UK exam chiefs: About the compsci coursework you've been working on. It means diddly-squat GCSE computer science coursework will no longer count toward the final grade after answers to set tasks were leaked online last year. Exam regulator Ofqual announced that non-exam assessment will not count to the final mark in GCSE computer science in 2018 or 2019. Previously the 20-hour assessment had accounted for 20 per …
My most recent round of job hunting involved several trips to HackerRank and equivalent sites — timed coding tests (in C++ for my roles) in an in-browser development environment. You're scored automatically based on passing or failing unit tests, some of which involve timing constraints, but then the better interviewers will examine your code and require that you defend it.
I thought it was all a fairly rational way to proceed: it probably gets as close as anything to the amount of useful information you can acquire about a candidate during the period of an interview process.
"...how useful and representative for real life subjects like computing."
Indeed - how much better it would be for IT jobs to eventually go to people who learnt by looking up canned solutions on-line, rather than figuring it out for themselves like some of the students will be doing.
Oh, wait - we already have this - it's called off-shoring.
The teaching system for the current set of students has been deliberately compromised, and I think the correct decision has been made to make the outcome as fair as possible to those whom, for whatever reason, will/can not take advantage of that fact - it's not an ideal solution, but I think it's not the worst they could come up with.
Also, note the following:
"Exam regulator Ofqual announced that non-exam assessment will not count to the final mark in GCSE computer science in 2018 or 2019.
This solution only applies to two years of course intake ie., the compromised coursework requirements will be replaced and then all is back to normal.
I'm sorry I beg to differ. Any examination that is predicated on suggested answers not being posted to the internet is pretty flawed to begin with. Is this just an exam board too lazy to deal with plagarism? Am I the only one where at leat half my degree exam questions were repeated from past papers - how is this any different?
To my mind its rather like punishing a programmer for using something from StackExchange.
(Also an aside - since when is a 10% increase "plateauing" El Reg? Also I thought the idea was to capture the interest of those who might find it useful in the future to have done a Computing course - not frog march all and sundry through it like its french, german or english lit.)
Tell the kids to start putting their skills to good use, maybe write a few hobby programs of their own (original ideas in Unity or Unreal Engine, maybe?), then set up a website on a free service like Wix, and point hyperlinks to download their programs from Dropbox, OneDrive, or similar so they don't have to pay for bandwidth on the website host. Then get on Instagram and YouTube, set up a channel to post about what they're doing, gather likes and feedback, respond to it all with updates, etc.
Then tell them to reference their website in any job application to give employers a chance to see what they can do. It might not be fully relevant to the position they are going for, but any that put in the effort to do that with a reasonable level of success are surely already a step further up the ladder in several ways.
All of the above is not a quick thing, but maybe that's the point... Learning the discipline to do that is one reason why still doing the practical section is necessary.
Exactly this. The whole system needs rethinking, and until this happens we will always have a factory-fodder education system in this country. I like these ideas as they are demonstrable and practical skills. Exam only CS is a joke; I was in teacher training when it was a 50/50 split between exams and coursework, and I thought it was bad when it dropped to 20%.
tbh, the skills shortage of the teachers is shocking too
When my son was choosing GCSE options a few years ago before the CS GCSE when the "equivalent" offering from his school was an IT BTEC (allegedly equivalent to 2 GCSEs) .... at the open evening where parents got to discuss with the subject teachers the IT person had a "sales pitch" that was basically "its all course work and you can resubmit as many times as you want so everyone can guarantee they'll get a distinction if they want to"
@AC
If that's what you were told re: BTECs, then the school are breaching the conditions of the qualification with Pearsons. BTECs, love them or loathe them, do not allow limitless re-submissions (can't think of a qual that does). In fact the specifications are very clear on the strict guidance associated with BTEC assignments, re-subs, briefs used and even the amount and detail of written feedback the teacher can give.
No I'm not naive enough to think dodgyness doesn't go on in some places, but the structure is pretty well defined and followed in my experience.
Can you elaborate on why testing under exam conditions only or mostly is a joke?
Do you have any insight into the issues of moderation between schools and parental involvement in coursework? Is coursework or project work which contributes to an examination grade always performed under controlled conditions at school?
MR T,
indeed, my lad [9 yo] is loving building animations/mini games in Scratch and Kodu, which other folk can see across the interwebs, it is great for his confidence, he has been showing the teachers how some of it works now, as well as helping his classmates...
Not too sure what to get him into next, all constructive suggestions are welcome!
Cheers,
Jay
If he's already happy with Scratch, give MIT's AppInventor a try - especially if there's a spare Android phone available to try things out on. All it needs is a Google account to log in, as it saves work on the Drive. There are loads of tutorials for different aspects, and it includes an Android emulator too.
