Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
I sympathize and can imagine I would be enraged if I were him, but wouldn't he actually benefit from having to revise that stuff and take the exam?
I mean I guess it depends whether we think exams are essentially worthless tests to get a piece of paper, or whether the practice of studying, revising and sitting them under a pressure situation is a valuable experience.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
I thought one of the points of Uni education was to earn above average salaries
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
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.
Its absolutely true. The numbers say yu have got to be pretty ill and old to die from COVID essentially. Over 80 with at least one co-morbodity.
In the middle ages, in case you were wondering, the was no such thing as managing illnesses like hypertension, heart disease and diabetes. Chaucer strangely doesn't refer to transplant surgery in the Canterbury tales.
No the numbers don't say that.
The numbers say that with our healthcare, and with our treatments you are more likely to be pretty old and ill to die. But younger people especially those with co-morbidities are possible to die too even with our healthcare looking after them - and @ydoethur is right comorbidities and ill health were rife then.
With the absence of any antibiotics or medicine then young people with TB (a major issue then) or some other comorbidities could have been slaughtered in vast numbers then.
There’s plenty of places in the world with only a pretty Middle Ages standard of healthcare available to most people and with young populations. .
I'm sorry this is just rubbish. You obviously have no idea of medicine in the middle ages.
There are certainy many places in the world which have no money for good medicines and equipment, but decent knowledge of medicine is almost everywhere. Even if rural developing areas are only using early 20th century medicine practices (which I doubt) they are still centuries ahead of middle ages medicine.
Without wanting sounds like a cock, I suspect you are somewhat less travelled than me to be saying this.
Isn't it going to be evident who this person is pretty quickly, simply by looking at vote records? Or is it already common knowledge? (I have no idea, and obviously nobody should post any names here).
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
The interest rate is extortionate
Correct, but it's something I don't really have to think about as in 20 years it'll be wiped, paid or not. Essentially, the more I earn, the more I pay back as I've benefitted from University, but if I fall on hard times then I don't pay anything back at all until I get back on my feet. Right now I'm earning enough that means I'll probably get close to paying it back just before it gets wiped, but with any modest wage growth for myself over the next 10-15 years I might end up paying it in full
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
The interest rate is extortionate
Correct, but it's something I don't really have to think about as in 20 years it'll be wiped, paid or not. Essentially, the more I earn, the more I pay back as I've benefitted from University, but if I fall on hard times then I don't pay anything back at all until I get back on my feet. Right now I'm earning enough that means I'll probably get close to paying it back just before it gets wiped, but with any modest wage growth for myself over the next 10-15 years I might end up paying it in full
When Plan 1 loans get written off for students from England, Northern Ireland and Wales Academic year you took out the loan When the loan’s written off 2005 to 2006, or earlier When you’re 65 2006 to 2007, or later 25 years after the April you were first due to repay
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
OK. That's fair enough. At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false. Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles. Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results. Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
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.
Its absolutely true. The numbers say yu have got to be pretty ill and old to die from COVID essentially. Over 80 with at least one co-morbodity.
In the middle ages, in case you were wondering, the was no such thing as managing illnesses like hypertension, heart disease and diabetes. Chaucer strangely doesn't refer to transplant surgery in the Canterbury tales.
No the numbers don't say that.
The numbers say that with our healthcare, and with our treatments you are more likely to be pretty old and ill to die. But younger people especially those with co-morbidities are possible to die too even with our healthcare looking after them - and @ydoethur is right comorbidities and ill health were rife then.
With the absence of any antibiotics or medicine then young people with TB (a major issue then) or some other comorbidities could have been slaughtered in vast numbers then.
There’s plenty of places in the world with only a pretty Middle Ages standard of healthcare available to most people and with young populations. .
I'm sorry this is just rubbish. You obviously have no idea of medicine in the middle ages.
There are certainy many places in the world which have no money for good medicines and equipment, but decent knowledge of medicine is almost everywhere. Even if rural developing areas are only using early 20th century medicine practices (which I doubt) they are still centuries ahead of middle ages medicine.
Without wanting sounds like a cock, I suspect you are somewhat less travelled than me to be saying this.
I reckon you can go pretty rural in any developing country and still find someone selling antibiotics.
Ofqual blames government 'policy changes every 12 hours' for A-level exam chaos
which rather sums up this government, badly thought out re-action due to the impact of the previously (badly thought out) action
And the buck-passing now begins.
I get the feeling OFQUAL are now in a blind panic. They have been shown as more naked than the Emperor, and they are wondering if their jobs are about to go.
By the end of the week Dido Harding will probably be in charge of a new educaiton and exams body.
Why not?
She sorted track and trace into a world beating system in days, or am I am reading the wrong newspapers and posts from the wrong PB posters?
