Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
He can’t fix it because he has lost confidence. The sooner he goes the sooner thing can improve.
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
It is currently a fiasco. NI students have the advantage over students from other parts of the UK. Scotland too, to a lesser degree.
I think this boil needs lancing - by people losing their jobs. They have had 5 months to put a detailed plan in place. Instead, what has been rolled out has all the hallmarks of something devised over a boozy lunch on the back of a napkin, by people with no kids in education.
Seems to me that we have got to the point where Johnson needs to step in, over-rule Williamson, and do what Scotland did and award centre assessed grades where they are higher than the algorithm.
He would also need to sack him
Probably yes (mainly his fault or Ofqual`s?). Certainly politically he`d have to go.
As I understand it the law needs a change to do that and reports this morning confirm ofqual put out the process in a wide consultation and teachers unions and every interested party endorsed the system being used
I think the GCSE should have teacher assesments as Northern Ireland announced today but a fair appeal system should be agreed for the A levels in England and Wales
We weren’t told the truth. And even with the system as it was put forward, plenty of people who knew what they were talking about had serious reservations.
That said, I knew it would be a fiasco but I’m stunned at how bad it has been, far worse than I predicted, largely due to government lying, dithering and incompetence.
It must bad bad then! Your words were, I believe, that that gov will "have its arse handed to it".
I`ve just read that NI is following Scotland on GCSEs. Surely Williamson has to back down? Grade inflation for a year is far preferable to this fiasco.
Agreed 100%.
This farce is indefensible. Change course now and that is reasonable, just as the Scots did. When in a hole, stop digging.
I'd be careful about a solution that involves accepting all teachers' predictions, as this will throw up a brand new set of inequities given that teachers, and their institutions, vary between the grimly realistic and the hopelessly optimistic.
The CEO of the Sixth Form Colleges' Association was making this point this morning. He was concerned that using just teachers' grades could throw up a whole new set of anomalies. As an alternative, he was arguing that Ofqual should sort out the bugs in the algorithm (e.g. the one that says subjects must have grade Us if there's been any Us in the past 3 years, and the small cohort bias), and run it again. He's saying this because he knows that sixth form colleges, given their size and nature, are in general much more accurate in their predictions than many schools with small sixth forms.
Too late.
Had the bugs been dealt with first time then fair enough, but its too little, too late to tinker with the edges now.
If you accept teachers grades then in general all the anomalies should be on the upside. That is better than anomalies on the downsides. It hurts anyone who may have outperformed the predictions but given the absence of exams I don't see any solution for that other than letting them take the exams later.
Given twin A's issues with exams we were looking at making the most of things and cheating (1 exam in October, 1 in January, 1 in June) but were told that unless people were preparing for October exams from March chances are they won't be in a position to start work now and be ready in time for October...
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
He can’t fix it because he has lost confidence. The sooner he goes the sooner thing can improve.
He can fix it by following the path the Scots laid out. It would have been better if he'd done it on Wednesday in hindsight but better late than never.
Did his Scottish equivalent resign? They did the same thing.
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
It is currently a fiasco. NI students have the advantage over students from other parts of the UK. Scotland too, to a lesser degree.
I think this boil needs lancing - by people losing their jobs. They have had 5 months to put a detailed plan in place. Instead, what has been rolled out has all the hallmarks of something devised over a boozy lunch on the back of a napkin, by people with no kids in education.
The same world-beating approach that propelled us to the top of the CV league tables
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
It's not a claim, it's a talking point, perhaps I should have added a Question mark as well?
Seems to me that we have got to the point where Johnson needs to step in, over-rule Williamson, and do what Scotland did and award centre assessed grades where they are higher than the algorithm.
He would also need to sack him
Probably yes (mainly his fault or Ofqual`s?). Certainly politically he`d have to go.
As I understand it the law needs a change to do that and reports this morning confirm ofqual put out the process in a wide consultation and teachers unions and every interested party endorsed the system being used
I think the GCSE should have teacher assesments as Northern Ireland announced today but a fair appeal system should be agreed for the A levels in England and Wales
We weren’t told the truth. And even with the system as it was put forward, plenty of people who knew what they were talking about had serious reservations.
That said, I knew it would be a fiasco but I’m stunned at how bad it has been, far worse than I predicted, largely due to government lying, dithering and incompetence.
It must bad bad then! Your words were, I believe, that that gov will "have its arse handed to it".
I`ve just read that NI is following Scotland on GCSEs. Surely Williamson has to back down? Grade inflation for a year is far preferable to this fiasco.
I never dreamed there was a risk schools would be unable to reopen because of the pressure from appeals.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
On the NHS, I think the "Protect the NHS" slogan is wrong. It should be "Protect the Nation's Health", and the NHS should get back to work soon.
Congratulations you've just annoyed 100,000 students who should be doing what they want because their centre assessment grades met the university requirements but their actual grades didn't because the algorithms had been screwed by the A and A* awarded by small cohorts in private schools.
There’s also a much greater than zero chance that Ofqal’s statistical analyses were deeply flawed.
I honestly think it must be bust somehow. 40% of grades downgraded is just such a huge number.
It can't be the case that in a normal year, 40% of grades are less than what students were predicted. Surely?
With a few exceptions at the top end I think that I’ve done pretty well if my predictions are within one of the grade they finally get. This is not an exact science and part of the big problem which has been thrown into focus by all this is that small, random differences in performance which happen to shift a result over an arbitrary grade boundary can have profound effects on someone’s future.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
On the NHS, I think the "Protect the NHS" slogan is wrong. It should be "Protect the Nation's Health", and the NHS should get back to work soon.
