Exams grades

[Triggaaar]

No, it was 1964. There, now you know my age

Ah, well that's a different system to the one Lamie is referring to. His google link shows 1965 onwards, so maybe yours was 1-8. You're not even 70 yet

 

[Seat Stealer]

Why is it we need a pass/fail or ABCDE or 1-9 or 9-1 rating? Why not just mark the paper, give a percentage for the correct answers etc. Therefore 78% will be better than 56% and 31% etc. Employers would then know exactly how well anybody did in any given exam. Simples.

 

[beorhthelm]

Why is it we need a pass/fail or ABCDE or 1-9 or 9-1 rating? Why not just mark the paper, give a percentage for the correct answers etc. Therefore 78% will be better than 56% and 31% etc. Employers would then know exactly how well anybody did in any given exam. Simples.

that would be a rating system with 100 grades.

 

[Medwayseagull]

Being an OAP the grading of exam results has changed somewhat. In my day everybody needed A & B to pass what is the criteria now.

OAP = Old Age Paininthearse.

 

[wellquickwoody]

How about we only allow the top 25% of academic achievers to go to Uni with government funding? Anybody else HAS to fund themselves.

 

[Bad Ash]

Why is it we need a pass/fail or ABCDE or 1-9 or 9-1 rating? Why not just mark the paper, give a percentage for the correct answers etc. Therefore 78% will be better than 56% and 31% etc. Employers would then know exactly how well anybody did in any given exam. Simples.

That would't work very well to allow for moderation of the results to balance spread of the grades. It possible in an easy exam you might need 90% for an A, but in a hard exam 75% would get you an A. Therefore comparing one person's 90% to the other persons 75% doesn't give a fair reflection of their performances.

 

[beorhthelm]

A*-C was considered a pass.

D-G was considered a not very good pass

U was complete failure.

A level

E is the pass grade, but C and above is considered good.

I don't like the new numbered system, there was nothing wrong with it before.

a big bag of this. dont really know why or when "A-C" became distorted to mean a pass, implying D is a fail. there is a pass mark, above that you have grades to signify how well you've passed.

 

[Seat Stealer]

That would't work very well to allow for moderation of the results to balance spread of the grades. It possible in an easy exam you might need 90% for an A, but in a hard exam 75% would get you an A. Therefore comparing one person's 90% to the other persons 75% doesn't give a fair reflection of their performances.

But if an employer was looking specifically for good maths results rather than social media, they would only be looking at the maths percentage not anything else.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

But if an employer was looking specifically for good maths results rather than social media, they would only be looking at the maths percentage not anything else.

Unfortunately exams differ each year in their degree of difficulty. An 80 % this year might be more achievable than 70 % next year if the paper is easier this year. To smooth out such anomalies the assumption is made that each year group has a similar range of abilities so by setting grade boundaries after absolute percentages are known it is fairer to students in those years where the exam is harder. It's not perfect but unless some way can be found to make exams equally difficult year on year, it remains a better system than publishing percentages.

 

[Seat Stealer]

Unfortunately exams differ each year in their degree of difficulty. An 80 % this year might be more achievable than 70 % next year if the paper is easier this year. To smooth out such anomalies the assumption is made that each year group has a similar range of abilities so by setting grade boundaries after absolute percentages are known it is fairer to students in those years where the exam is harder. It's not perfect but unless some way can be found to make exams equally difficult year on year, it remains a better system than publishing percentages.

ok, so what an employer must now do is factor in that a grade C in year X is the same as a grade B in year Y. Do employers get a chart to show the degree of difference in difficulty year on year. Or could a grade E be the same as an A depending on the year. Just a thought.

 

[Gwylan]

Unfortunately exams differ each year in their degree of difficulty. An 80 % this year might be more achievable than 70 % next year if the paper is easier this year. To smooth out such anomalies the assumption is made that each year group has a similar range of abilities so by setting grade boundaries after absolute percentages are known it is fairer to students in those years where the exam is harder. It's not perfect but unless some way can be found to make exams equally difficult year on year, it remains a better system than publishing percentages.

Or they could go back to the A Level system when I took them. Back in the day, there was no pass mark as such (or a mark that got you an A). A certain percentage passed, a certain percentage got As etc. It meant that something like 40% of candidates (or 30%, I can't remember the number) failed every year. In theory, someone could have got 65% percent and failed.

Our teachers would never tell us what was a pass mark because they said it changed every year (but in reality it was about 45%).

The beauty of this system, however, is that it doesn't matter whether an exam was more difficult or not

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

ok, so what an employer must now do is factor in that a grade C in year X is the same as a grade B in year Y. Do employers get a chart to show the degree of difference in difficulty year on year. Or could a grade E be the same as an A depending on the year. Just a thought.

The opposite is the intention ie a student who gets a C in year X will also get a C in year Y regardless of the difficulty of the exam as they are being graded relative to their peers not versus an arbitrarily difficult exam. This is achieved by moving the grade boundaries to exclude exam difficulty as an influence on the grade achieved. For most students this will work although those with ability on the borders between grades may be the losers if the shift in grade boundaries tips them into a lower grade.
If we just published percentages then employers would have the problem you describe of needing to know what a 70 % in year X is worth compared to the same result in year Y.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Or they could go back to the A Level system when I took them. Back in the day, there was no pass mark as such (or a mark that got you an A). A certain percentage passed, a certain percentage got As etc. It meant that something like 40% of candidates (or 30%, I can't remember the number) failed every year. In theory, someone could have got 65% percent and failed.

Our teachers would never tell us what was a pass mark because they said it changed every year (but in reality it was about 45%).

The beauty of this system, however, is that it doesn't matter whether an exam was more difficult or not

Isn't that the same as the current system ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I don't like the new numbered system, there was nothing wrong with it before.

Nor did I when I first heard about it. I recently read an article about why they changed and now I support the new marking scheme. The A to whatever system is restrictive to re-calibrating the system as students get better at the exams. In my day the A* never existed, it was added to split the A grade bracket. What do they do next - create an A** and then an A*** ? With the number system, as 9 is currently the best grade, all they need to introduce a 10 grade, and then an 11. A much cleaner and more logical system open to easy expansion.

 

[Gwylan]

Isn't that the same as the current system ?

Don't think so: the number of people passing, get top grades etc wouldn't vary if it were

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Don't think so: the number of people passing, get top grades etc wouldn't vary if it were

I don't think it does or not by any significant amount. It may be affected by technical issues like a large change in exam entry numbers year on year but not much else. Take Maths as an example where there was a lot of angst this year because the exam and syllabus are very different as there is now much more focus on problem solving than previously. Teachers thought it likely that absolute percentages would fall as both they and the students get to grips with the changes. I think I read that the number of top grades awarded actually rose marginally which would likely be a consequence of the grade boundaries shifting downwards from last year to compensate for the general difficulty level rising.

 

[BensGrandad]

Why can in it not be just pass or fail where the overall top 35% pass with distinction, the next 35% pass, the remaining 30% fail the difficulty of the exam would then be felt and be the same for all concerned.

 

[PTC Gull]

I thought maybe in your day it would have been 1-9 with 1-6 being passes...'in my day' it was A-E with A-C being passes...these were only introduced in 1975...you sure you weren't on the former?

Sorry I wasnt very clear the assessment was 1-9 but I converted that to what I thought was modern day terminology of A - B . I should stick with the old format.

My grade is a 5 or C-. BG must do better.