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
Why are they always whinging about Scottish students getting it for free then , incessant whining about England paying for our students , especially strong on here given the number of cult Tories.
We're discussing the way that the Government body has decided to award grades in exams that pupils never actually took, rewarding some and failing others by use of an arbitrary algorithm (and talking about "retakes" of exams that were never actually taken in the first place).
In order to approximately simulate (and "maintain the integrity") of an exam system that was optimised for conditions as they existed for our grandparents more than half a century ago, and has continued because "that's the way things should be."
Closed-book exams on subjects evolved for the post-Victorians on a schedule to allow the children to work on the fields over summer for careers that have changed out of mind, hammered to sort-of-fit while the original purposes of the system have long ceased to be applicable.
Exams that add a true random element based on a blend of which marker you get and how they're feeling on the day, plus whatever random events affect the mental and emotional state of a teenager on a particular day, and whether or not they make an exam-related blunder on a particular individual paper.
And then, just to add a true level of surreality to it all, the most important decisions of your future career (which university will accept you on which course) are done before the exam is taken. In order to preserve a schedule through the year based on what precisely?
Why tie up with school timetables, especially when the big driver over summer is to free the kids to work in the fields?
If we had open-book exams, using multiple assignments over the year, with less fetishing of subjects that were perceived as important a century ago, with the results given prior to university application, maybe the system would do the intended purpose somewhat better?
And maybe we could have held the exams remotely - far more feasibly than the traditional "sit in a big hall and regurgitate memorised facts about the formation of oxbow lakes because that's exactly what you need to be able to do in your future career or to learn stuff at university - no, wait..."
One of the advantages of the Modular AS and A2 curriculum is that substantive marks were accumulated before the final, so the predictions were more solidly based, and episodes like illness, bereavement etc less likely to impact.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
The interest rate is extortionate
Correct, but it's something I don't really have to think about as in 20 years it'll be wiped, paid or not. Essentially, the more I earn, the more I pay back as I've benefitted from University, but if I fall on hard times then I don't pay anything back at all until I get back on my feet. Right now I'm earning enough that means I'll probably get close to paying it back just before it gets wiped, but with any modest wage growth for myself over the next 10-15 years I might end up paying it in full
When Plan 1 loans get written off for students from England, Northern Ireland and Wales Academic year you took out the loan When the loan’s written off 2005 to 2006, or earlier When you’re 65 2006 to 2007, or later 25 years after the April you were first due to repay
Ah I thought it was 30 years which is actually Plan 2 if I remember. Yeah I'm after 2007 so I do actually have under 20 years left.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
OK. That's fair enough. At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false. Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles. Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results. Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
Snap!
“Pretending” is what this government does best. It is pretending to be a government, playing at Being PM and In The Cabinet. A bit like small children playing doctors and nurses.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
It's certainly a benefit, but not to the extent that many people assume.
In my case, I went when tuition fees were only £3,000, and the majority of my student loan balance is made up of maintenance loans which Scottish students also have to take at home.
It's also dishonest to describe fees in a way that suggests students are being saddled with debt, especially as the way repayments work mean nothing is actually taken from you unless you're earning over £21,000/£25,000 (dependent on the year of entry).
I thought one of the points of Uni education was to earn above average salaries
Exactly and someone on here the other day was waxing lyrical about how much more money Uni educated people made compared to the great unwashed.
We're discussing the way that the Government body has decided to award grades in exams that pupils never actually took, rewarding some and failing others by use of an arbitrary algorithm (and talking about "retakes" of exams that were never actually taken in the first place).
In order to approximately simulate (and "maintain the integrity") of an exam system that was optimised for conditions as they existed for our grandparents more than half a century ago, and has continued because "that's the way things should be."
Closed-book exams on subjects evolved for the post-Victorians on a schedule to allow the children to work on the fields over summer for careers that have changed out of mind, hammered to sort-of-fit while the original purposes of the system have long ceased to be applicable.
Exams that add a true random element based on a blend of which marker you get and how they're feeling on the day, plus whatever random events affect the mental and emotional state of a teenager on a particular day, and whether or not they make an exam-related blunder on a particular individual paper.
And then, just to add a true level of surreality to it all, the most important decisions of your future career (which university will accept you on which course) are done before the exam is taken. In order to preserve a schedule through the year based on what precisely?
Why tie up with school timetables, especially when the big driver over summer is to free the kids to work in the fields?
If we had open-book exams, using multiple assignments over the year, with less fetishing of subjects that were perceived as important a century ago, with the results given prior to university application, maybe the system would do the intended purpose somewhat better?
And maybe we could have held the exams remotely - far more feasibly than the traditional "sit in a big hall and regurgitate memorised facts about the formation of oxbow lakes because that's exactly what you need to be able to do in your future career or to learn stuff at university - no, wait..."
