Exam Results

[Yellow Fever 3,783]

11 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Anyone will be able to re sit at no cost and the student will be entitled to the best grade

Whilst this clearly resolves any fairness issues an autumn re sit might not be compatible with the student's plans for next year.

This was my point earlier.  If the grades were published earlier and resits were at the start of August there could be no issue that I can see other than finding people willing to invigilate and mark.

 

That bird has already flown due to this government's own stupidity earlier. Yes they 've flunked the class of 2020 as well as nearly everything else.

What they should do now is a mea culpa (as generally clearly innumerate arts/classic students they should be able to translate)  - like Sturgeon (an order of a magnitude a better leader than Johnson whatever your politics) and scrap the 'normalized'' grades and go with just predictions. 

It's impossible to defend the indefensible.

[Barbe bleu 826]

12 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

 

Both kids were predicted straight A's and A*'s (and had been top students for the past 3-4 years), yet somehow one got downgraded to two A's and a B, the other an A and two B's, this despite the teachers assessments.

 

 

sounds like your friend's children have been victims of an unusually gifted year group.a. 

As I understand it the basic premise is that schools were, in effect, given a limited number of As, Bs etc to hand out based on previous years' results.

If the school tried to hand out more grades of a type than they were given then those ranked by the school as being at the lower end of the grade had their results moderated downwards (although it also worked the other way)

I'm not sure how much scope schools had to deal with classes that are unusually gifted in comparison to previous years.  

[Indy_Bones 441]

That's the absurdity of it though, all kids are meant to take the same tests, so even if an entire class somehow all got straight A's, that would be no issue, but because no actual tests were taken, somehow it's deemed ok to straight out downgrade students if they are part of a strong school with good results overall on a willy nilly basis.

It's not the kids responsibility or fault if others in that school also perform to a high level, so for the govt to flat out limit the acceptable number of high grades regardless of aptitude already shows a blatant bias in the approach.

Just absolutely awful what a mess they've made of this whole thing.

[Barbe bleu 826]

3 hours ago, Indy_Bones said:

That's the absurdity of it though, all kids are meant to take the same tests, so even if an entire class somehow all got straight A's, that would be no issue, but because no actual tests were taken, somehow it's deemed ok to straight out downgrade students if they are part of a strong school with good results overall on a willy nilly basis.

It's not the kids responsibility or fault if others in that school also perform to a high level, so for the govt to flat out limit the acceptable number of high grades regardless of aptitude already shows a blatant bias in the approach.

Just absolutely awful what a mess they've made of this whole thing.

This is the problem with aggregating disaggregate data

Kids are not cleverer than they were last year and as a whole teaching has not suddenly improved this year. So across the piece the results this year should look like they did last year.  The moderation scheme was devised to do this and to reduce the bias that would otherwise creep in.

The fact that something like 40% of grades have been moderated downwards  and the results still resemble previous years is probably proof that, in aggregate terms, teachers tend to be very optimistic.

But each pupil is an individual and 40% have seen grades downgraded. Many will rightly say that it should not be them that gets the treatment.  For these kids their must be a way to challenge the algorithm and to demonstrate what they can do.   This is why I say that the appeals process and the right to a resit are key and why it is a shame that it has taken until august to get into this position.

Your friends kids are aggrieved; Maybe rightly, maybe wrongly.  A resit in june or july would have been possible in the disease climate and would have answered the question by now and in time for universities.

 

Edited August 16, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Bill 1,788]

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

As I understand it the basic premise is that schools were, in effect, given a limited number of As, Bs etc to hand out based on previous years' results.

'limited' when compared to public, or private schools it would seem

but do carry on hand crank

I'm sure you will be able to crowbar 'tribalism' into it somewhere, as your weasel words try to distract from obvious government blame as you did previously with the handling of Covid-19

[Well b back 3,205]

2 hours ago, FenwayFrank said:

I haven’t followed things particularly closely but if someone genuinely feels they have been downgraded a couple of grades can’t they take the exam in September anyway?

