What now happens to all the A level people now upgraded who suddenly now have a right to the course they had failed to qualify for under this disaster, whose places have already been taken up by other candidates who did OK out of this casino, and/or where any spare places have been filled rapidly in clearing. Including courses like medics and vets where universities can't just create places by buying a desk?
It really is amazing to see so many people who advocated the long term shut down of schools now wailing about children's futures being stolen.
Incredible really.
Time for our regular reminder that almost no children have died of Covid. The latest NHS England weekly bulletin states that 20 people aged 0-19 have died after a positive Covid test in English hospitals during the entirety of the pandemic to date, and 16 of those had serious underlying health conditions.
The likelihood of a healthy child falling seriously ill from Covid is minuscule; of one actually dying, probably about the same as being struck by a lightning bolt. And still nearly all ten-and-a-half million schoolkids (the key worker offspring excepted) had to be locked up at home for half-a-year.
I don't think schools were shut primarily to protect children.
Spot on. Schools were seen as a conduit for transmission between otherwise isolated groups of adults. If children can be carriers then it doesn't really matter whether they get it badly or not. What matters is how they transmit it.
Remember at the start of all of this lots of clever people were pointing out how previous flu epidemics have rapidly dissolved once school holidays occur.
Now as it happens it looks like in this case children are also poor carriers as well as not getting the disease themselves. But that wasn't clear at the time the original decisions to shut schools were made.
"You may have contributed to the death of your dad and grandma but you're still healthy" isn't exactly reassuring to a child.
Indeed. I don't see how the Government could have done anything else other than shut the schools when they did given what they thought they knew at the time.
Given that national lockdown came a week later, the idea of schools staying open was for the birds. (And whilst the NHS didn't collapse, in the beginning of April it was a close-run thing.)
But yes, there should have been a lot more re-opening a lot earlier. But it's the same pattern; government proposed something unworkable, stamped its feet when told it needed to tweak its plans, got beaten by the clock.
It really is amazing to see so many people who advocated the long term shut down of schools now wailing about children's futures being stolen.
Incredible really.
Time for our regular reminder that almost no children have died of Covid. The latest NHS England weekly bulletin states that 20 people aged 0-19 have died after a positive Covid test in English hospitals during the entirety of the pandemic to date, and 16 of those had serious underlying health conditions.
The likelihood of a healthy child falling seriously ill from Covid is minuscule; of one actually dying, probably about the same as being struck by a lightning bolt. And still nearly all ten-and-a-half million schoolkids (the key worker offspring excepted) had to be locked up at home for half-a-year.
I don't think schools were shut primarily to protect children.
No. The problem was that nobody was really thinking of the welfare of the children at all.
To be fair, everyone was panicking in March. Govt. realised it had been caught out badly and rushed to deal at short notice with what they saw, rightly, as a potential calamity. What they didn't do, apparently, was think about matters like exams as the situation developed.
There's plenty of people who are paid to think about matters like exams.
But its easier to do nothing and let someone else take the decisions and get the blame.
You mean OFQUAL? Well it seems they did think about it and came up with a solution that all 4 governments proceeded with a variant of ... And the teaching unions endorsed.
As recently as two weeks ago this system was considered a good idea by OFQUAL, the SQA, the other devolved bodies, the UK Government, the Scottish Government, The Welsh Government, the NI Government, the Tories, the SNP, Labour, the Lib Dems, more parties and all of the Teaching Unions endorsed it too!
A lot of people now saying things should have been better but I don't see even a single body flagging this up and warning about it in advance.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that. Williamson should be banished to the farthest corners of the back benches for the rest of this century.
Seriously, Mr Tyndall? Please think of the poor MPs who will be there until 2100...
Or perhaps you means like the chap who founded the University of London? He is still with them, I believe.
I usually revel in the suffering of MPs but you are right this is perhaps a little cruel on the other backbenchers.
OFQUAL did the job they were set, should have been Williamson apologising today - instead just threw Taylor and OFQUAL under the bus. Disgraceful.
Ofqual was created by labour in 2008 and in 2019 Angela Rayner, labour's deputy leader, announced plans to scrap the 'deeply unfair system of teachers predictions' and yet Starmer attacks HMG for doing something he was against one year ago
Starmer is great on hindsight and hypocrisy
Well it certainly seems that Teachers predictions are unfair, just in a different way.
