Exam Grades

surrey_commuter

This is Paul Johnson, of the IFS writing about it in today's Times

The method used to assign grades makes some sense. Schools were asked to rank their students in each subject. Then information on earlier grades within the schools, and earlier attainment at GCSE, was used to assign grades to each student this year. The resulting distribution of grades looks comparable to the distribution in previous years. Indeed, there are rather more higher grades than in the past.

There are two obvious problems with what Ofqual did. I suspect that there are more, but it will require many more hours of study to discover them.

First, and most obvious, the process adopted favours schools with small numbers of students sitting any individual A-level. That is, it favours private schools. If you have up to five students doing an A-level, you simply get the grades predicted by the teacher. If between five and fifteen, teacher-assigned grades get some weight. More than 15 and they get no weight. Teacher predictions are always optimistic. Result: there was a near-five percentage point increase in the fraction of entries from private schools graded at A or A*. In contrast, sixth-form and further education colleges saw their A and A* grades barely rise — up only 0.3 per cent since 2019 and down since 2018. This is a manifest injustice. No sixth-form or FE college has the funding to support classes of fifteen, let alone five. The result, as Chris Cook, a journalist and education expert, has written: “Two university officials have told me they have the poshest cohorts ever this year because privately educated kids got their grades, the universities filled and there’s no adjustment/clearing places left.”

Second, the algorithm used makes it almost impossible for students at historically poor-performing sixth forms to get top grades, even if the candidates themselves had an outstanding record at GCSE. For reasons that are entirely beyond me, the regulator did not use the full information on GCSE performance. Rather than use data that could help to identify when there are truly outstanding candidates, the model simply records what tenth of the distribution GCSE scores were in. There is a huge difference between the 91st and 99th percentiles, yet they are treated the same. There is little difference between the 89th and 91st, yet they are treated differently.

As Dave Thomson, chief statistician at FFT Education Datalab, has noted, adjustments for changed prior attainment do not appear to take account of the historic value added of the school. That means schools that historically have been good at translating GCSE performance into good A-level results seem to be penalised.

Then there appears to be a more general lack of common sense applied to the results of the model. If it predicts a U grade (a fail) for a subject in a school, then some poor sucker is going to fail, deserved or not. That’s why some seem to have been awarded Us despite predicted grades of C.

To repeat, the truth is that the regulator was handed an impossible task. But it should have done a better job. More information on students’ prior performance should have been used. For individual schools, results should have been more constrained not to be worse than the average of the past three years, unless there was a big drop-off in prior attainment. Ways could have been found around the small numbers problem. Some of this might have led to a little grade inflation across the board this year. What we got was grade inflation for the already privileged and little or nothing for the rest.

The whole thing should have been more transparent, quicker and with a better worked-out appeals process. This was all bound to end up in a mess, but it didn’t need to be this much of a mess.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

This is Paul Johnson, of the IFS writing about it in today's Times

The method used to assign grades makes some sense. Schools were asked to rank their students in each subject. Then information on earlier grades within the schools, and earlier attainment at GCSE, was used to assign grades to each student this year. The resulting distribution of grades looks comparable to the distribution in previous years. Indeed, there are rather more higher grades than in the past.

There are two obvious problems with what Ofqual did. I suspect that there are more, but it will require many more hours of study to discover them.

First, and most obvious, the process adopted favours schools with small numbers of students sitting any individual A-level. That is, it favours private schools. If you have up to five students doing an A-level, you simply get the grades predicted by the teacher. If between five and fifteen, teacher-assigned grades get some weight. More than 15 and they get no weight. Teacher predictions are always optimistic. Result: there was a near-five percentage point increase in the fraction of entries from private schools graded at A or A*. In contrast, sixth-form and further education colleges saw their A and A* grades barely rise — up only 0.3 per cent since 2019 and down since 2018. This is a manifest injustice. No sixth-form or FE college has the funding to support classes of fifteen, let alone five. The result, as Chris Cook, a journalist and education expert, has written: “Two university officials have told me they have the poshest cohorts ever this year because privately educated kids got their grades, the universities filled and there’s no adjustment/clearing places left.”

