This happens on some questions anyway. Especially in all the business papers I did, all the ones with an asterisk near the question number had to be answered in continuous prose and you were judged on your communication skills/spelling/punctuation etc with some exam boards.

I think its unfair for those who are dyslexic especially. Lots of schools don't seem keen to pay out to test them for dyslexia so some don't even get diagnosed so no help is available for them...

 

With the sole exception of an English exam, I just cannot see the point of this. Two things spring to mind immediately. Firstly, exams are meant to be a test of knowledge of a certain subject, not a knowledge of English. And secondly - unless ALL subjects are marked by English teachers (which would be plainly ridiculous), I doubt very much that the markers would be hot on spelling and punctuation either.

 

I'm probably showing my age here, but that was always the case. It's only relatively recently that literacy skills were not considered in any subject outside English and I think that was a backward step. Unfortunately, the effects of this show. I remember years ago, having a discussion with my son's primary school teacher because the spelling in his homework hadn't been corrected. I was told they only corrected spelling if it was a spelling lesson . I was told it didn't matter in other areas and they didn't want to damage their enthusiasm. I asked them if their future employer's would do the same if there were spelling errors in his CV. - I got a blank look

Dislexia is a different problem and there should be provision for helping children with this. And if I remember rightly (it's a long time ago) consideration was given to diagnosed dislexic children when doing exams.

 

That's a bit stupid and I'm taking GCSE now and though I am an able student and have no problems when it comes to punctuation, grammar and spelling there is certainly people in my year who do have these problems and I can't believe it is for ALL subjects. Surely if, say, in a Geography assessment the whole idea is put across the student should receive the appropriate marks?

 

With the sole exception of an English exam, I just cannot see the point of this. Two things spring to mind immediately. Firstly, exams are meant to be a test of knowledge of a certain subject, not a knowledge of English. And secondly - unless ALL subjects are marked by English teachers (which would be plainly ridiculous), I doubt very much that the markers would be hot on spelling and punctuation either

Interesting - LOL
I have completely the opposite view. Why add to the confusion that it is only applicable to English. Most subjects require a certain amount of written English - why would you want to children that they only have to worry about English if the subject is English. Surely English skills apply across the board, and long past their education too. How confusing for a child to write something in one subject and be told that's fine, but do the same thing in English and told it's wrong!

 

there is certainly people in my year who do have these problems

but surely, isn't it better to help those students with problems and rectify it rather than just accept it? They may get their exams in other subjects if only the relevant answers are given, but it won't help them in the workplace where literacy IS expected and important in many different areas, not just an English related job.

 

but surely, isn't it better to help those students with problems and rectify it rather than just accept it? They may get their exams in other subjects if only the relevant answers are given, but it won't help them in the workplace where literacy IS expected and important in many different areas, not just an English related job.

Yes and they do get help, I'm glad to say my school is pretty amazing and even the ones who struggle get booster sessions and extra revision sessions.

 

i don't think this is a bad idea?
I mean, I know certain individuals will struggle, but I also think it means the teachers are going to be trying harder with those students who struggle.

PLUS I'm not sure if you remember it but I think this may have come about from the whole 'students answer exam questions in text speak' from the last (couple of?) years... maybe?

 

Interesting - LOL
I have completely the opposite view. Why add to the confusion that it is only applicable to English. Most subjects require a certain amount of written English - why would you want to children that they only have to worry about English if the subject is English. Surely English skills apply across the board, and long past their education too. How confusing for a child to write something in one subject and be told that's fine, but do the same thing in English and told it's wrong!

It didn't seem to do me any harm! Despite grammar and punctuation being marked only in English exams, I managed to get 5 "O" Levels, three "A" Levels and then a degree in English and Philosophy. (All of which will gve you an inkling into how long ago it was that I was at school )

I do agree that the better your English skills, the easier you will find other examinations. When you have around thirty minutes under exam conditions to write an essay in answer to something, then not having to think about how to write an essay is a distinct advantage - and, of course, the better your language and punctuation skills, the easier it is to explain yourself properly and get your point across.

