[Misc] Exam results

[cloud]

My son had four GCSE results on Tuesday, as CIE exam board release theirs a week earlier. Of the four grades, two were as expected. One was two grades down from the predicted grade (predicted in Jan/Feb after mocks), and one was one or two grades down.

That means my son will need to do at least two re-sits this September to get his proper grades, and to know that he got them through his own efforts.

Still need to wait until August 20th for the remaining grades, then we will know how many resits are needed. We are assuming maybe 5-7 retakes, which will take up most of September and will be a headache for both the schools and the pupils.

 

[cloud]

Maybe the predicted grades will be revealed in due course.

The predicted grades will be made available on August 20th. But only Scotland are allowed to use predicted grades at the moment. I suppose the school can use them if they make an appeal on pupils' behalf.

 

[Acker79]

https://twitter.com/A_Weatherall/status/1294012623776817158

I was going to wait till tomorrow but I can't.

The U grades (and other large drops) appear to be the result of a rounding issue when assigning ranked students to their grades. It'll be hard to explain via tweet but I'll try.

Please bear with me as I use a simplified example.

Imagine a cohort of 20 students: each of these students (remember they're represent real people who have probably worked very hard alongside their teachers for 2 years - never forget that) is nominally worth 5% of the grade distribution however it falls.

Now the students, according to their teacher (excellent judgement - quoting DfE), have been assessed during this time and they've perhaps sat a mock or two and have done essays or end of unit tests and so the teacher submits a grade and a rank for each one.

The grade is a suggested grade for OfQual, but the rank is a distinct order and it ultimately will determine what grade each student will receive.
Now, coming up is the magic I will never know, because I don't have all the data, but OfQual have described it quite comprehensively.

All those grades from these 20 students along with all the others from all the cohorts for that subject form a distribution of grades that OfQual can prod and poke at to see if it's a fair distribution.
They decided it wasn't, adjustments needed to be made.

Fair enough; it was to be expected. So they use a combination of the subject history at that school AND the prior attainment of the 2020 students to come up with a distribution of grades that the 20 students we imagined have to fit into.

For example:
A* 7%; A: 15%; B: 22%; C: 52%; D: 3%; E: 0.5%; U: 0.5%

I made these numbers up but let's pretend I ran them through "the algorithm".

This is what my 20 students have to fit into.

Notice I haven't told you their grades. It's now irrelevant. The rank is king.

Student number 1 gets an A*. Remember every student is worth 5% as I have 20.
Student number two would take us to 10% but wait I'm only allowed 7% so A grade for student 2 (Their CAG was A* - drat).
Students 3 and 4 take me to 20% so they get As (I'm allowed 22% to get A*/A)

My next 4 students all get B, we've used up 40% but I'm only allowed 44% A*/B. Sucks to be us. Next student (45%) gets a C.
I've got 55% worth of students (11) left but unfortunately only space for 10 in my Cs.
So I've one student left. We've used 96% of our grade allowance.

Now here's the kicker.
Surely they'll get a D.
Nope, only 99% of my students can have a A*/D.
An E?
Fraid not that takes us to 99.5% not not a full 20 students worth.
But a U. I've got 100% now. So my student can go here.

And that is how rounding down gave C students U grades.


[tweet]1294026856149254144[/tweet]

 

[LamieRobertson]

https://twitter.com/A_Weatherall/status/1294012623776817158

I was going to wait till tomorrow but I can't.

The U grades (and other large drops) appear to be the result of a rounding issue when assigning ranked students to their grades. It'll be hard to explain via tweet but I'll try.

Please bear with me as I use a simplified example.

Imagine a cohort of 20 students: each of these students (remember they're represent real people who have probably worked very hard alongside their teachers for 2 years - never forget that) is nominally worth 5% of the grade distribution however it falls.

Now the students, according to their teacher (excellent judgement - quoting DfE), have been assessed during this time and they've perhaps sat a mock or two and have done essays or end of unit tests and so the teacher submits a grade and a rank for each one.

The grade is a suggested grade for OfQual, but the rank is a distinct order and it ultimately will determine what grade each student will receive.
Now, coming up is the magic I will never know, because I don't have all the data, but OfQual have described it quite comprehensively.

All those grades from these 20 students along with all the others from all the cohorts for that subject form a distribution of grades that OfQual can prod and poke at to see if it's a fair distribution.
They decided it wasn't, adjustments needed to be made.

Fair enough; it was to be expected. So they use a combination of the subject history at that school AND the prior attainment of the 2020 students to come up with a distribution of grades that the 20 students we imagined have to fit into.

For example:
A* 7%; A: 15%; B: 22%; C: 52%; D: 3%; E: 0.5%; U: 0.5%

I made these numbers up but let's pretend I ran them through "the algorithm".

This is what my 20 students have to fit into.

Notice I haven't told you their grades. It's now irrelevant. The rank is king.

