Past Exam Papers

Science GCSEs are so easy, pupils can pass them drunk

2009-05-10T01:34:00.002+08:00

If anyone has any doubts about the standard of science GCSEs, this link on the Studentroom website makes interesting reading.

One of the students on the website responding to the question of whether the exams are too easy said he was drunk when he turned up for the GCSE, threw up and had to be carried in to the exam hall, sat the paper (but has no recollection of doing so) and then passed out. He passed the exam.

This novel exam technique is probably not one that most pupils who are about to sit GCSEs and A-levels would embark on thankfully, but a recent study has found that A-level exam revision has become something of a science in itself.

At a seminar this week, one of the big exam boards presented findings from a study of 39 first year undergraduates who were asked about how they prepared for their A-levels.

Candidates virtually memorized the mark schemes, the guidance written by chief examiners telling examiners how to allocate marks to the likely responses from pupils. The students knew in minute detail what key words, phrases and arguments to insert to get points and in some cases, their teachers had worked out the mathematical probability of certain questions coming up. Teachers had also supplied them booklets of model answers, and even booklets for different versions of the same questions, which they memorised and regurgitated.

Obviously methods like these have always been a feature of passing exams, to a greater and lesser degree. But I can't remember any mention of "mark schemes" when I was taking A-levels (more than 20 years ago) and was given very little idea about what examiners were looking for - apart from being told to give a response that actually answers the question.

The study found that the problem with the formulaic approach of today's students was that any unanticipated questions or approach to topics completely threw them. The students admitted that their narrow focus lacked autonomy or creativity but they didn't care - they were only interested in getting the grades. Some even said they deliberately steered clear of more original thinking or taking risks in their answers because they thought they might get penalised.

From this September, the A* grade will be introduced to address the failure of A-levels to stretch the very able. It will be interesting to see if students, teachers and examiners, who have long been comfortable with this tick box approach, can cope, assuming the new question papers are truly different, which is a big assumption.

Food to improve memory

2009-05-06T01:36:00.002+08:00

MEMORY TRICKS: HOW TO IMPROVE MEMORY

2009-05-06T01:28:00.002+08:00

Do you have other methods that you used to improve your memory? Kind to share with us your tricks?

Dr Whiting on Memory - Short Term Memory Supplements

2009-05-06T01:26:00.002+08:00

Do you have any short term memory problem?

Bright pupils 'do better among clever peers'

2009-05-06T01:17:00.002+08:00

By Timesonline

Bright pupils from all backgrounds do better in their GCSEs if they go to a predominantly middle class school with other clever pupils, according to compelling new research into the power of peer group effects on academic performance.

The research, based on GCSE results of 555,000 pupils in England - an entire year group - suggests that for the brightest ten per cent of teenagers, being educated with other clever children in an affluent state school can add on average half a grade to each subject they take at GCSE. Over eight GCSEs, this could mean that instead of getting straight Bs, a pupil gets four As and four Bs.

Conversely, bright children going to disadvantaged schools in poor areas are likely to underachieve to the same degree.

It suggests that “pupils attending more advantaged schools derive additional educational benefits from being educated with pupils with higher levels of prior attainment, and lower levels of deprivation,” the report’s authors, Dr Philip Noden and Professor Anne West, from the London School of Economics, conclude.

The research, commissioned by the Sutton Trust education charity is the first major study to quantify the extent of peer group effects.

The authors suggest that bright pupils do worse in deprived schools because the government’s gifted and talented programme is not working properly there. Deprived schools may also have worse pupil behaviour and less effective teaching.

They are also more likely to encourage bright teenagers to do vocational courses, not because the pupils are suited to them, but because the points earned for passes in these subjects will help boost the school’s league table position.

This means that simply throwing extra money at deprived schools will not on its own be enough to close the attainment gap between rich and poor. There needs to be more help for gifted pupils in sink schools and better careers advice to ensure they are entered for the right exams, the report says.