I think Rayner was advocating a move away from conditional offers, to post A level application.
That would at least have gotten away from the fiasco of university admissions that has suddenly arisen.
Teachers’!
Post A-level applications would be great for schools and, if handled well, for universities in terms of their planning. It would need a bigger gap between results and the start of the next university year though.
What would worry me is the effect on students from families which no or little history of applying. At the moment schools can (and mostly do) put a lot of effort into supporting applications, from advice about suitable courses and universities (and even the question of whether university is the correct route) to help with personal statements and supporting references. Now if they have actual grades the references and personal statements lose much of their impact, but who is going to be able to support them through the process?
There are solutions, but each has a cost and they would need to be carefully balanced. I’m not sure who I would trust to get it right.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that. Williamson should be banished to the farthest corners of the back benches for the rest of this century.
Seriously, Mr Tyndall? Please think of the poor MPs who will be there until 2100...
Or perhaps you means like the chap who founded the University of London? He is still with them, I believe.
I usually revel in the suffering of MPs but you are right this is perhaps a little cruel on the other backbenchers.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
Any word on BTec and CTec? Results due last week. No word yet.
I don't think the BBC or the Guardian have kids doing these so they mostly don't exist; they just have the task of being future employees doing essential but not very glamorous jobs. However TBF the BBC have managed this:
Because this applies to GCSE grades as well, one side effect that could come back to bite is that over-generous teacher predictions (by some, not all) could lead to many more students reaching the threshold to do A-level courses. It's likely that some of those who scrape the required GCSE grades could struggle on A levels. Expect retention and results to decline on A-level courses by 2022.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that.
Bollocks to that. This just makes A Level grades meaningless. What’s the point in them because you can’t tell in a few years time when hiring a graduate if the person was really 3As or not? And this one off inflation disadvantages the 2018/2019/2021/2022 graduates in the first years of their career when employers still look at A Level grades.
The government seems incapable of thinking further ahead than tonight’s twitter trends.
I’d love to know if there are people in Cabinet calling these things out or if ministers are wary of stepping on toes outside their brief. I’ve seen it before in the private sector. Most of the room knowing that a committee is sleep walking into disaster but no one having the guts to speak up and say what everyone’s thinking. Which here is “no exam, no grade. Fix the consequence not the other way round”.
You are making the almost universal mistake of those outside education of thinking that A-levels are themselves a reliable measure of anything other than the ability to do A-levels. They are correlated with ability and understanding of a subject, but I’ve seen enough candidates underperform on the day (and some with an ability to cram for a test having done little or no work all year) to know that the difference between an A and a B is largely illusory.
And that is before you get to the inevitable foul-ups of the exam boards in a normal year.
That’s life. You underperform when it matters then deal with it. In the big wide world it’s not unusual for hiring managers to delegate selection of interview candidates to a junior, who’s given 3 hours to read 100 CVs, to invite 6 to interview for 1 job.
What should they have done then. As now we have many pupils with higher grades than they would have got, all top courses will be over subscribed, so if they had done this Thursday the same problem would have existed.
Maybe they should have held exams ....
Yep. Exams are, by their nature, socially distant.
Once again time machines don't exist and what we know now is very different to what we knew in March.
The papers were set well before March and the exams could have held anyway by may/June.
Because this applies to GCSE grades as well, one side effect that could come back to bite is that over-generous teacher predictions (by some, not all) could lead to many more students reaching the threshold to do A-level courses. It's likely that some of those who scrape the required GCSE grades could struggle on A levels. Expect retention and results to decline on A-level courses by 2022.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that.
Bollocks to that. This just makes A Level grades meaningless. What’s the point in them because you can’t tell in a few years time when hiring a graduate if the person was really 3As or not? And this one off inflation disadvantages the 2018/2019/2021/2022 graduates in the first years of their career when employers still look at A Level grades.
The government seems incapable of thinking further ahead than tonight’s twitter trends.
I’d love to know if there are people in Cabinet calling these things out or if ministers are wary of stepping on toes outside their brief. I’ve seen it before in the private sector. Most of the room knowing that a committee is sleep walking into disaster but no one having the guts to speak up and say what everyone’s thinking. Which here is “no exam, no grade. Fix the consequence not the other way round”.