Congratulations you've just annoyed 100,000 students who should be doing what they want because their centre assessment grades met the university requirements but their actual grades didn't because the algorithms had been screwed by the A and A* awarded by small cohorts in private schools.
There’s also a much greater than zero chance that Ofqal’s statistical analyses were deeply flawed.
I honestly think it must be bust somehow. 40% of grades downgraded is just such a huge number.
It can't be the case that in a normal year, 40% of grades are less than what students were predicted. Surely?
Don't forget people sit 3 exams so it's highly likely people will drop a single grade or 2. How often do AAA predictions become ABB..
This is the statistic I would like to know. What proportion of pupils had a downgrade?
If 40% of A-levels are downgraded... and you treat the probabilities of a downgrade as independent (they probably aren't)... and assume people do 3 A levels... then the chances of any individual student *not* being downgraded are 21.6%.
So almost 80% of students drop a grade. And for a large proportion, that would affect a university offer presumably.
I only have anecdotal evidence of the results from 1 school. And it did look like grades were allocated on an exam basis.
Most unis do have leeway so a drop of a single grade usually doesn't impact your place so AAB when you needed AAA wasn't a problem unless the B was in the required subject, AAC or ABB is..
And university places are limited to stop Russell group unis taking places from secondary institutes so that's another issue that would need to be resolved.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
It's not a claim, it's a talking point, perhaps I should have added a Question mark as well?
Perhaps. Considering that the Scots fixed this after a comparable delay after the results were published without any issues like you're talking about, considering the shortage of foreign students etc . . . I see no reason its beyond the wit of man for England to fix this too.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
On the NHS, I think the "Protect the NHS" slogan is wrong. It should be "Protect the Nation's Health", and the NHS should get back to work soon.
Congratulations you've just annoyed 100,000 students who should be doing what they want because their centre assessment grades met the university requirements but their actual grades didn't because the algorithms had been screwed by the A and A* awarded by small cohorts in private schools.
In my opinion, the biggest lesson from this is that without examinations or other proper assessments, the education system is totally unmanageable. Estimated results are not an adequate substitute for real results. Surely we cannot go through all this again next year?
The next priority is that schools have to go back in September, and make a proper start on the next year of studies. To this end, the government must do whatever it has to do right now to achieve this.
Anyhoo Gavin Williamson should be safe, because I'm largely editing PB this week and nothing major happens when Mike's away.
Have to confess I'm really warning to Frank Spencer Gavin Williamson, anyone who manages to ensure private schools get a boost whilst the plebs suffer is awesome in my book.
Seems to me that we have got to the point where Johnson needs to step in, over-rule Williamson, and do what Scotland did and award centre assessed grades where they are higher than the algorithm.
He would also need to sack him
Probably yes (mainly his fault or Ofqual`s?). Certainly politically he`d have to go.
As I understand it the law needs a change to do that and reports this morning confirm ofqual put out the process in a wide consultation and teachers unions and every interested party endorsed the system being used
I think the GCSE should have teacher assesments as Northern Ireland announced today but a fair appeal system should be agreed for the A levels in England and Wales
We weren’t told the truth. And even with the system as it was put forward, plenty of people who knew what they were talking about had serious reservations.
That said, I knew it would be a fiasco but I’m stunned at how bad it has been, far worse than I predicted, largely due to government lying, dithering and incompetence.
It must bad bad then! Your words were, I believe, that that gov will "have its arse handed to it".
I`ve just read that NI is following Scotland on GCSEs. Surely Williamson has to back down? Grade inflation for a year is far preferable to this fiasco.
I never dreamed there was a risk schools would be unable to reopen because of the pressure from appeals.
Yet that is now a non-trivial risk.
That is how bad and crazy this has got.
Schools not opening because of a separate Government screw up is the ultimate revenge (ironically it's not revenge its actual just an unavoidable consequence).
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
To individuals or collectively?
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
Good grief. This could end up being even worse for the government than ydoethur predicted weeks ago.
So that’s one fairly awesome achievement to their credit, given that I painted what I thought was the worst case scenario.
Somewhere, a blog is being edited to include "So-called "doctors" and "experts" failed to predict how much trouble has been caused... Once again this shows that, as Feynman would have said, we need freakish superpredictors who can think the unthinkable without distraction from the media bubble... (cont p 94)"
Seriously, I can imagine how it might have looked from the No 10 batty cave. The algorithm gave the right number of each sort of grade. It would have allowed the right number of people to go to each University. Big picture was quick and efficient- hell, let's use it every year and save a fortune on exams. A few little people would have had their plans stuffed, but that happens every year, anyway.
Sort of a bit like the stories of Soviet factory production quotas. You're told to make 10 million shoes, you make 10 million size 4 ballet shoes (left foot only). Job done.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
It's not a claim, it's a talking point, perhaps I should have added a Question mark as well?
Most universities (mine included) would happily bump up intake of UK students to help with the expected overseas student shortfall (albeit there's not much profit in home students compared to overseas). My uni's mid-point estimate is that overseas students are will be down 70%, so there will be spare capacity. However, as I understand it (can't find source now, may be something I was told at work) there's an agreement between universities not to increase home student intake over 5% above normal levels, to avoid completely shafting the lower ranked universities by taking all their students (universities further down could still be in a lot of trouble if the top 20 all take 5% extra, obviously, as that's one average sized university worth of students gone).
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
It is currently a fiasco. NI students have the advantage over students from other parts of the UK. Scotland too, to a lesser degree.
I think this boil needs lancing - by people losing their jobs. They have had 5 months to put a detailed plan in place. Instead, what has been rolled out has all the hallmarks of something devised over a boozy lunch on the back of a napkin, by people with no kids in education.
