UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[Alcibiades]

A level "results" are out today in England/Wales - already shaping up to be at least as much of a potential s***show as the Scottish experience in the last couple of weeks was.

It seems the downgrading and bias against deprived schools has not been quite as bad as in Scotland. Honestly, short of running exams, this is probably the best way it could have been done while keeping the value of grades, although perhaps with more leniency to high-achievers in schools with historically lower results.

[Granite City]

A level "results" are out today in England/Wales - already shaping up to be at least as much of a potential s***show as the Scottish experience in the last couple of weeks was.

It seems the downgrading and bias against deprived schools has not been quite as bad as in Scotland. Honestly, short of running exams, this is probably the best way it could have been done while keeping the value of grades, although perhaps with more leniency to high-achievers in schools with historically lower results.

I just went through my final results day in Scotland (3As at Advanced Higher so yay me!) and I would have to agree.

The concept of moderation via a statistical model wasn't the problem and that's where I disagree with the majority of the criticism. The problem was that the model was entirely too lazy and didn't deliver on what they had promised; most importantly the failure to take samples from school to test how robust internal moderation had been before they applied their own.

There was a lot of other horrendous communication problems from the SQA but those will happen any year. It won't affect me but the pass rates this year are going to be a problem into the future, I would imagine grade boundaries would need to come down by at least 5% next year to keep to the new standard (and they'll have to be to the same standard if the justification for this year's high pass rate is that we will be disadvantaged by COVID).

Hopefully this will lead to a new and better system where core qualifications (GCSE/Nat 5 Maths and English) can be criteria based and allow anyone to pass and traditional exam systems at A-Level and Higher. Not too optimistic.

[Alcibiades]

A level "results" are out today in England/Wales - already shaping up to be at least as much of a potential s***show as the Scottish experience in the last couple of weeks was.

It seems the downgrading and bias against deprived schools has not been quite as bad as in Scotland. Honestly, short of running exams, this is probably the best way it could have been done while keeping the value of grades, although perhaps with more leniency to high-achievers in schools with historically lower results.

I just went through my final results day in Scotland (3As at Advanced Higher so yay me!) and I would have to agree.

The concept of moderation via a statistical model wasn't the problem and that's where I disagree with the majority of the criticism. The problem was that the model was entirely too lazy and didn't deliver on what they had promised; most importantly the failure to take samples from school to test how robust internal moderation had been before they applied their own.

There was a lot of other horrendous communication problems from the SQA but those will happen any year. It won't affect me but the pass rates this year are going to be a problem into the future, I would imagine grade boundaries would need to come down by at least 5% next year to keep to the new standard (and they'll have to be to the same standard if the justification for this year's high pass rate is that we will be disadvantaged by COVID).

Hopefully this will lead to a new and better system where core qualifications (GCSE/Nat 5 Maths and English) can be criteria based and allow anyone to pass and traditional exam systems at A-Level and Higher. Not too optimistic.

Congrats on your results!

I think that contrary to initial predictions this year has actually shown that written external exams are necessary.

Having criteria based exams sounds good, but in practise would be very difficult. How do you gauge, year on year, what is a 9/A*/C etc. level of achievement? The reason that grade %s are the same every year is because that it is assumed each cohort has the overall same ability, which is reasonable in such a large sample size.

[Granite City]

A level "results" are out today in England/Wales - already shaping up to be at least as much of a potential s***show as the Scottish experience in the last couple of weeks was.

It seems the downgrading and bias against deprived schools has not been quite as bad as in Scotland. Honestly, short of running exams, this is probably the best way it could have been done while keeping the value of grades, although perhaps with more leniency to high-achievers in schools with historically lower results.

I just went through my final results day in Scotland (3As at Advanced Higher so yay me!) and I would have to agree.

The concept of moderation via a statistical model wasn't the problem and that's where I disagree with the majority of the criticism. The problem was that the model was entirely too lazy and didn't deliver on what they had promised; most importantly the failure to take samples from school to test how robust internal moderation had been before they applied their own.

There was a lot of other horrendous communication problems from the SQA but those will happen any year. It won't affect me but the pass rates this year are going to be a problem into the future, I would imagine grade boundaries would need to come down by at least 5% next year to keep to the new standard (and they'll have to be to the same standard if the justification for this year's high pass rate is that we will be disadvantaged by COVID).

Hopefully this will lead to a new and better system where core qualifications (GCSE/Nat 5 Maths and English) can be criteria based and allow anyone to pass and traditional exam systems at A-Level and Higher. Not too optimistic.

Congrats on your results!

I think that contrary to initial predictions this year has actually shown that written external exams are necessary.

