What's with the Russell/secondary university de-facto ranking people on here seem to be using ?
Mine was neither.
I'm using it because although it's inaccurate it represents the dilemma. This year University numbers are restricted so that less popular institutions aren't empty as more popular / renowned / famous institutions grab students to fill up unused overseas student gaps.
And Russell Group is the name used by the UK's 24 leading universities now York and Durham are members. So it Russell group really is a nice shortcut for the popular institutions where students want to go but have been told not to allow them in.
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.
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
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 am afraid you did anyway.
Erisdoof's statement is somewhat sweeping, but on a national level developing countries have well educated and experienced staff. The trouble is they are currently working for the NHS.
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.
The other frustrating thing looking at this whole mess is that we did keep the schools open for key workers during the pandemic, why didn't we also let kids doing A Levels (and maybe GCSEs) all be part of that cohort?
The question is why the other three governments do not adopt Scotland's approach
Becasue it is daft, vast grade inflation helps no one
It's the least bad solution.
Have you got a less bad solution that doesn't result in some students getting worse grades than they should have got?
Autumn exams, Max's solution of going back to the school, bumping up double downgrades to single...
Who is going to help students prepare for those Autumn exams and how do you cope with the people who could afford for private exam prep and those who can't
Especially as those who can afford it have already won due to the small cohort bump...
well it wont be teachers, they dont want to go back to work
Are you claiming teachers have not been working?
yes.
its school holidays.
As it happens I’ve just come back from school.
For many teachers the Wednesday before the A-level results is the first day back, for even more it this Wednesday as the GCSE results can have a significant affect on A-level choices.
Most teachers will spend some or all of the last two weeks preparing for the new year.
Teachers are a bit like actors: just because we are not in a classroom does not mean we are not working.
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.
We started our A2s in the summer term of lower sixth.
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.
The one final exam or two worth in total 50%.
How about less of a focus on exams and more of a focus on consistent work and research, etc. which are skills that are useful in life.
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
The EU have nothing to do with this policy since education is not and never has been an EU competency. So this would always have been a Government issue and one the Government could fix.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
The EU have nothing to do with this policy since education is not and never has been an EU competency. So this would always have been a Government issue and one the Government could fix.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
Ah so it was just deflection, okay then no worries
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.
The one final exam or two worth in total 50%.
How about less of a focus on exams and more of a focus on consistent work and research, etc. which are skills that are useful in life.
Stack Overflow is my most useful resource.
And that was how things were albeit end of module coursework rather than end of module exams before Cummings decided to take us back to the 1940's...
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.
We started our A2s in the summer term of lower sixth.
Same, but for the last couple of weeks of term and we went over the same stuff at the start of the autumn term.
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.
Are BBC Wales quite pro Plaid? How different, how very different, from the home life of our own dear BBC Scotland!
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
The EU have nothing to do with this policy since education is not and never has been an EU competency. So this would always have been a Government issue and one the Government could fix.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
Ah so it was just deflection, okay then no worries
No it was a point on democracy.
The argument about taking back control was frequently made that it is better for democracy to control what happens. This shows the power of democracy in action.
When you ask why democracy matters . . . When you ask why taking back control matters . . . look here. Look at what happens when the public says "enough". Under things we control the government can change course - the EU with things it controls does not.
That is why we should take back control. To ensure this democratic oversight applies to everything. Do you understand 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?
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.
Are BBC Wales quite pro Plaid? How different, how very different, from the home life of our own dear BBC Scotland!
Whereas in England CCD are very critical of the government.
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.
Who would teach them? Their previous year’s teachers will now have full timetables teaching the next year group.
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.
Hope I'm wrong!
Isn't as late as possible 3 November?
How do you read that from betfair's rules ?
The VP market start date is still at 3 November 2020.
not sure about the Presidential nominee one, it looks like that may be during the convention.
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
The EU have nothing to do with this policy since education is not and never has been an EU competency. So this would always have been a Government issue and one the Government could fix.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
I wonder if Germany screwed up on the exams front because of Covid?
This is why I support Taking Back Control and ensuring democracy matters. Because democracy works.
How would the EU have changed this decision?
Precisely they wouldn't have.
