Our results:
A* = 2
A = 10
B = 36
C = 112
D = 50
E = 32
F = 20
G = 4
U = 2
X = 1
A*-C = 160/332 (48.2%)
A*-G = 320/332 (96.4%)
Which puts our department as leading Core Subject department in the school, by both number (by far, and even taking into account we're a double award subject) and percentage.
1st A* pupil evAH in the history of our subject too.
However, I do happen to have raw coursework marks stored on this very computer. The fact that we only got 1 pupil getting a U (technically a UU) is testament to the fact that GCSEs are almost impossible to fail. The pass mark, unofficially, for our subject is 12%. That means that kids who are ignorant of nearly 9 things out of every 10 taught to them actually pass the subject...
My personal opinion is that the Gaussian Distribution Curve should be brought back for GCSEs.
Assign a pass mark - say 25% (think this is harsh? Degree pass marks are 40%). Everyone who doesn't attain that gets an F for FAIL. No F/G pass grades that we have now. F = FAIL. All of the pupils who pass are placed on a big graph, like they used to do. The graph is then divided up so that the top 10% get an A, next 15% get a B, next 50% get a C, next 15% get a D and last 10% get an E. Assign the top 10% of the top 10% (that's the top 1%) an A*, which isn't so much a different grade as a marker of the elite A pupils (as was intended):
Passing grades
10% = A (inc 1% A*)
15% = B
50% = C
15% = D
10% = E
All who did not attain 25% of total marks = F
This would acheive two things. Firstly, you'd not be studying for a paper - you'd be competing against your fellow pupils. It's not enough to do well in raw marks, safe in the knowledge that if you get half of the marks you'll get a C/B grade - you've got to do well in the raw marks AND beat other people while doing it. Life's a competition, so get used to it.
Secondly, you'd have a very clear definition of ability. This is important for A-Level subjects and those institutions teaching them. You KNOW that if a child gets an F, he's got less than 25% and will likely not do well on an A-Level course of the same subject. You KNOW that if a child gets a B, he's better than at least 75% of his peers who passed the subject and will likely do better than most of those 75% on an A-Level course of the same subject. You KNOW that A-grades are the top 10%, and A* pupils are the educational elite.
Currently, and apologies to anyone here who feels offended by this but facts ARE facts, the largest proportion of children will acheive a C or more in most subjects - that's the majority of children who TAKE the exams, rather than the majority who pass (though that's also true). Take a GCSE and you've got a 61% chance of getting a C or better. Take a GCSE and you've got a 98% chance of passing. All that tells HE institutions is that the kids with U/X grades are appalling, but we knew that anyway.
[/Ramble]
Well done to anyone who got what they wanted. Now move onto A-Levels and forget your GCSEs - nearly everything they taught you was an exaggeration of the truth.
