Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, pandarilla said:

Dundee certainly did this, and no schools were allowed to submit unrealistic grades.

My issue is that our higher results have been stung because they've obviously decided across the board cuts - which is horribly unfair on the individual kids who never got the chance to perform (or over-perform) this year.

The overall grades might be a reasonably balanced prediction across the country, but plenty of individuals are going to have been shafted here.

I believe that, but clearly that's not been happening in most places.

Someone in the SQA must have known something wasn't right ages ago, and should have asked massively over performing regions or schools to re-submit

[Gaz]

1 hour ago, Todd_is_God said:

A lot of this could surely have been avoided by, unless there was an exceptional reason not to, just using the prelim results.

It's not ideal either, but it's surely far better for a student to receive an award based on an exam they sat, rather than the exams others at their school sat over the last 5 years.

There are loads of logistical reasons alone why using prelim results wouldn't work.

I would imagine (certainly we did) that all schools used prelim results as part of the reason for the predicted grade.

[craigkillie]

5 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

Storm in a tea cup. I doubt very much Uni’s are giving too much consideration to the odd lower grade this year. 

I think they absolutely will be. In a lot of university courses, particularly the most popular ones at the best universities, grades are essentially the only entry criteria used.

For example, something like maths at Glasgow will get literally thousands if not tens of thousands of applications every year, and there certainly isn't going to be someone individually sifting through them one by one wondering if that C should really have been a B if it wasn't for the covid. Applications above a particular level will be accepted, those below a particular level will be binned and only a small number on the borderline will be given any individual consideration.

If this decision has pushed a student's grades into or just below that borderline category then there's a very good chance they will now be fucked.

This is my problem with the system being used - it is nonsensical to use group level averages to make judgement on the individuals within that group, especially when the groups themselves are quite variable in terms of performance, which is more likely in deprived areas. I'm pretty sure my year group would have been screwed over by this - the year before mine nobody got 5 As, and in the year after only one person did, but in my year there were five of us who managed it. Presumably our teachers' predicted grades would have been laughed out of the room on the basis of what had gone before.

[Gordon EF]

4 hours ago, madwullie said:

Can't do much for the attainment gap, slamming poor schools and boosting the good ones cos that's how they normally do. 

I know at my old school there'll be some very sad faces. Generally poor simd areas, with one "posh" area, from where kids normally are the higher performers alongside a handful from the other areas. If it's taken as an average, surely it's obvious that the better pupils will get hammered while the poorer pupils will get boosted? 

I say all this knowing next to nothing about the process this year, but I know in my old department the head will have hammered evidence based over wishful thinking  grading, so hopefully that will allow for appeals. 

Surely they're not reverting every pupil at a school to the mean of that school? Aren't they more likely to be saying 'if 50% usually get As, we'd expect roughly the same this year so if you put forward 70% as As, we're going to bust about 20% down to a B'?

[Gaz]

11 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

This is my problem with the system being used - it is nonsensical to use group level averages to make judgement on the individuals within that group, especially when the groups themselves are quite variable in terms of performance, which is more likely in deprived areas. I'm pretty sure my year group would have been screwed over by this - the year before mine nobody got 5 As, and in the year after only one person did, but in my year there were five of us who managed it. Presumably our teachers' predicted grades would have been laughed out of the room on the basis of what had gone before.

Yeah this is the kind of thing I was alluding to earlier on. A few years ago we had a year group that were so far ahead of the previous (and, up to this point, the subsequent) year group(s) that it was obvious that our N5 results were going to be massively improved (and the Higher results the following year).

If this predicted grades situation had happened back then those kids would have been absolutely fucked, as they would have looked at our previous results / SIMD data and decided there was no way we were going to get the jump we did end up getting.

Edited August 4, 2020 by Gaz

[HTG]

We're going to need a fucking lock down to get back on topic. 

[Thistle_do_nicely]

5 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I think they absolutely will be. In a lot of university courses, particularly the most popular ones at the best universities, grades are essentially the only entry criteria used.

For example, something like maths at Glasgow will get literally thousands if not tens of thousands of applications every year, and there certainly isn't going to be someone individually sifting through them one by one wondering if that C should really have been a B if it wasn't for the covid. Applications above a particular level will be accepted, those below a particular level will be binned and only a small number on the borderline will be given any individual consideration.

If this decision has pushed a student's grades into or just below that borderline category then there's a very good chance they will now be fucked.

This is my problem with the system being used - it is nonsensical to use group level averages to make judgement on the individuals within that group, especially when the groups themselves are quite variable in terms of performance, which is more likely in deprived areas. I'm pretty sure my year group would have been screwed over by this - the year before mine nobody got 5 As, and in the year after only one person did, but in my year there were five of us who managed it. Presumably our teachers' predicted grades would have been laughed out of the room on the basis of what had gone before.