The same world-beating approach that propelled us to the top of the CV league tables
Which makes me wonder, how are other countries handling this? There must be many others in a similar situation (unless they have more modular exams as we used to and can make much more reasonable estimates from that).
Seems to me that we have got to the point where Johnson needs to step in, over-rule Williamson, and do what Scotland did and award centre assessed grades where they are higher than the algorithm.
He would also need to sack him
Probably yes (mainly his fault or Ofqual`s?). Certainly politically he`d have to go.
As I understand it the law needs a change to do that and reports this morning confirm ofqual put out the process in a wide consultation and teachers unions and every interested party endorsed the system being used
I think the GCSE should have teacher assesments as Northern Ireland announced today but a fair appeal system should be agreed for the A levels in England and Wales
We weren’t told the truth. And even with the system as it was put forward, plenty of people who knew what they were talking about had serious reservations.
That said, I knew it would be a fiasco but I’m stunned at how bad it has been, far worse than I predicted, largely due to government lying, dithering and incompetence.
It must bad bad then! Your words were, I believe, that that gov will "have its arse handed to it".
I`ve just read that NI is following Scotland on GCSEs. Surely Williamson has to back down? Grade inflation for a year is far preferable to this fiasco.
The UK's Quangocracy really are having a shocker of a year.
Presumably you include Cummings and the Boris bus in that?
Boris has been elected within the past year and has a popular mandate.
The rest - not so much as a sniff of democracy comes their way....
Whereas technically you are correct, PM Johnson and Mr Cummings do seem to consider these semi-autonomous government bodies as handy shields behind which they can hide any errors.
That's not at all new - it has been a major part of the point of quangos (and criticism of them) for decades.
Not to be totally negative about it - it's not the worst thing for industries to be subject to the relative predictability of bureaucratic bodies rather than constant, fickle political intervention by headline obsessed politicians.
However, it only works to a degree. You can avoid commenting on last night's controversial TV show ("that's for Ofcom to say") or a gas billing snafu that crops up somewhere or other ("I've asked Ofgem to look into it urgently"). But, as Williamson is finding, you can't dodge the really big questions. A-levels and GCSEs are such a massive part of the school system, and this situation (deciding grades given inability to run exams) has been brewing for many months - as Education Secretary, you can't say "not really my remit".
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
It is ofqual who have caused this crisis and must provide an appeal process today
Williamson is hopeless and must go but ultimately any overruling of ofqual may well require a change in the law as seen in Scotland and Stormant being recalled in NI
The buck stops for this utter debacle with the elected ministers. No ifs, no buts. No fig leaves to hide behind. Take responsibility and go.
Take responsibility and fix it. If they do that there's no need to go. Ofqual dropped the ball but they're fixing it.
If they don't fix it urgently though, then yes they should go. U-turning should not lead to sackings if its the right thing to do.
Only the diehards have any confidence in Williamson to put things right. He needs to go. Should have already gone. Utterly useless.
He is but right now he has to put it right
It is currently a fiasco. NI students have the advantage over students from other parts of the UK. Scotland too, to a lesser degree.
I think this boil needs lancing - by people losing their jobs. They have had 5 months to put a detailed plan in place. Instead, what has been rolled out has all the hallmarks of something devised over a boozy lunch on the back of a napkin, by people with no kids in education.
Looking at the Ofqal apologia for their actions (319 pages), it must have been a bloody large napkin.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
It's not a claim, it's a talking point, perhaps I should have added a Question mark as well?
Most universities (mine included) would happily bump up intake of UK students to help with the expected overseas student shortfall (albeit there's not much profit in home students compared to overseas). My uni's mid-point estimate is that overseas students are will be down 70%, so there will be spare capacity. However, as I understand it (can't find source now, may be something I was told at work) there's an agreement between universities not to increase home student intake over 5% above normal levels, to avoid completely shafting the lower ranked universities by taking all their students (universities further down could still be in a lot of trouble if the top 20 all take 5% extra, obviously, as that's one average sized university worth of students gone).
The UK's Quangocracy really are having a shocker of a year.
Presumably you include Cummings and the Boris bus in that?
Boris has been elected within the past year and has a popular mandate.
The rest - not so much as a sniff of democracy comes their way....
Whereas technically you are correct, PM Johnson and Mr Cummings do seem to consider these semi-autonomous government bodies as handy shields behind which they can hide any errors.
That's not at all new - it has been a major part of the point of quangos (and criticism of them) for decades.
Not to be totally negative about it - it's not the worst thing for industries to be subject to the relative predictability of bureaucratic bodies rather than constant, fickle political intervention by headline obsessed politicians.
However, it only works to a degree. You can avoid commenting on last night's controversial TV show ("that's for Ofcom to say") or a gas billing snafu that crops up somewhere or other ("I've asked Ofgem to look into it urgently"). But, as Williamson is finding, you can't dodge the really big questions. A-levels and GCSEs are such a massive part of the school system, and this situation (deciding grades given inability to run exams) has been brewing for many months - as Education Secretary, you can't say "not really my remit".
Frankly I couldn't care less if they're a shield so long as the right thing is done now. Even if the answer is "Ofqual have called this wrong, I am stepping in now to overrule them and we will change the law to permit this" then I would be happy to accept that and move on.
It should never be too late to do the right thing. Ofqual were given a chance to call this right, they've failed, its time to move on.
The UK's Quangocracy really are having a shocker of a year.
Presumably you include Cummings and the Boris bus in that?
Boris has been elected within the past year and has a popular mandate.
The rest - not so much as a sniff of democracy comes their way....
Whereas technically you are correct, PM Johnson and Mr Cummings do seem to consider these semi-autonomous government bodies as handy shields behind which they can hide any errors.
