[BarbaraH]

We were a bit disappointed with our results for OCR B at AS today. The kids have really enjoyed the course and we thought we had done loads of preparation and cracked the requirements. The results for Using Historical Evidence: Russia in Turmoil 1900-1921 were okay - 14 got A grades out of 41 - but not spectacular. For the Using Historical Evidence paper we did Popular Protest in Britain 1780-1880 and only one student got an A on this paper (although it was a spectacularly good A, and he did better than he did on Russia!)
Just wondering what anybody else's experiences of this course are and if anyone can offer any help/advice/insight!

[Mark H.]

We opted to do OCR Specification A but our results were also very different between the two modules. On the British (essay) paper we got 10 As (and 8 Bs) out of 24 candidates, but on the European/World (sources) paper only three of each. There were some very odd discrepancies. 13 candidates scored at least two grades lower on the sources paper, including 4 A-D combinations and one B-U. Only one candidate managed an A on both papers. On the other hand two able candidates did do slightly better on the sources paper than the essay. In my naivete I was hoping that the new Specifications might see OCR sorting out some of its apparently wayward marking but prima facie this does not appear to have been the case. Of course these things can be due (in the Historian's favourite cliche) 'to a variety of factors' but I'm not very reassured. I would be interested to see how other OCR customers have fared.

This post has been edited by Mark H.: 22 August 2009 - 07:14 AM

[jessie j]

Mark H., on Aug 20 2009, 07:04 PM, said:

We opted to do OCR Specification A but our results were also very different between the two modules. On the British (essay) paper we got 10 As (and 8 Bs) out of 24 candidates, but on the European/World (sources) paper only three of each. There were some very odd discrepancies. 13 candidates scored at least two grades lower on the sources paper, including 4 A-D combinations and one B-U. Only one candidate managed an A on both papers. On the other hand two able candidates did do slightly better on the sources paper than the essay. In my naivete I was hoping that the new Specifications might see OCR sorting out some of its apparently wayward marking but prima facie this does not appear to have been the case. Of course these things can be due (in the Historian's favourite cliche) 'to a variety of factors' but I'm not very reassured. I would be interested to see how other OCR customers have fared.

[MrsRH]

We are spec A too, but our problem is with the essay paper, whereas our sources paper went well.

Mark - i'll trade you tips on the sources, for tips on the essays if you do F961 and 964!

[amylgillett]

Our school shared a similiar experience - we study War of the Roses for the essay paper and Italian Unification for sources. On the whole our students achieved much better results on the essay paper than the sources although some students gained excellent results on both which suggests that the teaching of the unit was good, despite it being first time through. It is very frustrating!

[JohnP]

We did Radicalism as our British option and 7 out of 12 got an A.
we did Robespierre as our non-British and not one A out of 12 but plenty of extenuating circumstances such as the time allotted.
All in all I'm quietly confident for re-sits but only as the students HAVE to improve.