Having criteria based exams sounds good, but in practise would be very difficult. How do you gauge, year on year, what is a 9/A*/C etc. level of achievement? The reason that grade %s are the same every year is because that it is assumed each cohort has the overall same ability, which is reasonable in such a large sample size.

I agree, I was just referring to the absolutely core subjects at about GCSE level. To me, if your going to make passing Maths and English a prerequisite to virtually anything coming out of school, anyone should, in principle, be able to achieve them based on a consistent year-to-year standard. The implication (to me anyway) of requiring those two is to display minimum competency and I think that can be achieved without the need to compete for grades.

In England I could see a need to make that separate from GCSE because when they go so aggressively from 10 to 3 or 4 subjects, individual grades for Maths and English can matter more because you less likely to have anything at higher level for those but its reasonable for employers and universities to have a better idea of ability in the subject. In Scotland though, Nat 5s in Maths and English are basically already seen as pass-fail as if you need to make clearer your ability in an area its likely you'll already have a Higher in Maths or English because we go from 6-8 subjects to 5 to 3 or 4.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Situation in Wales less of a mess because... well... AS levels and coursework were not abolished there, making certain obvious (if still imperfect) solutions possible.

[NewYorkExpress]

https://www.bbc.com/news/education-53799860

A-level grades awarded in sixth form colleges this year fell below the average of the last three years in England, new analysis suggests.

The Sixth Form Colleges Association said its research is evidence that students in larger institutions have been failed by this year's system.

Almost 40% of A-level grades awarded on Thursday in England were lower than teachers' predictions.

The government has defended the approach it used to determine grades.

Students, who were not able to sit exams this year because of the coronavirus pandemic, had 280,000 A-level results downgraded.

Exam regulator Ofqual has faced criticism over the statistical model it used to decide the grades.

I don't think Boris Johnson is going to suffer any real problems from this, but this could cost Education Secretary Gavin Williamson his position.

[parochial boy]

Speaking of which, might it not be the time to maybe consider the fact that having such a hierarchical system of « elite » and « non-elite » universities could, in fact, actually be a very bad and unhealthy thing?

[CumbrianLefty]

Situation in Wales less of a mess because... well... AS levels and coursework were not abolished there, making certain obvious (if still imperfect) solutions possible.

Labour administration there still getting stick though.

Meanwhile, an announcement on English grades due in the next few hours - u-turn ahoy?

[EastAnglianLefty]

The Welsh government has now U-turned and said that students will get their teacher-predicted grades instead, as has the Northern Irish government for GCSEs (but not for A-levels.)

[afleitch]

John Swinney. Saviour of the Students

[Alcibiades]

Grades in England will now also be awarded on the basis of teacher predictions. A number of implications:
- What about centres who were more realistic with their predictions than others and consequently had fewer marked down? Are they being penalised for their honesty?
- Next year, students with CAGs who have deferred will be competing with students with exam-based grades. The former will obviously be higher than the latter.
- Will grades be taken less seriously because of inflation?

In my opinion, the system which should have been used was that teachers submit grades with a short justification, along with examples of work. An examiner then makes a judgement on whether this is the right grade. Obviously too late now, underscores govt’s incompetence. This move has been made entirely under public pressure and with no consideration for the consequences. Or of course actually sitting exams...

[CumbrianLefty]

The government has had several months to work out how to best cope with this one.

No excuses.

[EastAnglianLefty]

For the record, along with CAGs, schools were required to submit evidence underpinning their assessments. It's just that no use seems to have been made of this evidence.

[brucejoel99]

Has there ever been a time that a Conservative government has said "there will be no U-turn under any circumstances" that wasn't immediately followed by a government U-turn within 48 hours?

[Cassius]

Has there ever been a time that a Conservative government has said "there will be no U-turn under any circumstances" that wasn't immediately followed by a government U-turn within 48 hours?

1980.

Except even then, the government did make U-turn away from hard monetarism, albeit over a period of years rather than 48 hours.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Here comes indyref2

https://twitter.com/andydphilip/status/1295304258422820864?s=20
Do we have a Scotland thread or is it subsumed under this one?

[CumbrianLefty]

Thread for the 2021 election in that forum section.

[LabourJersey]

Has there ever been a time that a Conservative government has said "there will be no U-turn under any circumstances" that wasn't immediately followed by a government U-turn within 48 hours?

The Tories have a remarkable habit of letting some terrible policy happen, get flak for it, say they're continuing said terrible policy, only to flip shortly thereafter.

It's bizarre; I understand plenty of Tories in government care a lot more about staying in power than anything else, but you'd think they would realize they shouldn't pursue unpopular policies in the first place

[Blair]

The thing for me that makes this different to the u-turn over free school meals & the NHS surcharge is that this was coming for months; the Education Select Committee warned about this & other MPs, Schools and heads have written about this- this wasn't a problem that suddenly emerged.

