Results!

ninebeanrows

My Results were pretty awful:o

Mocks / Hope for LC

Maths 25% / C1
Biology 62% / B2
English 75% / B3
French 60% / C1
Physics 35% / B3
Geography 81% / A2

Irish (o) 67% / B

Got myself 330pts in the mocks but with 2 fails:D

Looking to get 450pts in the real thing;)

It all reflects on which subjects your able to bluff through and which ones you really just can't:D

Looking for a C in Maths now, done the first bit of study i ever have for maths over the last few weeks and it's actually grand.

As for Physics, im going to have to really start studying... It's just soooo boring.. Looking for a B in that too

cocoa

md99 wrote:

I don't think it's as simple as 'putting the work in and getting the result you deserve' though, if it was there'd be none of this % grade distribution... I hate this idea, though it may help me a bit in maths...

umm, what? You mean, allocating a certain percent of exams to grade A, B, C etc AKA marking to a curve? That is not the way it works for the LC...

lilmizzme

How are u people finding time to go on this thing....those results must have taken a fair amount of study!!!

Also, a rant if I may,....we paid €90 each to get all our mock exams out and corrected...it's not been two weeks and I have not gotten one back!!And we're being told they may not be back b4 easter!!does anyone else not think this is a bit ridiculous???how can we beefit from the mocks, if we dont get them back as soon as possible to look at??

ninebeanrows

cocoa wrote:

umm, what? You mean, allocating a certain percent of exams to grade A, B, C etc AKA marking to a curve? That is not the way it works for the LC...

Oh but it is

If the grades are are out of shape they fix them whichever way, they take a sample of papers from around the country and work a marking scheme out around them to ensure the grades are distributed in the way they want.

Naikon

Weathercheck wrote:

Oh but it is

If the grades are are out of shape they fix them whichever way, they take a sample of papers from around the country and work a marking scheme out around them to ensure the grades are distributed in the way they want.

QFT:)



As you can see, the results have to be adjusted to a bell curve because a bell curve is a standard method of representing scores.

Most people score further towards the mean in most cases, the average LC points score is the 300-399points range.
so 24.7% of people(the majority) will score in this range as expected(or not;))

A relatively small standard deviation is required so the marking scheme is adjusted depending on applicant scoring.
Not that easy to score 400+ when you could be screwed over by this distribution.

The guy

So far this is what I have gotten back:

Irish: 66%
English: 65%
Maths: 69%
History: 58% (pretty bad)
Physics 74%

Not bad considering I studied the night before for them

cocoa

Weathercheck wrote:

Oh but it is

If the grades are are out of shape they fix them whichever way, they take a sample of papers from around the country and work a marking scheme out around them to ensure the grades are distributed in the way they want.

and your evidence for this?

Rozabeez

I've been told that about JC by a few teachers.

Mushy

Hmmm....40% in English, that cant have been good. Although I havent seen the paper yet, so teacher may go over it now. 195 for 4 subjects, thats not good at all not after being on 110 for 2:D

JC 2K3

480 total

md99

cocoa wrote:

and your evidence for this?

How about www.examinations.ie , for a start?... :rolleyes:

Look under Statistics section for a nice surprise. Seriously, if your teachers haven't gone over the system at this stage...

analyse this

B1 in French
B3 in English- expect to do better in the real thing

DtotheK

ZorbaTehZ wrote:

Did you get DEB? What did you think of the paper?
I couldnt believe it when I got out of the exam 30 minutes before the end and still got 97%. IMO the paper was ridiculously easy, the skewlines, the solids in contact and roofs question were a piece of piss.