One of the advantages of the Modular AS and A2 curriculum is that substantive marks were accumulated before the final, so the predictions were more solidly based, and episodes like illness, bereavement etc less likely to impact.
Cummings/Gove system was a retrograde step IMO
Yes, under a modular system, we would have had a much easier time predicting grades. And resitting the odd module in Autumn wouldn't have been such a burden for students.
Odds on Gove/Cummings even being asked about this by a journalist...?
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
Tuesday, August 18[edit] 9:00-11:00pm EDT[125] Theme: "Leadership Matters"[92] Presidential candidate nominating and seconding speeches[67] For Biden: For Sanders: Presidential roll call vote Confirmed speakers:
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
Also, the Highers + 4 years system presumably means that only the strongest at school could go straight to a 3 year course south of the border (edit: beginning as if straight to the more or less 2nd yr in a Scottish u/grad degree).
My son is applying to Oxford, LSE, Warwick, UCL and probably Durham. Edinburgh was the only possible Scottish University on the list but I don't think it is going to make the cut.
And actually the rather silly 4 year degree in Scotland (completely unnecessary for anything outside of medicine, vetinary and dentistry) means that Scottish students can find themselves with similar debts to those that do the 3 years in England. You still have to live and you have to pay your maintenance back.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
Going by opinion on here it means debasing the whole education system and is totally wrong thing to do, unless that could only be applied to Scotland doing it.
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
OK. That's fair enough. At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false. Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles. Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results. Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
I would assume that when OfQual tested it's system it all worked properly. It was only when they scaled-up that it didn't. Which often happens Of course if they didn't do any tests ........
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Tuesday, August 18[edit] 9:00-11:00pm EDT[125] Theme: "Leadership Matters"[92] Presidential candidate nominating and seconding speeches[67] For Biden: For Sanders: Presidential roll call vote Confirmed speakers:
I always work on the basis that Betfair leaves it as late as possible.
So I'm expecting shortly before/at Biden's acceptance speech on Thursday.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
There's something in that - I've never felt that "U-turn" was a deadly accusation. But the point is that they get sent a line from the whips when the original policy comes out, expecting them to routinely send it to constituents. What this MP is saying (and I've heard similar comments before) is that it's currently unwise to do that, as so many policies get reversed within weeks, and you look stupid standing up for a position just before it is repudiated.
I remember the same happening in bumpy periods under Labour. It's a sign of lack of Ministerial confidence, and of course of lack of preparation before the policy gets announced in the first place. There is a genuine role for kite-flying and for official consultation when you can see a problem coming.
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
OK. That's fair enough. At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false. Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles. Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results. Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
Exactly, in years to come A-Levels 2020 will be known as the fake result year
Sort of on topic, I don't understand why invigilated exams couldn't take place this year - particularly for A-levels.
The invigilator sits 5-10m away from the candidates anyway, the desks could easily be spaced, one-way systems put in place, and security too.
The invigilator simply wears a visor when 'patrolling' the room.
If it works for pubs (loud, drinking, and casual) it'd definitely work for a formal structured exam, which is all about procedure.
Err. Perhaps because pupils were told 5 months ago that there wouldn't be any? And consequently haven't done any studying in that time? Small matter I realise.
I think that was a mistake - suspended, yes, but studying should have continued regardless. Schools are supposed to have continued teaching throughout.
They should have been deferred, not cancelled.
Even those who've "got" a A* have been cheated: they've never had a chance to show what they can do and prove it to themselves and others under exam conditions.
They'll always feel a level of guilt and impostor syndrome.
OK. Good response. My youngest was told there were no GCSES back in March. After a 2/3 month break to play Xbox and sleep till 2 pm, he has got it together to put in some work to read and research the A Levels he will start in 2 weeks time. He has been reading Plato, Freud, history and sacred Hindu texts for example. Stuff that interests and engages him. He hasn't given a moment's thought to French verbs, quadratic equations, mole values or ox bow lakes apart from to give thanks that he doesn't have to consider them any more. Asking him to pivot and 're learn these now for an exam at Christmas would be a massive intrusion on his A Level prospects.
Thanks. Good challenge.
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
OK. That's fair enough. At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false. Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles. Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results. Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
I would assume that when OfQual tested it's system it all worked properly. It was only when they scaled-up that it didn't. Which often happens Of course if they didn't do any tests ........
It was fundamentally flawed because it was trying to find a grade for an exam which wasn’t going to happen instead of thinking about how to assess 2 years’ work in the absence of such an exam.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
Going by opinion on here it means debasing the whole education system and is totally wrong thing to do, unless that could only be applied to Scotland doing it.
I never shared that opinion though. I agreed with Scotland changing course and I hope England does the same thing.