Whereas you seek to blame Johnson for the manifest errors of others.
Boris needs a reshuffle - and then a mighty kick up the arse to the new Cabinet. The six months since Covid hit have been largely woeful.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
UCAS predictions are given in September - November before Mocks. School assessments were done in March after Mocks but would be higher than mocks because there is a term after Mocks to drum point scoring techniques into students.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
To individuals or collectively?
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
To give "results" when exams have not been taken was always going to be full of problems.
I have no idea how to get out of this. Just using teachers grades is daft as they are over optomistic. The idea of using mock results to increase your grade via an appeal is ok but by the time your appeal happens your University place may be lost.
I do wonder how many poeple this is affectng as there were lots of happy smiling faces on results day.
Its hard to know what would be fair here.
I have not seen a sensible solution that will resolve this quickly.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
To individuals or collectively?
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
To give "results" when exams have not been taken was always going to be full of problems.
I have no idea how to get out of this. Just using teachers grades is daft as they are over optomistic. The idea of using mock results to increase your grade via an appeal is ok but by the time your appeal happens your University place may be lost.
I do wonder how many poeple this is affectng as there were lots of happy smiling faces on results day.
Its hard to know what would be fair here.
I have not seen a sensible solution that will resolve this quickly.
If there is no perfect solution then we need the least bad solution.
Do we have anyone defending the government on this? Even if it to say it was all OFQUAL’s fault?
The mistake was to cancel exams. The solution is to get the kids to sit the exams this autumn. So what if that delays the start of the degree courses? It's not like there isn't time to catch up.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
It's too late now. I would have thought all the spare places that were created in medicine/vet/ etc will have been filled by now.
What evidence do you have for that claim?
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
It's not a claim, it's a talking point, perhaps I should have added a Question mark as well?
Most universities (mine included) would happily bump up intake of UK students to help with the expected overseas student shortfall (albeit there's not much profit in home students compared to overseas). My uni's mid-point estimate is that overseas students are will be down 70%, so there will be spare capacity. However, as I understand it (can't find source now, may be something I was told at work) there's an agreement between universities not to increase home student intake over 5% above normal levels, to avoid completely shafting the lower ranked universities by taking all their students (universities further down could still be in a lot of trouble if the top 20 all take 5% extra, obviously, as that's one average sized university worth of students gone).
Thought that too. But the cap wasn't an entirely bad idea. Virtually everyone who wants to go to University can go now, so expansion of more prestigious courses and Unis will leave less prestigious ones in deep trouble.
Trouble is that the admissions process depends on the grades being reasonably predictable. The combination of ups and downs in the Ofqual algorithm was bad enough, the subsequent squirming is making things far worse.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
The UK's Quangocracy really are having a shocker of a year.
Presumably you include Cummings and the Boris bus in that?
Boris has been elected within the past year and has a popular mandate.
The rest - not so much as a sniff of democracy comes their way....
Whereas technically you are correct, PM Johnson and Mr Cummings do seem to consider these semi-autonomous government bodies as handy shields behind which they can hide any errors.
Whereas you seek to blame Johnson for the manifest errors of others.
Boris needs a reshuffle - and then a mighty kick up the arse to the new Cabinet. The six months since Covid hit have been largely woeful.
Who kicks him up the arde?
The voters.
If he's really bad, his MPs before he has to face them.
My criticism is the lack of a functional appeals process. Indeed, I see no reason why certain results ("overperforming" students, for example) couldn't have been pre-appealed, some time ago.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
Oh dear, a problem of their own making. I suspect English ones will have a similar problem with a lack of overseas students.
Do we have anyone defending the government on this? Even if it to say it was all OFQUAL’s fault?
The mistake was to cancel exams. The solution is to get the kids to sit the exams this autumn. So what if that delays the start of the degree courses? It's not like there isn't time to catch up.
Do you know how university finances work - you would need to pay the universities directly (and discover it actually would cost less than the insane loan scheme currently used).
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
To individuals or collectively?
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
To give "results" when exams have not been taken was always going to be full of problems.
I have no idea how to get out of this. Just using teachers grades is daft as they are over optomistic. The idea of using mock results to increase your grade via an appeal is ok but by the time your appeal happens your University place may be lost.
I do wonder how many poeple this is affectng as there were lots of happy smiling faces on results day.
Its hard to know what would be fair here.
I have not seen a sensible solution that will resolve this quickly.
If there is no perfect solution then we need the least bad solution.
Using teachers grades is the least bad solution.
I agree, with using mocks where higher being the next least bad solution (but should be automatic - no appeal necessary). Mocks must be proper mocks though. (I`m surprised that some schools don`t make pupils sit mocks.)
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
This would be a horror show in an independent Scotland.
But as it is not, Westminster will be expected to bail them out. Natch.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
To be honest, I don’t know enough to comment. Certainly there has always been an issue with UCAS predicted grades not matching final grades, but as @Fysics_Teacher notes, these are often marginal calls. My own A-levels were ABC, but I was two marks in two subjects off AAB.
At A-level, the commonest predictions I made this year were jointly A and C, but as I noted I had a very able cohort. I predicted Ds as well, and got them. Nobody got less than a D, but then in the six years I have been teaching at that school only two students ever got Es, so that seems to me to be fair enough. I can’t remember that any were shockingly out of line with the UCAS predictions, and indeed some of them may have been an improvement on them. But as noted above, it is a very inexact science.
If you care about education you don’t put Gavin Williamson in charge of it. This scandal was made in 10 Downing Street, nowhere else.