You can spot a learner a mile off.
You won't care about their qualifications, as such, you'll notice the other stuff they've done. Seriously, do you employ someone in IT because they have GCSE Computer Science? No. You employ them because they have X number of GCSEs plus they've done this and this and this, and have this hobby, and built this, and this is their YouTube maker channel, and "Cool, how does that work?" when you show them around.
The only people who give any kinds of credence to GCSEs / A-Levels are: Teachers (because of school league tables), HR people hiring positions they have NO idea what they involve.
Industry certs are the same. I'm much more interested that someone actually managed a live network for X years than that they have the last X years of Microsoft certs.
Degrees are different - that's an optional 3/4 years of studying that they CHOOSE to do, at an advanced level, with almost no help from others. It doesn't even matter what they do it in - it means they're a learner by choice. But, like I say, you can spot the learners.
GCSEs are to get you into college for A-Levels,
A-Levels are to get you into university for degrees.
Nobody pays any real heed to GCSE/A-Level outside of that. Sure, it's often a "Must have basic GCSE in English or Maths" line in there somewhere, but HR write that, not the people who will be working with the guy. And there's some justification in there that you'd expect someone able to count/write properly to have passed through the joke-which-is-GCSE nowadays without any trouble at all.
Other than that, if you want to hire a kid you look for a learner. They can be a complete school dropout, you can still spot a learner ("I dropped out to start my own business doing... and I was successful for X years... and as part of that I did Y and Z...").
I have hired from the Apprentice programs. The guy had previously qualified / worked as a chef and a jeweller's sales assistant. He's now, two years down the line, an IT Tech for a large company with a career path and a work history in IT, beating all his "mates" who only have GCSEs or A-Levels (and, in a few years, degrees) in Computer Science.
Especially nowadays, all the kids have a big list of weird qualifications because that's what the schools push them towards if they don't get GCSEs. Hairdressing. Catering qualifications. Customer service. Etc. You can't really pay heed to them as EVERYONE has them, or could get them.
I have a degree. In maths. It proves I can learn.
I started an IT business out of university. It proved I am skilled enough to make a living and juggle my own staff / business / accounts.
My first "real" job, and everyone since, they couldn't care less about my GCSEs, ALevels or what my degree is in (three times I've had it stated that HAVING a degree is what they look for... lots of the people in high-power jobs have degrees like Art History or Geography etc.). They look for "what else has he done", "what has he done that proves he can do the job" and "what has he done that proves he can tackle something he's never seen before".
Sure, if you want a career in McDonald's, I'm sure GCSE's or "food safety" courses will help.
But if you're hiring personnel for ANY job, ignore the Qualifications page unless it's literally blank. Even being full of junk every year is suspicious (how do you find the time/money to do all those courses? Oh, your employer MADE you do them...).
But scoot down to the "what other transferable skills" bit and/or have a chat with them. They don't need a massive industry experience to stand out from the others.
"Since the GCSE was launched in 2013, interest in the course has waned. Some 64,159 Year 11 students registered for the computer science exam this year, compared with 60,521 in 2016."
Now, I'm no maths major, but something about those sums doesn't quite add up with the first sentence.
Numbers quoted will be for new registrations, it won't account for those already on programme.
I'm thinking that with reduced demographics entering the 14 yr age band in those years, it might actually be a percentage increase over that time period?
Assuming you mean "England, Wales and Northern Ireland", I was going to say something along those lines, except that- having checked- Ofqual doesn't cover Northern Ireland or Wales either.
"However, the body insisted that all UK schools must continue to give students the opportunity within the timetable to complete the tasks."
Ofqual can "insist" it wants a gift-wrapped pony, but it's not likely to get it as far as Scotland- or Wales or NI- is concerned! (To be fair, this is more likely inaccurate paraphrasing on the part of the same person that wrote the headline than Ofqual's fault).
Great! My daughter's school decided not to offer Computing GCSE because of a lack of interest. So we decided to teach it to her at home because it was her favourite subject but we couldn't teach her the GCSE because you can't do the coursework at home so we have started to teach her the iGCSE which doesn't have that bit.
Now we discover that we needn't have bothered and could just have taught her the GCSE in the first place!
Why don't they time the assessments so then they are all at the same time? The whole idea of computer science isn't about memorising commands. I have seen that exams usually are all about memorisation. When I studied IT, we used BBC computers back in the day. I hated WordWise.
Not quite perfect. It should reflect the real world even more closely, even though the exercise will have to take part in seperate sessions over several weeks. The first hour must be taken up with an embarassingly patronising pep-talk from the teacher about what a great project this is and how it's going to create a "new paradigm" or some other such nonsense, along with a vague outline of what the project actually is. The next 3 hours will be spent in a "requirements gathering" phase, where the pupils have to translate this waffle into a design for the actual system, going back to the teacher every half hour to receive non-answers to their questions about what is actually needed.