Grade inflation is bad. Going off teacher grades is bad. But every alternative is worse.
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time . . . going off teachers grades is the worst solution here except for all other solutions that have been created including OFQUAL's.
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
UK democracy can never work when it’s governments are supported by less than 50% of the population and MP’s are chosen by a handful of crusty oldies who are party members with views locked in the 50’s it’s no wonder our MP’ are so impressive.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
Then why isn't Cummings sacked?
Because it wasn't a fuck up?
I never said sack people, I said fix the mistake. What mistake hasn't been fixed now?
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Ending judicial review opens up so many possibilities for the government, up to and including the suspension of elections and the suppression of opposition, that I can't see Tory MPs opposing it.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
Also, the Highers + 4 years system presumably means that only the strongest at school could go straight to a 3 year course south of the border (edit: beginning as if straight to the more or less 2nd yr in a Scottish u/grad degree).
My son is applying to Oxford, LSE, Warwick, UCL and probably Durham. Edinburgh was the only possible Scottish University on the list but I don't think it is going to make the cut.
And actually the rather silly 4 year degree in Scotland (completely unnecessary for anything outside of medicine, vetinary and dentistry) means that Scottish students can find themselves with similar debts to those that do the 3 years in England. You still have to live and you have to pay your maintenance back.
More correctly the medical etc degrees' extra years are added on to the end of the basic bachelor's degree - the Scottish extra year is added to the front end so to speak, [edit] and it is effectivelyt replaced by the second year of the A level/6th form in the English system. The 4 year degree has its benefits and, as you say, also a cost.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
Considering there are 4 administrations in the UK, controlling 4 different education systems, setting 4 different policies, ran by 4 different political parties . . . and the same thing has happened in all 4 countries then the idea this could or should have been spotted and fixed sooner seems a little harsh.
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
Considering there are 4 administrations in the UK, controlling 4 different education systems, setting 4 different policies, ran by 4 different political parties . . . and the same thing has happened in all 4 countries then the idea this could or should have been spotted and fixed sooner seems a little harsh.
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
Did it happen in Wales? I haven't seen much coverage of the situation there.
Out of interest, does anyone know if large numbers of Scottish students go to English and Welsh universities, given they'd need to pay full fees whereas they don't closer to home?
It feels a bit unlikely to me that Scottish students having all met their offers to English universities is a more than trivial issue given the size of Scotland as a country plus the strong incentive for Scottish 18 year olds to stay in Scotland for university.
I went to a Russell Group University about 8 years ago now and returned to do a masters degree a couple of years ago. I could count the number of times I met a Scottish student on one hand.
You would need to be either pretty stupid or fabulously rich to take on all that debt when you can do it for free at home.
Also, the Highers + 4 years system presumably means that only the strongest at school could go straight to a 3 year course south of the border (edit: beginning as if straight to the more or less 2nd yr in a Scottish u/grad degree).
My son is applying to Oxford, LSE, Warwick, UCL and probably Durham. Edinburgh was the only possible Scottish University on the list but I don't think it is going to make the cut.
And actually the rather silly 4 year degree in Scotland (completely unnecessary for anything outside of medicine, vetinary and dentistry) means that Scottish students can find themselves with similar debts to those that do the 3 years in England. You still have to live and you have to pay your maintenance back.
More correctly the medical etc degrees' extra years are added on to the end of the basic bachelor's degree - the Scottish extra year is added to the front end so to speak, [edit] and it is effectivelyt replaced by the second year of the A level/6th form in the English system. The 4 year degree has its benefits and, as you say, also a cost.
Medicine is a special case because there is a lot you really need to learn if you are not going to kill people. I understand its effectively a 5 year course already. But most University courses in Scotland are far too long. 4 years doing an LLB Hons and then another year on the Diploma was absurd and we were desperate to start work by the end of it.
The backdoor being used by the Scottish government is college which is being used to repair the damage done by useless schools (that the government is far too scared to touch) but then allows entrance into 2nd or even 3rd year at some Universities such as Robert Gordons or Abertay. But I do think that we need to be more radical about this and the current crisis is an opportunity to do so.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
Considering there are 4 administrations in the UK, controlling 4 different education systems, setting 4 different policies, ran by 4 different political parties . . . and the same thing has happened in all 4 countries then the idea this could or should have been spotted and fixed sooner seems a little harsh.
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
Did it happen in Wales? I haven't seen much coverage of the situation there.
It did but they have the dataset from AS Levels (scrapped by Cummings and Gove in England) to work from, so the results are a bit more realistic.
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
Considering there are 4 administrations in the UK, controlling 4 different education systems, setting 4 different policies, ran by 4 different political parties . . . and the same thing has happened in all 4 countries then the idea this could or should have been spotted and fixed sooner seems a little harsh.
