Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

blogs.lse.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 92 posts

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#51

Post by meheleventyone »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #21
meheleventyone wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I’d expect assessment of an individual to be about their performance not their schools past performance. Any system not predicated on that is doomed to fail in assessing students performance as this one obviously did.

Well that's what exams are for but they went out the window as soon as the virus arrived. Whatever system the govenment put in place would be worse but it didn't need to be this bad.

They could and probably should have done exactly what ended up happening and relying on prior data per student. Imperfect though it was at least it's about their attainment rather than an aggregate attainment.

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#52

Post by m4r35n357 »

m4r35n357 wrote: post #5
jonplackett wrote: post #2

The problem was not using an algorithm, it was that they used a crap algorithm that could award students grades that were higher than those even available on the paper that they sat, and made it impossible to get a high grade if no-one fromm your college got one before. I'd love to see the details of the algorithm itself. Surely it can't have been too difficult to put some guard rails in there to prevent it moving an…

A description of the algorithm and its shortcomings: http://thaines.com/post/alevels2020

Unfortunate that the HN "algorithm" favours the views of various clueless gobshites over the useful and relevant link I posted above . . .

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#53

Post by asplake »

rbecker wrote: post #50
asplake wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, the unfairnesses of the two options are very different. On the one hand, you leave it to educators and employers to select candidates based on unreliable grades, versus excluding swathes of the population from opportunity. Leave it to decision-makers that seem to fetishise exam grades and you come to what I'm sure the vast majority of people regard as the wrong conclusion. Yes, there would have been fallout,…

> On the one hand, you leave it to educators and employers to select candidates based on unreliable grades, versus excluding swathes of the population from opportunity. That "versus" is unwarranted - unless everyone is given top marks, exclusion happens in either case. In fact it would happen in that case as well, as top colleges (practically by definition of 'top') cannot accept everyone. All you've done is changed…

Ofqual Chairman Says It Was A "Fundamental Mistake" To Believe Algorithm Grades "Would Ever Be Acceptable" https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/ofqual-algorithm-m...

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#54

Post by chippy »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #27
chippy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We really need to see what teachers assessments in previous years look like. Are they consistently optimistic?

You don't have to look far, now the government has caved we can see the grade inflation, particularly from state schools.

That is showing this years assessments, which I imagine, were done during the lockdown. I'm wondering about previous years.

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#55

Post by rbecker »

asplake wrote: post #53
rbecker wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the one hand, you leave it to educators and employers to select candidates based on unreliable grades, versus excluding swathes of the population from opportunity. That "versus" is unwarranted - unless everyone is given top marks, exclusion happens in either case. In fact it would happen in that case as well, as top colleges (practically by definition of 'top') cannot accept everyone. All you've done is changed…

Ofqual Chairman Says It Was A "Fundamental Mistake" To Believe Algorithm Grades "Would Ever Be Acceptable" https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/ofqual-algorithm-m...

"Students will now receive grades based on their teacher’s estimate of what their grade would have been"

But if those estimates are improved using statistics, there's a political fallout. There's some valid criticism of the algorithm used (far less than that BBC article tries to imply), but there's no question the algorithm's estimates were more accurate.

So much ink was spilled calling the algorithm biased for its 4% increase in A-grades for independent schools, yet teacher's 40% increase of grades above the expected average is... what? Unbiased?

On any other topic, such a position would be called "anti-science".

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#56

Post by jonplackett »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #8
jonplackett wrote: post #2

The problem was not using an algorithm, it was that they used a crap algorithm that could award students grades that were higher than those even available on the paper that they sat, and made it impossible to get a high grade if no-one fromm your college got one before. I'd love to see the details of the algorithm itself. Surely it can't have been too difficult to put some guard rails in there to prevent it moving an…

and made it impossible to get a high grade if no-one fromm your college got one before Well that is unlikely. If you are going to handle it algorithmically then what else would you expect. Clearly the teachers can't be relied on because now everybody is getting an A*, the grades are effectively useless as an indicator. I was disappointed although not surprised that the government caved on this.

It says this is happening in the article.

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#57

Post by jonplackett »

londons_explore wrote: post #4
jonplackett wrote: post #2

The problem was not using an algorithm, it was that they used a crap algorithm that could award students grades that were higher than those even available on the paper that they sat, and made it impossible to get a high grade if no-one fromm your college got one before. I'd love to see the details of the algorithm itself. Surely it can't have been too difficult to put some guard rails in there to prevent it moving an…

The algorithm was the same one used for decades, and previously published. It pretty much says: > You get your exam grade. If that isn't available, you get a grade set by averaging your peers from the same school, with the set of peers decided by a ranking set by your teacher. If that isn't available, you get a grade chosen by your raking in class selected from the distribution of your schools past performance. There…

The algorithm you describe seems to have nothing in common with what has happened. There are students getting many grade levels above or below what they were predicted. That makes zero sense.

Grade inflation is a completely different topic and has happened even more now that they've decided you can have whichever grade is higher out of predicted VS algorithm, grades are up something like 20% on last year.

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#58

Post by asplake »

rbecker wrote: post #55
asplake wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ofqual Chairman Says It Was A "Fundamental Mistake" To Believe Algorithm Grades "Would Ever Be Acceptable" https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/ofqual-algorithm-m...

"Students will now receive grades based on their teacher’s estimate of what their grade would have been" But if those estimates are improved using statistics, there's a political fallout. There's some valid criticism of the algorithm used (far less than that BBC article tries to imply), but there's no question the algorithm's estimates were more accurate. So much ink was spilled calling the algorithm biased for its 4…

There’s a fundamental asymmetry here. Fail a student unfairly, and the harm to them is potentially irreparable. Pass more than usual, and you increase competition for places and while there’s certainly some unfairness there, the system will ultimately compensate through interviewing, delayed starts, etc.

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#59

Post by rbecker »

asplake wrote: post #58
rbecker wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Students will now receive grades based on their teacher’s estimate of what their grade would have been" But if those estimates are improved using statistics, there's a political fallout. There's some valid criticism of the algorithm used (far less than that BBC article tries to imply), but there's no question the algorithm's estimates were more accurate. So much ink was spilled calling the algorithm biased for its 4…

There’s a fundamental asymmetry here. Fail a student unfairly, and the harm to them is potentially irreparable. Pass more than usual, and you increase competition for places and while there’s certainly some unfairness there, the system will ultimately compensate through interviewing, delayed starts, etc.

> the system will ultimately compensate through interviewing, delayed starts, etc.

A roundabout way of saying that some students that would have been accepted to their chosen college, won't be, because their grades weren't as inflated as their competitions. Isn't that also potentially irreparable harm, not just "some unfairness"?

Re: What the world can learn from the UK's A-level grading fiasco

#60

Post by asplake »

rbecker wrote: post #59
asplake wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a fundamental asymmetry here. Fail a student unfairly, and the harm to them is potentially irreparable. Pass more than usual, and you increase competition for places and while there’s certainly some unfairness there, the system will ultimately compensate through interviewing, delayed starts, etc.

> the system will ultimately compensate through interviewing, delayed starts, etc. A roundabout way of saying that some students that would have been accepted to their chosen college, won't be, because their grades weren't as inflated as their competitions. Isn't that also potentially irreparable harm, not just "some unfairness"?

There’s a massive difference between not getting your preferred place and being denied the opportunity even to apply
Post reply on HN