After a ten-minute "project kick off party" with a plastic cup of warm orange squash, the project management chart will be revealed, with the pupils informed that they have to produce a detailed projectr plan with time estimates, and give half hourly updates as the work progresses,so that the chart can be kept up to date.
Then the actual work begins at the computer. The pupils are regularly interrupted with simulated phone calls and urgent emails to test their stress management capabilities, and the sound of a loud argument in another office is piped in at regular intervals. After about the 12th hour, the first requirement changes arrive, thereafter increasing in number at a staedy rate until the 16th hour. After 18 hours, the work completed goes "live", even though it is not fully finished and the teacher starts testing the delivered work and harassing any pupils whose work contains bugs and demands that they are fixed instantly. The pupils are informed that the "project" has been cancelled at the 19 hours 55 minute mark of the exercise.
Only software that comes close to working after all this is demmed to earn its' writer a pass. No marks can be gained or lost due to the quality or lack thereof of the actual code.
This willl be an adequate introductio to real life IT for any pupil with aspirations to work in the industry. The pupils will not think to share their solutions with each other between sessions, as they'll be so busy bitching about the teacher, requirements changes, etc with each other.
And don't forget to allocate 15% of the time to investigating and documenting variances between the actual operation of, and the available documentation for, any frameworks you are using.
Luxury. I get 10% of time for investigating the differences, but no time for documenting them for everyone else. Six months later, guess what happens when someone else runs into the same problem?
Also:
1. There'll be a last-minute addition to the project which is absolutely vital but there's no budget for it..
2. As soon as the project goes live, any incoming data formats will change because the person that was recruited to create it left the job to work in waste management.
This post has been deleted by its author
Education is a political football that has been kicked to death, swapping and changing the GCSE at the last minute is ridiculous and counter productive to what they are supposed to achieve and that is a proficiency in the given subject. You can't have a CompSci without course work it just doesn't work, how do you fully demonstrate your knowledge in an exam? Knowing the syntax and being able to describe what something does is not the same as putting it all together in a working program.
You can't have coursework to which the answers have been published either. So what were the alternatives? Either do what they've done and ditch the coursework, or else produce a whole new set of coursework, publish it in a mad panic and put the kids under extreme pressure to finish it all up in a fraction of the normal time? Oh, and hope that they've plugged the leak so the new coursework doesn't get published too. And deal with endless whinging about how shabbily the kids have been treated because they weren't given enough time.
Nope, when there are no good answers you have to make a guess as to which is the least bad one.
There is no One True Answer. Unlike exams, there is more than one right answer in coursework and better answers should be awarded higher grades.
Programming and programming languages are built on plagiarism. The fact someone's posted the exact question and an answer doesn't mean anything. Similar questions are also repeated on Stack Overflow about 500 times.
... "better answers should be awarded higher grades." exactly - and the marking criteria for the controlled assessment activity did just that - the guidance to assessors gives bands for complexity of answers within the total mark awarded. If a student uses simpler solutions they are limited to a lower mark band - one example I've seen in the past is to have an 8-point question split into three bands based on quality of answer (1-3, 4-6, 7-8) and marks didn't reach the higher bands unless specific features were seen in the answer.
Sadly there is one true answer.
I discovered this the hard way when I advised my god daughter on some pascal programming in the '80's; they had been taught one particular loop process (can't remember which; not for next, might have been do while or repeat until) and the use of the fully functional loop I explained and she coded was failed as "not the right answer".
I got a tad shirty about this and then discovered the sad truth that Shaw's dictum about those who can't...teach was sadly too true. It was explained to me in no uncertain terms that "THIS WAS THE ANSWER" and all else was a fail.
Some twenty years later and I was doing an OU Java course simulating race conditions on a train track and gating via a tunnel. My code worked perfectly including race conditions but was failed by the tutor. I did enquire as to whether it had been run, and was informed that it didn't have to be - it was the wrong answer...
You are correct; plagiarism (albeit with the skill to recognise an appropriate solution) is one of the few bases of good code authoring. Indeed, other than FP every time we spin up an instance of a class we are plagiarising our own work (or whomsoever we copied it from). Sadly most people marking the solutions provided are better at copying the "FAIL" rather than evaluating the submission.
This...oh so many times this.
I was banned from assisting with homework as my efforts produced good answers but without the critical key words. I was advised that a wrong answer with the keywords was worth more marks than a right answer without them.
How the hell is that right? On a couple of instances in college I produced a more compact working solution than the model answer in digital design work. Under the current rules I would have failed each module for that
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