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
Did it happen in Wales? I haven't seen much coverage of the situation there.
The advantage in Wales was the use of AS level actual results. Nonetheless around 40% were down graded and normally hostile BBC Wales News (Plaid supporters) haven't let up at how bad they think things are.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
[Citation] please on the accommodation being full considering the universities normally have accommodation for foreign students who aren't coming. When I went to a Russell Group uni a third of my Halls of Residence weren't British.
I've not seen even a single university yet say they're full and have no accommodation available. Instead many have said the opposite. You saying it does not make it true, what evidence do you have for that?
Shows the government is listening and responding to concerns rather than out of touch.
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
Considering there are 4 administrations in the UK, controlling 4 different education systems, setting 4 different policies, ran by 4 different political parties . . . and the same thing has happened in all 4 countries then the idea this could or should have been spotted and fixed sooner seems a little harsh.
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
Excellent point. Perhaps it is to do with the relevant agencies being arms-length and the jobs being delegated to them?
"Once you're in a hole, stop digging" is a good principle. And better to U turn late than not at all. However, a fair chunk of this was foreseeable (H/T @yodethur) and the foot dragging by the government has made some of the fallout harder to manage.
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Ending judicial review opens up so many possibilities for the government, up to and including the suspension of elections and the suppression of opposition, that I can't see Tory MPs opposing it.
I can see that too, but I thought I was being unnecessarily conspiratorial.
The pass here was really sold in March when no one in either Scotland or anywhere else in the UK could be bothered with coming up with an alternative means of assessment of the individual child based on their actual work. Instead, in various ways, they all decided to use a computer model to estimate results which inevitably causes a lot of individual unfairness and has no objective justification.
To deny people places or opportunities when they didn't get the chance is just wrong but to assume that every child would have taken that chance is absurd. What a mess. The classes of 2020 will never have credible results and it is not their fault. They are victims of the Virus in the same way as residents of Care Homes and the consequences will be with them for so much longer.
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.
Its absolutely true. The numbers say yu have got to be pretty ill and old to die from COVID essentially. Over 80 with at least one co-morbodity.
In the middle ages, in case you were wondering, the was no such thing as managing illnesses like hypertension, heart disease and diabetes. Chaucer strangely doesn't refer to transplant surgery in the Canterbury tales.
No the numbers don't say that.
The numbers say that with our healthcare, and with our treatments you are more likely to be pretty old and ill to die. But younger people especially those with co-morbidities are possible to die too even with our healthcare looking after them - and @ydoethur is right comorbidities and ill health were rife then.
With the absence of any antibiotics or medicine then young people with TB (a major issue then) or some other comorbidities could have been slaughtered in vast numbers then.
There’s plenty of places in the world with only a pretty Middle Ages standard of healthcare available to most people and with young populations. .
I'm sorry this is just rubbish. You obviously have no idea of medicine in the middle ages.
There are certainy many places in the world which have no money for good medicines and equipment, but decent knowledge of medicine is almost everywhere. Even if rural developing areas are only using early 20th century medicine practices (which I doubt) they are still centuries ahead of middle ages medicine.
Without wanting sounds like a cock, I suspect you are somewhat less travelled than me to be saying this.
I reckon you can go pretty rural in any developing country and still find someone selling antibiotics.
Yes, often not stored correctly but can be bought at the market in many countries without prescription.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
It really isn;t democracy, its commentariatocracy.
The government only u-turns when the commentariat wants. On boats in the channel they are sticking to their 'let them come' guns.
Why? the commentariat isn;t interested in that issue.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
It really isn;t democracy, its commentariatocracy.
The government only u-turns when the commentariat wants. On boats in the channel they are sticking to their 'let them come' guns.
Why? the commentariat isn;t interested in that issue.
No the commentariat wanted Cummings head on a spike. The issue blew over.
The government changes not when the commentariat want it to change, but when the voters are angry on issues that may make them change their votes. That's democracy.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
[Citation] please on the accommodation being full considering the universities normally have accommodation for foreign students who aren't coming. When I went to a Russell Group uni a third of my Halls of Residence weren't British.
I've not seen even a single university yet say they're full and have no accommodation available. Instead many have said the opposite. You saying it does not make it true, what evidence do you have for that?
Who says that foreign students aren't coming? Perhaps surprisingly, numbers seem to be holding up pretty well...
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.
Its absolutely true. The numbers say yu have got to be pretty ill and old to die from COVID essentially. Over 80 with at least one co-morbodity.
In the middle ages, in case you were wondering, the was no such thing as managing illnesses like hypertension, heart disease and diabetes. Chaucer strangely doesn't refer to transplant surgery in the Canterbury tales.
No the numbers don't say that.