More controversially, the authors also suggest that in order to maximise the benefits to pupils of the positive peer group effect, bright children should be spread more evenly throughout state schools, rather than allowed to gravitate towards a few ’good’, predominantly middle-class, schools.

While not exactly suggesting that the interests of the brightest middle class children should be sacrificed for the benefit of all, the report comes pretty close by promoting “a more even spread of pupil intakes into state schools in terms of ability and disadvantage”.

“Encouraging greater use of area wide banding, in which pupils of a range of abilities are enrolled at all local schools, would be a relatively low cost means of reducing (...) educational inequality. The intakes of all schools in the area would be genuinely comprehensive, and so the potential benefits and penalties of being with certain peer groups would be evenly spread,” the authors say.

They also advocate a lottery or random allocation system for handing out places in oversubscribed schools. This would have the effect of preventing middle class people from colonising the best state schools by buying or renting property within the school catchment area - an option often not open to pupils from poorer families.

Dr Lee Elliot Major, research director of The Sutton Trust, accepted that this was a controversial solution. “Some might suggest that a return to the grammar school system is the answer because it puts all the bright children together. But we would prefer a system that creates a balanced intake in all schools, so that the positive peer effect is shared around and you don’t get pockets of affluence and deprivation,” he said.

GCSEs are too easy and should be abolished. Discuss

2009-05-06T01:13:00.002+08:00

By Timesonline

For 21 years, more students have passed GCSEs each year than the year before. So are the exams too easy? And should they be scrapped? Here, Rod MacKinnon, the head of Bristol Grammar School, argues for abolition while, in the first of three special reports, Alexandra Blair looks at the controversy

Test yourself: Maths GCSE from 1988... | and from 2008

And check the answers: 1988... | and 2008

Asking how GCSEs could be reformed is the wrong question. We are tinkering with a system that was designed for a different age. What we should be asking is: why do we make our children sit these exams at all?

O-level and CSE examinations, the precursors to GCSEs, were introduced at a time when most students finished their education at 16. They provided an assessment of children at the end of their compulsory education and they told an employer something about that student’s ability.

Today, only a few do not go on to study for A levels, diplomas or other qualifications and by 2013 it will be compulsory for all students to stay on in education or training until 17. By 2015 this will apply to all 18-year-olds. What we really need is a sensible assessment system that helps 16-year-olds to choose the right course for the next stage of their education.

We are using GCSEs to do that job now. But that is a hugely expensive and bureaucratic way to help students, their parents and teachers to find the 16-plus course that suits them.The CSE and O-level system was more straightforward and far cheaper.

Today’s GCSEs involve an increasingly complex rubric of assessment and coursework, which lends itself to a flawed system.

One problem with course work is detecting plagiarism; another is the extent to which students may be helped by their parents, which favours the middle classes.

The Government wants to reform the continuous assessment system by introducing “controlled assessment”, under which students would complete coursework in school under supervision. This will be too bureaucratic, will tie up teachers and will not provide a good learning experience.

The Conservatives say that government reforms designed to restore confidence in continuous assessment have failed and want to go back to “high-stakes” final exams. Michael Gove, the Shadow Schools Secretary, has said that a Conservative government would wish to see “less emphasis on modules and coursework and more on proper, rigorous testing”. Both approaches fail to get to the root of the problem. We do not need an external public examination system for 16-year-olds.

We are overexamining our children. Of course there should be exams and assessments — but the GCSE external examination system is an unproductive use of time that dominates the summer term and is unnecessary. Schools can match students to their next courses of study using their own tests and graded assessments, under rigorous external monitoring. Teachers could then focus on teaching during that term. For those few who leave school at 16, school assessments would be an adequate indicator of their achievements.

Each year we see that about half of students do not get five GCSEs at grades A* to C including English and Mathematics. These results tell the child and the employer very little; they fail to recognise the achievement of thousands of children and they do not usefully differentiate between individual students’ achievements. Yet these students have a rich range of talents, skills and qualities to offer.