It was clear however last tuesday that it was a disaster & the stories coming out on Thursday & Friday should have got No.10s ears perking up; which is why Williamson's strong 'there's no u-turn' was actually rather shocking & convinced me there wouldn't be one.

However once you had 20+ Tory MPs going on the radio, including some who weren't the usual suspects, it was pretty clear that the issue was toxic.

Williamson offered to resign & he should have; this isn't something you can blame on civil servants. He simply wasn't on top of his brief for the most important set piece event that he's had for months... this is what happens when you put people who are awful ministers in important jobs.

He only got the education job because it didn't require a security clearance (as he was sacked for allegedly leaking classified news from the NSC) & he needed to be 'rewarded' for helping Boris win the backing of MPs in the leadership race; the same reason why Grant Shapps, who was a middling & below average junior minister under cameron, became transport secretary. Every first cabinet has people given plum jobs as rewards & they're often sh**t at it.

His vanity is also pretty hilarous; he was pictured & filmed drinking out of a mug for some sort of surly frontpage apology spread; when I read he was a student politician it all made sense...

[CumbrianLefty]

He also has an actual whip on his desk. Complete oddball

[cp]

Has there ever been a time that a Conservative government has said "there will be no U-turn under any circumstances" that wasn't immediately followed by a government U-turn within 48 hours?

The Tories have a remarkable habit of letting some terrible policy happen, get flak for it, say they're continuing said terrible policy, only to flip shortly thereafter.

It's bizarre; I understand plenty of Tories in government care a lot more about staying in power than anything else, but you'd think they would realize they shouldn't pursue unpopular policies in the first place

It's precisely because their objective is power - as opposed to sincerely held ideological beliefs or deeply held ethical principles - that they entertain and enact these disastrous policies in the first place.

These sorts of politicians shimmied up the greasy pole of elite mediated electoral politics by placating noisy, narrowly interested, tiny but well-heeled/connected (and often mutually contradictory) constituencies. That effort - not the corralling of votes in general election campaigns or building campaigns of genuine mass appeal - is how they obtained power. Consequently, their instinct once in office is to placate and hedge, defer toward the conventional wisdom of the narrow elite that empowered them, and generally ignore the wider public. The Tories aren't the only ones who behave like this, of course. See also: Labour, New.

[EastAnglianLefty]

The thing for me that makes this different to the u-turn over free school meals & the NHS surcharge is that this was coming for months; the Education Select Committee warned about this & other MPs, Schools and heads have written about this- this wasn't a problem that suddenly emerged.

It was clear however last tuesday that it was a disaster & the stories coming out on Thursday & Friday should have got No.10s ears perking up; which is why Williamson's strong 'there's no u-turn' was actually rather shocking & convinced me there wouldn't be one.

However once you had 20+ Tory MPs going on the radio, including some who weren't the usual suspects, it was pretty clear that the issue was toxic.

Williamson offered to resign & he should have; this isn't something you can blame on civil servants. He simply wasn't on top of his brief for the most important set piece event that he's had for months... this is what happens when you put people who are awful ministers in important jobs.

He only got the education job because it didn't require a security clearance (as he was sacked for allegedly leaking classified news from the NSC) & he needed to be 'rewarded' for helping Boris win the backing of MPs in the leadership race; the same reason why Grant Shapps, who was a middling & below average junior minister under cameron, became transport secretary. Every first cabinet has people given plum jobs as rewards & they're often sh**t at it.

His vanity is also pretty hilarous; he was pictured & filmed drinking out of a mug for some sort of surly frontpage apology spread; when I read he was a student politician it all made sense...

I'm not sure about this. The number of MPs coming out to criticise was a lot fewer than you had over Barnard Castle and I don't think any of the Tories called for him to be sacked. I think it was the realisation that the whole story was going to happen again over GCSEs and that having the same story in the papers for 10 days wasn't sustainable.

[CumbrianLefty]

Cock up over BTECs to add to the pile now.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

The BTEC disaster is magnitudes worse than what happened with A-levels but I doubt the government will take it as seriously because it's working class kids getting f-ed. Makes me so angry.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The BTEC disaster is magnitudes worse than what happened with A-levels but I doubt the government will take it as seriously because it's working class kids getting f-ed. Makes me so angry.

I seem to remember Gavin Williamson, who I understand is still (somehow) the Secretary of State for Education, make a Big Public Statement the other month about the Importance of Vocational Education, that it was as valid as the academic route and so on. And yet now... silence, inaction. What a surprise.