The numbers say that with our healthcare, and with our treatments you are more likely to be pretty old and ill to die. But younger people especially those with co-morbidities are possible to die too even with our healthcare looking after them - and @ydoethur is right comorbidities and ill health were rife then.
With the absence of any antibiotics or medicine then young people with TB (a major issue then) or some other comorbidities could have been slaughtered in vast numbers then.
There’s plenty of places in the world with only a pretty Middle Ages standard of healthcare available to most people and with young populations. .
I'm sorry this is just rubbish. You obviously have no idea of medicine in the middle ages.
There are certainy many places in the world which have no money for good medicines and equipment, but decent knowledge of medicine is almost everywhere. Even if rural developing areas are only using early 20th century medicine practices (which I doubt) they are still centuries ahead of middle ages medicine.
Without wanting sounds like a cock, I suspect you are somewhat less travelled than me to be saying this.
One thing I’d be interested to know is whether, when AS levels and coursework were abolished, anyone in DfEd raised the issue of what would happen if, for whatever reason, pupils in a school or area were unable to sit their exams.
Anticipating a pandemic might have been a step too far - though wasn’t there meant to be a flu pandemic plan (did that say anything about schools?). But foot and mouth happened in 2001 and that limited people’s ability to travel. So an event preventing exams was not that unforeseeable.
Did Gove and his super-forecaster Cummings think about these sorts of challenges then?
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
This is going to be like Cummings all over again, isn’t it? Lots of hand-wringing “I share your pain” tweets but f*** all action.
Yes. This is where the Presidential trend in our politics has taken us - Parliament, which is supposed to hold government to account is increasingly toothless, and so MPs can say anything because they don't have the power to turn words into action and so don't have to take responsibility for providing an alternative.
So everyone opposes the unpopular status quo, but nothing changes. It's going to do massive damage in the long-run to trust in the democratic process.
Parliament also has itself to blame (in part) by voting not to sit and have long holidays instead.
Our democratic institutions - and such checks and balances as we have - are being hollowed out and will, if this trend is not reversed, end up being about as meaningful as all the flummery that happens when HMQ opens Parliament.
We are only just startig here. Once the government has got its teeth into quashing judicial review, the sky's the limit. We'll be able to see what people who view the likes of Trump, Modi, Orban and Erdogan as allies can do when they know there are no checks on their power.
Given the number of judicial reviews already started by students and schools, it will be interesting to see whether Tory MPs revise their views towards it. This is now - given that the appeals system has been torn up - the only way OFQAL’s decision can be challenged. If even this route is removed, what do MPs think the aggrieved will do to express their dissatisfaction?
Vote? Complain?
Judicial reviews shouldn't be needed to do the right thing. I hope and expect there should be a review this week from people realising it is the wrong thing. The argument to me that OFQUAL have screwed up is undeniable now and it shouldn't take a judicial review to get a u-turn.
It will be too late for many students as they will have lost their place.
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
They won't have lost their place if the government puts in place measures to ensure everyone gets their place. That's been done in Scotland so why can't it be done in England?
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
Why can't it be done in England - the accommodation is already full for one reason.
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
[Citation] please on the accommodation being full considering the universities normally have accommodation for foreign students who aren't coming. When I went to a Russell Group uni a third of my Halls of Residence weren't British.
I've not seen even a single university yet say they're full and have no accommodation available. Instead many have said the opposite. You saying it does not make it true, what evidence do you have for that?
Who says that foreign students aren't coming? Perhaps surprisingly, numbers seem to be holding up pretty well...
Tuesday, August 18[edit] 9:00-11:00pm EDT[125] Theme: "Leadership Matters"[92] Presidential candidate nominating and seconding speeches[67] For Biden: For Sanders: Presidential roll call vote Confirmed speakers:
I always work on the basis that Betfair leaves it as late as possible.
So I'm expecting shortly before/at Biden's acceptance speech on Thursday.
One thing I’d be interested to know is whether, when AS levels and coursework were abolished, anyone in DfEd raised the issue of what would happen if, for whatever reason, pupils in a school or area were unable to sit their exams.
Anticipating a pandemic might have been a step too far - though wasn’t there meant to be a flu pandemic plan (did that say anything about schools?). But foot and mouth happened in 2001 and that limited people’s ability to travel. So an event preventing exams was not that unforeseeable.
Did Gove and his super-forecaster Cummings think about these sorts of challenges then?
I'm not certain if it's the way it works now but having the entire course mark decided in a single or double 3 hour exam at the end is ridiculous I think, that wasn't the case at Uni and nor with any professional system of qualification I've attended.
The absence of government ministers and OFQUAL from the media makes me feel confident that they're busy working something out and not out there defending this indefensible mess.