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.
You've lost me. What does the EU have to do with this policy and how would us being a member have meant this would or wouldn't have been a Government cock up?
The EU have nothing to do with this policy since education is not and never has been an EU competency. So this would always have been a Government issue and one the Government could fix.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
I wonder if Germany screwed up on the exams front because of Covid?
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
Does that mean they get the university place that disappeared last week though? Otherwise it solves one problem and creates another.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
The places haven't disappeared. Nobody in a position of authority has said they've disappeared - in fact many Universities have already said they'll honour all offers regardless.
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
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.
We started our A2s in the summer term of lower sixth.
Fox jr too, and with moduar exams the 3rd term of A2 doesn't need to be purely revision.
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.
The one final exam or two worth in total 50%.
How about less of a focus on exams and more of a focus on consistent work and research, etc. which are skills that are useful in life.
Stack Overflow is my most useful resource.
Consistent work and research is what PhDs are for.
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
By 76 we had grey, red (Manchester) and the Wilson inspired University extension mainly in technology and engineering.
Does that mean they get the university place that disappeared last week though? Otherwise it solves one problem and creates another.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
The places haven't disappeared. Nobody in a position of authority has said they've disappeared - in fact many Universities have already said they'll honour all offers regardless.
I will wait and see if the people I know who should be going to XYZ actually get into XYZ. Trust me I'm not holding my breath and will be very surprised if they do.
And once again even if they do (which I seriously doubt) where do they live when the accommodation is full.
If they really are U turning a la Sturgeon to junk the algo and take the teacher grades this is imo the right call at this point. It's making the best of a bad job. The 2020 pandemic year results will be forever stamped with a "treat with caution" label - regardless of how inflated they are in aggregate compared to normal years - and so it's right to not add a ton of individual anomalies and injustices on top of that.
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.
It's another example of the young making sacrifices for the old due to the virus, though I'm sure it will be completely lost on the most selfish generation.
Does that mean they get the university place that disappeared last week though? Otherwise it solves one problem and creates another.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
The places haven't disappeared. Nobody in a position of authority has said they've disappeared - in fact many Universities have already said they'll honour all offers regardless.
I will wait and see if the people I know who should be going to XYZ actually get into XYZ. Trust me I'm not holding my breath and will be very surprised if they do.
And once again even if they do (which I seriously doubt) where do they live when the accommodation is full.
I expect they will and I expect the accommodation will not be full.
There are enough issues to worry about without inventing more.
Assume no one changes their mind on this, it’s going to be interesting to see how many people still don’t make their offers: after all the teacher assessed grades are not all the same as the predictions made for UCAS purposes.
I expect that their will be a few very dissatisfied people even after this.
Does that mean they get the university place that disappeared last week though? Otherwise it solves one problem and creates another.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
The places haven't disappeared. Nobody in a position of authority has said they've disappeared - in fact many Universities have already said they'll honour all offers regardless.
I will wait and see if the people I know who should be going to XYZ actually get into XYZ. Trust me I'm not holding my breath and will be very surprised if they do.
And once again even if they do (which I seriously doubt) where do they live when the accommodation is full.
I expect they will and I expect the accommodation will not be full.
There are enough issues to worry about without inventing more.
Are your children applying for university this year - thought not.,
The anecdotes I'm posting are coming from the social media feeds of my children and a lot are seriously not happy.
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.
The one final exam or two worth in total 50%.
How about less of a focus on exams and more of a focus on consistent work and research, etc. which are skills that are useful in life.
Stack Overflow is my most useful resource.
Consistent work and research is what PhDs are for.
Most people don't get PhDs, most people however do get jobs and these are skills that could be useful.
For my line of work, coursework and research skills would have been a lot more beneficial than exams about sorting algorithms and big O notation
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
By 76 we had grey, red (Manchester) and the Wilson inspired University extension mainly in technology and engineering.
Labour actually asked the Government to do this and they're seemingly doing it. I think this is the first example of Labour actually suggesting a policy
The university you went to shouldn't make a difference, my personal experience is makes no difference whatsoever in terms of your ability to do the job.