You are making the almost universal mistake of those outside education of thinking that A-levels are themselves a reliable measure of anything other than the ability to do A-levels. They are correlated with ability and understanding of a subject, but I’ve seen enough candidates underperform on the day (and some with an ability to cram for a test having done little or no work all year) to know that the difference between an A and a B is largely illusory.
And that is before you get to the inevitable foul-ups of the exam boards in a normal year.
That’s life. You underperform when it matters then deal with it. In the big wide world it’s not unusual for hiring managers to delegate selection of interview candidates to a junior, who’s given 3 hours to read 100 CVs, to invite 6 to interview for 1 job.
Then if you don’t mind missing out on lots of good people that is your prerogative. But if you are hiring graduates why not look at their degrees? That should give you a much better and more recent measure of their ability and knowledge.
Are we now in a situation where whenever the Govt announces anything which will adversely affect anyone then there will be a media storm such that there will have to be a U-turn?
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
What should they have done then. As now we have many pupils with higher grades than they would have got, all top courses will be over subscribed, so if they had done this Thursday the same problem would have existed.
Maybe they should have held exams ....
Yep. Exams are, by their nature, socially distant.
Once again time machines don't exist and what we know now is very different to what we knew in March.
The papers were set well before March and the exams could have held anyway by may/June.
It would have been better than this fiasco
If you think the OFQUAL algorithm favoured independent schools then you really would not have liked the effect of setting exams where the last couple of months before the papers had been done under lockdown and remote learning.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Are we now in a situation where whenever the Govt announces anything which will adversely affect anyone then there will be a media storm such that there will have to be a U-turn?
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
So Govt will simply become impossible.
The dice will never ever be unloaded against the honest PAYE employee/employer in the tax system.
Are we now in a situation where whenever the Govt announces anything which will adversely affect anyone then there will be a media storm such that there will have to be a U-turn?
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
So Govt will simply become impossible.
U turning when it is the right thing to do isn't wrong.
There was much condemnation of the ending of furlough and saying they should u turn on that. They haven't.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Because this applies to GCSE grades as well, one side effect that could come back to bite is that over-generous teacher predictions (by some, not all) could lead to many more students reaching the threshold to do A-level courses. It's likely that some of those who scrape the required GCSE grades could struggle on A levels. Expect retention and results to decline on A-level courses by 2022.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that.
Bollocks to that. This just makes A Level grades meaningless. What’s the point in them because you can’t tell in a few years time when hiring a graduate if the person was really 3As or not? And this one off inflation disadvantages the 2018/2019/2021/2022 graduates in the first years of their career when employers still look at A Level grades.
The government seems incapable of thinking further ahead than tonight’s twitter trends.
I’d love to know if there are people in Cabinet calling these things out or if ministers are wary of stepping on toes outside their brief. I’ve seen it before in the private sector. Most of the room knowing that a committee is sleep walking into disaster but no one having the guts to speak up and say what everyone’s thinking. Which here is “no exam, no grade. Fix the consequence not the other way round”.
You are making the almost universal mistake of those outside education of thinking that A-levels are themselves a reliable measure of anything other than the ability to do A-levels. They are correlated with ability and understanding of a subject, but I’ve seen enough candidates underperform on the day (and some with an ability to cram for a test having done little or no work all year) to know that the difference between an A and a B is largely illusory.
And that is before you get to the inevitable foul-ups of the exam boards in a normal year.
That’s life. You underperform when it matters then deal with it. In the big wide world it’s not unusual for hiring managers to delegate selection of interview candidates to a junior, who’s given 3 hours to read 100 CVs, to invite 6 to interview for 1 job.
Then if you don’t mind missing out on lots of good people that is your prerogative. But if you are hiring graduates why not look at their degrees? That should give you a much better and more recent measure of their ability and knowledge.
Not quite, it often reveals who had a connection at said high quality university so got a decent offer.
Well done Tories but what an absolute travesty that we had to get here
Boggles the mind that they sat there and watched the Scottish govt go through exactly the same thing. They must have thought "this time it'll be different".
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
OFQUAL did the job they were set, should have been Williamson apologising today - instead just threw Taylor and OFQUAL under the bus. Disgraceful.