Assessment at 16 needs to focus on celebrating what children can do and recognising the progress that they have made. We should not be misled by the current situation, where we see apparently poor attainment recorded annually in our GCSE exam system. It is this system that is wrong; it fails to meet the needs of children, families and schools, and wastes vital financial and time resources. We must come up with a system that identifies and celebrates the achievements of all children, guiding them on to the next stage of their learning.

Rod MacKinnon

‘It’s like Everest — more people reach the top now’

Over the next few weeks, hundreds of thousands of students across Britain will sweat over the first of a slew of GCSE exam papers that they will face this summer.

Since 1988, controversy has dogged the qualification. Not only is every GCSE pupil now continually assessed throughout his or her two-year course of study, but often they are examined in smaller “bite-sized” chunks — and in some cases the course is wholly modularised. Coursework, which is used in almost all GCSE examinations, will soon be done largely under controlled supervision and can account for up to two thirds of final marks.

These changes have led critics to complain that many of the exams are too easy, that they are too often about memorising the right answers rather than using knowledge to work them out, and have not kept up with the rigour of A levels. Worst of all, they say, the number of teenagers achieving A* to C grades has risen every year for the past 21 years — proof, they claim, that the exam is getting easier.

According to research by the University of Buckingham, 8.6 per cent of students achieved the top grade in 1988, while last year that figure had risen to 20.7 per cent.

But grade inflation alone does not mean that the achievement is necessarily easier, insists Kathleen Tattersall, chairwoman of Ofqual, the new exams and qualifications regulator, and former director-general of AQA, the exams awarding body, who has overseen the implementation of the GCSE in all its forms over the years.

As a champion of the GCSE, Tattersall admits that some changes have allowed teachers to “teach to the test”, but she compares taking the exams with climbing Everest. “A lot more people get to the top of Everest now than when Hillary and Tenzing reached it in 1953. The mountain’s the same height but equipment and knowledge are better and the routes are better known,” she says. “But it doesn’t change the difficulty of progressing up the mountain, and still some fail to reach the summit.”

Grade inflation is not unique to Britain, she adds, because teaching methods have improved worldwide — and while, in previous years, only examiners knew what boards would test, now there is far more information available. The exams still demands that a student applies himself or herself, she argues, and that is no less difficult.But according to Professor Alan Smithers, director of education and employment research at Buckingham University, the reason for the improved grades is more prosaic: the increased modularisation and continual assessement of GCSEs has boosted grades and, above all, so has the growing importance of league tables.

Since 1997 the Government has used exam results to judge teachers, and league tables to set targets and “name and shame” schools where pupils do not measure up. As a result, the exam is now as much a test of a school’s ability to get pupils high marks as it is of students’ knowledge and understanding, Professor Smithers says.

At the same time, the growing number of candidates and computerisation have made it easier to mark papers with one-word answers than to allow students “free response” questions that require greater interpretation from the examiner. Professor Smithers further argues that the fall in A-level candidates taking modern languages and physics is a direct result of the GSCE being an “insufficient platform”.

So have GSCEs become easier, or are teenagers more intelligent than they were 20 years ago? Or do new exam methods simply make higher grades more attainable?

Controversy was always going to plague GCSEs. When the O-level was introduced in 1951, it was designed to test only the top 20 per cent of the year group, and the CSE, the alternative award, the next 20 per cent.So until 1974, more than half of each year group (today, about 300,000 teenagers) would leave school with no qualifications.

The GCSE, though, was designed to test the whole range of abilities, alongside vocational qualifications (NVQs), as the culmination of compulsory education for all students. So while it started out as a similar construct to its predecessors, with two-hour or three-hour “terminal” exams at the end of each course, it has changed considerably. To overcome the spectrum in ability, foundation and higher-tier papers were devised to stretch both ends in most of the 50 subjects. In the higher- tier papers the lowest mark is a C grade, and in foundation-tier papers the highest is a C grade.

Over the years, dissatisfaction with the GCSE seems to have grown. While comprehensives have to carry on with it, many private schools have given it up. Most have instead taken on the International GCSE (IGCSE), which has less coursework and is similar to the O level, especially in maths.

