If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Perhaps, I thought that the split was fairly even, maybe because I dropped a subject from As to A2.
To be fair, when writting particularly fast, like in an exam, I miss the first letters of words, or struggle to spell even the most simple word. Like 'speak' I was having real trouble with it the other day.
This also relates to the thread on core subjects being optional at 14. It just emphasises that we need to keep working at those skills.
Shame you don't do the same on here
To be fair, when you're doing an exam, you don't give a fart about spelling, it doesn't matter and you don't get extra marks for it, it's not like the SATs in that way. It's important to get enough information down in the set period of time, not about how correct you are in terms of spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
It's not like we have a choice in taking english is it? So that's a silly thing to say, especially considering your views on compulsory maths, english and science education.
Perhaps candidates should be penalised for spelling, grammar, and punctuation mistakes, with lee-way allowed for persons with dyslexia, or other learning difficulties, in english. In science perhaps only being penalised for mis-spelling a scientific term that should be well-known?
So does spelling in an exam really matter all that much?
English Language maybe, but in literature one is being tested about ones abillity to comprehend and argue for or against various questiosn relating to the set texts. Not about ones ability to spell.
Why? some characters have bloody stupid names, ie iago. in fact, I'm not even sure I've spelt that right.
Ideas and intelligence ahve little or no relation to how good your spelling is, and spelling shouldn count for little in examination halls when the pressure is on. I've written things like that before, and I have quite good English (albeit not perfect).
Standard English is desirable, but far from showing children are stupid, I actually think that things such as "should of" show that children have a grasp of the concept that SE is not the only desirable form of English. Now, of course they should write "should have" or "should've" instead, but does it really matter that fucking much? The rise of Amercian spellings, such as dropping the e in -ley words, also illustrates nothing other than US cultural imperialism.
Rather than children being stupid, bad spelling in examinations illustrates what is wrong with the education syestem in this country. teachers now only teach children how to pass examinations, because their school's reputation, their own reputation, and their mortgage repayments depend on it. Teach a child how to spell but not how to pass an exam and you will be labelled a "failing" teacher because your exam results will not be so high. Teach an illiterate child how to pass an exam and you will get a pay rise for being "successful".
Spelling should play little role in examination marking, but because of performance-related pay and league tables spelling gets ignored in the clamour to get kids passed through their exams.
A-levels have become easier, schools minister admits
Author John Clare, Education Editor
DATE: 18 Aug 2004
Ignore the myths, says schools minister David Miliband, this year's A-levels have been as testing as ever
Author
DATE: 18 Aug 2004
What the hell is that about?!
Hardly.
For example, I have several friends with the name Victoria, but three different way's of shortening it. Vikki, Vicky and Vicki.
Spelling does not affect understanding, or I would have done terribly at GCSE and AS.
Science needs to have an understandable level of standard English spelling and grammar, and good spelling of technical terms, such as burette.
My sig, do not start with me, you will not win
in a literature exam, you take the books in with you. misspelling the character names is unforgivable.
and what do you mean, spelling is not tested in lit GCSEs? ours was. don't tell me they've abolished that?
the spelling and grammar standards in education are getting crapper by the minute. i was in a uni year with people only 2 years younger than me, who didn't know such basics as the differences between 'their, there and they're', and the use of apostrophes. we learnt that in primary school. and i could forgive them if i were doing a science subject, but this was a writing degree, where 95% of them had an english a level.
it's ok to be rubbish at spelling and pass maths or science exams, but english exams? come on now.
if you come out with an A* english grade, people expect you to be exceptional at english. which includes spelling and grammar. anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong.
Exams shouldn't be a spelling test or a grammar test, they should be about what you know. How you express it is definitely important, but it's a very fine balance to find.
Marks shouldn't be lost for poor spelling, but there should be a lot of bonus marks for good spelling and grammar. Far more bonus marks athat are available at present, and where available when me and kaff did our exams.
Although it did depress me how many people in my A'Level English Language class didn't know what a verb or a noun was. It was pathetic to watch, although it helped me because I was made to work harder because I was seen as the "bright" one in the class. Hrm.
Old A'Levels, the ones we took, were mostly based on final examinations at the end of year 13, all in one go then. Modular courses were slightly different, but it was a similar principle.
The new system is of AS and A2 exams. At the end of year 12 children take AS exams in four subjects (mostly). They then progress to A2 exams, at the end of year 13. The AS and A2 exams are added together to give an A'Level grade overall.