Everyone seems desperate to throw OFQUAL under the bus, but I think the Gov't should stick to it's guns. If pupils want to get a better grade they can sit an autumn exam.
Are you offering to pay their salaries for the lost working year?
What is odd is that no ministers spotted the huge political elephant trap -- another sign of Boris's inexperienced Cabinet?
Everyone seems to want airy fairy artificially inflated grades. The young man I refferred to in my previous post went to a standard comp not some tiny cohort private school - my guess is actually the algorithm is rather better than most people like to think it is.
These days A-levels exist mainly as a gateway to university -- the number of university places is the important thing, and if I were Boris I'd pressure the universities to speed up the acceptance process. Almost no-one cares about A-levels beyond that.
I keep hearing this and it simply isn't true. I'm 37 with an 18 year track record of employment of one sort or another in a wide variety of fields, and when I apply for jobs employers still want to know my A-levels. That even included Bristol and Bath universities, which was a pain as their forms took ages to fill in.
To what extent would an employer take account of the huge change in grading systems that occurred at the end of the 1980s? Under the system of relative marking , an A grade really stood out in a way that it has long ceased to do. How many employers would have the knowledge to take on board the likely truth that a pupil obtaining BCC grades circa 1985 would likely have managed AAA circa 2000? Admittedly Anno Domini will be removing the issue to some extent in that people who sat A levels in the mid to late 1980s will now be over 50 years old. Doubtless it must still crop up though.
Labour actually asked the Government to do this and they're seemingly doing it. I think this is the first example of Labour actually suggesting a policy
How come Labour haven't implemented this policy in Wales yet? Seems like an opportunity to steal a march on the UK Government doing it in England?
The university you went to shouldn't make a difference, my personal experience is makes no difference whatsoever in terms of your ability to do the job.
Obviously the subject studied does matter but once you get in place a group who only want to recruit from the same universities they went to then the getting the interview becomes much harder.
Labour actually asked the Government to do this and they're seemingly doing it. I think this is the first example of Labour actually suggesting a policy
How come Labour haven't implemented this policy in Wales yet? Seems like an opportunity to steal a march on the UK Government doing it in England?
Good question. They do have ASs to go on which seems like a sensible decision in hindsight but I agree, they should put this into action in Wales
Does that mean they get the university place that disappeared last week though? Otherwise it solves one problem and creates another.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
The places haven't disappeared. Nobody in a position of authority has said they've disappeared - in fact many Universities have already said they'll honour all offers regardless.
I will wait and see if the people I know who should be going to XYZ actually get into XYZ. Trust me I'm not holding my breath and will be very surprised if they do.
And once again even if they do (which I seriously doubt) where do they live when the accommodation is full.
I expect they will and I expect the accommodation will not be full.
There are enough issues to worry about without inventing more.
Are your children applying for university this year - thought not.,
The anecdotes I'm posting are coming from the social media feeds of my children and a lot are seriously not happy.
That doesn't address what I said whatsoever.
Of course they're not happy if they've not got the grades they wanted. That doesn't magically make the universities full though.
The university you went to shouldn't make a difference, my personal experience is makes no difference whatsoever in terms of your ability to do the job.
Obviously the subject studied does matter but once you get in place a group who only want to recruit from the same universities they went to then the getting the interview becomes much harder.
That might be how they choose who they ask for an interview but I work with people from all kinds of backgrounds, some with degrees from Cambridge, some with no degrees at all, they're all good.
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
By 76 we had grey, red (Manchester) and the Wilson inspired University extension mainly in technology and engineering.
More on topic I participated in a senate committee looking at entry A level results and final degree classification, it concluded that A levels were a poor predictor of degree classification.
Labour actually asked the Government to do this and they're seemingly doing it. I think this is the first example of Labour actually suggesting a policy
Free school meals over the summer?
Scrapping the NHS surcharge?
There was a phase where the big question before PMQs was what the government would climb down on that week.
Makes the whole "Captain Hindsight" thing a bit unfair, of course, but politics often isn't fair...
Everyone seems desperate to throw OFQUAL under the bus, but I think the Gov't should stick to it's guns. If pupils want to get a better grade they can sit an autumn exam.
Are you offering to pay their salaries for the lost working year?