Anthony Seldon, Master of Wellington College, has gone one step farther, rejecting all GCSEs in favour of the International Baccalaureate (IB). “The GCSE doesn’t stretch pupils because it’s all about memorising the right answers and doesn’t allow them to be active learners,” Dr Seldon says. “The IGCSE is better because it has less continual assessment, but it’s still the same old donkey.” His move has been supported by admission tutors at Oxford and Cambridge universities.

In March, Kathleen Tattersall appeared to acknowledge critics’ concerns, at least in regard to science GCSEs. The new single-science GCSE had been dumbed down and contained too many multiple-choice and superficial questions, she said. GCSE physics had replaced the testing of physical concepts with questions about, for example, the pros and cons of CCT and mobile phones. In fact, there had been a “significant reduction in content” from GCSE physics papers between 2002 and 2007.

“Where we find a problem, we say so,” she says. “Questions have been raised over modern languages, but in 2007 we found that the level was about right. Whether it should be preparation for A-level or a retrospective examination is a different matter, and there will always be a tension between the two.” From September, the GCSE will change again. While some subjects still rely on end-of-course exams, most will be “unitised”, with assessment making up a large proportion of marks and final exams accounting for just 40 per cent of the marks.Each unit may be resat once. The new-style GCSE will not have the “blanket coverage” of old exams, Tattersal admits, but there will be “no hiding place” for a lack of knowledge among students.

The exam boards, including AQA, OCR and Edexcel, insist that there is “no evidence exams are getting easier”, attributing the improved grades simply to “better teaching and students working harder”.

“Students still have to demonstrate the same level of knowledge, skills and understanding but in a different way. There is nothing to fear from some GCSEs becoming more modular and students being able to resit exams,” says a spokesman for OCR. “Having to sit exams in one block can be nerve-racking and does not suit everyone.”

So, on the 21st anniversary of the GCSE, times2 picked three of last year’s exams by the AQA board in French, physics and maths to compare with those of 1988. We then asked three experts for their views.

These cannot be perfect comparisons, given how the exams have changed, but in French and Maths our experts found that the 2008 papers were more demanding. As for physics, the Institute of Physics suggests that the questions in the latest paper are muddling. To our mind, they illustrate that not all subjects have dumbed down. What do you think?

Alexandra Blair

‘The 1988 paper tries harder to be 'down with the kids’

When it comes to comparing exam papers, the general chorus always seems to be how much easier exams are now than they were 20 years ago. But the evidence from these two GCSE papers is that, in mathematics at least, that is far from true.

The curriculum being examined is similar. You have got questions about probability, symmetry transformations and solving equations. But I think there is a genuinely different feel to the paper of 2008.

Now, students are expected and challenged to think about how they are applying the mathematics. 1988 feels more like the application of techniques that the student has learnt.

For example, question 10 from the 1988 paper requires simply plugging numbers into an equation given at the beginning of the paper to calculate the volume and surface area of a tin of baked beans. In contrast, question 23 from the 2008 paper requires combining ideas of geometry and algebra in an analytical way to find the relationship between lengths in the cone and cylinder. The 1988 paper also shows more evidence of trying to get “down with the kids”, with references to Doctor Who and the Muppets. In 2008 they seem to be trying to engage children with the maths rather than the Muppets.

What I still feel is missing is exciting maths. In English, my son is learning the grammar of the subject (essential core skills that all students must leave school with) but he is also studying Richard III (not necessarily a prerequisite for modern life). When I was at school (doing O-levels, I admit, rather than GCSEs), the curriculum we studied was brave. We were exposed to matrices, group theory and topology — real maths.

Maybe it’s not for everyone but the plan in future is to have two GCSEs in maths. It would be great if one of those was used to expose students to the Shakespeare of maths.

Hay fever drugs ‘cost students an exam grade’

2009-05-06T01:03:00.002+08:00

By Timesonline

Nearly three quarters of students taking hay fever medication can expect to drop a grade in their exams this year as ingredients in the most popular remedies interfere with their ability to concentrate, research suggests.

