Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrellaView Post
So would you say then Bagpuss that the standard of education and the behaviour of children has improved in the last 30 years?
I'm not Bagpuss but I'd suggest that the meedjah and the populists have been telling people since the dawn of time that education standards, moral standards and all sorts of other standards are slipping, the 'yoof of today' are useless and feckless and SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!!!
I'm skeptical.
And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014
I'm not Bagpuss but I'd suggest that the meedjah and the populists have been telling people since the dawn of time that education standards, moral standards and all sorts of other standards are slipping, the 'yoof of today' are useless and feckless and SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!!!
I'm skeptical.
I'm not. Compare an A-level Maths paper from the 80s with one now.
You'll see that the questions have been split into small bite sizes and lead you by the nose to the right answer.
I'm not. Compare an A-level Maths paper from the 80s with one now.
You'll see that the questions have been split into small bite sizes and lead you by the nose to the right answer.
The thing I really resent is that it used to be the top 10% got an 'A'. Now they have decided that standards have improved so much that 35% get an 'A'. The aim should always be to determine who is best. We live in a competitive world.
The thing I really resent is that it used to be the top 10% got an 'A'. Now they have decided that standards have improved so much that 35% get an 'A'. The aim should always be to determine who is best. We live in a competitive world.
whs
Whatever method you apply, exams one year will be easier or harder than the other; we need to find out who's (relatively) best, who's good, who's OK and who's crap, and the way to do that is to award grades by percentiles.
And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014
I'm not. Compare an A-level Maths paper from the 80s with one now.
You'll see that the questions have been split into small bite sizes and lead you by the nose to the right answer.
When I sat my A-levels they showed us such papers and the kind of questions were similar... they seemed harder on first glance but then we weren't taught towards those style of questions so they would do.
The thing I really resent is that it used to be the top 10% got an 'A'. Now they have decided that standards have improved so much that 35% get an 'A'. The aim should always be to determine who is best. We live in a competitive world.
Its called Equality. Students should not be discriminated against because of their intellect. All students put in the same effort in attending classes and homework etc so they should all be awarded the same grade and they should all be allowed to apply for any degree in any college and be able to get a seat. This is the dream of Labour in turning this country into a socialist republic.
The thing I really resent is that it used to be the top 10% got an 'A'. Now they have decided that standards have improved so much that 35% get an 'A'. The aim should always be to determine who is best. We live in a competitive world.
WHS
Then it wouldn't matter whether exams were harder or easier than last year. Didn't they used to do this back in the sixties/seventies?
and the way to do that is to award grades by percentiles
Quite. The purpose of exams is so that unis and employers can make a judgement so they have to be hard enough to properly distinguish between abilities. The reasons for high grades is academic.
Then it wouldn't matter whether exams were harder or easier than last year. Didn't they used to do this back in the sixties/seventies?
I don't know if it was done everywhere, but my father (or maybe his father) had this... except they scaled the results so the top person got 100 and the bottom person got 0.
However... they DO set the marks for A,B,etc based on a target rate. Or they did just a few years ago for the exams I sat.
Unlike at uni where 70% was a first, in every subject, regardless.
I don't know if it was done everywhere, but my father (or maybe his father) had this... except they scaled the results so the top person got 100 and the bottom person got 0.
However... they DO set the marks for A,B,etc based on a target rate. Or they did just a few years ago for the exams I sat.
Unlike at uni where 70% was a first, in every subject, regardless.
I finished O-levels in the seventies, and I remember a pass with an E grade was thought of as being OK, because in those days many more kids failed exams.
Nowadays a D or an E grade is considered a failure.
Comment