One thing I’d be interested to know is whether, when AS levels and coursework were abolished, anyone in DfEd raised the issue of what would happen if, for whatever reason, pupils in a school or area were unable to sit their exams.
Anticipating a pandemic might have been a step too far - though wasn’t there meant to be a flu pandemic plan (did that say anything about schools?). But foot and mouth happened in 2001 and that limited people’s ability to travel. So an event preventing exams was not that unforeseeable.
Did Gove and his super-forecaster Cummings think about these sorts of challenges then?
FWIW my pro-EU wet Tory tutor at Oxford was not a fan of AS levels for the simple reason that you lose the summer term of the lower sixth.
It's obvious that the exams should have been postponed until we knew more. If that meant delaying kids moving up the schools including some not starting school this September, so be it.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
It really isn;t democracy, its commentariatocracy.
The government only u-turns when the commentariat wants. On boats in the channel they are sticking to their 'let them come' guns.
Why? the commentariat isn;t interested in that issue.
It is more a case of there is no easy U turn to be had on the transmanche regatta.
They don't have the bottle or favourable geography for an Australian style operation. They are just waiting until the weather turns bad enough to kill sufficient informal immigrants that the rest will be discouraged from attempting the crossing. At that point victory will be declared. Possibly with Mk IIa Spitfire fly over.
No I couldn't because there was a very critical "if" there.
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
They are only u turning because of disquiet in the shires and their own MP’s getting nervous about going to the next members bbq, nothing to do with wider anomalies.
Good. That is why I support democracy.
That’s not democracy that’s the tories protecting the tories
That's democracy.
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
Then why isn't Cummings sacked?
Because it wasn't a fuck up?
I never said sack people, I said fix the mistake. What mistake hasn't been fixed now?
One thing I’d be interested to know is whether, when AS levels and coursework were abolished, anyone in DfEd raised the issue of what would happen if, for whatever reason, pupils in a school or area were unable to sit their exams.
Anticipating a pandemic might have been a step too far - though wasn’t there meant to be a flu pandemic plan (did that say anything about schools?). But foot and mouth happened in 2001 and that limited people’s ability to travel. So an event preventing exams was not that unforeseeable.
Did Gove and his super-forecaster Cummings think about these sorts of challenges then?
I'm not certain if it's the way it works now but having the entire course mark decided in a single or double 3 hour exam at the end is ridiculous I think, that wasn't the case at Uni and nor with any professional system of qualification I've attended.
Isn't modular exams the way to go?
One exam every term/two terms, each one worth 10% of the final mark, with no option to resit if you get a poor mark.
Comments
I mean I guess it depends whether we think exams are essentially worthless tests to get a piece of paper, or whether the practice of studying, revising and sitting them under a pressure situation is a valuable experience.
I honestly don't know either way!
My comment was just directed at A-level finals for university entry this year, not for GCSEs.
I'm just suggesting robbing a term from the university course. There's a couple of reasons for that: (1) it gives legitimate A-levels to everyone, and 2-4 months of study prior to the exam and (2) the first year of university doesn't count to the finals anyway - you only have to pass - so it's less serious to borrow from that.
Isn't it going to be evident who this person is pretty quickly, simply by looking at vote records? Or is it already common knowledge? (I have no idea, and obviously nobody should post any names here).
I've been consistently attacking this algorithm system as unreasonable and saying there should be a u-turn. I've been arguing why this algorithm was unfair and unreasonable and wrong. I've been saying that the teachers gradings are the least worst system available.
So how is that praising the government for what it is currently doing?
And if the government u-turns and does what I have been calling for then why shouldn't I be happy?
If the government is doing what I oppose then changes to what I support then I am not being unreasonable for being happy with that. There is nothing partisan there!
Academic year you took out the loan
When the loan’s written off
2005 to 2006, or earlier
When you’re 65
2006 to 2007, or later
25 years after the April you were first due to repay
This is not something that happened out of the blue. The government has had 5 months to think about the issue which is not what grades to give for non-existent exams but what do you do when no exams are taken.
What should be the right measure for 2 years’ work?
No-one - whether at DfEd or OFQAL or anywhere else seems to have asked themselves this basic question.
And, following on from that, what are the consequences of this for schools, universities and apprenticeships? And how do we come up with a practical fair solution?
The current mess flows from this, all of it eminently foreseeable from March onwards. But then we have cretins in charge.
At root the problem is pretending there have been exams. Any system of grades, and indeed individual grades, is therefore fundamentally false.
Not sure what the solution is, but once the decision was taken to abandon exams, someone, somewhere ought to have sat down in March and thought this through from first principles.
Of how to admit students to University in the absence of any results.
Not how do we manufacture a set of fake results.
She sorted track and trace into a world beating system in days, or am I am reading the wrong newspapers and posts from the wrong PB posters?