They don't care about the state education system because they don't use it. I have a modest proposal for improvement: no minister, senior civil servant (including quangos), SPAD or MP on a select committee should be allowed to send their child to private school. They would have one year's grace period (two years if their child were doing GCSEs or A-levels, or their Scottish equivalent). Perhaps any children transitioning from private to state could be treated as equivalent to looked after children so that they have relatively privileged status in the admissions process, given the difficulties of getting a school place after the standard entry year. The goal is not to punish but to better align incentives for decision makers.
Step 1) Mandate that all conditional offers from universities and technical colleges for British citizens and residents will be made unconditional. Solves the issue for anyone staying in (British) education. Any duds that slip through can come out in the wash of First Year exams.
Step 2) If necessary bung some extra cash the universities way. They are going to need a bail out without the foreign (Chinese) students anyway.
Step 3) Declare 2020 null and void for A Level unless you have taken the exam. Offer an exam in both autumn and spring, with a generous one off educational grant to anyone who defers going on the dole to instead complete their studies. Special tuition for those who want it.
Step 4) Said exams if necessary to be held in requisitioned conference facilities with the million person volunteer army to help oversea on the day.
Step 5) GCSEs cancelled this year, just like when Voldemort killed that kid in Harry Potter. In the grand scheme, on well.
Step 6) Hysteria to be dialled down a notch. Cv-19 is thankfully not the plague. School to be mandatory rather than optional from here on in.
Personally I see this as one of the more easily solvable problems caused by the lockdown. Money has been spaffed about to help all of pensioners (qe to support stock market bubble), property owners (stamp holidays), small business owners (no questions asked grants and govt backed loans) and workers (furlough). What about some love for the poor sods who aren’t at all risk from this disease and have had their life chances stunted in a final spiteful act by the over 60s?
A shame we don’t have another few Rishi’s knocking about the make up the numbers in the rest of Cabinet.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
So using the algorithim is probably more accurate than using teachers predicted grades?
To individuals or collectively?
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
To give "results" when exams have not been taken was always going to be full of problems.
I have no idea how to get out of this. Just using teachers grades is daft as they are over optomistic. The idea of using mock results to increase your grade via an appeal is ok but by the time your appeal happens your University place may be lost.
I do wonder how many poeple this is affectng as there were lots of happy smiling faces on results day.
Its hard to know what would be fair here.
I have not seen a sensible solution that will resolve this quickly.
If there is no perfect solution then we need the least bad solution.
Using teachers grades is the least bad solution.
I agree with this, assuming there are enough places that are needed.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
It was ranking within grades which often resulted in people being on grade boundaries when they were being placed as the safely a C type person as the instructions for ranking (rank people in the likelihood of getting that grade) differed from the way the algorithm is using the information. There is a twitter feed I can't currently find that covers it in more detail.
What it does mean is that a lot of people who should be a safe grade X are getting grade Y instead...
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Yes, but that was in a time without medicine when the science of germs and bacteria was at best imperfectly understood.
If Covid had rampaged through the world instead of Spanish flu, what would the consequences have been?
The Black Death is an interesting one economically though because it led to a short lived economic boom. This was followed, over the next eighty years, by a decreasing trade balance and a shortage of silver, culminating in the Great Slump of the mid fifteenth century (which was, among other things, a cause of the Wars of the Roses).
I kinda agree - but it`s not as simple as that. If my daughter is awarded centre assessed grades on Thursday I suspect that they will be higher than she would have got in the exams - and she knows this too. This is not good, psychologically, and will be with her through life. All she wants are the grades that she would have got. She knows what they would have been within a very narrow margin of error.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Especially when you consider the vast majority of those killed by covid would never had made it in life long enough to be killed by covid.
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
While the difference is obviously huge, medicine is a tad better now than in the 14th century, and we are only 8 months into the crisis with some months in lockdown, whereas looking back at the Black Death the "peak" lasted four years.
If a disease as terrible as the Black Death were to strike now, how high would the death rate be after 8 months? I reckon under 5%
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
aviations?
Damn you, autocorrect ! Variations, possibly.
Incidentally, I think there might be a good case for arguing that Ofqal were ultra vires in applying the algorithm to determine individual grades, by throwing out teacher assessments (other than rank order), and also throwing out individual performance history.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
I see some overlap between other people's taxes and other people's death. Either way, one's view will largely depend upon whether you fall within the 1-2% who are likely to pay
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
There is no appropriate dataset from the last year to work from (exam boards didn't previously ask for predicted grades).
What they needed to do would be to identify statistical anomalies (the AAB that becomes AAU) and then either override the system to fix those or rewrite the algorithm until those issues disappeared.
There have been lots of reports on this UCAS constantly track this. Grades predicted versus those achieved have been running at 40% overestimation for ages.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
I am correct though on the 10,000 places am I not
No, not really. It’s been announced but no detail on how it’s to be done has come through AFAIK.
In fact, the situation is severely complicated because teaching staff at universities are usually on short term contracts and therefore they’re the ones that got laid off early when income dried up. Meaning there’s probably less capacity for new students than there was before the pandemic.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
I am correct though on the 10,000 places am I not
The Scottish Government has asked for them, do we have any evidence that the universities actually created the places and are admitting students?
If tory MPs wanted to do extraordinary things for young people they might have fought to keep schools open like Sweden did, and forced through the examinations as scheduled.
Of course the same people who are wailing about the algo would have been sent into orbit by that.
As it is the tories sacrificed the young and the livelihoods and health of countless others to save some people over the age of 80. Possibly.
They are now reaping the harvest of that policy. And at the same time they probably realise surely they can never, ever please the commentariat.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Especially when you consider the vast majority of those killed by covid would never had made it in life long enough to be killed by covid.
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
Even by your quite low standards, that doesn’t seem to make sense.
Incidentally, did you know that statistically the most dangerous human activity is breathing? Everyone who breathes, dies.