That does not help the guy who has been widely reported in the press. Was predicted A* A* A and was given B B D and has now had his Oxford offer pulled. What makes his more laughable is one of those was in maths. In maths he also decided to take the more advanced maths exam as well ( forget what it’s called ). Those exams were actually sat in January and guess what he got the best possible mark equivalent to an A* in a more advanced exam than the A level. His only problem he went to a state school that had bad results last year, so his results were downgraded accordingly based on others failure and not his efforts to overcome his disadvantages in life.

[Well b back 3,205]

The petition is going well, more signing than the brexit one.

https://www.change.org/su/p/boris-johnson-boris-johnson-we-need-a-fairer-system-for-this-year-s-a-level-and-gcse-students/f?source_location=psf_petitions

[Barbe bleu 826]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

'limited' when compared to public, or private schools it would seem

but do carry on hand crank

I'm sure you will be able to crowbar 'tribalism' into it somewhere, as your weasel words try to distract from obvious government blame as you did previously with the handling of Covid-19

Here he is again.  

A polite and open discussion is underway so Bill decides to disrupt it.  Once again nothing but abuse is being added to the debate by him.

 

[Bill 1,788]

6 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Here he is again.  

A polite and open discussion is underway so Bill decides to disrupt it.  Once again nothing but abuse is being added to the debate by him.

you have the choice to not read my posts, or even set your preferences to ignore me

if not, don't whine when I point out where you are coming from and why

 

[Barbe bleu 826]

20 minutes ago, Bill said:

you have the choice to not read my posts, or even set your preferences to ignore me

if not, don't whine when I point out where you are coming from and why

 

 

I ignored you for a very long time. The problem is that as soon as you appear the quality of the debate falls away.

It descends into personal attacks, nonsense about bets and this odd obsession about lies and identities. 

I get that you have a need that this forum meets but its a shame that it has to come at the expense of everyone else.

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

That bird has already flown due to this government's own stupidity earlier. Yes they 've flunked the class of 2020 as well as nearly everything else.

What they should do now is a mea culpa (as generally clearly innumerate arts/classic students they should be able to translate)  - like Sturgeon (an order of a magnitude a better leader than Johnson whatever your politics) and scrap the 'normalized'' grades and go with just predictions. 

It's impossible to defend the indefensible.

Spot on but @Barbe bleu likes to give it his best shot, and frequently does 😀

Unfortunately (for him) the government have produced such a complete shambles this time that he's really got very little to work with.

See that the appeal process we've heard so much about as the solution to this problem - which any even slightly competent government would have had ready before they announced results which they knew would be massively contentious - was finally published yesterday........and withdrawn a few hours later!!!!! 🥴

You literally could not make up nonsense like this - if Yes, Minister had run storylines like this we wouldn't have been laughing, we'd have just dismissed it as ridiculous and far-fetched.

Well, it is no longer far- fetched, we actually have a Government of fur-lined, ocean-going stupidity and yet apparently some people are still quite happy with them. I suspect for many people the reality will only kick in when it not only affects them personally but it actually hits them in their pockets..............which is pretty soon for most of us (assuming that we're lucky enough not to have been hit already).

[Bill 1,788]

23 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

 

I ignored you for a very long time. The problem is that as soon as you appear the quality of the debate falls away.

It descends into personal attacks, nonsense about bets and this odd obsession about lies and identities. 

I get that you have a need that this forum meets but its a shame that it has to come at the expense of everyone else.

I do not see the quality CM's comments 'falling away' as a consequence of my posting

In fact what I do see is him taking the same stance towards your guff as myself, only far more eloquently

Your posts on thus thread as elsewhere have been little more than weasel words trying excuse the governments actions by misrepresenting what others have said.