Second, the algorithm used makes it almost impossible for students at historically poor-performing sixth forms to get top grades, even if the candidates themselves had an outstanding record at GCSE. For reasons that are entirely beyond me, the regulator did not use the full information on GCSE performance. Rather than use data that could help to identify when there are truly outstanding candidates, the model simply records what tenth of the distribution GCSE scores were in. There is a huge difference between the 91st and 99th percentiles, yet they are treated the same. There is little difference between the 89th and 91st, yet they are treated differently.

As Dave Thomson, chief statistician at FFT Education Datalab, has noted, adjustments for changed prior attainment do not appear to take account of the historic value added of the school. That means schools that historically have been good at translating GCSE performance into good A-level results seem to be penalised.

Then there appears to be a more general lack of common sense applied to the results of the model. If it predicts a U grade (a fail) for a subject in a school, then some poor sucker is going to fail, deserved or not. That’s why some seem to have been awarded Us despite predicted grades of C.

To repeat, the truth is that the regulator was handed an impossible task. But it should have done a better job. More information on students’ prior performance should have been used. For individual schools, results should have been more constrained not to be worse than the average of the past three years, unless there was a big drop-off in prior attainment. Ways could have been found around the small numbers problem. Some of this might have led to a little grade inflation across the board this year. What we got was grade inflation for the already privileged and little or nothing for the rest.

The whole thing should have been more transparent, quicker and with a better worked-out appeals process. This was all bound to end up in a mess, but it didn’t need to be this much of a mess.

It is if nothing else true to form, wouldn't you say?

bompington

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

This is Paul Johnson, of the IFS writing about it in today's Times

The method used to assign grades makes some sense. Schools were asked to rank their students in each subject. Then information on earlier grades within the schools, and earlier attainment at GCSE, was used to assign grades to each student this year. The resulting distribution of grades looks comparable to the distribution in previous years. Indeed, there are rather more higher grades than in the past.

There are two obvious problems with what Ofqual did. I suspect that there are more, but it will require many more hours of study to discover them.

First, and most obvious, the process adopted favours schools with small numbers of students sitting any individual A-level. That is, it favours private schools. If you have up to five students doing an A-level, you simply get the grades predicted by the teacher. If between five and fifteen, teacher-assigned grades get some weight. More than 15 and they get no weight. Teacher predictions are always optimistic. Result: there was a near-five percentage point increase in the fraction of entries from private schools graded at A or A*. In contrast, sixth-form and further education colleges saw their A and A* grades barely rise — up only 0.3 per cent since 2019 and down since 2018. This is a manifest injustice. No sixth-form or FE college has the funding to support classes of fifteen, let alone five. The result, as Chris Cook, a journalist and education expert, has written: “Two university officials have told me they have the poshest cohorts ever this year because privately educated kids got their grades, the universities filled and there’s no adjustment/clearing places left.”

Second, the algorithm used makes it almost impossible for students at historically poor-performing sixth forms to get top grades, even if the candidates themselves had an outstanding record at GCSE. For reasons that are entirely beyond me, the regulator did not use the full information on GCSE performance. Rather than use data that could help to identify when there are truly outstanding candidates, the model simply records what tenth of the distribution GCSE scores were in. There is a huge difference between the 91st and 99th percentiles, yet they are treated the same. There is little difference between the 89th and 91st, yet they are treated differently.

As Dave Thomson, chief statistician at FFT Education Datalab, has noted, adjustments for changed prior attainment do not appear to take account of the historic value added of the school. That means schools that historically have been good at translating GCSE performance into good A-level results seem to be penalised.

Then there appears to be a more general lack of common sense applied to the results of the model. If it predicts a U grade (a fail) for a subject in a school, then some poor sucker is going to fail, deserved or not. That’s why some seem to have been awarded Us despite predicted grades of C.

To repeat, the truth is that the regulator was handed an impossible task. But it should have done a better job. More information on students’ prior performance should have been used. For individual schools, results should have been more constrained not to be worse than the average of the past three years, unless there was a big drop-off in prior attainment. Ways could have been found around the small numbers problem. Some of this might have led to a little grade inflation across the board this year. What we got was grade inflation for the already privileged and little or nothing for the rest.

The whole thing should have been more transparent, quicker and with a better worked-out appeals process. This was all bound to end up in a mess, but it didn’t need to be this much of a mess.

It is if nothing else true to form, wouldn't you say?

I do find it bizarre that the inhabitants of the Trump thread can not see the correlation between Trump and Boris.