What is odd is that no ministers spotted the huge political elephant trap -- another sign of Boris's inexperienced Cabinet?
Everyone seems to want airy fairy artificially inflated grades. The young man I refferred to in my previous post went to a standard comp not some tiny cohort private school - my guess is actually the algorithm is rather better than most people like to think it is.
These days A-levels exist mainly as a gateway to university -- the number of university places is the important thing, and if I were Boris I'd pressure the universities to speed up the acceptance process. Almost no-one cares about A-levels beyond that.
I keep hearing this and it simply isn't true. I'm 37 with an 18 year track record of employment of one sort or another in a wide variety of fields, and when I apply for jobs employers still want to know my A-levels. That even included Bristol and Bath universities, which was a pain as their forms took ages to fill in.
To what extent would an employer take account of the huge change in grading systems that occurred at the end of the 1980s? Under the system of relative marking , an A grade really stood out in a way that it has long ceased to do. How many employers would have the knowledge to take on board the likely truth that a pupil obtaining BCC grades circa 1985 would likely have managed AAA circa 2000? Admittedly Anno Domini will be removing the issue to some extent in that people who sat A levels in the mid to late 1980s will now be over 50 years old. Doubtless it must still crop up though.
One summer while home from university I applied for (and got) a job in the local abattoir (don’t ask...).
The form asked me to list all my qualifications, but the box was so small I had to ask for an extra sheet. I think they did it deliberately as I was not exactly the only person in that situation.
Everyone seems desperate to throw OFQUAL under the bus, but I think the Gov't should stick to it's guns. If pupils want to get a better grade they can sit an autumn exam.
Are you offering to pay their salaries for the lost working year?
What is odd is that no ministers spotted the huge political elephant trap -- another sign of Boris's inexperienced Cabinet?
Everyone seems to want airy fairy artificially inflated grades. The young man I refferred to in my previous post went to a standard comp not some tiny cohort private school - my guess is actually the algorithm is rather better than most people like to think it is.
These days A-levels exist mainly as a gateway to university -- the number of university places is the important thing, and if I were Boris I'd pressure the universities to speed up the acceptance process. Almost no-one cares about A-levels beyond that.
I keep hearing this and it simply isn't true. I'm 37 with an 18 year track record of employment of one sort or another in a wide variety of fields, and when I apply for jobs employers still want to know my A-levels. That even included Bristol and Bath universities, which was a pain as their forms took ages to fill in.
To what extent would an employer take account of the huge change in grading systems that occurred at the end of the 1980s? Under the system of relative marking , an A grade really stood out in a way that it has long ceased to do. How many employers would have the knowledge to take on board the likely truth that a pupil obtaining BCC grades circa 1985 would likely have managed AAA circa 2000? Admittedly Anno Domini will be removing the issue to some extent in that people who sat A levels in the mid to late 1980s will now be over 50 years old. Doubtless it must still crop up though.
One summer while home from university I applied for (and got) a job in the local abattoir (don’t ask...).
The form asked me to list all my qualifications, but the box was so small I had to ask for an extra sheet. I think they did it deliberately as I was not exactly the only person in that situation.
Could be handy for behaviour management.
"Good afternoon class. I'm your new physics teacher. Just so you know, I used to work in an abattoir. What does that mean?"
"Very good. Now we all understand that, let us begin..."
"Tony Blair warns another national lockdown is 'impossible' and blasts 14 day quarantine rules as too long - as he claims ministers have been over relying on experts during coronavirus crisis
Ex-PM said 'not possible' and 'not credible' to have another national lockdown He said the Government should roll out mass testing programme to stop spread Claimed ministers' 14 day quarantine travel policy is 'wrong' and should be cut Mr Blair suggested ministers have been over-reliant on officials during the crisis"
Glad the government is in touch and listening if the rumours of a u-turn is true. Kudos to them for that.
It’s a shame it took them so long though: they had seen what happened in Scotland and should have realised the same thing would happen in England.
But yes, in general governments should not be pilloried for changing their minds when it becomes obvious that they made a mistake or else the chances of them doing it next time (and there is always a next time) are reduced, or at least the process of making a change gets spread out over more time.