Numerous folk on here have fallen foul of this tactic of yours, irrespective of what name you have posted under

That is the real threat to decent discussion on here.................. as you well know

A tactic much used by both RTB, and hand crankWhether others have noticed this similarity i don;t know - but

[Barbe bleu 826]

19 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Spot on but @Barbe bleu likes to give it his best shot, and frequently does 😀

Unfortunately (for him) the government have produced such a complete shambles this time that he's really got very little to work with.

See that the appeal process we've heard so much about as the solution to this problem - which any even slightly competent government would have had ready before they announced results which they knew would be massively contentious - was finally published yesterday........and withdrawn a few hours later!!!!! 🥴

You literally could not make up nonsense like this - if Yes, Minister had run storylines like this we wouldn't have been laughing, we'd have just dismissed it as ridiculous and far-fetched.

Well, it is no longer far- fetched, we actually have a Government of fur-lined, ocean-going stupidity and yet apparently some people are still quite happy with them. I suspect for many people the reality will only kick in when it not only affects them personally but it actually hits them in their pockets..............which is pretty soon for most of us (assuming that we're lucky enough not to have been hit already).

I am not a spokesman for givernmwnt and I have not given unqualifird support in any thread. In some I have been very critical of certain aspects.

What I like to do is examine the evidence and come to a balanced conclusion on the basis of that evidence, taking into account what others say.

So, on this one I completely get what the idea was and think it was an approach worthy of support. The critical error though was in publishing these results in August and thus not giving pupils time to lodge appeals or take 'resits'.

as you see it fit to make this personal  tell me what of the above and my previous posts you disagree with. 

 

 

Edited August 16, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Barbe bleu 826]

3 minutes ago, Bill said:

I do not see the quality CM's comments 'falling away' as a consequence of my posting

In fact what I do see is him taking the same stance towards your guff as myself, only far more eloquently

Your posts on thus thread as elsewhere have been little more than weasel words trying excuse the governments actions by misrepresenting what others have said.

Numerous folk on here have fallen foul of this tactic of yours, irrespective of what name you have posted under

That is the real threat to decent discussion on here.................. as you well know

A tactic much used by both RTB, and hand crankWhether others have noticed this similarity i don;t know - but

OK, I'll consider my involvement in this thread at an end. 

The pink.un is a community of very intelligent people and a few needy bullies. Unfortunately it is the latter (ie you) that spoil it.

And please stop saying 'guff' it is as annoying as the monty python references.

[Bill 1,788]

shame, I was hoping you could shed some light on hand crank's claims to have been a 'track and tracer'

...... or maybe that is why you have slunk off 😏

 

[BigFish 1,986]

4 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

Anyone will be able to re sit at no cost and the student will be entitled to the best grade

Whilst this clearly resolves any fairness issues an autumn re sit might not be compatible with the student's plans for next year.

This was my point earlier.  If the grades were published earlier and resits were at the start of August there could be no issue that I can see other than finding people willing to invigilate and mark.

 

True @Barbe bleu, it is not like the government didn't have five months to do better than this cluster****

[kick it off 1,952]

Where your argument falls down BarbeBleu, is the fact that some kids haven't been downgraded so they're swanning off to uni on the basis of living in the right postcode, whilst poorer kids actually have to sit the exams to achieve the same opportunity. Does that not smack of inequity and inherent unfairness to you?

The other point it falls down is schools dont have the space or staffing capacity to run a full cohort and invite hundreds of extra kids in to complete a full timetable of exams. If you're advocating resits as the solution then you cant send the kids back to school in September- its not feasible to run a full school and an exam programme for an additional year group on top.

[kick it off 1,952]

and just to add, teachers were not optimistic in their predictions. We internally moderated our gcse predictions to ensure they were fair, consistent and roughly in line with what we consistently achieve.

Teachers cannot predict which kid will revise the wrong topic, or turn up prepared for their biology exam to find they have chemistry and they misread the timetable, or which kid will screw the exam up because they've been kicked out by their parents the night before and had to sleep on friends' sofa. All of those things happen, every year in every school, but you cant seriously expect us to pluck names out a hat and guess which kids it might be, and grade kids based on that?