I'm only going by a limited bit of experience within student funding/finance and not anything on a high level teaching side here, but are there not still a lot of courses/higher education providers offering foundation years at the start of the course which I think are there precisely for those who don't quite meet the normal 3/4 year honours course requirements?

I think they still attract the full whack of tuition fee for the cohort on "year zero" for the course though, which might be a bit of a fucker.

[Melanius Mullarkey]

13 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I think they absolutely will be. In a lot of university courses, particularly the most popular ones at the best universities, grades are essentially the only entry criteria used.

For example, something like maths at Glasgow will get literally thousands if not tens of thousands of applications every year, and there certainly isn't going to be someone individually sifting through them one by one wondering if that C should really have been a B if it wasn't for the covid. Applications above a particular level will be accepted, those below a particular level will be binned and only a small number on the borderline will be given any individual consideration.

If this decision has pushed a student's grades into or just below that borderline category then there's a very good chance they will now be fucked.

This is my problem with the system being used - it is nonsensical to use group level averages to make judgement on the individuals within that group, especially when the groups themselves are quite variable in terms of performance, which is more likely in deprived areas. I'm pretty sure my year group would have been screwed over by this - the year before mine nobody got 5 As, and in the year after only one person did, but in my year there were five of us who managed it. Presumably our teachers' predicted grades would have been laughed out of the room on the basis of what had gone before.

Indeed but the most popular courses (Maths at Glasgow, Medicine/Dentistry anywhere half decent etc) don’t really represent the majority. Yes, they’ll get a tonne of applications and they know they’ll fill their quota without having to really pay too much attention to grades. Arts and Farts/Joint Hons etc on the other hand (where I would wager a number of folk who are unsuccessful on the above successful maths courses for example) will be more lenient this year I would say.

[craigkillie]

1 minute ago, Thistle_do_nicely said:

I'm only going by a limited bit of experience within student funding/finance and not anything on a high level teaching side here, but are there not still a lot of courses/higher education providers offering foundation years at the start of the course which I think are there precisely for those who don't quite meet the normal 3/4 year honours course requirements?

I think they still attract the full whack of tuition fee for the cohort on "year zero" for the course though, which might be a bit of a fucker.

There definitely will be things like this for some courses, but will they even be running this year? A lot of universities don't seem to be doing any in-person lecturing at all until next year, so these would likely be one of the first things to go.

[vikingTON]

4 minutes ago, HTG said:

We're going to need a fucking lock down to get back on topic. 

Well perhaps you could contribute something of significance and the thread will naturally change its course instead of whining on the sidelines. I'm not holding my breath though.

[bennett]

9 minutes ago, virginton said:

Well perhaps you could contribute something of significance and the thread will naturally change its course instead of whining on the sidelines. I'm not holding my breath though.

 

Pity.

[vikingTON]

1 minute ago, bennett said:

 

Pity.

Crusades against online bullying and its impact on mental health for attention-seeking purposes one week; wishes death on another poster the next.

Never change bennett, you utter simpleton.

[bennett]

1 minute ago, virginton said:

Crusades against online bullying and its impact on mental health for attention-seeking purposes one week; wishes death on another poster the next.

Never change bennett, you utter simpleton.

I won't my exceedingly clever friend,  any chance we could get this back on topic now?

[HTG]

19 minutes ago, virginton said:

Well perhaps you could contribute something of significance and the thread will naturally change its course instead of whining on the sidelines. I'm not holding my breath though.

If contributing something of significance is a criteria for posting on here you're miles out your depth ... champ. 

[Ludo*1]

'#ResignSturgeon' is trending on Twitter due to the results drama.

[Gaz]

11 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

'#ResignSturgeon' is trending on Twitter due to the results drama.

Sturgeon could discover the cure for cancer, find every homeless person accommodation and valued, paid employment and "#ResignSturgeon" would still trend on Twitter most days.

[Ludo*1]

Just now, Gaz said:

Sturgeon could discover the cure for cancer, find every homeless person accommodation and valued, paid employment and "#ResignSturgeon" would still trend on Twitter most days.

To be fair, in among all the gammons there's usually a fair amount of support for Sturgeon on Twitter. Knives seem to be out tonight.

[Alert Mongoose]

[Gaz]

4 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

I'd love to see her dangling participles.

[Gaz]

9 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

To be fair, in among all the gammons there's usually a fair amount of support for Sturgeon on Twitter. Knives seem to be out tonight.

Surely these folk don't want the government interfering with the setting of grades by an independent body?