Well i tend to get A1 in all tech.. exams . yeah got the DEB it was pretty easy, the geometry mining and solids in contact (the cylinder resting on one of it's straight line elements ) i slightly messed up, got 50 out of 50 for most questions. the best question is always the locus/involute question!!! they're so easy and have them done in like 15 minutes. and the interpenetrating (*snigger*) question was grand aswell. Once i kept my 1st place in class i'm happy!:rolleyes:

cocoa

md99 wrote:

How about www.examinations.ie , for a start?... :rolleyes:

Look under Statistics section for a nice surprise. Seriously, if your teachers haven't gone over the system at this stage...

ok, two things, 1. I couldn't find anything on examinations.ie which supports your view, only thing in the stats section is a record of the percent of people that got certain marks, oh look, it changes...
and 2. There is no need to have a knowledge of how the marking scheme is made and it's just plain stupid to act condescending considering you're the one who failed to show any evidence.

marking to a curve is not some sort of shifty evil method, it's accepted and used in the GCSE system, but to my knowledge it is not here. As far as I know marking schemes are written quite soon after the exam scripts themselves.

BlackMamba

Thanks Weathercheck!!

Nehpets

cocoa wrote:

ok, two things, 1. I couldn't find anything on examinations.ie which supports your view, only thing in the stats section is a record of the percent of people that got certain marks, oh look, it changes...
and 2. There is no need to have a knowledge of how the marking scheme is made and it's just plain stupid to act condescending considering you're the one who failed to show any evidence.

marking to a curve is not some sort of shifty evil method, it's accepted and used in the GCSE system, but to my knowledge it is not here. As far as I know marking schemes are written quite soon after the exam scripts themselves.

Ask your teachers about it

AdMMM

There is no need to have a knowledge of how the marking scheme is made

I would have to say that Marking Schemes offer candidates a valuable insight into the mechanics behind the exam. Unless there have been significant sylabus changes, they allow us to get an idea of what is really asked of us when answering questions. A perfect example would be Economics - a 2 and half hour tour de force! From analysing previous marking schemes we know how much we need to write to get full marks!

cocoa

@ Nehpets : I asked for evidence, not opinion.
@ Murderer : an understanding of marking schemes themselves is certainly valuable, but I specifically specified an understanding of the process for making marking schemes.

Marshy

I've got all my results back now but I've decided not to post them up here because I'm not looking for affirmation or reassurance.

md99

No matter how much you refuse to believe it, cocoa, it doesn't mean it's not so.

No point in telling us things 'as far as you know'... when we know the real story

md99

cocoa wrote:

ok, two things, 1. I couldn't find anything on examinations.ie which supports your view, only thing in the stats section is a record of the percent of people that got certain marks, oh look, it changes...

Indeed, they change, oh look, English results from 04-06 were all within the same percentage.... What a CO-INCIDENCE! And look, under 1% of students got an A1 in Ordinary Level Irish in all 3 years. Now doesn't that just take the biscuit!

I think 'vary extremely slightly' would be a more accurate description....

Selphie

JC 2K3 wrote:

In fairness you don't deserve anything for learning off an essay perfectly. Even talking outside my personal opinion on it, the examiner will spot a learnt off essay a mile away and mark you down.

I didn't think it seemed learned off to be honest. It was on poverty, we were basically told it was going to be on the Pre, I did it for homework and got an A, wrote as much of it as I could possibly remember, added something on Bob Geldof cos it wasn't long enough, and got a lot less. My teacher said all the HL Irish was marked very hardly, put a lot of us up, me by 4%
Got more now...
English HL 88
French HL 80
Biology HL 65
waiting on history now, which should hopefully be better than my fairly bad maths result, so I'm reckoning about 480 for the mocks altogether....

Naikon

Nah, I could never understand this learning off approach, its a method which an experienced examiner will spot and depending on their attitude will mark you down.
I have never have and ever will at any stage "learn off" essays.
Its counter-productive in the long run.

Thats the problem with English, people think you either conform to socially acceptable work and become a drone or cog in the wheel of society by using second hand material(come on how original is your story really?), or you are considered a de-generate and write about what you feel.

Most fit the former, where original thinking is discouraged by teachers and prepackaged work is slavishly "remembered" or "recalled" or simply vomited on to a page while trying to fit the learnt essay into a somewhat coherent manner in the context presented.

Oh yes, I am bitter:p

JC 2K3

Naikon wrote:

Nah, I could never understand this learning off approach, its a method which an experienced examiner will spot and depending on their attitude will mark you down.
I have never have and ever will at any stage "learn off" essays.
Its counter-productive in the long run.

