![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
I realize my interpretation of characters has been influenced since HBP by my habit of conflating OWLS scores with the American grading system: A, B, C, etc.
But I gather JKR is basing the OWLS on the O-Levels, for which I have no cultural reference.
What does it mean that Harry can do E work in most of his classes, while scraping an O in the class he's been receiving intensive tutoring in since 3rd year?
In the American grading system, you'd have to be quite bright to get absolutely straight A's. Getting mostly B's means, basically, you're a bit above average or average but willing to apply yourself. Getting a B in a class where you've knocked yourself out trying to get an A means you aren't that great. Anyone willing to work hard enough should be able to scrape a C. I've been conflating those to O, E, A--how far off am I?
(For comparison: George W. Bush "passed" most of his college classes, but never, if I recall his published transcript, got higher than a B on those he consented to take letter grades on. Which would make him comparable to Ron, if A/B/C compared to O/E/A. Am I being grossly unfair to Ickle Ronniekins?)
Thanks!
But I gather JKR is basing the OWLS on the O-Levels, for which I have no cultural reference.
What does it mean that Harry can do E work in most of his classes, while scraping an O in the class he's been receiving intensive tutoring in since 3rd year?
In the American grading system, you'd have to be quite bright to get absolutely straight A's. Getting mostly B's means, basically, you're a bit above average or average but willing to apply yourself. Getting a B in a class where you've knocked yourself out trying to get an A means you aren't that great. Anyone willing to work hard enough should be able to scrape a C. I've been conflating those to O, E, A--how far off am I?
(For comparison: George W. Bush "passed" most of his college classes, but never, if I recall his published transcript, got higher than a B on those he consented to take letter grades on. Which would make him comparable to Ron, if A/B/C compared to O/E/A. Am I being grossly unfair to Ickle Ronniekins?)
Thanks!
I'm no authority, however, since I'm not English and my memories date from more than 25 years ago.
So - I, too, would love to know the answer.
(I was primarily a "B" student in high school who began to get a lot of "A"s in college, btw)
I always thought GWB just got a gentleman's C. You know, you go to one of the Ivys or another big name school, and if you show up to most classes and take the exams, you get a C, even if you didn't earn it.
There's also the fact that some students are really good at tests and others stink at them. If the OWLs are similar to say (not the SATs but the other one you can take, ACT?) those sorts of tests, then the grades you get all year don't matter at all and it's all about the tests. Generally, if you're bright and have good test-taking skills, you can ace the tests even if you didn't do so well in the class.
Case in point... I got Cs in AP European History, and a 5 on the AP exam. (Note to non USA people, AP classes are supposed to be the equivalent of college classes for high school students. You take an exam in May (generally) and if you get a 4 or 5, most colleges will count that as a college course. I always just equated the OWLs and NEWTs to AP tests, except that everyone takes them.
My point was meant to be that perhaps it is easiest to think of the OWLs as being similar to AP exams. How you do in the class is one indicator of how you might do on the test, but it is certainly not the only one. In theory, your grade in a particular course reflects the effort put forth and the knowledge retained. Your grade on an OWL or an AP exam, on the other hand, reflects how well you know what is on the test, whether your professor managed to teach you everything on the test, how well you take tests, and even what kind of day you're having.
Does that make sense or am I just rambling randomly? Also, is that anywhere near how the British system works, or not?
O Levels ( In my head, I equate this to the OWLS since we take it at 16, and the OWLs are for 5th years - 15/16 yrs old)
A1 -- 75 marks and above [O]
A2 -- 70-74 marks [O/EE]
B3 -- 65-69 [EE]
B4 -- 60-64 [A]
C5 -- 55-59 [A]
C6 -- 50-54 [P]
D7 -- 45-49 [P]
E8 -- 40-44 [D]
F9 -- 39 marks and below [T]
[These are my own estimations of Hogwarts' grades to O levels']
A pass would be typically at the 50 marks point [C6], but still considered very poor, on very shaky ground or have very poor foundation. Anything below a C6 is a certified fail-grade.
Sometimes(rarely actually), a [D7] will be counted as pass, when we regulate the marks across the level, but this is only for internal exams.
A decent grade would at least be B3 at least, B4 is so-so.
----------------------------------------
These are Hogwarts' grading system.
Ordinary Wizarding Levels Grading System
* O = Outstanding (Pass, may continue to N.E.W.T.)