Ofqual was created by labour in 2008 and in 2019 Angela Rayner, labour's deputy leader, announced plans to scrap the 'deeply unfair system of teachers predictions' and yet Starmer attacks HMG for doing something he was against one year ago
Starmer is great on hindsight and hypocrisy
Well it certainly seems that Teachers predictions are unfair, just in a different way.
I think Rayner was advocating a move away from conditional offers, to post A level application.
That would at least have gotten away from the fiasco of university admissions that has suddenly arisen.
Teachers’!
Post A-level applications would be great for schools and, if handled well, for universities in terms of their planning. It would need a bigger gap between results and the start of the next university year though.
What would worry me is the effect on students from families which no or little history of applying. At the moment schools can (and mostly do) put a lot of effort into supporting applications, from advice about suitable courses and universities (and even the question of whether university is the correct route) to help with personal statements and supporting references. Now if they have actual grades the references and personal statements lose much of their impact, but who is going to be able to support them through the process?
There are solutions, but each has a cost and they would need to be carefully balanced. I’m not sure who I would trust to get it right.
Though my Medical School has found the opposite. Post A level applications favour people from State schools and more marginal communities.
It may well be different on other courses. I think Ms Rayner was thinking getting marks out earlier, and then everything done like clearing. It would have its own wrinkles, but all offers would be unconditional.
What should they have done then. As now we have many pupils with higher grades than they would have got, all top courses will be over subscribed, so if they had done this Thursday the same problem would have existed.
Maybe they should have held exams ....
Yep. Exams are, by their nature, socially distant.
Once again time machines don't exist and what we know now is very different to what we knew in March.
The papers were set well before March and the exams could have held anyway by may/June.
It would have been better than this fiasco
I can't improve on this response so I will repeat it here.
If you think the OFQUAL algorithm favoured independent schools then you really would not have liked the effect of setting exams where the last couple of months before the papers had been done under lockdown and remote learning.
CAG is about the best that could be done unless schools were kept open through out the period. Schools closed so all the other options went out the window.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
The government has learned that a swift u turn is better. Can't get much swifter than what happened here really.
They u turned with the triple lock idea on Wednesday before the results were even released, results released Thursday by Friday cases getting reported that showed the triple lock wouldn't work, stayed quiet over the weekend and then reversed course on Monday.
Short of a TARDIS hard to get much quicker than that.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
I don't think it matters. U-turns generally only come anyway when something is absolutely beyond untenable, or the government sees a significant political advantage in reversing course. In the case of the former, it's necessity, however much it hurts to admit (and is rarely done anyway when anger can be briushed off). In the case of the latter, the perceived benefits outweigh a little ribbing from the lobby.
Are we now in a situation where whenever the Govt announces anything which will adversely affect anyone then there will be a media storm such that there will have to be a U-turn?
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
So Govt will simply become impossible.
This often happens when a party has been in government for a decade. We're in a bit of an unusual situation because the Opposition is not as well prepared as normal to take over.
If Brexit goes badly a Sterling crisis might provide the impetus to force unpopular but necessary policy decisions.
Because this applies to GCSE grades as well, one side effect that could come back to bite is that over-generous teacher predictions (by some, not all) could lead to many more students reaching the threshold to do A-level courses. It's likely that some of those who scrape the required GCSE grades could struggle on A levels. Expect retention and results to decline on A-level courses by 2022.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that.
Bollocks to that. This just makes A Level grades meaningless. What’s the point in them because you can’t tell in a few years time when hiring a graduate if the person was really 3As or not? And this one off inflation disadvantages the 2018/2019/2021/2022 graduates in the first years of their career when employers still look at A Level grades.
The government seems incapable of thinking further ahead than tonight’s twitter trends.
I’d love to know if there are people in Cabinet calling these things out or if ministers are wary of stepping on toes outside their brief. I’ve seen it before in the private sector. Most of the room knowing that a committee is sleep walking into disaster but no one having the guts to speak up and say what everyone’s thinking. Which here is “no exam, no grade. Fix the consequence not the other way round”.
You are making the almost universal mistake of those outside education of thinking that A-levels are themselves a reliable measure of anything other than the ability to do A-levels. They are correlated with ability and understanding of a subject, but I’ve seen enough candidates underperform on the day (and some with an ability to cram for a test having done little or no work all year) to know that the difference between an A and a B is largely illusory.
And that is before you get to the inevitable foul-ups of the exam boards in a normal year.