Thats the problem with English, people think you either conform to socially acceptable work and become a drone or cog in the wheel of society by using second hand material(come on how original is your story really?), or you are considered a de-generate and write about what you feel.

Most fit the former, where original thinking is discouraged by teachers and prepackaged work is slavishly "remembered" or "recalled" or simply vomited on to a page while trying to fit the learnt essay into a somewhat coherent manner in the context presented.

Oh yes, I am bitter:p

I've written critical essays in the past and gotten high marks. You haven't been penalised for being "different", you've been penalised for not backing up what you say and/or not writing at a high enough standard of English.

JC 2K3

md99 wrote:

Indeed, they change, oh look, English results from 04-06 were all within the same percentage.... What a CO-INCIDENCE! And look, under 1% of students got an A1 in Ordinary Level Irish in all 3 years. Now doesn't that just take the biscuit!

I think 'vary extremely slightly' would be a more accurate description....

What about all this fuss about people failing Maths then?

cocoa

md99 wrote:

Indeed, they change, oh look, English results from 04-06 were all within the same percentage.... What a CO-INCIDENCE! And look, under 1% of students got an A1 in Ordinary Level Irish in all 3 years. Now doesn't that just take the biscuit!

I think 'vary extremely slightly' would be a more accurate description....

ok, if you think grade stats varying by a very small amount with a fourteen thousand people sample is evidence of marking to a curve, fine whatever. But personally, I don't make a habit of believing things for which I have no evidence. Why should I give you any more evidence than "to my knowledge" when you are doing the exact same thing? Oh, and by the way, history A1 varied by 3% so there you go, doesn't that take the biscuit.

md99

cocoa wrote:

ok, if you think grade stats varying by a very small amount with a fourteen thousand people sample is evidence of marking to a curve, fine whatever. But personally, I don't make a habit of believing things for which I have no evidence. Why should I give you any more evidence than "to my knowledge" when you are doing the exact same thing? Oh, and by the way, history A1 varied by 3% so there you go, doesn't that take the biscuit.

oh my GOD, what a massive leap!

As regards having no evidence, since the majority of teachers in our school have made a habit of telling us how the exams are marked (and we're talking teachers with 20-30 years experience here) I never felt the urge to question it, after all, why would they lie... It's just common knowledge, as you can see, nobody else here on the board has decided to question it, look if it was up to me it wouldn't be that way either, I don't like it but why don't you just face the simple truth? I'm sure if you look it up officially, you'll find it says the same.

md99

JC 2K3 wrote:

What about all this fuss about people failing Maths then?

despite the fuss... only around 4% fail maths every year. Most of these get an E, an extremely small amount (0.10%) get an NG....

Pure Cork

All the marking schemes are flexible. If most students aren't performing well on a particular section, or are performing too well, the marks are adjusted accordingly. I don't think it makes any noticeable difference. Why argue about something so pointless?

cocoa

md99 wrote:

oh my GOD, what a massive leap!

As regards having no evidence, since the majority of teachers in our school have made a habit of telling us how the exams are marked (and we're talking teachers with 20-30 years experience here) I never felt the urge to question it, after all, why would they lie... It's just common knowledge, as you can see, nobody else here on the board has decided to question it, look if it was up to me it wouldn't be that way either, I don't like it but why don't you just face the simple truth? I'm sure if you look it up officially, you'll find it says the same.

I did look it up officially, it doesn't work that way. and yes, if you take 3% of a fourteen thousand strong sample, it is a significant change. A few of my teachers are also under the impression that marking to a curve happens, a few aren't but I generally don't take other people's opinions as evidence. I'm pretty sure that marking to a curve used to be in operation, but I see no evidence of it happening since 01. By the way, asking the opposition to look up your evidence for you generally won't work.
Hell, I'm not even that much opposed to marking to a curve, it's a sound idea and only fails to achieve desired equality when massive irregularities happen, it just seems weird to me that so many people just assume there's some examiner somewhere marking your exam, not on its own merits but in direct comparison to another's.