Even hay fever sufferers not taking any medication face a 40 per cent risk of achieving lower grades than expected as a result of their condition, the study by the Education for Health charity has found.

The study was funded by the drug firm Shering-Plough, which makes several hay fever remedies.

Samantha Walker, the charity’s director of research and the lead author of the study, said that for too long hay fever had been regarded as a trivial condition.

“Hay fever peaks between the ages of 14 and 24. This is precisely the time when many people are doing life-changing exams and we need to take it seriously,” she said.

She hoped that the study, based on the exam performance of 1,834 15 to 17-year-olds, would open a discussion on how to “remove the bias operating against those with hay fever” by shifting the examination season to a time that does not coincide with the peak pollen count.

Dr Walker said she also hoped that the study, the first to analyse the impact of the condition on exam performance, would help students to manage their hay fever symptoms better by directing them towards the most appropriate, nonsedating medication.

The study compared the exam performance of participants in mock and final GCSE exams for maths, English or science.

The normal expectation is that most children will achieve the same grade achieved in their mocks, or with increased effort, improve on them when sitting the exam. Any drop in grade is therefore unexpected.

But the study found that those who had hay fever symptoms on an exam day were 40 per cent more likely to drop a grade between their mock and their final exam.

This increased to 70 per cent if they were on a sedating allergy medication at the time of their exam.

Teenagers with severe hay fever, and a history of symptoms in previous years, were twice as likely to drop a grade.

Michelle Cox, 18, sneezed her way through her English literature A Level paper on Monday and fears that it may well have cost her a grade.

Ms Cox, from Bexleyheath, South London, had a similar experience when she sat her GCSE maths paper. “I was sneezing and my nose really hurt and I was so tired. I got a grade D, but had been expected to get a C,” she said.

She takes hay fever medication every day, but was not aware that it might be making her drowsy. She is hoping that things will improve for her remaining three A level papers.

Some 28 per cent of students on hay fever medication were on a sedating antihistamine. This is despite the wide availability of effective nonsedating treatments and guidelines recommending their use.

Dr Walker said that the sedating treatments, containing the drug chlorpheniramine and most usually sold under the name Piriton, adversely affected exam performance.

Students who fear that hay fever has interfered with their results can apply to the Joint Council for Qualifications, for their condition to be taken into account.

When pollen counts

Hay fever affects an estimated 15 million people in Britain. Its incidence has tripled over the last 20 years

It affects 30-40 per cent of children. The peak age of onset is in adolescence

Grass pollen counts are at their highest between mid-May and end of June

600,000 GCSE students sit between 5 and 15 exams during a 5-week period between May and June

Hay fever remedies which contain chlorpheniramineK cause drowsiness

Non-drowsy remedies contain loratidine, cetirizine, acrivastine, desloratidine, levocetirizine or fexofenadine

Source: Education for Health

How to raise your literature essay exam grades

2009-05-06T00:58:00.002+08:00

By Luke Arnott

Reviewing Feedback from Tests and Papers Helps Students Improve

Boost the grade on your next essay exam by putting your previous tests into context. Adopt a constructive attitude, adjust study habits, and get extra help if needed.

Students taking literature courses usually get tests and papers returned, with feedback, before writing a final exam. This can be stressful for those whose interim grades are disappointing. However, it is an opportunity for students to improve.

Focus on What You Can Do Next

Anyone getting back a bad test is liable to be upset. If it happens to you, resist the temptation to blame a sadistic professor or noisy roommates, or to throw out the exam and do nothing at all.

Take a few days off. Once you can look at your results a little more dispassionately, be honest with yourself. Did you devote too little time to studying beforehand? Were you tested on material which you only skimmed, or didn't fully understand? If the answer to such questions is yes, plan to correct your study habits accordingly.