If you assume that nobody could be so thick and they could have asked around about what other countries did and that they had 4 months to think about it then you have to ask yourself how did they end up here?

The best I can come up with is that Cummings crew of other worldly data geeks gave them the answer for the accepted level of grade inflation and then they worked back from there. Assume those implementing are autistic, swotty, privately educated you get the inhuman mixed with preservation of their own.

First.Aspect

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

Now, if you were debating anything about bicycles or training, the correct "forum" response would be something along the lines of "you have a child's reading age" or "you are just humiliating yourself now". This instantaneously makes everything you have just said incorrect.

Repeat as necessary (3-4 repeats seems about normal).

coopster_the_1st

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

You have again proved my point that those in the public sector are looking for problems, not solutions.

You say you would get into trouble for using a built in Windows tool designed to perform remote management/oversight perfectly in your at risk situation. You would successfully be able to argue that you are doing this to comply with the C19 teaching guidelines and thus delivering education to your students safely for them and safely for yourself. I think anyone trying to stop you doing this would look very foolish, very quickly in the current situation. In fact, they should be facilitating you implementing this solution.

The above outlines perfectly how the private sector operates compared to public sector.

TDLR: Grow some and put the education of your students first alongside mitigating your health risk. This is how the real world operates.

Ben6899

You have way more patience than me, Bomp, responding to him.

TheBigBean

tailwindhome said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

An interesting video explaining just how inaccurate Ofqual's algorithm was.

https://youtu.be/wZODW080gsc

Tl;dr it was only about 60% accurate when applied to 2019 data and they published this in their own report. (page 204 if anyone wants to look).

I have been encouraging people to read the report. The executive summary is not that longer, but it is more than 140 characters.

Would you mind reposting a link to that report
Ta

TheBigBean said:

Furher reading on exam methodology in case anyone is interested.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/awarding-gcse-as-a-levels-in-summer-2020-interim-report

First.Aspect

coopster_the_1st said:

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

You have again proved my point that those in the public sector are looking for problems, not solutions.

You say you would get into trouble for using a built in Windows tool designed to perform remote management/oversight perfectly in your at risk situation. You would successfully be able to argue that you are doing this to comply with the C19 teaching guidelines and thus delivering education to your students safely for them and safely for yourself. I think anyone trying to stop you doing this would look very foolish, very quickly in the current situation. In fact, they should be facilitating you implementing this solution.

The above outlines perfectly how the private sector operates compared to public sector.

TDLR: Grow some and put the education of your students first alongside mitigating your health risk. This is how the real world operates.

Yes you should jolly well give them a piece of your mind, that's what I say. That will sort it.

kingstongraham

coopster_the_1st said:

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

You have again proved my point that those in the public sector are looking for problems, not solutions.

You say you would get into trouble for using a built in Windows tool designed to perform remote management/oversight perfectly in your at risk situation. You would successfully be able to argue that you are doing this to comply with the C19 teaching guidelines and thus delivering education to your students safely for them and safely for yourself. I think anyone trying to stop you doing this would look very foolish, very quickly in the current situation. In fact, they should be facilitating you implementing this solution.

The above outlines perfectly how the private sector operates compared to public sector.

TDLR: Grow some and put the education of your students first alongside mitigating your health risk. This is how the real world operates.

You're saying that if you asked whether you could bypass security controls, and were told "no", you'd do it anyway?

coopster_the_1st

First.Aspect said:

coopster_the_1st said:

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

You have again proved my point that those in the public sector are looking for problems, not solutions.

You say you would get into trouble for using a built in Windows tool designed to perform remote management/oversight perfectly in your at risk situation. You would successfully be able to argue that you are doing this to comply with the C19 teaching guidelines and thus delivering education to your students safely for them and safely for yourself. I think anyone trying to stop you doing this would look very foolish, very quickly in the current situation. In fact, they should be facilitating you implementing this solution.

The above outlines perfectly how the private sector operates compared to public sector.

TDLR: Grow some and put the education of your students first alongside mitigating your health risk. This is how the real world operates.

Yes you should jolly well give them a piece of your mind, that's what I say. That will sort it.