It's more confusing to explain than it actually is.
ah, i understand. thank you
given that i can see why people think that the new A Levels are easier as modular courses are easier in the long run. the same thing happened in scotland too. the highers were replace with higher still (examination based to modular based) and it is thought that they are easier in the long run too. as someone who has sat both "old" highers and "new" highers i can see why people think that.
what people seems to forget is that you don't take exams for the sake of taking exams, you take them to prepare you for the workplace.
and it's all very well to say that you shouldn't discriminate against people who can't spell, but if you hand in a CV and covering letter riddled with spelling and grammar mistakes, the person wouldn't think 'oh, best not discriminate against the poor spelling and grammar', they'd just put it straight in the bin.
it might seem harsh to you, but it's life. and these days i don't think exams adequately prepare kids for it.
at my college most people were satisfied with an E pass
i think its mainly down to the new "social sciences" as its down to exam technique mainly, i know, i done one, whilst when i was doing my proper subjects, chemistry physics and maths, in a class of 20 only one or 2 ever got an A, and most people got Cs, Ds and Es which to do a uni course in physics, are erm useless
and its also mainly down to fact people resiti modules and cause of league tables, teachers are obliged to teach the exam, not the subject so the kids may do better but they have less understanding
and also exam papers themselves, instead of being open ended, they guide you through in steps, like a) b) and c)
when i went off to uni and finally done my end of year exams in maths, i had 3 hours to do 5 questions of all which the question was no longer than 4 lines, and that paper was worth 12.5% of year each
personally we should scrap league tables, and give more grading power to the schools, as my university marks my exam papers, like by 5 different people
resorting back to 10% of students get As 15% get Bs, 10% get Cs, 15% get Ds, and 10% get Es and the other 40% fail is regressive as if you're in a unusually bright year, you could get a C whilst if you're in a stupid dosser year doing same paper, you could get an A - stupid in my opinion
Less people passed in my psychology classes this year than usual because the exams were so hard.
I've now got 2 Cs and an E... I'm appealing for my sociology grade & re-sitting my psychology. Pisses me off because our special needs department only really caters for dyslexia whereas I'm dyspraxic and only got help in April before my finals... a half hour session to talk once a week.
Really fucked my exams up
secondly, it's easy for people who've already done their exams to say that exams are easier, or 'ohh i could pass that with flying colours' because they've done them, already learnt what they had to learn for the exam so, unless they can wipe people's memories clean and make them sit the new exams, there isn't any sure-fire way to test whether they are or aren't easier.
however, i agree that the exams are more accommodating to people now, for my french exam i'd already done 62.5% of my grade before i sat the exam however, i still had to pass the 62.5%. it isn't like a get out of jail free card.
and lastly, at least on the boards we sit, exams are still marked on the curve, so there isn't a set percentage that you have to achieve to get a certain grade as it depends on your peers.
anyways, that's for gcse at least...
IMO, I think everyone here should come over and do the Leaving Cert. Yes, that would be nice. You don't get to drop any core subjects (English, Maths and Irish) and you study four more. That's seven subjects. In total...*tries to remember*...10 3 hour exams.
You get penalised for spelling, grammer, if the paper isn't laid out properly (or maybe that last one was the teachers' scare mongering).
You do two major sets of exams here - Junior and Leaving Cert. Junior is around 15/16 - year 9, I think. Leaving Cert would be Year 12.
There are different levels to the grades you can get - A1, A2, B1, B2, B3 - all the way down to a D3, anything lower and you've failed. For each separate level there are points allocated - 100 for A1 on an higher level paper, 60 for A1 on an ordinary level paper. And then down in batches of 5 points.
Every college course has a set number of points you need to get to be enrolled in that course. Many people think it is the difficulty of the course that determines the points, but it is purely the popularity.
eg, My course (Journalism) and its sister course (Media Arts) have much the same core academic material. Although Media Arts is approx 50 points higher. Because you get to be a dj and make television programmes, whereas in Journalism, we interview old people.
The higher and ordinary levels in subjects are just that - two levels of difficulty. And in Irish and Maths, add foundation onto that at the bottom.
The college offers were released today. It's bringing back a whole lot of memories.
I really hope that made sense. My point? Yes, there is one
I would have done the A levels noooo bother!
My problem is what the results tell us.
Any exam in which 90-odd% of people pass tells us nothing. You might as well just hand out certificates at the start of the course and save two years.
im sure there was students with As who got turned from some of the places i applied to, simply cause they completely thick and lacking common sense, only reason they had As is cause they were spoonfed their course so couldnt think up an answer of their own