Student number 1 gets an A*. Remember every student is worth 5% as I have 20.
Student number two would take us to 10% but wait I'm only allowed 7% so A grade for student 2 (Their CAG was A* - drat).
Students 3 and 4 take me to 20% so they get As (I'm allowed 22% to get A*/A)

My next 4 students all get B, we've used up 40% but I'm only allowed 44% A*/B. Sucks to be us. Next student (45%) gets a C.
I've got 55% worth of students (11) left but unfortunately only space for 10 in my Cs.
So I've one student left. We've used 96% of our grade allowance.

Now here's the kicker.
Surely they'll get a D.
Nope, only 99% of my students can have a A*/D.
An E?
Fraid not that takes us to 99.5% not not a full 20 students worth.
But a U. I've got 100% now. So my student can go here.

And that is how rounding down gave C students U grades.


[tweet]1294026856149254144[/tweet]

Total bllx then

 

[beorhthelm]

And that is how rounding down gave C students U grades.

its staggering they didnt see this was an outcome of simple algo approach. statistically there are n number of U across the country but within smaller groups that number will be different. at class level most will get no U grades, as individual students will get several. would need very complex rules to do properly, so head off with simple hack - dont moderate anything more than two grades, dont have any Us this year. no one is going to complain about a spike in C-F grades.

really wonder how much other public policy is driven by such naive statistics, divorced from real world context.

 

[Bold Seagull]

But they’ve tried their best so it’s okay.

 

[Bold Seagull]

My son had four GCSE results on Tuesday, as CIE exam board release theirs a week earlier. Of the four grades, two were as expected. One was two grades down from the predicted grade (predicted in Jan/Feb after mocks), and one was one or two grades down.

That means my son will need to do at least two re-sits this September to get his proper grades, and to know that he got them through his own efforts.

Still need to wait until August 20th for the remaining grades, then we will know how many resits are needed. We are assuming maybe 5-7 retakes, which will take up most of September and will be a headache for both the schools and the pupils.

#Omnishambles. I’m pretty sure Schools Minister Nick Gibbs had ‘promised’ downgrades would only be by 1 grade. That clearly was incorrect. Williamson and Gibbs have a lot to answer in this fiasco. It was never going to be easy, never going to be perfect, but it surely could have been better.

 

[CHAPPERS]

Tenner says nobody gets sacked for this.

 

[Mtoto]

its staggering they didnt see this was an outcome of simple algo approach. statistically there are n number of U across the country but within smaller groups that number will be different. at class level most will get no U grades, as individual students will get several. would need very complex rules to do properly, so head off with simple hack - dont moderate anything more than two grades, dont have any Us this year. no one is going to complain about a spike in C-F grades.

really wonder how much other public policy is driven by such naive statistics, divorced from real world context.

Plenty. Most of it, in all likelihood, as a. Cummings lives and breathes stats, modelling and algorithms and b. he's not as smart as he thinks he is.

 

[Simster]

I think this tweet just about sums up our truly appalling government:

[tweet]1294218734941470720[/tweet]

 

[Simster]

Tenner says nobody gets sacked for this.

Williamson has demonstrated some tremendous qualities so far:
public school detachment from reality - check
pure incompetence - check
beta-male drippiness in front of the press - check
do as he's told, don't question anything - check

He'll probably get promoted.

 

[beorhthelm]

Plenty. Most of it, in all likelihood, as a. Cummings lives and breathes stats, modelling and algorithms and b. he's not as smart as he thinks he is.

im thinking far broader across government departments and history. this isnt something today's secratary of state conjured up, its from the exam board and regulator. in education they've probably been applying such ill thought change to meet political whims for decades.

 

[Doonhamer7]

D7 jr’s school has already agreed to submit appeals which is good news. Algorathims don’t take into account reality of some years. I remember when at Uni, the year ahead of me awarded 95% of Chemical Engineers 1st class honour degrees (40+ started the degree, 20 completed it of which 19 got 1sts)- now it was an exception and the Institution of Chemical Engineers was bought in to do appropriate checks and balances. What I really dislike is that kids from less wealthy areas get it whilst the private schools who know how to play all the game exceedingly well get left off. As a retired MD of my business told me when doing p/t teaching whilst doing his phd at Cambridge - there are three types of students: the very bright (very few) who stand out a mile, those that work very hard (Who come from a normal background) and those that have been very well taught (I.e private school kids).

I’m not a socialist but until all children get the same education we’ll not change society - once the very rich have to send their kids to state schools then we’ll have the real challenge on investment and raising of standards. And whilst we’re at it, if you want to be a ‘law/decision maker‘ in the UK (council, MP or Lord) prerequisite is no private education!


Anyway I hope everyone’s kids does well in their appeals and gets what they need to move to the next step in their life and thus realise their full potential,

role on next Thursday for GCSE debacle!

 

[Cheshire Cat]

https://twitter.com/A_Weatherall/status/1294012623776817158

I was going to wait till tomorrow but I can't.

The U grades (and other large drops) appear to be the result of a rounding issue when assigning ranked students to their grades. It'll be hard to explain via tweet but I'll try.

Please bear with me as I use a simplified example.

Imagine a cohort of 20 students: each of these students (remember they're represent real people who have probably worked very hard alongside their teachers for 2 years - never forget that) is nominally worth 5% of the grade distribution however it falls.