However, my two main worries still stand. If someone is being tested on biology, then it is knowledge of biology that should be marked and not knowledge of English. If a biology paper is being marked, then biology markers will not necessarily have enough knowledge of the English language to mark spelling and punctuation as well.

 

PLUS I'm not sure if you remember it but I think this may have come about from the whole 'students answer exam questions in text speak' from the last (couple of?) years... maybe?

It probably has. I used to mark English Key Stage 3 papers, and the amount of children who wrote in text speak was amazing - and, of course, it was marked down in an English exam. However, I don't think it should be marked down in any other kind of exam. For example, why should your knowledge of the English language affect your mark for your knowledge of biology?

 

It didn't seem to do me any harm! Despite grammar and punctuation being marked only in English exams, I managed to get 5 "O" Levels, three "A" Levels and then a degree in English and Philosophy. (All of which will gve you an inkling into how long ago it was that I was at school )

I do agree that the better your English skills, the easier you will find other examinations. When you have around thirty minutes under exam conditions to write an essay in answer to something, then not having to think about how to write an essay is a distinct advantage - and, of course, the better your language and punctuation skills, the easier it is to explain yourself properly and get your point across.

However, my two main worries still stand. If someone is being tested on biology, then it is knowledge of biology that should be marked and not knowledge of English. If a biology paper is being marked, then biology markers will not necessarily have enough knowledge of the English language to mark spelling and punctuation as well.

we got marked down for bad use of English in Philosophy at uni

 

we got marked down for bad use of English in Philosophy at uni

Did you really? I didn't.

ETA- sorry, when I read that back after posting it sounded really nasty and I didn't mean it to be!

 

I got marked down for incorrect English when doing a history degree, and one teacher said that he had international students that could write better English than me!

Luckily I have a friend with a masters in English, who proof reads my work

 

Did you really? I didn't.

ETA- sorry, when I read that back after posting it sounded really nasty and I didn't mean it to be!

yeah we were
and I don't think it sounded really nasty?

I got marked down for incorrect English when doing a history degree, and one teacher said that he had international students that could write better English than me!

Luckily I have a friend with a masters in English, who proof reads my work

It may just be now then...

ooo, I'll tell you what i did get once though! (sorry, going ever so slightly off topic here...)

my dissertation supervisor (psychology (i was doing a joint degree)). I sent her an email asking some questions and she emailed me back and told me that she was not even going to contemplate answering my questions until I had all my spelling and grammar correct.

well... i got paranoid then because my spelling is normally ok, by grammar is a bit dodgy, especcially with inverted commas and where they should go when an s is at the end of the word, so i asked my friend to go over it for me...

my crime? not capitalising one i

i very rarely capitalize i's!

 

i very rarely capitalize i's!

I hate people who don't capitalise I's

 

I hate people who don't capitalise I's

well It's a bIt sIlly In the mIddle of words :lol:

(sorry, i did actually mean just i's which i know you know, but there we go and it's ok, most people hate me)

 

One of the modules in the English/Philosophy degree I did was the philosophy of equality. When the tutor marked my first essay in that module, I was absolutely devastated to find he had only given me a mark of 65%. Worse still, the tutor said that he had marked it so low because it was unstructured, and proceeded to set out the way he would have structured it.

I pointed out to him that just because I had structured it differently to him did not mean that it was unstructured or that my structure was wrong, but he wouldn't listen. So I wrote a letter to the Head of the Faculty saying that I thought the tutor was marking unfairly, and listing the structure of my essay. The Head of Faculty remarked it and it came back with a mark of 98%.

That's just one of the reasons I worry that markers of subjects other than English should not be subtracting marks for what they mistakenly perceive as bad use of English.

 

One of the modules in the English/Philosophy degree I did was the philosophy of equality. When the tutor marked my first essay in that module, I was absolutely devastated to find he had only given me a mark of 65%. Worse still, the tutor said that he had marked it so low because it was unstructured, and proceeded to set out the way he would have structured it.

