Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Modern foreign languages' started by cassiopee, Aug 26, 2011.
I know it is mi for moi but apart from that...
It's more likely to be relevance/content with AQA than accuracy/quality. Then if content is marked low, the language mark is automatically depressed.
Still o news of the re-marks requested. Perhaps I am the only one who has requested any?
Re-marks are back. All 10 sent up, all made a grade change!! Yippee!! ....but should we have had to resort to requesting these re-marks?
Good to see you got such positive results from your remarks and no, you shouldn't have had to resort to requesting the remarks.
Does anyone have any stats on which subjects have the most request for remarks and which subjects have most resultant changes in grades?
Do the exam boards have an acceptable level of error? Or alternatively are the exam boards given an acceptable level of error by their governing body (whoever that is) before they are asked to explain themselves or action is taken?
So glad you got the right outcome, Vacherin.
As you say. it's a pity that you had to appeal or rather ask for a review. We were pleased with our IGCSE AQA results in both languages.
BTW dare I say it- probably the end of this thread now?
It probably is. It has been a thoroughly enjoyable thread which has highlighted many issues (being sad, I have re-read all the posts!) and has had a positive effect on the world of examining. As we enter another phase in GCSE testing (albeit a familiar one to those of us who have been teaching for so long), I wonder what the future holds.
I wonder if the new GCSE will have a better spread of marks across the grades. Current GCSE can have grades A to E squeezed into 9 marks. Eg Higher Listening 27 for an A but 18 would have been an E. 9 marks out of 45 cover 5 grades.
I suspect that there will be a wider range of marks as there are more available but I don't think there will be grades for individual components awarded, so it may be more difficult to compare them.
Interesting. Thank you
It will certainly be interesting to see how the first exam series goes.
Can anyone explain how UMS HAS BEEN replaced?
I suppose all 4 papers are out of same total. Add up total. Place pupils in rank order. Allocate grades by rank.
As I recall in pre UMS days each unit was allocated a nominal number of points say 5 at higher 3 at foundation and these were allocated according to the physical mark you got on the paper. For example, if the higher listening had 30 marks, 0-2= 0 points 3-10= 1 point 11-15= 2 points, 16-20= 3 points, 21-26= 4 points and 27-30= 5 points. So it mattered not if you got 26 or 30, they both were worth 5 points whereas on UMS every mark you scored counted.
If you get a low mark on one higher paper, do scores suddenly drop to 0 then?
No. Raw score per paper scaled to 60 then added up. Grades then allocated by total mark out of 240
I am a bit lost...
Tier of entry - candidates at the bottom end of Higher risk scoring a U.
Grades are determined by % of pupils getting a certain mark across the country.
So does deciding tier of entry involve some amount of second guessing what decision other schools are making?