Now the students, according to their teacher (excellent judgement - quoting DfE), have been assessed during this time and they've perhaps sat a mock or two and have done essays or end of unit tests and so the teacher submits a grade and a rank for each one.

The grade is a suggested grade for OfQual, but the rank is a distinct order and it ultimately will determine what grade each student will receive.
Now, coming up is the magic I will never know, because I don't have all the data, but OfQual have described it quite comprehensively.

All those grades from these 20 students along with all the others from all the cohorts for that subject form a distribution of grades that OfQual can prod and poke at to see if it's a fair distribution.
They decided it wasn't, adjustments needed to be made.

Fair enough; it was to be expected. So they use a combination of the subject history at that school AND the prior attainment of the 2020 students to come up with a distribution of grades that the 20 students we imagined have to fit into.

For example:
A* 7%; A: 15%; B: 22%; C: 52%; D: 3%; E: 0.5%; U: 0.5%

I made these numbers up but let's pretend I ran them through "the algorithm".

This is what my 20 students have to fit into.

Notice I haven't told you their grades. It's now irrelevant. The rank is king.

Student number 1 gets an A*. Remember every student is worth 5% as I have 20.
Student number two would take us to 10% but wait I'm only allowed 7% so A grade for student 2 (Their CAG was A* - drat).
Students 3 and 4 take me to 20% so they get As (I'm allowed 22% to get A*/A)

My next 4 students all get B, we've used up 40% but I'm only allowed 44% A*/B. Sucks to be us. Next student (45%) gets a C.
I've got 55% worth of students (11) left but unfortunately only space for 10 in my Cs.
So I've one student left. We've used 96% of our grade allowance.

Now here's the kicker.
Surely they'll get a D.
Nope, only 99% of my students can have a A*/D.
An E?
Fraid not that takes us to 99.5% not not a full 20 students worth.
But a U. I've got 100% now. So my student can go here.

And that is how rounding down gave C students U grades.


[tweet]1294026856149254144[/tweet]

Unfortunately that reads as completely plausible.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Williamson has demonstrated some tremendous qualities so far:
public school detachment from reality - check
pure incompetence - check
beta-male drippiness in front of the press - check
do as he's told, don't question anything - check

He'll probably get promoted.

Agree with it all except the last sentence...... which is I presume ironic anyway. He's expendable and on the way out.

 

[Stato]

Agree with it all except the last sentence...... which is I presume ironic anyway. He's expendable and on the way out.

Forget Williamson, we should all be targeting the lazy, lying, useless blagger who on 18 March 2020 said:

" And of course this does mean that exams will not take place as planned in May and June. Though we will make sure that pupils get the qualifications they need and deserve for their academic career." https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-18-march-2020

As the Cummings fraud proved, nothing will change unless the pressure is landed directly on the man whose only interest is in himself.

 

[dsr-burnley]

" And of course this does mean that exams will not take place as planned in May and June. Though we will make sure that pupils get the qualifications they need and deserve for their academic career."

It could have been pointed out at the time that what the pupils need and what they deserve are two different things so satisfying both is impossible.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I’m not a socialist but until all children get the same education we’ll not change society - once the very rich have to send their kids to state schools then we’ll have the real challenge on investment and raising of standards. And whilst we’re at it, if you want to be a ‘law/decision maker‘ in the UK (council, MP or Lord) prerequisite is no private education!

Good idea in theory. But there has always been a difficulty about getting even the most dedicated lawmaker to put this into practice for their own children. Shirley Williams was in charge of abolishing grammar schools, but not until after her child finished there. Tony Blair for political reasons couldn't send his child to a fee paying school so was forced to send them to a comprehensive which just happened to be 10 miles away and was the most selective "comprehensive" in the country. Diane Abbott was a passionate opponent of fee paying schools for other people's children but all in favour for her own.

Are you proposing to do this by making all schools the equal of the worst comprehensive, or all schools the equal of the best private school?

 

[Doonhamer7]

Good idea in theory. But there has always been a difficulty about getting even the most dedicated lawmaker to put this into practice for their own children. Shirley Williams was in charge of abolishing grammar schools, but not until after her child finished there. Tony Blair for political reasons couldn't send his child to a fee paying school so was forced to send them to a comprehensive which just happened to be 10 miles away and was the most selective "comprehensive" in the country. Diane Abbott was a passionate opponent of fee paying schools for other people's children but all in favour for her own.

Are you proposing to do this by making all schools the equal of the worst comprehensive, or all schools the equal of the best private school?

I agree it will never happen, but Ideally the second but let’s be realistic it will never happen, at least we can step the majority up a grade, so the worst will become the norm, the norms become better and so on. A system in 2020 where your real chances on life ( look at chance of being a judge, senior civil servant, partner in big law/accounting company, military rank etc etc) depend on how wealthy your parents are is archaic. I will admit if my kids had needed it we’d have scraped the money to get them to private schools but we have been lucky as schools in Horsham are good and my kids are bright.

 

[Stat Brother]

Nailed it:-

[tweet]1294247375066849280[/tweet]