That’s life. You underperform when it matters then deal with it. In the big wide world it’s not unusual for hiring managers to delegate selection of interview candidates to a junior, who’s given 3 hours to read 100 CVs, to invite 6 to interview for 1 job.
Then if you don’t mind missing out on lots of good people that is your prerogative. But if you are hiring graduates why not look at their degrees? That should give you a much better and more recent measure of their ability and knowledge.
What if they all have a 2-1 from an equivalent Russell Group in the same subject? Or what if you are hiring for a non graduate role?
OFQUAL did the job they were set, should have been Williamson apologising today - instead just threw Taylor and OFQUAL under the bus. Disgraceful.
Ofqual was created by labour in 2008 and in 2019 Angela Rayner, labour's deputy leader, announced plans to scrap the 'deeply unfair system of teachers predictions' and yet Starmer attacks HMG for doing something he was against one year ago
Starmer is great on hindsight and hypocrisy
Well it certainly seems that Teachers predictions are unfair, just in a different way.
I think Rayner was advocating a move away from conditional offers, to post A level application.
That would at least have gotten away from the fiasco of university admissions that has suddenly arisen.
Teachers’!
Post A-level applications would be great for schools and, if handled well, for universities in terms of their planning. It would need a bigger gap between results and the start of the next university year though.
What would worry me is the effect on students from families which no or little history of applying. At the moment schools can (and mostly do) put a lot of effort into supporting applications, from advice about suitable courses and universities (and even the question of whether university is the correct route) to help with personal statements and supporting references. Now if they have actual grades the references and personal statements lose much of their impact, but who is going to be able to support them through the process?
There are solutions, but each has a cost and they would need to be carefully balanced. I’m not sure who I would trust to get it right.
Though my Medical School has found the opposite. Post A level applications favour people from State schools and more marginal communities.
It may well be different on other courses. I think Ms Rayner was thinking getting marks out earlier, and then everything done like clearing. It would have its own wrinkles, but all offers would be unconditional.
If it really isn’t a problem then I can’t see a downside. I still think it would need a bigger gap between the grades and the start of the university year though: perhaps move it to January. I would not want to see any less time for teaching and I don’t trust the exam boards to get the grade right now, let alone if they had to do every thing faster.
Well done Tories but what an absolute travesty that we had to get here
Boggles the mind that they sat there and watched the Scottish govt go through exactly the same thing. They must have thought "this time it'll be different".
That's the bit I don't understand they watched a shit storm develop for 6 days (Wednesday 5th to Monday 10th) saw the eventual conclusion and instead of checking if they had similar issues went - nothing to worry about we've got this covered.
The weird bit I don't get was why use mocks and not the CAGs - mocks are a complete mare as schools use them for very different purposes - some talk you through them so you know what to do, others get you to sit them blind to see what they need to fix.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
Christ almighty. It’s relentless whining at the moment. Universities charge plenty. Their top staff are adequately remunerated. They can sort it themselves instead of leeching off the taxpayer
Are we now in a situation where whenever the Govt announces anything which will adversely affect anyone then there will be a media storm such that there will have to be a U-turn?
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
So Govt will simply become impossible.
If its a new tax decided by an algorithm that randomly increases taxes on people whose postcode happens to contain a 4 then the media storm will be high and it wont get through.
If its a new tax which the government can justify to the country then there will be still be a vested interest driven media storm but with a big majority it should and probably would survive.
Id expect an online sales tax and changes to CGT to both come through within 12 months and survive media driven challenges.
If this is what we have to look forward to over the next five years, Keir best start measuring the curtains
Maybe Captain Hindsight should come up with some productive ideas first. Rather than saying "I'm not the guy I thought should be PM" alternated with "we can all see there's a problem here that should be fixed ... oh it's been fixed now."
Well done Tories but what an absolute travesty that we had to get here
Boggles the mind that they sat there and watched the Scottish govt go through exactly the same thing. They must have thought "this time it'll be different".
I think the antipathy felt towards the SNP is also a factor. Not wanting to follow in their footsteps. A feeling that the Scottish government had only u-turned to make life difficult for Westminster. All of these combined to prevent them from learning from the Scottish experience.
No sign yet of the Irish government learning from Britain or Northern Ireland, though they have a fortnight to do so.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
Christ almighty. It’s relentless whining at the moment. Universities charge plenty. Their top staff are adequately remunerated. They can sort it themselves instead of leeching off the taxpayer
That's code for - can you remove the constraints you created which means we can't take the numbers we now have to.