On the topic of the exam fiasco: having skim-read OFQAL's methodological paper, it seems to me that the major unforced error in their work is their ad hoc small subject entry adjustment and how that interacts with the state/private school mix. Their own analysis shows that their algo boosts the number of A grades awarded to private school pupils by 4.7 % points compared to last year, far outstripping the improvement for any other type of school, and yet at no point do they consider this to be problematic or even worthy of note. Only in a country where it had become an ingrained norm for the wealthy to game the system would this be possible. Other than that, my sense is they adopted a reasonable methodology but that whatever they chose the result was likely to be politically untenable.
Surely the first test of algorithm would have been to predict accurately last years exam results. I wonder if they did that.
Williamson must go. The Tories have fucked up royally.
There is no appropriate dataset from the last year to work from (exam boards didn't previously ask for predicted grades).
What they needed to do would be to identify statistical anomalies (the AAB that becomes AAU) and then either override the system to fix those or rewrite the algorithm until those issues disappeared.
There have been lots of reports on this UCAS constantly tack this. Grades predicted versus those achieved have been running at 40% overestimation for ages.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
I am correct though on the 10,000 places am I not
No, not really. It’s been announced but no detail on how it’s to be done has come through AFAIK.
In fact, the situation is severely complicated because teaching staff at universities are usually on short term contracts and therefore they’re the ones that got laid off early when income dried up. Meaning there’s probably less capacity for new students than there was before the pandemic.
I knew it had been announced but looks like it has not been thought through by Sturgeon
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
I am correct though on the 10,000 places am I not
The Scottish Government has asked for them, do we have any evidence that the universities actually created the places and are admitting students?
Yes.
I don't see anyone in Scotland still appearing on the media saying they've been denied a place despite getting the grades now. In which case absence of evidence is itself evidence of absence.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Especially when you consider the vast majority of those killed by covid would never had made it in life long enough to be killed by covid.
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
Even by your quite low standards, that doesn’t seem to make sense.
Incidentally, did you know that statistically the most dangerous human activity is breathing? Everyone who breathes, dies.
It really is quite amazing that after such a long time so many people are so ignorant of what COVID is and who it affects.
Perhaps the government should award the teachers' grades for GCSEs but stick with the algorithm grades for A-levels. Appeals against GCSE grades could overload the system.
However a big increase in A-level grades would disrupt the universities as some would have too many students meeting their offers, resulting in others having too few.
Does anyone know how many extra places would be needed and where if all students with offers were given places? Might be the only way out at this point
Would that many extra places be needed? Or would it just be fewer for clearing?
No idea, would be worth finding out. Then the actual A level grades could be sorted out later.
I may be wrong but as far as I know Scotland has created 10,000 new places
But this is complete tosh. The Scottish government pays Universities the princely sum of £1850 per student. Scottish Universities survive because this is cross subsidised by English students pay £9250 and non EU students paying £20k+. Scottish Universities face a financial crisis and simply cannot afford to take on another 10k additional Scottish students that cost them money.
I am correct though on the 10,000 places am I not
The Scottish Government has asked for them, do we have any evidence that the universities actually created the places and are admitting students?
Yes.
I don't see anyone in Scotland still appearing on the media saying they've been denied a place despite getting the grades now. In which case absence of evidence is itself evidence of absence.
They will have had to go through clearing. They probably weren’t offered a place at their first choice even if they did get the grades, because such places over-recruit and therefore would have filled up with those who weren’t downgraded. Therefore, they will still have been failed by the system.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
aviations?
Damn you, autocorrect ! Variations, possibly.
Incidentally, I think there might be a good case for arguing that Ofqal were ultra vires in applying the algorithm to determine individual grades, by throwing out teacher assessments (other than rank order), and also throwing out individual performance history.
If that was the case schools wouldn't be complaining the way they are - the fact is that the A grades were snatched by small cohorts and everyone else was marked down slightly... if what you said was try the survey mentioned below wouldn't have been possible - those 60,000 students (so 100 or so colleges) would have results that were in line with the past 3 years. As they haven't something went seriously wrong.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Especially when you consider the vast majority of those killed by covid would never had made it in life long enough to be killed by covid.
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
Even by your quite low standards, that doesn’t seem to make sense.
Incidentally, did you know that statistically the most dangerous human activity is breathing? Everyone who breathes, dies.
It really is quite amazing that after such a long time so many people are so ignorant of what COVID is and who it affects.
You said the majority of those killed by Covid would not have lived long enough to die of it.
Which is an effect of this virus I will admit I was unaware of.
Children were robbed of their future when the government decided to shut down schools, especially state schools, with the full compliance (in fact the urging) of Keir Starmer. And then allowed many teachers to let their pupils rot with little or no work.
No British government in history has ever done that
The government’s handling of the exam results situation is not seen as particularly successful with only 17% of voters in England approving and 42% disapproving. Even Conservatives voters struggle to muster much enthusiasm. While supporters of other parties are predictably negative, Conservative voters split evenly with 27% approving and 27% disapproving.
On the topic of the exam fiasco: having skim-read OFQAL's methodological paper, it seems to me that the major unforced error in their work is their ad hoc small subject entry adjustment and how that interacts with the state/private school mix. Their own analysis shows that their algo boosts the number of A grades awarded to private school pupils by 4.7 % points compared to last year, far outstripping the improvement for any other type of school, and yet at no point do they consider this to be problematic or even worthy of note. Only in a country where it had become an ingrained norm for the wealthy to game the system would this be possible. Other than that, my sense is they adopted a reasonable methodology but that whatever they chose the result was likely to be politically untenable.
No result was going to work out - however as with SQA they really should have looked how it would play out and picked up things like that 4.7% increase.