* E = Exceeds Expectations (Pass, almost always continues to N.E.W.T)
* A = Acceptable (Pass, rarely continue to N.E.W.T)
* P = Poor (Fail, may repeat subject)
* D = Dreadful (Fail, may not receive O.W.L. credit)
* T = Troll (Fail, with distinction. More than one T may mean refusal into other N.E.W.T.s)
----------------------------------------
In my JC (Junior college, where we take A Levels), we have another scaling.
A Levels ( This is the NEWTs in my head, since we take it at 18, and the 7th years are 17/18.)
A - 70 marks and above [O]
B - 60- 69 [O/EE]
C - 55 - 59 [EE]
D - 50 - 54 [A]
E - 45- 49 [A / P]
S - 40- 44 [D]
U - 39 and below [T]
E grade is a passing grade, anything below is a fail grade. It is considered rather "Poor" so [P] would be a good Hogwarts-equivalent, but its not a fail grade, so it might be acceptable as an [A] as well.
A decent grade would be C at least, if you want the grade to count on a certificate. Anything lower than that just looks bad. No Cs preferably. (But in school, we all scraped by with Es, Ss, Us, occasional Ds... good grades only show up during crunch time. :D)
Hope this can give you a good estimation!
(Hey, don't look down on the Brit's scoring system! See what snorkackcatcher said!)
Its not actually lenient. Getting 90 marks is unheard of, unless in clear-cut subjects like maths/science. And in that area, seldom too. It is of course, quite impossible to achieve that in humanities subjects like Geography, History, Social Studies, English, Economics etc.
I suppose you have to take in account the examination type as well as the duration of the exam. By examination type, I mean - do the questions come as MCQs (Multiple Choice Questions) or open-ended ones?
MCQs are easier to score, and much easier to 'spot questions' for or train for as they often repeat the same kind of questions, with the same options no less. O Levels consists of a very small percentage of MCQs, and A Levels, almost none at all. Only for Chemistry/Physics/Biology, and that's only 1 out of 4 papers.
Open-ended ones are harder to score of course, examiners have to mark you against a sheet of 'key points' or Level Marking ( in O and A level) according to your language ability, coherence, and just overall presentation. In humanities subjects, you're required to add-on personal evaluation plus case studies and specific examples in the essays. (Eg: If you're writing about chalk cliffs and rate of erosion, you have to name Peacehaven Cliffs protected by an undercliff wall or Black Rock Marina the Chalk cliffs and the Quaternary Head)
Also, for A Levels, the duration of the exam are 'just nice' if you're well-prepared and go in to start writing immediately. If you're not prepared or if you fumble, the marks lost are easily parcels of 10 marks and above. (How to get 90?!)
Eg: For Economics (A Level), given 2 hrs 15 mins, you have to write 3 essays, 25 marks each. We are encouraged to fill at least 3 sides of writing paper - so that's 1 and 1/2 sheets at the very least for part (i) of the question - usually 10-12 marks. Part 2 - 13-15 marks, 2 sheets, 4 sides at least, excluding the diagrams which take up to 8 lines wide (depending on how big you draw them).
And when you're done, that's only for 1 question. 2 more to go. Lather, rinse, repeat.
And there's still Geography - 3 hour paper, History...etc. Our science papers have 4 parts (For O and A). ( 3 written, 1 practical split into 4 sessions throughout the year. The MCQ paper is 40 questions and only 1 hour is given. Its pretty horrifying, this paper.)
Hope this gives you a rough idea of exactly how tough and demanding it can be!
Ah, so, it might be 2 papers weighted out of 50 each, or up to 15ish each? Still, I am referring to final score. If 70 percent out of the possible marks is given the top-level grade, well... it doesn't make me feel that great about having got Summa Cum Laude (3.75 GPA or greater, I think it was?) on my Bachelor's in the US, if someone who flew well under "Cum Laude" could have got similar honours in the UK.
Also, for A Levels, the duration of the exam are 'just nice' if you're well-prepared and go in to start writing immediately. If you're not prepared or if you fumble, the marks lost are easily parcels of 10 marks and above. (How to get 90?!)
Wait -- they dock you for thinking a bit before you write? IOW for how soon you begin, never mind they can't tell what might be going on in your head?
Eg: For Economics (A Level), given 2 hrs 15 mins, you have to write 3 essays, 25 marks each. We are encouraged to fill at least 3 sides of writing paper [...] And there's still Geography - 3 hour paper, History...etc. Our science papers have 4 parts (For O and A). ( 3 written, 1 practical split into 4 sessions throughout the year. The MCQ paper is 40 questions and only 1 hour is given. Its pretty horrifying, this paper.)