We have to give them the appropriate grade for the level of ability they have demonstrated over the 2/3 years of gcse study (which by the way is far more representative than a one off exam). We can't penalise individual students on hypothetical scenarios they might experience. 

Thays why you are wrong buying into the right wing media "dishonest teachers inflating grades" narrative. Thats not accurate and that's why trying to replicate national results through an algorithm doesn't work. We can't account for all the variables, and we can't guess which kids will experience the multitude of issues that affect exam performance. By trying to implement national moderation, you are literally throwing darts at a board blindfolded and punishing kids if they are unlucky enough to get hit.

Edited August 16, 2020 by kick it off

[Barbe bleu 826]

1 hour ago, kick it off said:

and just to add, teachers were not optimistic in their predictions. We internally moderated our gcse predictions to ensure they were fair, consistent and roughly in line with what we consistently achieve.

Teachers cannot predict which kid will revise the wrong topic, or turn up prepared for their biology exam to find they have chemistry and they misread the timetable, or which kid will screw the exam up because they've been kicked out by their parents the night before and had to sleep on friends' sofa. All of those things happen, every year in every school, but you cant seriously expect us to pluck names out a hat and guess which kids it might be, and grade kids based on that?

We have to give them the appropriate grade for the level of ability they have demonstrated over the 2/3 years of gcse study (which by the way is far more representative than a one off exam). We can't penalise individual students on hypothetical scenarios they might experience. 

Thays why you are wrong buying into the right wing media "dishonest teachers inflating grades" narrative. Thats not accurate and that's why trying to replicate national results through an algorithm doesn't work. We can't account for all the variables, and we can't guess which kids will experience the multitude of issues that affect exam performance. By trying to implement national moderation, you are literally throwing darts at a board blindfolded and punishing kids if they are unlucky enough to get hit.

These are fair points. 

Kids mess up exams for any number of reasons unrelated to their potential and in a largely random fashion.  I would also agree that the algorithm should compensate by accepting a higher pass rate than normal.  40% seems very high but I could well believe that 5-10% have a nightmare time that has a big impact on exams. So a 5-10% inflation seems reasonable to me. I have no idea what the pass rate was this year compared to others.

You say that your grades were roughly in line with previous years. I am sure that is correct but with so much moderation I am not sure that is true across the board. And I have not said or suggested dishonesty comes into it at all. I doubt that there is more than a couple of teachers who have handed in grades that do not reflect their true opinion one way or the other.

But you have missed my point. I have never said that the algorithm is anything like perfect. Its too late now but my argument is that the algorithm should have been a first go with disputes and inconsistencies dealt with by appeals and resits, all in time for September. Hard to organise, sure, but this are unusual times that have required great effort and great sacrifice from many. 

Edited August 16, 2020 by Barbe bleu

[Barbe bleu 826]

1 hour ago, kick it off said:

Where your argument falls down BarbeBleu, is the fact that some kids haven't been downgraded so they're swanning off to uni on the basis of living in the right postcode, whilst poorer kids actually have to sit the exams to achieve the same opportunity. Does that not smack of inequity and inherent unfairness to you?

yes, the education system is unequal and I imagine that exam results prove this every year.

If the intention was to correct inequalities then the honest thing to do would have been to put a compensation factor into the algorithm and be open about doing so.   But I dont think that was the intention which instead was to give as accurate an estimate of what each child would have got had they sat the exam.

[kick it off 1,952]

30 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

yes, the education system is unequal and I imagine that exam results prove this every year.

If the intention was to correct inequalities then the honest thing to do would have been to put a compensation factor into the algorithm and be open about doing so.   But I dont think that was the intention which instead was to give as accurate an estimate of what each child would have got had they sat the exam.

