I have said on here that I agree with Early Entry for particular students who are borderline C/D.  However I think is happening more and more (and for no real reason) is that entire classes of able students are being entered for the foundation exam.  They perform really well and the boundary for an C on foundation goes up (as we know only a certain percentage can pass).  Result is that the weaker students (still more than capable) end up with a lower grade because of this.  Does anyone agree?

 

This is idea is a complete myth, grade boundaries are set before marking, if they wasnt we could abuse the system. Grade Boundaries change to normalise exams from year to year. Although there is a correlation between results and boundaries there is not a causality.

Well it is news to me that grade boundaries are set before the exam is sat.

If your scenario was the case we may as well enter all our year 7s to bring down pass boundary each year? Or enter or the "safe" C's from Year 11 to do bad on purpose. Or collude with other schools so that we all agree to score 1 mark nation wide.

pencho

as we know only a certain percentage can pass

Again, as they are criterion referenced, not norm referenced, there is no limit on how many can get a C (btw, this is not the same as "pass" as all grades from D to G are pass grades). You can see this in the wildly varying proportion of students getting an A* from year to year - there's no cut-off point for the number of students allowed in.

I know that we do not follow norm referencing. However the percentage of students who pass in Year 11 (or at any sitting) has very steadily increased year on year. About 18-22% roughly get a C on the foundation paper. If suddenly more grade A and A* students are sitting a foundation paper to secure a grade C in Y10 it is my belief that these students will do very well (better than weaker Y11). I don't believe a much greater percentgae of students will be awarded a C on the foundation paper. It doesn't happen like that. Someone said on here last month the the number of students who get a C+ in Maths is determined by their KS2 results. I do not believe that the pass mark for a C on either tier is set before they sit the exam.

Edexcel Foundation Grade C boundary

March 2012 153/200

November 2011 129/200

 

But the March papers were much easier so what do you expect??

[edited by: pwc9000 at 6:40 (GMT 0) on 20-4-2012]

pencho

I do not believe that the pass mark for a C on either tier is set before they sit the exam.

It isn't. It is set after all the papers have been marked.

GoldMaths

This is idea is a complete myth, grade boundaries are set before marking, if they wasnt we could abuse the system. .

Rubbish!

On a recent edexcel course, they said that they only set grade boundaries once all papers are marked and the results are in.  I couldn't clarify what criteria they used from that point - this was when they went into waffle-mode or, more likely, I nodded off...

[edited by: googolplex at 8:19 (GMT 0) on 20-4-2012]

Thresholds are categorically set only after the completion of marking.  As a bare minimum, 85% of marks must be on the awarding body's system before thresholds are set - in practice it's usually in the high 90s.

If you really are interested in how it's done, read through section 6 of the Code:

http://www.ofqual.gov.uk/downloads/category/93-codes-of-practice?download=680%3Agcse-gce-principal-learning-and-project-code-of-practice-2011#page=37

Kevin

[edited by: kevchenko13 at 9:26 (GMT 0) on 20-4-2012]

As others have said boundaries are set after the majority of marks are collected and taking particular attention to the profile of results expected by the KS2 results of the students who took that qualification.

I have that written in black and white from an exam board. 

pwc9000

Edexcel Foundation Grade C boundary

March 2012 153/200

November 2011 129/200

 

But the March papers were much easier so what do you expect??

Easier - yes.

24 marks easier - I don't believe so.

Some students I worked with scored in the high 130's on the November 2011 papers in a formal mock (ie a solid C) but got high 140's in this sitting which is a D grade. They were 'solid Cs' in my experience based on the mock and classork but fell short in this exam due to the jump in boundaries.

It does bring into serious doubt the ability of those who set the exam if they are so inconsistantly difficult.

[edited by: MathsHOD at 16:27 (GMT 0) on 20-4-2012]

The awarding bodies are allowed to set grade boundaries only when they have sufficient evidence as to the difficulty of the current Paper - i.e. when most if not all of the provisional marks are on the system.

I agree with maths HOD. 

Edexcel Linear - 45% approx got C+

Edexcel Modular - 61% approx C+

Whereas no difference in summer.

