Good luck on the GCSE results

[malumbu]

Sorry missed last week and the A Levels. Met a boisterous and excited group of 18 year olds travelling from Bromley to Dartford nightclub last Thurs evening. All a long time ago for me!

[TheCat]

Despite the fact that this is the second year of a numerical grading system, on the radio this morning they were saying that the change from A*-G to a 9-1 numerical system is likely to cause confusion and anxiety amongst teenagers and parents....

If a 9-1 numerical system is going to cause you confusion then one would have to think our schooling system is in more trouble than we thought....

[malumbu]

I'm on a formal appraisal system that has gone from a five box system which allowed intermediate marks (ie nine in total), to a five box, to six, to three, to six, to five, and now to six again. A mid mark (3) is supposed to be absolutely fine, and a four just saying that there are a couple of particular areas where you need to improve. But our natural bias is that 5/10 is a useless mark.

Takes me back to my school days where different teachers used different marking, and different standards. numerical with half marks could in theory be 20 different marks, and A - E 15 (A + to E -). Personally I like to be clever and use Greek.

Confused you will be.

[TheCat]

I suppose you could confuse a '9' (this highest possible) with a lower case 'g' (the lowest possible)......

[diable rouge]

The new grades have come about because of so many students getting As...https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-44125336

Serves them right for being so swotty...:)

[rendelharris]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Despite the fact that this is the second year of a

> numerical grading system, on the radio this

> morning they were saying that the change from A*-G

> to a 9-1 numerical system is likely to cause

> confusion and anxiety amongst teenagers and

> parents....

>

> If a 9-1 numerical system is going to cause you

> confusion then one would have to think our

> schooling system is in more trouble than we

> thought....

Bit cynical - it hasn't just replaced letters with numbers, it's somewhat more complex. For example, my niece has just been awarded 3x9, 4x8 and 2x7. 7,8 and 9 are replacements for the A and A* bands, so when looking at her results and comparing them with a competitor for a job or college place who took their GCSEs under the old grade system, has she got 7 A* and 2 A grades? 3 A* and 6 A grades? Split the difference and call it 5 A* and 4 As? It is confusing and the change, in my opinion and that of many teaching friends and former colleagues, was totally unnecessary.

[malumbu]

But nice results Rendel - hope your all proud.

[rendelharris]

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But nice results Rendel - hope your all proud.

Very, thanks!

[TheCat]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Despite the fact that this is the second year of

> a

> > numerical grading system, on the radio this

> > morning they were saying that the change from

> A*-G

> > to a 9-1 numerical system is likely to cause

> > confusion and anxiety amongst teenagers and

> > parents....

> >

> > If a 9-1 numerical system is going to cause you

> > confusion then one would have to think our

> > schooling system is in more trouble than we

> > thought....

>

> Bit cynical - it hasn't just replaced letters with

> numbers, it's somewhat more complex. For example,

> my niece has just been awarded 3x9, 4x8 and 2x7.

> 7,8 and 9 are replacements for the A and A* bands,

> so when looking at her results and comparing them

> with a competitor for a job or college place who

> took their GCSEs under the old grade system, has

> she got 7 A* and 2 A grades? 3 A* and 6 A grades?

> Split the difference and call it 5 A* and 4 As? It

> is confusing and the change, in my opinion and

> that of many teaching friends and former

> colleagues, was totally unnecessary.

you say 'cynical', I say 'wry observation'....in any case...potato/potarto

Best thing is to not try to look backwards and compare to an old system. I know its human nature to want to judge things on what we're familiar with, but in 2 years no one will worry about what the 'equivalent' was under the old system...they'll just worry about 1-9...and the point im making is thats a pretty bloody simple system to understand!

[diable rouge]

Agree that it will become less of an issue re. comparisons. The majority of University intakes tend to be from the same age group, although there will be those taking gap years and mature students. Employers could be confused initially, but surely that's what interviews are for...

[rendelharris]

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Best thing is to not try to look backwards and

> compare to an old system. I know its human nature

> to want to judge things on what we're familiar

> with, but in 2 years no one will worry about what

> the 'equivalent' was under the old

> system...they'll just worry about 1-9.

Which would be all well and good if it wasn't for the fact that, as I said above, it means young people will be competing against each other in the job market with differently-graded qualifications, which is confusing for employers and unfair on applicants. Say you had two candidates applying for a job, one had eight Bs under the old system and one has eight 5s under the new. 4-5-6 now covers what was C-B - how does an employer know whether the 5s equate to a B or a C? Yes 1-9 is "a bloody simple system to understand", but A-G didn't exactly require a PhD to follow and it really didn't need changing.