Cummings/Gove system was a retrograde step IMO
They do seem to have asked the basic question and come up with a system that superficially worked on average. But it hasn't worked at the extremes and that isn't good enough. So time to accept that it hasn't worked and move on.
You consistently claim there are 'cretins' but if there then it applies in all 4 countries the same. All 4 countries had this happen originally - cretins in all of them?
That's the depressing thing
“Pretending” is what this government does best. It is pretending to be a government, playing at Being PM and In The Cabinet. A bit like small children playing doctors and nurses.
Odds on Gove/Cummings even being asked about this by a journalist...?
Tuesday, August 18[edit]
9:00-11:00pm EDT[125]
Theme: "Leadership Matters"[92]
Presidential candidate nominating and seconding speeches[67]
For Biden:
For Sanders:
Presidential roll call vote
Confirmed speakers:
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
And actually the rather silly 4 year degree in Scotland (completely unnecessary for anything outside of medicine, vetinary and dentistry) means that Scottish students can find themselves with similar debts to those that do the 3 years in England. You still have to live and you have to pay your maintenance back.
Of course if they didn't do any tests ........
Piss off the voters and they won't vote for you next time. So if you fuck up and piss people off then in a democracy you reverse ferret and fix the mistake.
In a non-democratic system you can steamroller through and ignore the complaints since they're unlikely to result in an actual revolution.
So I'm expecting shortly before/at Biden's acceptance speech on Thursday.
Hope I'm wrong!
I remember the same happening in bumpy periods under Labour. It's a sign of lack of Ministerial confidence, and of course of lack of preparation before the policy gets announced in the first place. There is a genuine role for kite-flying and for official consultation when you can see a problem coming.
Grade inflation is bad. Going off teacher grades is bad. But every alternative is worse.
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time . . . going off teachers grades is the worst solution here except for all other solutions that have been created including OFQUAL's.
Are you mad? There is no govt a*se that the PB Tories won't kiss ...
A better organised government could have prevented a lot of these problems by using the last five months better.
A government with better political antennae would have realised that their position was unsustainable well before now. (As happened with the Rashford free school meals thing.)
Yes, BoJo still has a majority of 78. 77 if we discount the one under a cloud. BoJo doesn't have to go. That means Williamson doesn't have to go. But the UK would be better governed if we had different ministers to the ones we have.
I never said sack people, I said fix the mistake. What mistake hasn't been fixed now?
Why did not one of the 4 countries fix this before it happened?
Oh you will be robbing students from secondary universities to fill up the already full up Russell group ones.
The backdoor being used by the Scottish government is college which is being used to repair the damage done by useless schools (that the government is far too scared to touch) but then allows entrance into 2nd or even 3rd year at some Universities such as Robert Gordons or Abertay. But I do think that we need to be more radical about this and the current crisis is an opportunity to do so.
I've not seen even a single university yet say they're full and have no accommodation available. Instead many have said the opposite. You saying it does not make it true, what evidence do you have for that?
To deny people places or opportunities when they didn't get the chance is just wrong but to assume that every child would have taken that chance is absurd. What a mess. The classes of 2020 will never have credible results and it is not their fault. They are victims of the Virus in the same way as residents of Care Homes and the consequences will be with them for so much longer.
The government only u-turns when the commentariat wants. On boats in the channel they are sticking to their 'let them come' guns.
Why? the commentariat isn;t interested in that issue.
If this was an EU competency then there would have been much gnashing of teeth but nothing would have changed. See CAP etc
Because its controlled by democratic governments the governments have responded.
Democracy works.
The government changes not when the commentariat want it to change, but when the voters are angry on issues that may make them change their votes. That's democracy.
It is also the least worse solution.
There is no alternative.
https://inews.co.uk/news/education/a-level-results-2020-record-number-disadvantaged-pupils-university-places-ucas-579198
Mine was neither.
Anticipating a pandemic might have been a step too far - though wasn’t there meant to be a flu pandemic plan (did that say anything about schools?). But foot and mouth happened in 2001 and that limited people’s ability to travel. So an event preventing exams was not that unforeseeable.
Did Gove and his super-forecaster Cummings think about these sorts of challenges then?
There's only one viable solution. Get on with it.
It's obvious that the exams should have been postponed until we knew more. If that meant delaying kids moving up the schools including some not starting school this September, so be it.
They don't have the bottle or favourable geography for an Australian style operation. They are just waiting until the weather turns bad enough to kill sufficient informal immigrants that the rest will be discouraged from attempting the crossing. At that point victory will be declared. Possibly with Mk IIa Spitfire fly over.
One exam every term/two terms, each one worth 10% of the final mark, with no option to resit if you get a poor mark.
The one final exam or two worth in total 50%.