Ahh. So basically, they give a lot more, and expect less percentage?
For A Level Chemistry (and similarly in O Levels)
We have Paper 1 - 40 marks, 40MCQ. Q1-30 are normal MCQ, while the last 10 are 'evaluative MCQs' where the 4 options are statements, and you have to choose whether all of the statements are correct, only 1 is correct, or only 2 is correct or whether 2 and 3 is correct or 1 and 2 is correct.
Paper 2 - 60 marks, 1.5 hours. This consists of structured questions where different topics can exist in 1 question to test your integration of knowledge. All compulsory questions, each varying from 10-15 marks, usually 6 questions or so.
Paper 3 - 80 marks - 2 hours. For this, we choose 4 out of 5 questions. Each question is 20 marks, with (i), (ii) carrying different marks in it. This is the longer and tougher version of P2.
Paper 4 - 64 marks (This is the year-long practical, testing Skill A, B, C, D. ABCD refers to specific skills like calculation of data, evaluation of data etc.) Experiments are done alone in the lab, each Skill is 8 marks.
The total doesn't add up to 100, but instead each paper is given a percentage weightage on how important it is, eg: Paper 3 is very very important, so the percentage may be about 40%. The total score is still computed to a 100% - but that's for internal exams.
About the As and the Os, they use a bell-curve to cut the levels, but of course, I'm not privy to how exactly they compute it. In the A levels, there's no specific scaling like I've provided up there - it will depend on the scoring of students nationwide. For all you may know, for a particularly difficult paper, the highest score may only be a 55, but that's an A as far as everything is concerned.
For Econs - Paper 1 - 50 marks - but only 40%. Paper 2 - 75 marks but 60% weightage. And this applies to the H2 level only. (H1, H2, H3 refers to different depth of study for the subject - this is another topic altogether.)
I think its very hard to reconcile US and UK's system, particularly if you're used to the 90+ points as grade A...well, I'm sure everything is tested differently in the US, am I right? What are the exam formats like? That may account for the difference in marks expectations. The A level equivalent in US is? Is it the SATs? We can take that here too, but at our own leisure.
Regarding your qualification, I'm sure it is another matter totally as A Levels is not the same as university level. A Level is what we take to get to the U. So I don't think the comparison applies. Your qualification is quite safe. :)
Hm. That's not what I meant exactly. Thinking time doesn't really exist, because all the preparation has to be done before the exams. When you look at the question, you only process it and immediately start to answer it. You must 'get it' immediately. More time spent thinking means less time answering, and in the end, only what you wrote would be marked.
If you spend more than 10 minutes thinking about what the question wants, then your time is running really short. At the most, 'thinking' must be done in tandem with planning out your answers (for writing out essays).
I'm not too sure about what you mean by your last sentence. If you would care to elaborate, I'll be happy to answer. (Though I'm wondering if we're off-topic already. ;p)
What are the exam formats like? That may account for the difference in marks expectations. The A level equivalent in US is? Is it the SATs?
I guess? That's the exam that most institutions are interested in as far as admission to a university. However, we normally take that exam around the junior (third) year of high school, which age-wise sounds to me more like O-level. Also, you can attempt it multiple times to improve your score, which I don't get the impression you can do with O or A levels?
I'm not too sure about what you mean by your last sentence.
They offer a more difficult exam, expecting that people will not be likely to score 100 because they don't have time to get to all the questions, and therefore much lower marks are considered passing?
Well - yes, papers consists of essays questions, and this is particularly for humanities subjects. Not so for Chem/Bio/Physics of course. Although, Bio does have a small essay section. So the answer is "yes" to this first question.
Hmm. You can retake particular O Level subjects if you've failed them, and combine them with your first. But then you have to wait for a whole another year before taking the exam. (You can take SATs about 4 times throughout the year yes?) But for A Levels - only results in one sitting are accepted, so if you fail one subject, you're obliged to repeat everything you've taken at the next exam (next year) - this can be and is extremely draining.
So yes, you can repeat, but most people don't, the effort put into revising and studying for the whole entire syllabus is way too daunting for some people, particularly because this repeat would be without the guidance of school teachers. You're on your own. (Unless you're having tuition of course.)
I think the main difference is that - SATs - they consist mainly of MCQs and is thus easier to accumulate a higher numerical score as compared to the grading for the short answer questions/essays. The bar for the A Levels is never set at 100 marks as being the highest benchmark because you cannot grade the essay the same way you tick off an MCQ - its not that definitive and clear-cut. The A Levels don't have MCQs as part of their examination, and in the case where they do, it is way outweighed by other components. (Eg: Chemistry).
