54 replies to this topic

[boberz]

High grade work is not marked wrong in an exam, it is true coursework is in many subjects and it should be removed from all of them. The best students know how to choose which bits of info are most important, so it these students who should be able to adapt best with the time limit. I dont deny that you and i can get A grades but i suggest that because of coursework many others get a grades who do not deserve them thereby devaluing our grade.

It is not your information, knowledge, or even arguments that are being tested. It is your debate, critical analysis, and supporting of assertions with evidence that is necessary. An employer, university admissions officer or anyone else, does not see an immense knowledge of Liberal reforms, Nazi state or medicine through time; they see your overall abilities as a history student. It is not a disadvantage not to have enough time it just helps seperate students.

Coursework makes a mockery of the exam system, people can go into their final exams (me included) needing only a handfull of UMS marks to guarentee an A there is no pressure and no reason to work.

[Crazy-Fish]

I suppose, that with another subject, biology, even if i didn't take the last exam I would get a B. Exams have become a laughing stock because, for example, in chemistry A level last year, only 18% was needed to get a C grade. . .

Our teaching for history coursework is very stressful as we need to do hundreds of years worth of history in a few weeks. so yea, overall, I agree with you, all qualifications should be 100% exam in order to relieve much of the stress on pupils and teachers alike.

In a few years time, people will want work handed in on strict deadlines, and there will be no one there to check its right, so in that sense, coursework is not a fair preparation for the future.

[pepper]

I think presantions, group work, and what you have done in class is the best/fairest way to be assesed. exams put you in stress and mean you dont preform as well and course work gives a huge adventage to well off kids you have the resources and help to do well.

[Marx]

1) If you could choose the way in which you demonstrated your ability as a history student, how would you do it?

2) What are your thoughts about coursework?

3) Does the current system of examinations at the end of a course work? If not, what would you like to see instead?

I imagine this is directed at GCSE / A Level students.
I have just completed my Intermediate 2 exams and I'm now studying the Higher course. (Scottish qualifications)

I like the way the Intermediate 2 course is layed out, 3 internal assesments and one final exam. The assesments called NAB's help you and the teacher work out if you can really handle the course enough to sit the exam. If you don't pass all 3 NAB's, you don't sit the final exam.

There is no coursework on our course, you study 3 topics for the exam. For any history teachers, there are a select number of topics that are REALLY good.

Wallace, Bruce & The Scottish Wars of Independance - Ok, being English I found the topic pretty good. There is enough easily memorable information to make it easier for your students to learn, also its quite an exciting course with all the battles etc. Braveheart is a bit of an obvious movie choice.

Red Flag - In my opinion, the most interesting topic available. It's quite quick but you can go back to 1861 with the Emancipation of the Serfs act and move forward by discussing how this act let the peasants feel they had the power to change their conditions, leading to the industrial revolution, the provisional government and then the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 (I think ). There is loads of stuff you can talk to students about such as - Rasputin, Marxism, Political ideology, oppression, is communism a good thing ?, social improvements around 1850-1900's, industrial revolution and how this helped the revolutionaries, the russo japanese war and lots of other things.

Murder in the Cathedral - No, no, no, no, no, no. This entire topic is based on feudualism and the last 10 pages or so acctually focuses on Becketts murder.

French Revolution - Sounded interesting, I never fully studied it though.

Regarding exams - for Int2, you write your own extended responce which you then come in and write out under exam conditions. This is a great idea as you get to choose your own question and pick the subject you are the most interested in. I imagine by writing in depth, it really helps the markers work out who is "ok" and who is "good". The extended responce is a third of your final grade. Then the final exam - One 8 mark short essay and 12 3-4 mark questions. The short essay is quite simple, its possible to pick out an extended responce question that is often asked in the short essay choices.

The Int2 course was very entertaining, I enjoyed everything about it. Unfortunately its going to be phased out in 2014 ish, thanks to some bright spark who thought after the previous 100's of reforms it would be a great idea to reform the system again, while not increasing schools budgets to cope with buying new books etc.