Oh and there are some non Russell Group universities who are going to be in a real mess as we swipe their students.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
As if the EU would have us back. At best we have been a surly partner. The EU is best shot of the English.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
If they have to do that it will be EEA/EFTA and then they can pretend that it is a great victory and we are back in the EEC
If this is what we have to look forward to over the next five years, Keir best start measuring the curtains
Polling suggests that the public are supportive of U Turns.
No one has ever told the meedja, though.
As a long term critic of this government (and to be fair most govts!) I certainly approve of and welcome u-turns. This particular govt does have a habit of going through a we definitely wont u-turn phase, which is generally silly and unnecessary on the ones like this and the Rashford school meals where the outcome was inevitable.
Because this applies to GCSE grades as well, one side effect that could come back to bite is that over-generous teacher predictions (by some, not all) could lead to many more students reaching the threshold to do A-level courses. It's likely that some of those who scrape the required GCSE grades could struggle on A levels. Expect retention and results to decline on A-level courses by 2022.
10 out of 10 for the Government performing the U-Turn. Absolutely the right thing to do.
0 out of 10 for the politics of their performance and for getting into this mess in the first place. They left it far far too late to do this and there are no valid excuses for that.
Bollocks to that. This just makes A Level grades meaningless. What’s the point in them because you can’t tell in a few years time when hiring a graduate if the person was really 3As or not? And this one off inflation disadvantages the 2018/2019/2021/2022 graduates in the first years of their career when employers still look at A Level grades.
The government seems incapable of thinking further ahead than tonight’s twitter trends.
I’d love to know if there are people in Cabinet calling these things out or if ministers are wary of stepping on toes outside their brief. I’ve seen it before in the private sector. Most of the room knowing that a committee is sleep walking into disaster but no one having the guts to speak up and say what everyone’s thinking. Which here is “no exam, no grade. Fix the consequence not the other way round”.
You are making the almost universal mistake of those outside education of thinking that A-levels are themselves a reliable measure of anything other than the ability to do A-levels. They are correlated with ability and understanding of a subject, but I’ve seen enough candidates underperform on the day (and some with an ability to cram for a test having done little or no work all year) to know that the difference between an A and a B is largely illusory.
And that is before you get to the inevitable foul-ups of the exam boards in a normal year.
That’s life. You underperform when it matters then deal with it. In the big wide world it’s not unusual for hiring managers to delegate selection of interview candidates to a junior, who’s given 3 hours to read 100 CVs, to invite 6 to interview for 1 job.
Then if you don’t mind missing out on lots of good people that is your prerogative. But if you are hiring graduates why not look at their degrees? That should give you a much better and more recent measure of their ability and knowledge.
What if they all have a 2-1 from an equivalent Russell Group in the same subject? Or what if you are hiring for a non graduate role?
Do you often get dozens of applicants from the same university with the same grade in the same subject? That is amazing.
Seriously, if you are using A-levels to distinguish between graduates then you are doing it wrong as to getting the best people for interview. If you are just interested in a warm body why not just pick a name out of a hat?
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
If they call the EU the BC, they might get away with it.
Christ almighty. It’s relentless whining at the moment. Universities charge plenty. Their top staff are adequately remunerated. They can sort it themselves instead of leeching off the taxpayer
That's code for - can you remove the constraints you created which means we can't take the numbers we now have to.
Oh and there are some non Russell Group universities who are going to be in a real mess as we swipe their students.
Yes, there will be. So be it. Perhaps we need to pause and think about this rush to send over half our school leavers to university.
Do you think that mocking the government for U-turns is going to persuade them that next time there is something they ought to change their mind on they should go ahead and do it? Or might they say ‘we will get stick for this if we change our mind, so we might as well carry on doing what we are doing”?
Good point. It's not the U-turn that is embarrasing. It's getting yourself into a position that is so untenable which is embarrasing.
That's the issue. This government hasn't learned that a swift U-turn is a bit embarrassing, but isn't shameful. It's the "WE STICK TO OUR PLAN, NO U-TURN" followed by a U-turn that gets them every time.
Wait until a U turn that has us back in the EU by next years A levels...