Understand What Your Exam Mark Means

In the meantime, put your exam grade into context. Instructors often tell their students what the average marks were; if yours doesn't, feel free to ask. If you got a B- and the average was a C, you may not be doing as poorly as you think.

This is especially important in the humanities, and in literature courses particularly. Evaluating answers to essay questions can be very subjective, and many teachers save A-range grades for only the best-written responses. Some teachers and professors grade harshly on the first midterm to set a high standard. Others prefer to mark more leniently at first, and be tougher later.

2008 Past exam papers – Comparison report

2009-04-08T00:17:00.004+08:00

Looking for past exam papers from top primary school in Singapore? There are a few websites out there offering these past exam papers online. Whether you are a student, tutor or parents, you should make a comparison first before making any purchase.

White Concepts Research has made that easy for you by making the comparisons. Here are the reasons why you should consider having this comparison report.

Avoid paying more for the same thing
- The research shows you could avoid overpay by average SGD 14.00 for each primary level papers if you do not know that there is website that offers better deals compared to others.
- If you are a tutor, you would probably want to know which websites offer the best deal to buy the total sets of papers from P1~P6. In this report, you will find out that the largest price gap you could have overpay is SGD78.60 if you did not know the best deals available.
Comparison work can take-up a lot of your precious time
- Searching for websites and compare pricing for each sites can be tedious and time consuming.
- The price format display for each site is different and some efforts to consolidate this information to compare are required.
Comparison Report is easy to understand
- The report is presented in PowerPoint format.
- The information are presented with graphical and large fonts that will help you understand easily.
Best Deal for Students and Tutors
- The report provide specific answer to
  - “Which website offers the Best Deal for Students” and
  - “Which website offers the Best Deal for Tutors who buys total sets from P1~P6”

Don’t forget to get a copy of this comparison report for only SGD 5 before you make any purchase of past exam papers online .

If you have any comments or questions, please feel free to drop an email to whiteconcepts@yahoo.com

Check out the Preview of the Comparison Report

| Get your Presentation Pack

Past exam papers - Comparing Offer Report Preview by White Concepts Research

2009-04-07T23:51:00.003+08:00

Here is the snap shot preview of the report. Get it now before buying any past exam papers online.

Past exam papers – Look out for these

2009-04-07T23:47:00.003+08:00

Other than the selling price, you need to consider a few other factors before buying it.

How many sets of past exam papers are included in the selling package on offer?
- Selling at lower price does not mean it is value for money if you did not take note how many sets of papers are included. Consider this – Which one is cheaper? $10 for 20 sets of papers or $8 for 14 sets of papers? It’s simple maths and a quick comparison would tell you that $10 for 20 sets would be a better deal because it is lower price per set.
Any freebies?
- There are websites that offer free past exam papers for 2007 and some don’t. However, of those that offer, some requires you to buy the 2008 past exam papers before you can download the free 2007 papers. You can get to know all these in the comparison report.
Any discounts?
- Some websites do give package deal if you buy all the sets of papers from P1~P6. There is one website that did not mentioned in their website but after inquire through email, they do give some discounts. You need to ask!

To do all these checking, consolidating information, do some calculation and compare them can take up a lot of your time.

Need a quick comparison report so that you can buy without overpay to those websites, get it NOW in this website. Look out for the advertisement on the right hand side of this website.

Click Here for the Preview.

Don’t buy past exam papers without this comparison report

2009-04-07T23:44:00.003+08:00

Always look for a few websites offering the same product or services and try to compare as much as possible before commit to buy the product or services.

There are a few websites which can be consider popular or I shall say aggressive in their marketing advertisement online, publishing in free and paid classified sites.

The details are not always in the classified due to limited space provided. You need to enter the main website selling these past exam papers to learn more.

Once you’ve entered the website, skip those sales pitch. There are written meant to target your emotional side. A few things you need to look out before you click on the payment button.

Price, No. of sets of Papers, Freebies and Money-back guarantee. More of this in my next entry.

Mean while, click here to see the preview of the comparison report.

Or get the comparison report NOW. Please see the advertisement on the right hand side of this website.