"Tony Blair warns another national lockdown is 'impossible' and blasts 14 day quarantine rules as too long - as he claims ministers have been over relying on experts during coronavirus crisis
Ex-PM said 'not possible' and 'not credible' to have another national lockdown He said the Government should roll out mass testing programme to stop spread Claimed ministers' 14 day quarantine travel policy is 'wrong' and should be cut Mr Blair suggested ministers have been over-reliant on officials during the crisis"
Quite why they didn't just do this to start with is beyond me. Who cares if a few "undeserving" people get into uni this year.
Because it devalues the "results". 2020 A Levels will always be tainted
Incorrect.
Not sitting exams devalued the "results". Cancelling exams tainted 2020. That can't be undone so is not a reason not to go with the teacher assessed grades.
Everyone seems desperate to throw OFQUAL under the bus, but I think the Gov't should stick to it's guns. If pupils want to get a better grade they can sit an autumn exam.
Are you offering to pay their salaries for the lost working year?
What is odd is that no ministers spotted the huge political elephant trap -- another sign of Boris's inexperienced Cabinet?
Everyone seems to want airy fairy artificially inflated grades. The young man I refferred to in my previous post went to a standard comp not some tiny cohort private school - my guess is actually the algorithm is rather better than most people like to think it is.
These days A-levels exist mainly as a gateway to university -- the number of university places is the important thing, and if I were Boris I'd pressure the universities to speed up the acceptance process. Almost no-one cares about A-levels beyond that.
I keep hearing this and it simply isn't true. I'm 37 with an 18 year track record of employment of one sort or another in a wide variety of fields, and when I apply for jobs employers still want to know my A-levels. That even included Bristol and Bath universities, which was a pain as their forms took ages to fill in.
To what extent would an employer take account of the huge change in grading systems that occurred at the end of the 1980s? Under the system of relative marking , an A grade really stood out in a way that it has long ceased to do. How many employers would have the knowledge to take on board the likely truth that a pupil obtaining BCC grades circa 1985 would likely have managed AAA circa 2000? Admittedly Anno Domini will be removing the issue to some extent in that people who sat A levels in the mid to late 1980s will now be over 50 years old. Doubtless it must still crop up though.
One summer while home from university I applied for (and got) a job in the local abattoir (don’t ask...).
The form asked me to list all my qualifications, but the box was so small I had to ask for an extra sheet. I think they did it deliberately as I was not exactly the only person in that situation.
Could be handy for behaviour management.
"Good afternoon class. I'm your new physics teacher. Just so you know, I used to work in an abattoir. What does that mean?"
"Very good. Now we all understand that, let us begin..."
I normally go with “and if you don’t do what I say I’ll tell you exactly what my job was”. I use a similar threat with the flexible cystoscopies I have to have from time to time. (If you look the term up all I can say is you have been warned).
"Tony Blair warns another national lockdown is 'impossible' and blasts 14 day quarantine rules as too long - as he claims ministers have been over relying on experts during coronavirus crisis
Ex-PM said 'not possible' and 'not credible' to have another national lockdown He said the Government should roll out mass testing programme to stop spread Claimed ministers' 14 day quarantine travel policy is 'wrong' and should be cut Mr Blair suggested ministers have been over-reliant on officials during the crisis"
Quite why they didn't just do this to start with is beyond me. Who cares if a few "undeserving" people get into uni this year.
Next up will be the Universities - I was told, long before this, that they have calibrated their offers on past results of predictions. So if everyone gets the predicted marks, then they will have promised too many places.
So next up will be increasing university places to match.
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
By 76 we had grey, red (Manchester) and the Wilson inspired University extension mainly in technology and engineering.
Quite why they didn't just do this to start with is beyond me. Who cares if a few "undeserving" people get into uni this year.
Because it devalues the "results". 2020 A Levels will always be tainted
Incorrect.
Not sitting exams devalued the "results". Cancelling exams tainted 2020. That can't be undone so is not a reason not to go with the teacher assessed grades.
You are probably right as there does not seem to be any other alternative. I assume if there was Scott would have tweeted it,
Everyone seems desperate to throw OFQUAL under the bus, but I think the Gov't should stick to it's guns. If pupils want to get a better grade they can sit an autumn exam.
