claim on ‘six crew’ as well. You would need a driver, a guard and somebody to run the tea trolley. But who else?
Edit - the set was HA22, which consisted of two class 43 power cars and 4 mark three passenger units, modified to have electric doors and sewage tanks.
Set HA22 Delivered to ScotRail in May 2019
(North End) 43140 came to rest at bottom of Embankment
Mk3 coaches: 40622 + 42007 + 42564 + 42145
43030 (South End)
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/stonehaven-derailment.207648/page-6#post-4717007
Such as this
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-eu-is-used-to-bypass-national-democracy-home-office-minister-admits-a6680341.html
The formulas are designed to keep everything consistent, so that whatever additional percentages was set years ago to cover the additional costs Scotland and co incur continue for ever. So if Scotland got £1.05 for every £1 in England, as England added £1, Scotland would get an extra £1.05....
Now its possible that there are areas where Scotland receives less per capita than people in England do but given that Scotland loves to complain about how badly they are treated if any such situations actually existed we would hear about it every second of every minute of every hour of every day.
http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/page/HST+ScotRail+Fleet
So basically this reporter is talking bollocks when he is giving ‘facts.’
He should have kept his mouth shut at the start, or been rather more careful about claiming certainty.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/nc/north_carolina_trump_vs_biden-6744.html#polls