My son is back to school today. One of his pieces of "homework" over the summer was an entry into an economics essay competition comparing the effects of the Black Death and Covid.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
Especially when you consider the vast majority of those killed by covid would never had made it in life long enough to be killed by covid.
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
Even by your quite low standards, that doesn’t seem to make sense.
Incidentally, did you know that statistically the most dangerous human activity is breathing? Everyone who breathes, dies.
It really is quite amazing that after such a long time so many people are so ignorant of what COVID is and who it affects.
You said the majority of those killed by Covid would not have lived long enough to die of it.
Which is an effect of this virus I will admit I was unaware of.
No it is one of the first things he's said that makes sense.
Life expectancy in the dark and middle ages were such that there wouldn't have been a pool of vulnerable elderly around to be killed off by a virus that targets them like COVID19.
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Yes, that sounds about right. But this paper is about UCAS predicted grades. 75% overpredictions partly because teachers want to give their students the best chance of getting in to the university of their choice, even though they know the predictions are ambitious. The question is whether the predictions given to Ofqual were the same as the UCAS predictions. They should have been lower. UCAS predictions are what you hope they will get; Ofqual predictions should be what you think they will get.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
I'd be interested in @ydoethur 's comments on this, as from memory, the exercise was conducted on the basis of realism rather than optimism by his school ?
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
To be honest, I don’t know enough to comment. Certainly there has always been an issue with UCAS predicted grades not matching final grades, but as @Fysics_Teacher notes, these are often marginal calls. My own A-levels were ABC, but I was two marks in two subjects off AAB.
At A-level, the commonest predictions I made this year were jointly A and C, but as I noted I had a very able cohort. I predicted Ds as well, and got them. Nobody got less than a D, but then in the six years I have been teaching at that school only two students ever got Es, so that seems to me to be fair enough. I can’t remember that any were shockingly out of line with the UCAS predictions, and indeed some of them may have been an improvement on them. But as noted above, it is a very inexact science.
For GCSE I would rather not comment yet.
Incidentally, you mean OFQUAL not OFSTED.
Yes, typo. (And I note I have consistently been misspelling OFQUAL. Which seems only just.)
Comments
Especially if the government offers money to expand places while also considering the Scots fixed it after the fact without that being an issue and the absence of foreign students?
I think this boil needs lancing - by people losing their jobs. They have had 5 months to put a detailed plan in place. Instead, what has been rolled out has all the hallmarks of something devised over a boozy lunch on the back of a napkin, by people with no kids in education.
This farce is indefensible. Change course now and that is reasonable, just as the Scots did. When in a hole, stop digging.
Did his Scottish equivalent resign? They did the same thing.
Yet that is now a non-trivial risk.
That is how bad and crazy this has got.
https://www.ucu.org.uk/media/8409/Predicted-grades-accuracy-and-impact-Dec-16/pdf/Predicted_grades_report_Dec2016.pdf
Suggests that the vast majority of students are overpredicted in a normal year -> 75%.
Most unis do have leeway so a drop of a single grade usually doesn't impact your place so AAB when you needed AAA wasn't a problem unless the B was in the required subject, AAC or ABB is..
And university places are limited to stop Russell group unis taking places from secondary institutes so that's another issue that would need to be resolved.
"I no longer sell fireplaces and have built a career in politics."
G.Williamson, Daily Mail, 26th Jan 2018
The next priority is that schools have to go back in September, and make a proper start on the next year of studies. To this end, the government must do whatever it has to do right now to achieve this.
Anyhoo Gavin Williamson should be safe, because I'm largely editing PB this week and nothing major happens when Mike's away.
Have to confess I'm really warning to Frank Spencer Gavin Williamson, anyone who manages to ensure private schools get a boost whilst the plebs suffer is awesome in my book.
Do you think the individuals grade should matter most, or collectively it doesn't matter if some individuals suffer so long as the collective is OK as an average?
Seriously, I can imagine how it might have looked from the No 10 batty cave. The algorithm gave the right number of each sort of grade. It would have allowed the right number of people to go to each University. Big picture was quick and efficient- hell, let's use it every year and save a fortune on exams. A few little people would have had their plans stuffed, but that happens every year, anyway.
Sort of a bit like the stories of Soviet factory production quotas. You're told to make 10 million shoes, you make 10 million size 4 ballet shoes (left foot only). Job done.
But I suspect that in many institutions this distinction was not made.
https://twitter.com/jamiesusskind/status/1295275011742326785
Not to be totally negative about it - it's not the worst thing for industries to be subject to the relative predictability of bureaucratic bodies rather than constant, fickle political intervention by headline obsessed politicians.
However, it only works to a degree. You can avoid commenting on last night's controversial TV show ("that's for Ofcom to say") or a gas billing snafu that crops up somewhere or other ("I've asked Ofgem to look into it urgently"). But, as Williamson is finding, you can't dodge the really big questions. A-levels and GCSEs are such a massive part of the school system, and this situation (deciding grades given inability to run exams) has been brewing for many months - as Education Secretary, you can't say "not really my remit".
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/student-number-controls
It should never be too late to do the right thing. Ofqual were given a chance to call this right, they've failed, its time to move on.
https://twitter.com/CaptainK77/status/1295083589911150598
School assessments were done in March after Mocks but would be higher than mocks because there is a term after Mocks to drum point scoring techniques into students.
I have no idea how to get out of this. Just using teachers grades is daft as they are over optomistic. The idea of using mock results to increase your grade via an appeal is ok but by the time your appeal happens your University place may be lost.
I do wonder how many poeple this is affectng as there were lots of happy smiling faces on results day.
Its hard to know what would be fair here.