As if the EU would have us back. At best we have been a surly partner. The EU is best shot of the English.
Well, now that U turns are considered a good thing...
Tbf, that's because we have got the 24 day quarantine that people hate so much. We're not importing the virus on the same scale as February and March.
Are we imposing quarantine measures on the plague-ridden Yanks?
I'd damn well hope so. Anecdotally hear London is still a ghost town.
Anecdotes are wrong, if you are going out for a meal it now has to be booked a few days in advance, or eat very early or late. Its a bit of a shock when used to just pitching up, obviously partly down to reduced capacity but restaurants are as busy as normal in central London.
The point is that their credibility was measured far too high, so it was put through an algorithm to give a more realistic view based on past performance.
The point is that their credibility was measured far too high, so it was put through an algorithm to give a more realistic view based on past performance.
It does take a certain amount of skill to generate results that end up looking social-economically worse than SQA managed and that is what OFQUAL managed to do.
The buck has stopped there, the issue has been dealt with. Well done Boris and Gavin I'm sure you'll agree. 😈
Nope still problems to fix regarding student number restrictions given that clearing has allowed people to swap courses and some people who didn't have the grades on Thursday or 15:59 today now have them..
But I've been highlighting that issue all day and you still haven't grasped that its an issue that needs to be fixed and hasn't been.
Christ almighty. It’s relentless whining at the moment. Universities charge plenty. Their top staff are adequately remunerated. They can sort it themselves instead of leeching off the taxpayer
That's code for - can you remove the constraints you created which means we can't take the numbers we now have to.
Oh and there are some non Russell Group universities who are going to be in a real mess as we swipe their students.
Yes, there will be. So be it. Perhaps we need to pause and think about this rush to send over half our school leavers to university.
Most sensible have.
Mrs Eek and I are both graduates - only 1 of the twins will be going to university and that is to study a course that was previously only available as a post graduate course and where some of the other attendees have turned down Juilliard to attend (the course is unique in the world and purposefully designed to give the students every chance of succeeding in what is definitely a growth industry).
If it wasn't for that both of them would be looking for apprenticeships and uni isn't worthwhile - and for most courses where you would be able to pay the fees off (Computer Science being the obvious one) its really only the second best option as you should try for the degree apprenticeships first.
The point is that their credibility was measured far too high, so it was put through an algorithm to give a more realistic view based on past performance.
I do think criticisms of the PM for taking a break are unfair. He has been in intensive care and is a new parent in a country which believes in paternity leave.
Like it or not, he has the power to be PM for a number of years, and as citizens we will get a better performance from him if he takes his time off due rather than takes the macho presentee-ist approach.
There are loads of other reasons to criticise him.
For the record, I am impressed with the UK's numbers.
1. The concentration on hotspots and local lockdowns seems to be workng 2. Having avoided opening up really high risk activities (like nightclubs) helps 3. People seem to be obeying the 14 day quarantine, which is also great
I still think it's unlikely the UK will avoid seeing case numbers rise, simply because everywhere else that has relaxed them has seen numbers increase.
The buck has stopped there, the issue has been dealt with. Well done Boris and Gavin I'm sure you'll agree. 😈
Nope still problems to fix regarding student number restrictions given that clearing has allowed people to swap courses and some people who didn't have the grades on Thursday or 15:59 today now have them..
But I've been highlighting that issue all day and you still haven't grasped that its an issue that needs to be fixed and hasn't been.
Student number restrictions have already been lifted. Next issue?
This lot are going to get utterly eaten alive in any trade deal
Why do you think we will end up with No Deal - they don't understand how weak our position is and that to get a deal we need to stop worrying about things such as fishing..
This lot are going to get utterly eaten alive in any trade deal
Why do you think we will end up with No Deal - they don't understand how weak our position is and that to get a deal we need to stop worrying about things such as fishing..
The buck has stopped there, the issue has been dealt with. Well done Boris and Gavin I'm sure you'll agree. 😈
Nope still problems to fix regarding student number restrictions given that clearing has allowed people to swap courses and some people who didn't have the grades on Thursday or 15:59 today now have them..
But I've been highlighting that issue all day and you still haven't grasped that its an issue that needs to be fixed and hasn't been.
Student number restrictions have already been lifted. Next issue?
Have they - where is that flagged as that isn't what the Russell comment says?
