h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well I've just finished all my AS exams and am back at school. As I predicted, everyone is moaning. The teachers are moaning about the questions that were set, the students moaning of the workload and stress, and talk of major complaints going to the exam board from various institutions. It's all over the press, all over the media, and a big political issue. Now they are talking about reveiwing the whole process...

So is it a good idea. I concur with this excellently written Entry, which really goes beyond the news stories, that AS levels are based on a good principle of diverse and steady studying. I think they should stay. AS levels are a good idea, they just need to be implemented better.

What does everyone else think?

(on a side note, I did 2 exams plus 1 coursework for each of my subjects.)

awwww...
I too think that in theory they are a good idea, I just wish we hadn't been the first year. Lack of specimen papers and no real knowledge of what the exams might be like hasn't helped anyone prepare. There have also been far too many problems to call them anything like a success at the moment, and even the bloke who designed them has now admitted they're a failure.
However, I thinks it's wrong to write them off just because they're having teething problems. The problems should have been sorted out long before the AS levels came into the curriculum, but the fact that they weren't doesn't make the idea a failure.
I did two exams plus c/wk for two of my subjects, and three plus c/wk for the other two. My last one was today
It was a relief though, to know that if I mucked up totally then I had the chance to resit and the chance to bring my grade up with the other exams in that subject.

they're alright. but i think making us do general studies & key skills at the same time, esp as ere the fisrt yr, was a mistake.
my last exams next week (1 AS & 2 k/s) so im still not back @ school yet (well there has 2 b a plus side 2 doing the latest exams doesnt there?!)
my view is that if the government want 2 make us the guinea pig yr they better make sure the grade boundaries r suitable low!

I'm sorry, but there are still wild innacuracies in this, very onesided view. I've pointed them out, quite unusually voiciferously, before, and it's much too late to do so again right now.

Coelacanth, of course I've read your comments in Peer Review as well as other researcher's comments. I'm sorry, but I understood that there were a few things about the old/new AS levels, AO levels etc, which were then incorporated into the article by Dastardly himself. So I didn't feel it was necessary to change anything of the content while subbing the entry (btw, I'm German and have not the slightest knowlegde of the British education system). To the point: perhaps you could explain where the wild inaccuracies are and what you feel is biased. If these points are generally agreed upon, we could still have this entry updated.

The original entry with the PR thread is here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A544538

Thanks,
SchrEck Inc.

My school decided to drop Key Skills after the first module because people were finding it too much of an added strain (and partly because of a shortage in teachers). I enjoyed the first (communication) module though, and thought it was a bad decision. The idea of doing Key Skills is good, as many students (especially in my school) are focused very strongly on sciences and maths, and become quite shy and introverted. So the Key Skills really gave them something. Also IT and Maths are important things to cover.

true, but the communication 1, i feel, should b just judged on coursework, not an exam as well. also they skills they teach us in IT r almost identical to those taught lower down the school eg microsoft word, excel and access. oh & basic use of the internet 4 searches (which none ogf us here r capable of r we?!)
soz. i just feel that as they stand at present the key skills r a bigger waste of time than general studies!
im doing science & maths subjects & im also incredibly shy (tho no1 will beileve me on that point!) but i do not feel the key skills have helped in anyway whatsoever!
i'd welcome any1 elses opinions of them tho!

Wild inaccuracies? Well sorry I didn't get your hints in peer review, this is usually the way with me- you have to drive home a point with a sledge-hammer.
As far as I can see:
-You mentioned the old AS system which I incorporated, and helped me understand it for which I am grateful, after I got confused about the AO and S levels.
-You mentioned 'dumbing down' which I skimmed over because it is opinion (more informed than most, but opinion nonetheless), although I did say that the AS half of the course was easier.

I'm concerned that the article is inaccurate and even more concerned that it got into the guide if it is. I'm also sorry you don't like it and that you seem to think I ignored you which was unintentional.

Incidentally Frankie, we still do KS at our school but have had no lessons. We went into the exams unprepared and for our portfolio we have been given a booklet and told to go away and complete the criteria .
Add to that the fact that whent the first KS exam result were released in March lots of them were wrong. We had an assembly a couple of weeks later where they read out the list of those who'd been told that they'd failed but had actually passed. Worse than that, some people who had been told they'd passed had actually failed, which must have been awful

bloody hell! i hope the do better than that when they mark ours!

I think KS has the potential to be useful, but needs to be improved.

It should be focused on coursework and projects.

they really need 2 sort out the ASs before looking @ key skills

party starts here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A576380

oooh, fun.....but nt yet 4 sum of us

save us a will ya?

There's plenty there, I don't think you need to worry.

hey, i know what u party freaks r like wen u get going! afta 10 minutes all the good stuffs gone & ur left wiv the cheap stuff that tastes of cats p**s!....or so ive bin told....

Personally, I think the Key Skills system is basically flawed. At College, I've just taken AS exams in English Language, Maths and Computing. Despite this, I still have to take Key Skills exams in Communication, Application of Number and IT. Why? I mean, surely it would be impossible for me to pass these exams if I didn't have the abilities taught by Key Skills. By the way, I think you're right though, and they should be based around coursework

@ our sch we dont take k/s maths (i did it 4 AS & will prob do it nxt yr 2) & if u take AS english (i didnt ) u got 2 skip the communications exam, u get a pass as long as u pass the AS 1 (any grade).
wen r ur exams? we took communication on tues & ive got IT 2morrow morning

I had to do mine in Jan, and all the resits at our school were this week. I do AS Maths too, but I still had to do maths K/S, and I have friends who do English who have to do Communication.

I found it especially amusing that instead of the harsh 'fail' grade, it has been replaced with 'not yet passed'. No one else saw why I thought it waa funny though, so maybe it's just me... fortunately I passed, or I might not have found it as funny.

i think it funny! heehee! i feel better @ knowin ive faild now!

I was in the second to last year of the old A level system (finishing in June 2000), and have struggled to grasp the concept of the new AS exams. If I understand rightly, you study 4 AS subjects, then drop 1 of them to do 3 A2 exams in the second year. This leaves you with a total of 3.5 A levels plus your key skills.

The problem I have is this: it was possible to do this under the old system. For example, I studied the equivalent of five subjects at A level (although one was further maths, so two of my subjects were maths). One guy I know also studied five subjects (IT, chemistry, maths, biology and GS) PLUS the key skills modules (for which he gained an NVQ). I'll admit that most students under the old system only studied three subjects, hence their education was perhaps not as broad as it could have been, but it was possible to study more subjects and do key skills, thus neatly encompassing the advantages of the new system while still maintaining the depth of a full A level in every subject. Why then was it found necessary to introduce a new system when the old one was up to the job? it seems that all those who started their A levels in September 2000 have been put through an unnecessary amount of stress.

Incidentally, anyone reading this is probably thinking that the reason we did so many subjects was because we attended a public school (that's private school to our American cousins). We didn't. It was an ordinary state school. Also, it was not compulsory to study more than three subjects. It was a matter of personal choice.