This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

A Levels and results - does anyone have an opinion relevant to The IET ?

In the news today. This is the pathway to becoming an Engineer for many and considered "equivalent" to having completed a skilled apprenticeship by the educational establishment.
  • I was under the impression that the established way to become a "proper" engineer was to do your A levels, then go to university and get a BEng followed by an MEng.


    Anybody else would only be a technician, and might just be allowed to carry an oily rag and a spanner without supervision.

  • Roy Bowdler:

    In the news today. This is the pathway to becoming an Engineer for many and considered "equivalent" to having completed a skilled apprenticeship by the educational establishment. 




    IMO, A levels and NVQ type educational training structures are not compatible or comparable in terms of outcomes.

    A levels are theoretical in nature NVQs are practical based where there is a substanial amount of on-site assessment

    A levels are 2 years in duration; NVQs are 4-5 years in duration allowing a significant change in mental development before final assessment.

    A levels are measured by a end of year theoretical examination; NVQs are based on continual assessment using on-line multiple choice exam papers and observation where a  variety of recording media are used.

    But then it depends what type of engineer you want ... A levels lead onto degrees which are synthesis in nature ; Apprenticeships lead onto HNC/D which tend to be more anylitical in nature.


    Legh

     

  • A levels are ONE way, not THE way, towards a career in engineering. An A level can be followed by university or an apprenticeship. An apprenticeship does not preclude university later. Apprenticeships are good for practical experience. University courses can include industrial placement, where practical experience can be gained. There is plenty of flexibility. Many teenagers are fed up with school and long for a practical working environment.


    I followed all these routes. A levels, then apprenticeship then study for a degree later. I am not pretending that every career decision I made was a good one, but this was a path that suited me well and I don't regret it.
  • On the subject of A levels, I saw an article today which discusses the A level maths paper and how pupils have passed it this year by getting just 14% of the questions right.


    To get an A grade, pupils needed to get 55% of the answers right, 45% for a B, and 34% to get a grade C (for comparison, last year the old A level had a pass mark of 40%, with 80% correct answers required to achieve an A grade). Some have said that the inclusion of "more challenging content" has made the new-style exams a better preparation for university, but if people can pass their exam by getting 86% of the answers wrong, it doesn't strike me as being the best foundation for future academic success. If exam pass marks are this low, I think that some employers may question in future the meaningfulness of the qualification and, unless this is addressed, may subsequently prefer alternative qualifications or experience as a means of proving a candidate's understanding or ability.


    The full article is here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/a-level-maths-pupils-need-only-14-to-pass-this-year-wnvjz60hm

  • Well I would have aced my A levels with that scoring matrix Amber.... ?

  • Lisa Miles:

    Well I would have aced my A levels with that scoring matrix Amber.... ?




    ? Haha! Me too. Actually... perhaps this is just a clever way of attracting more young people to take STEM subjects at school. If I knew I had that great a margin of error, perhaps I would have chosen my A level subjects a little differently...

  • I am now getting very confused. For years we have been told that more and more pupils are passing their A levels/getting an A or A* and it has been explained that this is because the teaching is better and not to do with how easy or hard the exams are compared with yesteryear. Now they tell us that the grade boundaries are moved depending on how easy/hard the exam is to ensure that the right number of people pass. What is going on?

  • Alasdair Anderson:


    Now they tell us that the grade boundaries are moved depending on how easy/hard the exam is to ensure that the right number of people pass...




     

    That's always been the case though Alasdair. Even when I was doing my A levels (ahem... many years ago ?) we were told by one of our teachers that there was a percentages ratio at play in there too. So  they had to show for example 20% of students achieving A grade 20% at B, 30 at C etc etc. Which was unfortunate if you were the one that got downgraded to a lower grade simply as it lowered the percentages... 


    I also remember being told that you had to achieve a test mark of at least 45% to get any grade in the A level exams.


    Another irritant of mine is that you never get your exam papers back to see what you've got right and wrong!! So you can go through your entire life thinking you know the answer as you passed your exam in it and yet that was one of the incorrect answers you gave... ?

  • Alasdair Anderson:

    I am now getting very confused. For years we have been told that more and more pupils are passing their A levels/getting an A or A* and it has been explained that this is because the teaching is better and not to do with how easy or hard the exams are compared with yesteryear. Now they tell us that the grade boundaries are moved depending on how easy/hard the exam is to ensure that the right number of people pass. What is going on?




    I agree it is confusing. And for a topic like maths, where there is a right or wrong answer, I really don't understand how it matters how well or poorly other candidates did and why grades need to be assigned with quotas. Surely the pass marks should stay the same each year, especially in a subject like maths where the answers are less subjective or open to interpretation? I think it is a disservice to any students who got 99% of the answers correct, but on paper achieved no more than a classmate who got 45% of the answers wrong. Many university level STEM courses would require a C grade (or above) in maths, but with the current boundary of just 34% needed to achieve this (ie 66% of their questions were wrong!), it could be argued that they are also receiving a disservice and perhaps these candidates might benefit from re-taking the exam or sitting some sort of top-up paper to improve their level of understanding. If not, they may be unable to keep up with university peers once the course starts which could result in these people dropping out of the course completely.

     

  • I am tired of the arguments we often hear at this time of year, that standards are falling, hence more people are passing or the results are not worth as much as they used to. If would be good if we could have a look at some GCE papers of the 1960s for a side-by-side comparison with papers of these days.


    Surely some head teachers have past papers going back many years stashed away somewhere?  Why not dig them out and settle this argument?


    Or are they afraid of something?