Well then surely the fairest and most accurate way to do that would be to accept teacher grades which were based on what students would have got in the exam, if they had performed to their ability level, based on several years knowledge of the students and their work ethic, and ask for random work samples to support these grades, to ensure consistency and fairness.

Randomly downgrading students for no good reason other than to fit a model is neither accurate or fair. They did put a compensation factor in, but unfortunately it was aimed at ensuring private school kids avoided much of the chaos that state school kids were subjected to, by ensuring the algorithm wasn't applied to a majority of their results. Picking names off a list having never met the kids, and trashing their future is not accurate.

These aren't statistics we are talking about, they're real people whose life chances are being destroyed because "computer says no". You're talking about kids who have never got lower than an A, being given D grades because of where they live, and no recourse to appeal because they sat their mock exam in the library instead of the hall and it was only a partial mock. Kids who have dreams and goals, who should be in Russel Group universities who now have a set of grades that mean not only have they lost their place at their uni of choice, but they have no universities willing to take them. How on earth is that accurate? We're in the middle of a global pandemic - there is no way to accurately compare this cohort's results to any other because no other cohort has missed months of school and had their learning disrupted by a pandemic. It's silly to pretend these results should be in line with other years, it's an anomalous year and needs to be treated as such.

I appreciate what you're saying about exams in July, but we are where we are and the only solutions that are now viable are to accept ALL the centre assessed grades regardless, and/or to make all provisional uni offers unconditional. There is no other solution, and the govt will HAVe to eventually accept this. The choice they have is to do it now, or wait until they've caused utter chaos with GCSEs and then implement it. The sensible, logical solution is do it now, but this government are so incompetent that they won't, but sooner or later they have to, there is no other choice.

Edited August 16, 2020 by kick it off

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

6 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

I am not a spokesman for givernmwnt and I have not given unqualifird support in any thread. In some I have been very critical of certain aspects.

What I like to do is examine the evidence and come to a balanced conclusion on the basis of that evidence, taking into account what others say.

So, on this one I completely get what the idea was and think it was an approach worthy of support. The critical error though was in publishing these results in August and thus not giving pupils time to lodge appeals or take 'resits'.

as you see it fit to make this personal  tell me what of the above and my previous posts you disagree with. 

 

 

Well its interesting that you feel it necessary to clarify that you aren't a spokesman for the government - I didn't suggest you were, although I think I may have made a light hearted suggestion to that effect many months ago 😀

What I would say with respect to your previous posts, generally not just on this thread, is that you are a very consistent supporter of the government.

I'm not really too sure what you mean by unqualified support in this context and frankly, although I can recall some very occasional mild criticism of the government, given the scale and frequency of government incompetence (and deceitfulness) that we have witnessed over the last few months, I don't recall anything which would go anywhere near contradicting my description of you as a very consistent supporter of the government - I think most posters would feel that was a pretty fair description.

I've highlighted the key sentence in your post above which I think goes to the heart of many of the disagreements we've had on here. Your posts are always couched in moderate language in an attempt, I would suggest somewhat cynically, to sound reasonable - whilst I applaud the moderate language I completely reject the notion that you reach balanced or reasonable conclusions based on evidence or taking into account what others say, perhaps because I suspect you have an incredibly narrow and naive view of what constitutes evidence.

I could expand on this at some length but I'm sure nobody wants that, and I have got other things I should be getting on with 😀 So a simple example - in the early stages of the crisis I made quite a few highly critical posts some of which were based on observations from close family members which you dismissed very casually with lines like, and I paraphrase, you weren't particularly interested in unsubstantiated stories and preferred to rely on official statement\statistics - many of which we suspected at time and now know for certain were at best extremely disingenous, some straightforward lies and others simply inaccurate.

Of course there is no particular reason why you should believe me - after all I could have been a malcontent with a chip on my shoulder making it all up to discredit a government I dislike. Actually everything I posted was true but that is irrevelant - the point is a huge number of people were saying similar or related things, many from the NHS frontline (for many years the most trusted professionals in the country you may recall), many independent well respected scientists and researchers, and of couse many overseas experts.