Comments
But yes, there should have been a lot more re-opening a lot earlier. But it's the same pattern; government proposed something unworkable, stamped its feet when told it needed to tweak its plans, got beaten by the clock.
Results due last week. No word yet.
As recently as two weeks ago this system was considered a good idea by OFQUAL, the SQA, the other devolved bodies, the UK Government, the Scottish Government, The Welsh Government, the NI Government, the Tories, the SNP, Labour, the Lib Dems, more parties and all of the Teaching Unions endorsed it too!
A lot of people now saying things should have been better but I don't see even a single body flagging this up and warning about it in advance.
I like the bottling idea though.
Post A-level applications would be great for schools and, if handled well, for universities in terms of their planning. It would need a bigger gap between results and the start of the next university year though.
What would worry me is the effect on students from families which no or little history of applying. At the moment schools can (and mostly do) put a lot of effort into supporting applications, from advice about suitable courses and universities (and even the question of whether university is the correct route) to help with personal statements and supporting references. Now if they have actual grades the references and personal statements lose much of their impact, but who is going to be able to support them through the process?
There are solutions, but each has a cost and they would need to be carefully balanced. I’m not sure who I would trust to get it right.
Seems to follow.....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-53804579
It would have been better than this fiasco
Suppose Rishi Sunak announces any specific tax rise affecting a subset of the population - will it be possible to actually get it through? I fear not.
So Govt will simply become impossible.
There was much condemnation of the ending of furlough and saying they should u turn on that. They haven't.
It may well be different on other courses. I think Ms Rayner was thinking getting marks out earlier, and then everything done like clearing. It would have its own wrinkles, but all offers would be unconditional.
They u turned with the triple lock idea on Wednesday before the results were even released, results released Thursday by Friday cases getting reported that showed the triple lock wouldn't work, stayed quiet over the weekend and then reversed course on Monday.
Short of a TARDIS hard to get much quicker than that.
If Brexit goes badly a Sterling crisis might provide the impetus to force unpopular but necessary policy decisions.
The weird bit I don't get was why use mocks and not the CAGs - mocks are a complete mare as schools use them for very different purposes - some talk you through them so you know what to do, others get you to sit them blind to see what they need to fix.
If this is what we have to look forward to over the next five years, Keir best start measuring the curtains
If its a new tax which the government can justify to the country then there will be still be a vested interest driven media storm but with a big majority it should and probably would survive.
Id expect an online sales tax and changes to CGT to both come through within 12 months and survive media driven challenges.
No one has ever told the meedja, though.
No sign yet of the Irish government learning from Britain or Northern Ireland, though they have a fortnight to do so.
Oh and there are some non Russell Group universities who are going to be in a real mess as we swipe their students.
As if the EU would have us back. At best we have been a surly partner. The EU is best shot of the English.
Seriously, if you are using A-levels to distinguish between graduates then you are doing it wrong as to getting the best people for interview.
If you are just interested in a warm body why not just pick a name out of a hat?
Time for the government to reassure businesses that there will be no more national lockdowns.
(You have to click on the link to view it properly.)
https://twitter.com/SteveStuWill/status/1294738150166654977
What a shit show.
But I've been highlighting that issue all day and you still haven't grasped that its an issue that needs to be fixed and hasn't been.
It's what he says while "wanking into the void".
Mrs Eek and I are both graduates - only 1 of the twins will be going to university and that is to study a course that was previously only available as a post graduate course and where some of the other attendees have turned down Juilliard to attend (the course is unique in the world and purposefully designed to give the students every chance of succeeding in what is definitely a growth industry).
If it wasn't for that both of them would be looking for apprenticeships and uni isn't worthwhile - and for most courses where you would be able to pay the fees off (Computer Science being the obvious one) its really only the second best option as you should try for the degree apprenticeships first.
Like it or not, he has the power to be PM for a number of years, and as citizens we will get a better performance from him if he takes his time off due rather than takes the macho presentee-ist approach.
There are loads of other reasons to criticise him.
1. The concentration on hotspots and local lockdowns seems to be workng
2. Having avoided opening up really high risk activities (like nightclubs) helps
3. People seem to be obeying the 14 day quarantine, which is also great
I still think it's unlikely the UK will avoid seeing case numbers rise, simply because everywhere else that has relaxed them has seen numbers increase.