So the scores in A Levels are more subjective to a marker's whims (although they do have a marking scheme) rather than the very straightforward right/wrong, 1 point for each correct answer in MCQs. This is especially prevalent in the "essay papers" I've mentioned, they mark according to "levels". L1 - 0-7 marks. L2 - 8-12 marks. L3 - 13-16 marks (This is a school gauge, if the essay totals 16 marks) So, the examiners have leeway within each level to mark according to their own impression of your work as well.
So the succinct answer would be "yes" to this.
Overall- and I hope no one is offended I think this- I think the O/A Levels is a harder qualifying exam than the SATs. Much, much harder.
Different Unis asked for different pass grades (straight As for Oxbridge, As and Bs for the redbricks) Entrance to the Civil Service was also gauged on O and A level passes (which equates with the Ministry).
You also have to remember that the percentage required to pass was changed in line with the places available (I got a 45% on one exam, which was originally a 'fail' grade, but was upgraded to a C pass because that particular exam board found that there weren't enough passes to fill the available Uni places... go figure. This is pretty much the equivalent of Slughorn dropping the pass requirement to take NEWT-level Potions - presumably if they'd stuck to Snape's criteria there would have been no students taking NEWT potions.
After all, we know Hermione at least got an O. Pretty sure the same was true of Draco since he was apparently awfully close to a perfect Draught of Living Death, too. And I see no reason why the same would not be true of Nott, since he's supposed to be as smart as Draco (or for the Ravenclaws).
They only reason they appear less talented in 6th year is because for once they were not using Snape's improved formulas - only Harry had them that year. Whereas for all previous years, they had apparently been on the board for everyone. -- Hwyla
the other point is to make clear that these are qualifications in their own right. At one time, getting five O levels got you a very good job (ads in the paper usually went something like: Qualifications required: 5 O levels, Maths and English essential). Many people of my generation left school after that, quite happy to have got that far. The only point in going on to do your 3 A levels was if you wanted to go to University. these days of course, the Gcse equivalent counts for very little and Univeristy degrees are two a penny. Seems you have to go on to do a masters in order to get anywhere.
(1) Marks/grades for classwork have no direct effect whatsoever on your final mark, which is entirely based on the examinations taken in fifth year. So it's possible to slack off or stumble through most of the year, ace the exam, and get a good grade. As Harry indeed did.
(2) The exams are set at a sufficient difficulty level that generally not even the best students are expected to get that close to 100% (exception: mathematics and other symbol-shuffling subjects with clear-cut answers). The marks required for each grade varied (*) but I've seen averages for A/B/C/D/E quoted as 70/60/50/40/35, or even 65/55/45/40/35 for at least some O levels. C or above was a pass at O level, and (technically) E or above at A level. Yes, those marks are low compared to the US system, but still represent a significant level of skill. The HP O/E/A/P/D map pretty much exactly to A/B/C/D/E.
(*) The O and A level system at the time JKR took them set the grades statistically -- basically they drew a bell curve of all the marks, and the top 10% were As, the next whatever-% Bs and so on. That method did have the advantage of automatically compensating for year-to-year varying difficulty of exams, at least in subjects where a lot of students took the exam. The GCSE system replaced O levels and is very different -- much more coursework/continuous assessment contributing to the final mark, and correspondingly higher pass grades. A levels may have coursework now too but seem to be largely the same as they were.
When applying to colleges and universities, you were required to submit (1) an application, which included an essay and, as part of it (2) the results of your SAT and standardized tests in a couple of other subjects (3) your grade point average over at least your last two years of high school, in all subjects, and (4) letters of recommendation from three adults who knew you well.
At least,that's how I remember it from back in the late (ish) 2oth century. Today's kids seem to have it even worse, since in addition they are expected to show leadership, do volunteer work/community service, show that they are well-rounded human beings, etc. All the kids at Hogwarts would seem like slackers to a seriously ambitious American kid, IMO!
BTW, this practice of continuous assessment is why I was so clear that Harry was cheating his way through Potions in HBP. I heard from a few British readers who insisted that what he was doing was not cheating because it was *only* course work - and only practical work, at that -, and he didn't cheat on the exam. In my biology and chemistry classes, labwork was graded and was part of your assessment.
That said, the "O" and "A" levels, and the leaving certificate my Irish cousins take, are far, far, harder than any tests I ever took in America.