I have not seen a sensible solution that will resolve this quickly.
Using teachers grades is the least bad solution.
Another in the long list of reasons May was a better PM than BoZo ever will be...
In any event, outsize aviations between schools in the optimism of their predictions ought to have been something comparatively simple to control for, statistically.
The exercise which Ofsted undertook was a bizarre method of applying an overall population judgment to individuals, with the only individual input the class ranking orders (which were themselves artificially forced by banning equal rankings).
One of the legal actions against Ofqal argues that they exceed their statutory remit. I'm not clear on the details, as I just heard a snippet on the radio this morning, but will be very interesting to follow.
Trouble is that the admissions process depends on the grades being reasonably predictable. The combination of ups and downs in the Ofqual algorithm was bad enough, the subsequent squirming is making things far worse.
Although there are some surprising similarities the major difference is the scale. When I was a lad the general presumption was that 1/3 of the world (ie Europe) died as a result of the Black Death. The view from historians now seems to be that this was based on serious under estimates of where the population stood pre-plague and it was in fact more like 50-60% of the population who died in the various waves.
Which does rather put the 1-2% of Covid into perspective, doesn't it?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/13/teachers-accused-submitting-implausibly-high-predicted-grades/
It's an odd year, so what if grades are too high.
If he's really bad, his MPs before he has to face them.
See Theresa May for details.
But as it is not, Westminster will be expected to bail them out. Natch.
At A-level, the commonest predictions I made this year were jointly A and C, but as I noted I had a very able cohort. I predicted Ds as well, and got them. Nobody got less than a D, but then in the six years I have been teaching at that school only two students ever got Es, so that seems to me to be fair enough. I can’t remember that any were shockingly out of line with the UCAS predictions, and indeed some of them may have been an improvement on them. But as noted above, it is a very inexact science.
For GCSE I would rather not comment yet.
Incidentally, you mean OFQUAL not OFSTED.
But the truth is, they will.
Step 2) If necessary bung some extra cash the universities way. They are going to need a bail out without the foreign (Chinese) students anyway.
Step 3) Declare 2020 null and void for A Level unless you have taken the exam. Offer an exam in both autumn and spring, with a generous one off educational grant to anyone who defers going on the dole to instead complete their studies. Special tuition for those who want it.
Step 4) Said exams if necessary to be held in requisitioned conference facilities with the million person volunteer army to help oversea on the day.
Step 5) GCSEs cancelled this year, just like when Voldemort killed that kid in Harry Potter. In the grand scheme, on well.
Step 6) Hysteria to be dialled down a notch. Cv-19 is thankfully not the plague. School to be mandatory rather than optional from here on in.
Personally I see this as one of the more easily solvable problems caused by the lockdown. Money has been spaffed about to help all of pensioners (qe to support stock market bubble), property owners (stamp holidays), small business owners (no questions asked grants and govt backed loans) and workers (furlough). What about some love for the poor sods who aren’t at all risk from this disease and have had their life chances stunted in a final spiteful act by the over 60s?
A shame we don’t have another few Rishi’s knocking about the make up the numbers in the rest of Cabinet.
If you have no better alternative in the absence of actual exams than teachers grades then they are the only option left.
What it does mean is that a lot of people who should be a safe grade X are getting grade Y instead...
If Covid had rampaged through the world instead of Spanish flu, what would the consequences have been?
The Black Death is an interesting one economically though because it led to a short lived economic boom. This was followed, over the next eighty years, by a decreasing trade balance and a shortage of silver, culminating in the Great Slump of the mid fifteenth century (which was, among other things, a cause of the Wars of the Roses).
They would have died due to low life expectancy rates or from lack of treatment for the c0-morbidities they have.
If a disease as terrible as the Black Death were to strike now, how high would the death rate be after 8 months? I reckon under 5%
Variations, possibly.
Incidentally, I think there might be a good case for arguing that Ofqal were ultra vires in applying the algorithm to determine individual grades, by throwing out teacher assessments (other than rank order), and also throwing out individual performance history.
https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/Press-releases-2020/August-2020/Law-firm-threatening-legal-action-over-A-level-gra
...The CAGs was then put through a “process of standardisation” including an “historic grade distribution” which saw the issued grades for large numbers of students determined wholly or largely by reference to how students at the school in question had performed in the relevant subject over the previous three years...
https://www.ucas.com/file/71796/download?token=D4uuSzur
What people are getting excited about isnt HMG marking, but teachers overforecasting and setting pupil expectations at the wrong level.
Really this years pupils have nothing to moan about, every year behind them was the same pattern.
In fact, the situation is severely complicated because teaching staff at universities are usually on short term contracts and therefore they’re the ones that got laid off early when income dried up. Meaning there’s probably less capacity for new students than there was before the pandemic.
Of course the same people who are wailing about the algo would have been sent into orbit by that.
As it is the tories sacrificed the young and the livelihoods and health of countless others to save some people over the age of 80. Possibly.
They are now reaping the harvest of that policy. And at the same time they probably realise surely they can never, ever please the commentariat.
Incidentally, did you know that statistically the most dangerous human activity is breathing? Everyone who breathes, dies.
Other than that, my sense is they adopted a reasonable methodology but that whatever they chose the result was likely to be politically untenable.
I don't see anyone in Scotland still appearing on the media saying they've been denied a place despite getting the grades now. In which case absence of evidence is itself evidence of absence.
Which is an effect of this virus I will admit I was unaware of.
No British government in history has ever done that
Life expectancy in the dark and middle ages were such that there wouldn't have been a pool of vulnerable elderly around to be killed off by a virus that targets them like COVID19.
(And I note I have consistently been misspelling OFQUAL. Which seems only just.)