So I'm afraid that when you claim to have reached balanced conclusions based on evidence I simply don't believe you. You could only reach many of the conclusions you've reached by ignoring most of the evidence or perhaps, and more likely IMO, you have looked at the evidence and decided to stick with the government you support warts and all, even at the risk of their incompetence having even more disastrous consequences this winter - because one thing we can be certain of is that this government has learnt absolutely nothing from its many mistakes - I think this weekend's events illustrate that pretty well.

Edited August 16, 2020 by Creative Midfielder

[Barbe bleu 826]

5 minutes ago, kick it off said:

Well then surely the fairest and most accurate way to do that would be to accept teacher grades which were based on what students would have got in the exam, if they had performed to their ability level, based on several years knowledge of the students and their work ethic, and ask for random work samples to support these grades, to ensure consistency and fairness.

Randomly downgrading students for no good reason other than to fit a model is neither accurate or fair. They did put a compensation factor in, but unfortunately it was aimed at ensuring private school kids avoided much of the chaos that state school kids were subjected to, by ensuring the algorithm wasn't applied to a majority of their results. Picking names off a list having never met the kids, and trashing their future is not accurate.

These aren't statistics we are talking about, they're real people whose life chances are being destroyed because "computer says no". You're talking about kids who have never got lower than an A, being given D grades because of where they live, and no recourse to appeal because they sat their mock exam in the library instead of the hall and it was only a partial mock. Kids who have dreams and goals, who should be in Russel Group universities who now have a set of grades that mean not only have they lost their place at their uni of choice, but they have no universities willing to take them. How on earth is that accurate?

I appreciate what you're saying about exams in July, but we are where we are and the only solutions that are now viable are to accept ALL the centre assessed grades regardless, and/or to make all provisional uni offers unconditional. There is no other solution, and the govt will HAVe to eventually accept this. The choice they have is to do it now, or wait until they've caused utter chaos with GCSEs and then implement it. The sensible, logical solution is do it now, but this government are so incompetent that they won't, but sooner or later they have to, there is no other choice.

We've probably taken this as far as it can go without repeating ourselves.

As you say there is now a choice. Either (1) the predicted grades are accepted in full and people will just have to deal with the fact that 2020 is an anomaly and universities will just have to take everyone who met their offer one way or another

Or (2) the government will persist and everyone will have to hope that there is sufficient scope in the appeals process to remove the obvious anomalies and that those who are still aggrieved make the best of it given that they have to wait until september to prove what they are really capable of.

 

 

 

[Van wink 2,994]

9 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

We've probably taken this as far as it can go without repeating ourselves.

As you say there is now a choice. Either (1) the predicted grades are accepted in full and people will just have to deal with the fact that 2020 is an anomaly and universities will just have to take everyone who met their offer one way or another

Or (2) the government will persist and everyone will have to hope that there is sufficient scope in the appeals process to remove the obvious anomalies and that those who are still aggrieved make the best of it given that they have to wait until september to prove what they are really capable of.

 

 

 

But September is surely too late if you are planning on going to University?

[kick it off 1,952]

Just now, Van wink said:

But September is surely too late if you are planning on going to University?

Universities have been told to hold some places back for January entry.

It won't get to that stage. There are already lawsuits being lined up. The govt will U-turn and go with centre assessed grades, that's a case of when, not if, in my opinion.

[Barbe bleu 826]

4 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Well its interesting that you feel it necessary to clarify that you aren't a spokesman for the government - I didn't suggest you were, although I think I may have made a light hearted suggestion to that effect many months ago 😀

What I would say with respect to your previous posts, generally not just on this thread, is that you are a very consistent supporter of the government.

I'm not really too sure what you mean by unqualified support in this context and frankly, although I can recall some very occasional mild criticism of the government, given the scale and frequency of government incompetence (and deceitfulness) that we have witnessed over the last few months, I don't recall anything which would go anywhere near contradicting my description of you as a very consistent supporter of the government - I think most posters would feel that was a pretty fair description.