What would the press and wee Jimmy Krankie say in her daily address, if a teacher was suspended(reprimanded) because he was implementing the C19 teaching solutions about staying distanced from pupils because the bureaucrats would not assist him as he is vulnerable?

rick_chasey

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

First.Aspect

coopster_the_1st said:

First.Aspect said:

coopster_the_1st said:

bompington said:

coopster_the_1st said:

rjsterry said:

You do come across as having a massive chip on your shoulder towards professions.

Only ones that come across as incompetent and that is what the teaching profession have shown themselves to be since mid-March.

There is a lot of truth in the statement "Those who can do. Those who can't teach" and the teaching profession have not disproved this over the last 5 months. Only a few days ago our resident IT teacher again demonstrated this point.

Defending incompetence, like you are doing will not raise the standards.

Presumably you are referring back to the post where I explained that our remote control software was broken and the council wouldn't let us replace it.

I have often noticed a "debating" tactic on forums where people assume that, because someone didn't spell something out in words of less than one syllable so they could understand it, choose to act as if the post was evidence of something they didn't say at all.

So let's look a little more closely:

Bompington actually said:

Decent remote control software could of course help with that kind of thing. We had shoddy but halfway effective remote software for demos, assistance etc - until our machines were upgraded to Windows 10, which broke it. They are refusing to replace it with something that works, on the grounds of a) cost and b) GDPR. WTF?

I should of course have added, for the benefit of the hard of thinking / desperate to own the libs crowd, that like most corporate networks, ours is locked down to the extent that the vast majority of network tools are just not accessible. They aren't very good at network management - I did a much better job when I worked at a special school with a full time teaching role and managed a small (c. 40 machines, 75 users) but perfectly formed network on the side. So I do know how to get round an awful lot of the restrictions, but would get into a lot of trouble if caught.


So when some argumentative idiot thinks they're so clever 'cos they replied with

coopster_the_1st said:

Should it be one for the irony thread that a computer teacher does not know about remote control options for computers?

If they are using Windows 10 Education, which is what a school should be using, remote desktop is included for free in Windows 10

it might give them a smug feeling for a few seconds, but it just reveals the depth of ignorance they have of the actual situation.

tldr: I know about RDP and have used it for years. The point that I clearly spelled out was that we are prevented from using it, not that we can't.

You have again proved my point that those in the public sector are looking for problems, not solutions.

You say you would get into trouble for using a built in Windows tool designed to perform remote management/oversight perfectly in your at risk situation. You would successfully be able to argue that you are doing this to comply with the C19 teaching guidelines and thus delivering education to your students safely for them and safely for yourself. I think anyone trying to stop you doing this would look very foolish, very quickly in the current situation. In fact, they should be facilitating you implementing this solution.

The above outlines perfectly how the private sector operates compared to public sector.

TDLR: Grow some and put the education of your students first alongside mitigating your health risk. This is how the real world operates.

Yes you should jolly well give them a piece of your mind, that's what I say. That will sort it.

What would the press and wee Jimmy Krankie say in her daily address, if a teacher was suspended(reprimanded) because he was implementing the C19 teaching solutions about staying distanced from pupils because the bureaucrats would not assist him as he is vulnerable?

Probably nothing at all. They have some news to report on you see.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

I have always liked the idea of giving every kid/ their circa £5k pa budget to spend at whichever school they want

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

Adults held responsible for the actions of their parents?

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

Adults held responsible for the actions of their parents?

Er are you familiar with how uni bursaries work?

First.Aspect

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

Adults held responsible for the actions of their parents?

Er are you familiar with how uni bursaries work?

You mean when they consider the income of the parents which the student doesn't necessarily have access to? They're not great either, but your idea is ridiculous.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rick_chasey said:

Saw a suggestion re school fees which I was a big fan of:

Your university fee per year is the average annual school fee you had 12-18.

Adults held responsible for the actions of their parents?

Er are you familiar with how uni bursaries work?

You mean when they consider the income of the parents which the student doesn't necessarily have access to? They're not great either, but your idea is ridiculous.

Parents need to think about that before they send them then .

tailwindhome

All students in England to get the teacher assessed grades

TheBigBean

tailwindhome said:

All students in England to get the teacher assessed grades

Universties are going to be annoyed.

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

tailwindhome said:

All students in England to get the teacher assessed grades

Universties are going to be annoyed.

According to who?