Are you offering to pay their salaries for the lost working year?
What is odd is that no ministers spotted the huge political elephant trap -- another sign of Boris's inexperienced Cabinet?
Everyone seems to want airy fairy artificially inflated grades. The young man I refferred to in my previous post went to a standard comp not some tiny cohort private school - my guess is actually the algorithm is rather better than most people like to think it is.
These days A-levels exist mainly as a gateway to university -- the number of university places is the important thing, and if I were Boris I'd pressure the universities to speed up the acceptance process. Almost no-one cares about A-levels beyond that.
I keep hearing this and it simply isn't true. I'm 37 with an 18 year track record of employment of one sort or another in a wide variety of fields, and when I apply for jobs employers still want to know my A-levels. That even included Bristol and Bath universities, which was a pain as their forms took ages to fill in.
To what extent would an employer take account of the huge change in grading systems that occurred at the end of the 1980s? Under the system of relative marking , an A grade really stood out in a way that it has long ceased to do. How many employers would have the knowledge to take on board the likely truth that a pupil obtaining BCC grades circa 1985 would likely have managed AAA circa 2000? Admittedly Anno Domini will be removing the issue to some extent in that people who sat A levels in the mid to late 1980s will now be over 50 years old. Doubtless it must still crop up though.
Depends what the employer wants to know, really.
If they want to know whether a potential employee is able to do a particular job (and an A-level is relevant), then the absolute grade is important (the later method).
If they want to employ someone who was in the top whatever percentage in their particular year of A-levels, then the relative grade is important (the earlier method).
Of course, someone who got an A in one year (a weak year) might have got a C in another year (a strong year) with exactly the same capability and performance in the relative grade system.
Well we will see what happens when the new grades are plugged into a system that has already processed the original results available. Yes you can squeeze mote into some lecture theaters but labs will be more difficult, accommodation may be an issue, especially the halls based and better private let’s. There will be other unseen problems by changing course in mid stream but they are where they are five months to come up with a solution five days to turn it on it’s head.
I received my degree in 1976 when there were only 24 universities no need for the Oxbridge or the Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
I think the term “red brick” was used to denote the non-Oxbridge universities, i.e. those not built of stone by medieval masons.
By 76 we had grey, red (Manchester) and the Wilson inspired University extension mainly in technology and engineering.
Isn't there a 'destroy Keble' society, membership of which costs a number of red bricks, or a single purple one?
I didn't think it was that bad, to be honest.
On the HR department thing.
In one company I worked for, they had a policy of "2.1 or a 1st from Russell Group, or foreign equivalent".
Then I found out the bit that would make a dog laugh.
The incoming CVs were filtered for this by a young lady in the HR department. That's what she did, filter against a list. Bin the CVs outside the criteria.
The funny bit - she had no degree. Straight in as an admin assistant from school.
Comments
And Russell Group is the name used by the UK's 24 leading universities now York and Durham are members. So it Russell group really is a nice shortcut for the popular institutions where students want to go but have been told not to allow them in.
Erisdoof's statement is somewhat sweeping, but on a national level developing countries have well educated and experienced staff. The trouble is they are currently working for the NHS.
BTW - I attended a Russell group uni
For many teachers the Wednesday before the A-level results is the first day back, for even more it this Wednesday as the GCSE results can have a significant affect on A-level choices.
Most teachers will spend some or all of the last two weeks preparing for the new year.
Teachers are a bit like actors: just because we are not in a classroom does not mean we are not working.
Stack Overflow is my most useful resource.
However other issues that were EU competencies democracy was powerless to respond to. If something became an issue then our government could say "nothing we can do, that's the EU's responsibility" and that was the end of the matter. Since the EU isn't a proper democracy that would see its government kicked out if it screwed up at the next election like can happen in Parliament it doesn't respond to such issues either.
Having control worked here in education. It works elsewhere too. All issues should be under the control of the government. All issues should be subject to democratic oversight. No issue should be responded to with "nothing we can do about that".
University matters a lot less than people think and even less so, the University you went to.
https://twitter.com/PeterArnottGlas/status/1295318932841168897?s=20
I am not sure what story that tells, besides which when I was there it was an almost bankrupt college within the University of Wales at the time.