I've highlighted the key sentence in your post above which I think goes to the heart of many of the disagreements we've had on here. Your posts are always couched in moderate language in an attempt, I would suggest somewhat cynically, to sound reasonable - whilst I applaud the moderate language I completely reject the notion that you reach balanced or reasonable conclusions based on evidence or taking into account what others say, perhaps because I suspect you have an incredibly narrow and naive view of what constitutes evidence.

I could expand on this at some length but I'm sure nobody wants that, and I have got other things I should be getting on with 😀 So a simple example - in the early stages of the crisis I made quite a few highly critical posts some of which were based on observations from close family members which you dismissed very casually with lines like, and I paraphrase, you weren't particularly interested in unsubstantiated stories and preferred to rely on official statement\statistics - many of which we know were at best extremely disingenous, some straightforward lies and others simply inaccurate.

Of course there is no particular reason why you should believe me - after all I could have been a malcontent with a chip on my shoulder making it all up to discredit a government I dislike. Actually everything I posted was true but that is irrevelant - the point is a huge number of people were saying similar or related things, many from the NHS frontline (for many years the most trusted professionals in the country you may recall), many independent well respected scientists and researchers, and of couse many overseas experts.

So I'm afraid that when you claim to have reached balanced conclusions based on evidence I simply don't believe you. You could only reach many of the conclusions you've reached by ignoring most of the evidence or perhaps, and more likely IMO, you have looked at the evidence and decided to stick with the government you support warts and all, even at the risk of their incompetence having even more disastrous consequences this winter - because one thing we can be certain of is that this government has learnt absolutely nothing from its many mistakes - I think this weekend's events illustrate that pretty well.

You are talking largely about covid here. I have been consistent in saying that I believe this government messed up the contain  phase by not investing properly in contact tracing and then in not properly protecting care homes. These are not and never were mild criticisms.  But equally I am not going to criticise unfairly because of a prior opinion of government.

If we all blindly criticised or supported without further thought what would we have. Ah yes, the brexit thread.

And for the record I dislike the idea of Boris as PM immensely.  He,  like Cameron before him, sought the top job for nothing more than the prestige of the position.  I think it a real pity that we could ever have been in a position where these two were candidates for the job, let alone actually in the job.

 

 

[Barbe bleu 826]

2 minutes ago, Van wink said:

But September is surely too late if you are planning on going to University?

My criticism was that appeals  and resits were not arranged for earlier. This is entirely my point.

 

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

My criticism was that appeals  and resits were not arranged for earlier. This is entirely my point.

 

Ok 👍

[Van wink 2,994]

15 minutes ago, kick it off said:

Universities have been told to hold some places back for January entry.

It won't get to that stage. There are already lawsuits being lined up. The govt will U-turn and go with centre assessed grades, that's a case of when, not if, in my opinion.

It seems to be be the only way they can go, an appalling lack of foresight, policies have to be assessed for their impact, things like environmental impact, financial consequences, I would have thought the impact on social mobility should also be looked at? 

Edited August 16, 2020 by Van wink

[Creative Midfielder 1,996]

25 minutes ago, kick it off said:

It won't get to that stage. There are already lawsuits being lined up. The govt will U-turn and go with centre assessed grades, that's a case of when, not if, in my opinion.

Its incredible that a government with a huge majority and a general election over 4 years away is managing, through sheer incompetence, to repeatedly back itself into corners from which the only escape is a complete u-turn.

Nevertheless I'm pretty sure you are right about the u-turn, Johnson has been invisible for the last two or three days and I doubt he'll visible this week either for obvious reasons. Presumably he'll resurface in time to remind us that all the kids must be in school at the start of next term even though he hasn't got a scooby about how to do it safely or indeed whether it is even possible. Will be interesting to see how many parents (and children) go along with it.