[TheCat]

>

> Which would be all well and good if it wasn't for

> the fact that, as I said above, it means young

> people will be competing against each other in the

> job market with differently-graded qualifications,

> which is confusing for employers and unfair on

> applicants. Say you had two candidates applying

> for a job, one had eight Bs under the old system

> and one has eight 5s under the new. 4-5-6 now

> covers what was C-B - how does an employer know

> whether the 5s equate to a B or a C? Yes 1-9 is

> "a bloody simple system to understand", but A-G

> didn't exactly require a PhD to follow and it

> really didn't need changing.

Fair enough, but we live in a multicultural country (at least for the moment), many people in the jobs market didn't even go to school in this country (so probably have a totally different grading system altogether), so I doubt comparability is really that much of a big deal for employers.

But I appreciate that you feel strongly about the lack of need for a change...fine, that your view. Mine is, that its really not that big of a deal.

[rendelharris]

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Agree that it will become less of an issue re.

> comparisons. The majority of University intakes

> tend to be from the same age group, although there

> will be those taking gap years and mature

> students. Employers could be confused initially,

> but surely that's what interviews are for...

You've got to get through to interview first, and that's what CVs are for...and you will get applicants a year apart in age having a completely different form of grading.

[diable rouge]

Thanks, I know what CVs are for, i.e. they're not just for presenting grades. Whether an applicant is invited to an interview or not will depend on a lot more than whether Johnny's 2 is or isn't equivalent to Sally's A...

[uncleglen]

When I did my O levels the Cambridge Board grading system was 1-9, but in reverse- 1 was the highest grade and 7,8,9 were fails.

[rendelharris]

diable rouge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thanks, I know what CVs are for, i.e. they're not

> just for presenting grades. Whether an applicant

> is invited to an interview or not will depend on a

> lot more than whether Johnny's 2 is or isn't

> equivalent to Sally's A...

No need to be sniffy DR, I wasn't being. My (admittedly limited) experience is that when there are a large number of applicants for a job a secretary will be told off to do a run-through of CVs/application forms first and bin those under a certain academic requirement, and grade confusion could easily see some of equal achievement to those retained miss out.

[malumbu]

Rendel - how quaint. A secretary helping with the admin. Haven't seen a secretary, PA or the like for years. Something that the bosses have to do now, sift through hundreds of applications. As most jobs in the metropolis need a degree, or in any case graduates will apply for, it tends to be a ten second job - degree, tick box, post graduate (my word they must be desperate), tick another box, sound like they would fit in, tick another box. Next application.

(written in good humour, as I am sure you realise)

[rendelharris]

malumbu Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rendel - how quaint. A secretary helping with the

> admin. Haven't seen a secretary, PA or the like

> for years. Something that the bosses have to do

> now, sift through hundreds of applications. As

> most jobs in the metropolis need a degree, or in

> any case graduates will apply for, it tends to be

> a ten second job - degree, tick box, post graduate

> (my word they must be desperate), tick another

> box, sound like they would fit in, tick another

> box. Next application.

>

> (written in good humour, as I am sure you realise)

Of course! I guess having spent nearly all of my non-freelance career in education, I'm used to headteachers having both secretaries and PAs, didn't realise they were dying out elsewhere.

[malumbu]

Sir Humphrey: Well briefly, sir, I am the Permanent Under Secretary of State, known as the Permanent Secretary. Woolley here is your Principal Private Secretary. I too have a Principal Private Secretary and he is the Principal Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary. Directly responsible to me are ten Deputy Secretaries, 87 Under Secretaries and 219 Assistant Secretaries. Directly responsible to the Principal Private Secretaries are plain Private Secretaries, and the Prime Minister will be appointing two Parliamentary Under-Secretaries and you will be appointing your own Parliamentary Private Secretary.

Hacker: Can they all type?

Sir Humphrey: None of us can type. Mrs Mackay types: she's the secretary.

[cella]

Tedious.

[malumbu]

Updated for 2018

Hacker: Can they all type?

Sir Humphrey: Yes Minister.

[cella]

Yawn.

[JohnL]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> diable rouge Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Thanks, I know what CVs are for, i.e. they're

> not

> > just for presenting grades. Whether an

> applicant

> > is invited to an interview or not will depend on

> a

> > lot more than whether Johnny's 2 is or isn't

> > equivalent to Sally's A...

>

> No need to be sniffy DR, I wasn't being. My

> (admittedly limited) experience is that when there

> are a large number of applicants for a job a

> secretary will be told off to do a run-through of

> CVs/application forms first and bin those under a

> certain academic requirement, and grade confusion

> could easily see some of equal achievement to

> those retained miss out.

Hasn't LinkedIn replaced all this ?

[malumbu]

Nope, I feel that it is targeted to those already in a career rather than those just starting out.

Or maybe nobody wants to head hunt me.