The argument about taking back control was frequently made that it is better for democracy to control what happens. This shows the power of democracy in action.
When you ask why democracy matters . . . When you ask why taking back control matters . . . look here. Look at what happens when the public says "enough". Under things we control the government can change course - the EU with things it controls does not.
That is why we should take back control. To ensure this democratic oversight applies to everything. Do you understand that?
Good luck with the insecurity thing. Have you looked into CBT?
That is the one this Government will pick...
not sure about the Presidential nominee one, it looks like that may be during the convention.
Mountain. Molehill.
There are cocks in all walks of life.
I'll check and report back.
It also shows how completely and utterly truly incompetent they are as this problem (and this conclusion) was obvious last Monday....
Jack Russell Tag the degree got you the interview everything else was up to you, now you have HR departments rejecting quality people even before interview because they went to the wrong university.
Remarkable this account is ran by a student! Would never have guessed that.
Once you've made the decision, and it's leakable, and lots of people need to know what's going on...
Just make the damn announcement. Put it on a website, press questions at 4.
This government can't even organise an omnishambles properly.
And once again even if they do (which I seriously doubt) where do they live when the accommodation is full.
There are enough issues to worry about without inventing more.
https://twitter.com/TC_Cornesto/status/1295279746952187905?s=20
I expect that their will be a few very dissatisfied people even after this.
The anecdotes I'm posting are coming from the social media feeds of my children and a lot are seriously not happy.
For my line of work, coursework and research skills would have been a lot more beneficial than exams about sorting algorithms and big O notation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keble_College,_Oxford#/media/File:Keble_College_Chapel_-_Oct_2006.jpg
Of course they're not happy if they've not got the grades they wanted. That doesn't magically make the universities full though.
Scrapping the NHS surcharge?
There was a phase where the big question before PMQs was what the government would climb down on that week.
Makes the whole "Captain Hindsight" thing a bit unfair, of course, but politics often isn't fair...
The form asked me to list all my qualifications, but the box was so small I had to ask for an extra sheet. I think they did it deliberately as I was not exactly the only person in that situation.
https://twitter.com/MichelleKinney/status/1295333736557555717?s=20
"Good afternoon class. I'm your new physics teacher. Just so you know, I used to work in an abattoir. What does that mean?"
"Very good. Now we all understand that, let us begin..."
Ex-PM said 'not possible' and 'not credible' to have another national lockdown
He said the Government should roll out mass testing programme to stop spread
Claimed ministers' 14 day quarantine travel policy is 'wrong' and should be cut
Mr Blair suggested ministers have been over-reliant on officials during the crisis"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8634645/Tony-Blair-warns-national-lockdown-impossible.html
But yes, in general governments should not be pilloried for changing their minds when it becomes obvious that they made a mistake or else the chances of them doing it next time (and there is always a next time) are reduced, or at least the process of making a change gets spread out over more time.
Headline - 2
7 days - 2
Yesterday - 0
Not sitting exams devalued the "results". Cancelling exams tainted 2020. That can't be undone so is not a reason not to go with the teacher assessed grades.
No, on checking ...
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-cameron-makes-a-quaker-oaf-688759
If this is u-turned then I called it right and will stand by my decision to oppose what the government and OFQUAL originally did.
Thanks for posting this.
So next up will be increasing university places to match.
I didn't think it was that bad, to be honest.
If they want to know whether a potential employee is able to do a particular job (and an A-level is relevant), then the absolute grade is important (the later method).
If they want to employ someone who was in the top whatever percentage in their particular year of A-levels, then the relative grade is important (the earlier method).
Of course, someone who got an A in one year (a weak year) might have got a C in another year (a strong year) with exactly the same capability and performance in the relative grade system.
In one company I worked for, they had a policy of "2.1 or a 1st from Russell Group, or foreign equivalent".
Then I found out the bit that would make a dog laugh.
The incoming CVs were filtered for this by a young lady in the HR department. That's what she did, filter against a list. Bin the CVs outside the criteria.
The funny bit - she had no degree. Straight in as an admin assistant from school.