[MhmMhm]

I personally think that all the extensive essay writing should be scrapped. Fair enough, if you study History at University, I suspect there would be a lot of essays and stuff. Maybe it's time we actually apply knowledge, and get marks for what we know, not just for writing a good essay.

I personally liked Standard Grade, but at Higher, you need to write two essays, on questions that you don't even know what's going to come up. Fair enough, it's supposed to test you on your vast knowledge and whatever, but it's human to forget things, and that makes it come down to luck really.

In the UK, we're mostly pushed towards qualifications/exams, not so much passion for a subject. You are only given a course syllabus to learn, and nothing outwith that. Something needs to be done about it imo.

[R.L.M.]

i also hate coursework and we always have to redo it. why cant we just give in are books mine is full of stuiped sheets or give in a portrolio of work like you do in some subjects .

[jynx07]

I personally think that all the extensive essay writing should be scrapped. Fair enough, if you study History at University, I suspect there would be a lot of essays and stuff. Maybe it's time we actually apply knowledge, and get marks for what we know, not just for writing a good essay.

I personally liked Standard Grade, but at Higher, you need to write two essays, on questions that you don't even know what's going to come up. Fair enough, it's supposed to test you on your vast knowledge and whatever, but it's human to forget things, and that makes it come down to luck really.

In the UK, we're mostly pushed towards qualifications/exams, not so much passion for a subject. You are only given a course syllabus to learn, and nothing outwith that. Something needs to be done about it imo.

I disagree, I am currently in my second year at University studying a history degree and for my course, so far its quite similar to the way the higher was ran.

The writing of two essays is quite easy, getting the right question is not about luck, its about looking at past papers and predicting what will come up. I don't know what topics you did but for me we looked at Britain (liberal reforms, labour, democracy etc.) and Germany (including the unification of Germany and the rise of the Nazis) and for us the essay questions were quite predictable. Each year their would either be a question on Labour or the Liberals, meaning if you could confidently write a essay for both then you were fine and an essay on either the Nazis or the unification of Germany. If you are currently studying higher I'd recomend you ask your teacher what topics they believe will come up because in my school our teachers told us what they think was most likely to come up. Remember the exam board can only ask you about what you know.

For me I quite like the way we are assessed in school. However in my uni we get 10% of our grade from a contribution in class. I feel this would be a good idea because it would also help teachers asses our understanding of the topics.

[student13]

I really enjoy history because I find it interesting, but with the upcoming GCSEs all I have done is cram in facts and in the exam i just find I am quoting lines from textbooks and revision guides. I don't think this shows a student's actual talent, as anyone can regurgitate a list of dates and 'reasons for the failure of the League of Nations'. For this reason, I think History could be made much more interesting and appealing for students if we were allowed to include our opinions in our answers. Obviously learning past events and dates is a given for a subject called 'History', but I don't think this should be the extent it reaches. If I was asked, for example, "Why do YOU think Hitler declae inferiority on certain races?" I think I would look forward to my History paper. And I agree with whoever mentioned less source questions.

[student13]

I think presantions, group work, and what you have done in class is the best/fairest way to be assesed. exams put you in stress and mean you dont preform as well and course work gives a huge adventage to well off kids you have the resources and help to do well.

I also agree with this, however I don't think it is plausible.

[Mr. D. Bryant]

I think presantions, group work, and what you have done in class is the best/fairest way to be assesed. exams put you in stress and mean you dont preform as well and course work gives a huge adventage to well off kids you have the resources and help to do well.

I also agree with this, however I don't think it is plausible.

I suspect that you are right, at least with regards to GCSE and A-Level. However, at Key Stage 3 (Years 7-9) your work in class, including group activities and presentations, will have some impact on your teachers' assessment of how you are doing. The changes to course work are supposed to create a more 'level playing-field', although how successful this has been has yet to be determined.

Ultimately, for GCSE, A-Level and similar qualifications, there is always going to be a strong element of examinations.