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

Sorry, can't remember what field you are in, but yes, it's a bit easier for more 'vocational' degrees. I do think that other subjects could learn from it, though. If you can present a piece of original work to a panel of examiners you can do the same thing to a potential employer. I'm not sure it matters what the subject is so long as you can present it in a way that interests, demonstrates some critical thought, shows initiative and any other skills you think the examiner/employer would value.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

Sorry, can't remember what field you are in, but yes, it's a bit easier for more 'vocational' degrees. I do think that other subjects could learn from it, though. If you can present a piece of original work to a panel of examiners you can do the same thing to a potential employer. I'm not sure it matters what the subject is so long as you can present it in a way that interests, demonstrates some critical thought, shows initiative and any other skills you think the examiner/employer would value.

I always found "tell me about your final year project" an excellent interview question for graduates. Really tests whether they can explain something complicated to someone who knows nothing about the subject.

tailwindhome

"the attainment gap in final grades between disadvantaged pupils and their peers has remained stable this year"

Wow.

TheBigBean

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

tailwindhome said:

All students in England to get the teacher assessed grades

Universties are going to be annoyed.

According to who?

What are they going to do with all the extra students they will be obliged to offer places to?

rick_chasey

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

Sorry, can't remember what field you are in, but yes, it's a bit easier for more 'vocational' degrees. I do think that other subjects could learn from it, though. If you can present a piece of original work to a panel of examiners you can do the same thing to a potential employer. I'm not sure it matters what the subject is so long as you can present it in a way that interests, demonstrates some critical thought, shows initiative and any other skills you think the examiner/employer would value.

I always found "tell me about your final year project" an excellent interview question for graduates. Really tests whether they can explain something complicated to someone who knows nothing about the subject.

Depends what the job is but sure.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

Sorry, can't remember what field you are in, but yes, it's a bit easier for more 'vocational' degrees. I do think that other subjects could learn from it, though. If you can present a piece of original work to a panel of examiners you can do the same thing to a potential employer. I'm not sure it matters what the subject is so long as you can present it in a way that interests, demonstrates some critical thought, shows initiative and any other skills you think the examiner/employer would value.

I always found "tell me about your final year project" an excellent interview question for graduates. Really tests whether they can explain something complicated to someone who knows nothing about the subject.

Exactly.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

I think it's interesting that so much weight is put on the grade. In my field, because you need to show examples of your work in any job interview scenario, there is much less reliance on the grade, because much stronger evidence of ability is right there in front of you.

How do you evaluate graduates?

CV + samples of work for selection for interview, then interview. Degree grade is one line in the CV and the samples of work tell you far more about the candidate's ability. At the interview you can then confirm that the work really is their work and that they have a good understanding of what they have produced.

How can they show you examples of they are trying to get their first job, that's what I'm asking.

They will have produced work for their degree, so everyone should have something to show. Obviously if a candidate has managed to do some work experience, then they can show that as well. An architecture exam consists of pinning your work on the wall and having it critiqued/ripped to shreds by examiners in front of your peers. It's a good system and one I would recommend for other subjects. There is no hiding if you haven't done the work. There are written exams and a dissertation as well but these form a smaller part of the overall assessment.

Got it. I can see that would work for that type of discipline, because there is a direct correlation between the degree subject and the profession. Scientists can show their final projects, any publications, the thesis. And the graduate degrees include a viva. So that works for postdocs and R&D roles.

But what about graduates from finger painting degrees, applying to unrelated professions. For that matter, my work? We train on the job but need to be capable of a particular way of thinking to do the job at all. Our best guide is their academic record, because we know from experience that anyone who wasn't pretty much straight A's and a 1st or 2:1 simply won't make it. We might spot someone with bad A levels and a really good degree and look past it, but to be honest they'd need to really impress in the interview process to assuage doubts.

Sorry, can't remember what field you are in, but yes, it's a bit easier for more 'vocational' degrees. I do think that other subjects could learn from it, though. If you can present a piece of original work to a panel of examiners you can do the same thing to a potential employer. I'm not sure it matters what the subject is so long as you can present it in a way that interests, demonstrates some critical thought, shows initiative and any other skills you think the examiner/employer would value.

I always found "tell me about your final year project" an excellent interview question for graduates. Really tests whether they can explain something complicated to someone who knows nothing about the subject.

Depends what the job is but sure.

I'm trying to think of a graduate level job where an ability to communicate complex ideas to the uninformed isn't useful.