Interesting

 

 i had students getting a d in november still getting a  d in march a near 20% swing i had students getting 150-1-2 and still not improving their grades we are submitting nearly all the top end marks for remarking and at least 1 parent wil complain to edexcel and ofqual  .

this is not the way to treat our kids i had kids coming in at half term and they improved there marks significantly  and were not rewarded for their efforts one parent has point blank refused to let his child retake the exam again in june if they increase it like this time a c will be nearly 180/200 .

 i am fed up of people saying its the easier paper ,clearly it is easier than the higher paper but for the kids that do it it is not the easier option and we are as professionals allowing edexcel and others to detract from their efforts .

 to get a c a percentage mark of 76% had to be achieved in the higher paper to get an A it was only 62% .

 

 

I wanted to try and explain my first post a tiny bit.  I know some people don't think I'm right about Early Entry, but consider this

Let's assume....

10000 students sit maths foundation maths exam.  All students are genuine foundation students.  We know from awarding bodies that in the region of 20% get a C on foundation.  This DOES NOT fluctuate that much.  So 2000 students would get a C

Now assume a different situation where we have 12000 students sit the foundation exam.  10000 of these are the same type of student described above, the other 2000 though are early entry Y10 students who are high ability that schools have put in just to secure a C (we know this is happening regularly and for no real reason).  The result the C grades on Higher tier go disproportionatley to the higher grade students.  It's wrong.

Also, another interesting fact

For 30 of our borderline C/D students we did OCR January entry and Edexcel March wentry to give them 2 attempts at their GCSE.  The students had mainly been prepared using Edexcel papers etc..., so there was a bias towards Edexcel potentially

In January 18 of these students achieved their C

The results unfortunatley came after the Edexcel papers were sat.  Students were more prepared for the March exam (trust me!!!!),   They were all psyched up and everything.  Lots of exam prep etc...  of the same 30 students who did Edexcel foundation - not one of them got a grade C.  How!!!  And then people ask why I support 2 entries in Y11 for borderline students.  It's just wrong.

 

 so do something about it complain everyone puts up with this the kids deserve better

i have complained to everyone 24 marks is too much of a swing upwards

smithteach

 so do something about it complain everyone puts up with this the kids deserve better

i have complained to everyone 24 marks is too much of a swing upwards

SmithTeach - trust me when I say that Pencho gives the exam boards plenty when it comes to standing up for the kids!

pencho

10000 students sit maths foundation maths exam.  All students are genuine foundation students.  We know from awarding bodies that in the region of 20% get a C on foundation.  This DOES NOT fluctuate that much.  So 2000 students would get a C

Now assume a different situation where we have 12000 students sit the foundation exam.  10000 of these are the same type of student described above, the other 2000 though are early entry Y10 students who are high ability that schools have put in just to secure a C (we know this is happening regularly and for no real reason).  The result the C grades on Higher tier go disproportionatley to the higher grade students.  It's wrong.

Pencho - interesting points.

My understanding (from communication with an exam board - albeit of a different subject whose boundaries had a massive swing last year) is that the awarding body looks at the prior attainment of the cohort (ie. KS2 SATS) and use this as part of the mechanism of deciding the boundaries.

If this is true for maths also, and I am led to believe it is, then in your example the awarding body should look at the cohort of 12000 and note that it is quite strong (due to the 'higher' kids early entered) and therefore note that more students should get a grade C and set their boundaries appropriately.

However,

pencho

For 30 of our borderline C/D students we did OCR January entry and Edexcel March wentry to give them 2 attempts at their GCSE.  The students had mainly been prepared using Edexcel papers etc..., so there was a bias towards Edexcel potentially

In January 18 of these students achieved their C

The results unfortunatley came after the Edexcel papers were sat.  Students were more prepared for the March exam (trust me!!!!),   They were all psyched up and everything.  Lots of exam prep etc...  of the same 30 students who did Edexcel foundation - not one of them got a grade C.  .

Your example very starkly shows just what a lottery exams are - in terms of exam boards, tiers of entry etc.

Out of curiosity were the students who did OCR and EdExcel ranked in a broadly similar order? Were the 'top' kids at the OCR exam the top at the EdExcel paper (and vice versa)?

Where would the boundary have to lie to in the Edexcel papers to have 18 students pass again?

I've already composed a letter to EdExcel (with copy to go to OFQUAL) but wanted to wait over the weekend to refine it.

Amongst all of this the key is not our school figures but, of course, the individual students whose life chances are being determined by this.

[edited by: MathsHOD at 7:22 (GMT 0) on 21-4-2012]