1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

AQA Grade Boundary Shift

Discussion in 'Drama and performing arts' started by ukpaul, Aug 22, 2013.

  1. ukpaul

    ukpaul New commenter

    We all remember how massive a change in raw marks needed to get particular grades there was in 2011, it needs pointing out that AQA have hardened these even further in the last couple of years,

    For Paper 2 - the Practical paper

    Here are the figures from 2011 to 2013 (figures from 2010 are in brackets)
    A* - 112 -- 114 (108)
    A - 104 -- 109 (94)
    B - 85 -- 91 (80)
    C - 66 -- 74 (66)
    D - 55 -- 64 (54)
    E - 44 -- 54 (42)
    F - 33 -- 44 (30)
    G - 22 -- 34 (18)

    In 2010 66 would have got you a C in the practical paper, now you barely scrape a D. 108 would have you getting an A* in 2010, now it gets you a B. 109/120 to get an A when it was 94 a few years ago?

    For paper 1 the Written Paper, again 2011-2013 (2010)

    A* - 68 -- 72 (63)
    A - 60 -- 64 (52)
    B - 52 -- 55 (41)
    C - 45 -- 47 (31)
    D - 37 -- 40 (26)
    E - 29 -- 34 (22)
    F - 22 -- 28 (18)
    G - 15 -- 22 (14)

    52 gets you an A in 2010, now it gets you a C, etc.

    Overall an A* now requires 93% (186/200) as opposed to 86% (171/200) a few years ago, an A now requires 87% (173/200) as opposed to 73% (146/200). 171 will now get you a B, in 2010 it would have got you an A*.

    There has been a whole grade shift within the last three years. If that doesn't require answers I don't know what does.
     
  2. I totally agree with this. Although we haven't done too badly on the written paper it is clear that in 2010 when the new spec came out the grades were VERY low- was this to lure people into thinking this was a great exam board spec??!!! I also remember looking at their online A example which had got 54 marks- this is no way looked like an A to me and what do you know, 3 years later it isn't as you now need 64- so those examples are redundant!!

    The boundaries are getting higher and higher each year- where will they go next? But I think this is the way for all GCSEs. Education is in a very sorry state at the minute!!
     
  3. I want to see an A or mark awarded over 68 marks, to know what is expected of our students. Even really articulate students are not getting in this boundary for paper one.
     
  4. We did get one A* and 3 As on the written paper this year but this is the first time we've ever managed anything higher than a B. Having said that, a number of my brightest students, who got A*s for English, only managed B, C and even a D! I will be very interested to get the papers back and see what a good answer looks like. I completely agree with how poor the exemplar stuff is.
     
  5. ukpaul

    ukpaul New commenter

    For an A* they are now saying an everage of 36 out of 40 marks is needed, A is now 32 out of 40 average, B is 27.5/40 and C 23.5/40.

    It isn't the grading that is the problem, the problem is that that the raw marks are now translated so that they are a grade or more lower than a few years ago. A department's raw marks will have to have improved, on average, by somewhere between 10 to 20 percent in the last few year's to ensure that results are comparable, over the years, for the written paper. For the practical exam that would need to be between 5 and 13 percent. If that is not the case then there would need to be a number of schools whose raw results have improved at an even greater rate than this.

    We need to see the difference in numbers of grades awarded for the practical and written papers separately and over a number of years, with reference to groups of similar schools. If there's a mismatch then results are being skewed.
     
  6. anfieldone

    anfieldone New commenter

    This is really useful to know Paul. Where did you get the figures from? Any chance you could email me this breakdown or put a link up on here to where you got it from?
     
  7. ukpaul

    ukpaul New commenter

    It's all on the AQA website, you have to go into the UMS marks section, choose the subject and year.

    I'd be interested in finding out what anyone on e-AQA is getting regarding marks for 'similar schools', mine is a selective private girls school (which you'd think was pretty high in terms of overall grades) and the average is coming up as 66% on the written paper for similar schools, for schools overall it is 57%. Thankfully we are doing a little better than our similar schools but that's the average figure.

    Now, extrapolate that to raw marks and the equivalent grades and you get 53/80 average for our similar schools and 46/80 for all schools. That translates to a high C for similar schools to ours and a high D for all schools. Half of the candidates across the country will therefore likely be getting below a C for the written paper.

    For comparison the overall average for the practical paper is the equivalent to 95/120 for all schools, this average being a B grade. (this is all using the percentages on e-AQA)

    So there you have the manipulation in a nutshell, the board realise that practical average grades are too high for them to have as final grades so the written paper is used to push the average back down so that the overall average raw mark is 140/200, which comes out as a high-ish C. Doesn't matter that students are doing better or just as well in the raw grades, the need is to change those boundaries to make it look as though the exam is not getting 'easier' (i.e. that we teach it better and that students respond better).

    The devil is in the detail, maybe they think we can't do the maths....
     

Share This Page