I pointed out to him that just because I had structured it differently to him did not mean that it was unstructured or that my structure was wrong, but he wouldn't listen. So I wrote a letter to the Head of the Faculty saying that I thought the tutor was marking unfairly, and listing the structure of my essay. The Head of Faculty remarked it and it came back with a mark of 98%.

That's just one of the reasons I worry that markers of subjects other than English should not be subtracting marks for what they mistakenly perceive as bad use of English.

that's awful! glad it got sorted though!

BUT i thought all marking at GCSE was done by outside markers with guidelines on exactly what was right or wrong, so any spelling and/or grammatical errors would be over and above whatever the student was trying to portray? Against Universities and the way that everything is internally marked? As against University marking systems which are internal with rather 'fluid' guidelines?

Plus, do students need to write full essays for things like biology now? When I did it (and at A level...) it was mostly one worded answers, with only one or two really short essay questions?

I think the subjects it will 'affect' are the subjects that it matters in, surely?
And it will help people in the long run with things like CV's, cover letters, etc.

 

I clicked on the link in post one and it mentioned Grammer..... for Christs sake....ER!!!! what a bunch of plonkers.
In the 50s and 60s we learned English without all the crap spouted nowadays.We didn't get fancy disabled names when we made a mess of it.We got a bollocking for not paying attention.
All these fancy names for educational brilliance....and they still can't spell or put a sentence together to save their lives.

My qualifications in English from school?....sod all...but I can beat the socks off all the clever gits on here.

 

I clicked on the link in post one and it mentioned Grammer..... for Christs sake....ER!!!! what a bunch of plonkers.
In the 50s and 60s we learned English without all the crap spouted nowadays.We didn't get fancy disabled names when we made a mess of it.We got a bollocking for not paying attention.
All these fancy names for educational brilliance....and they still can't spell or put a sentence together to save their lives.

My qualifications in English from school?....sod all...but I can beat the socks off all the clever gits on here.

ooo, a challenge!

 

ooo, a challenge!

im 22 and have only been 'acquiring' DVD's for the past 4 years and ive just figured out that i can match you on that

That's a line off another post of yours....im should be I'm....ive should be I've and i should be a capital I...plus a full stop at the end.

You wanna put a few quid on a spelling and grammar bee?

 

im 22 and have only been 'acquiring' DVD's for the past 4 years and ive just figured out that i can match you on that

That's a line off another post of yours....im should be I'm....ive should be I've and i should be a capital I...plus a full stop at the end.

You wanna put a few quid on a spelling and grammar bee?

I wasn't being tested then and if I was I would have done it correctly. This isn't a test! If you want me to type 100% correctly I can and I will, but it's is very rarely I capitalize my I's and not because I'm lazy but because a lot of it comes from my poetry where everything has its own meaning.

*shrugs*

ALSO, who specified just me?
you said 'but I can beat the socks off all the clever gits on here.'

I know a few who could give you a run for your money.

 

AND ITS ABOUT TIME.
I've always thought it to be stupid that kids can be a lazy as they like and still get excellent marks for the simple facts of not being able/willing to spell or where to put, a full.stop etc.

Standards should be maintained. Many of those that have recieved good/excellent grades regardless of how they spell etc have moved on to uni and got the shock of their lives, when the uni lecturers have marked them down on spelling and punctuation etc. Do we really want to go back to the old days i.e. 15/16th centuries before there was a uniform spelling. Google it and try to read some of the documents, I enjoy history but it takes a hell of a long time to read some of these.

In my day you were marked down in any subject for poor spelling. Heck in my maths exam, (exams were every year in them days) when I was in first year seniors (think thats yr 7 these days). Instead of writing the number 7 normally I did it with a line through it as the french do and although it was the correct answer my teacher marked it as wrong.

 

In my day you were marked down in any subject for poor spelling. Heck in my maths exam, (exams were every year in them days) when I was in first year seniors (think thats yr 7 these days). Instead of writing the number 7 normally I did it with a line through it as the french do and although it was the correct answer my teacher marked it as wrong.

I sometimes write them like that! And Z's as well... sometimes they come out like the number 3...

It's awful now because in my job I have to be correct with punctuation and grammar as well as keep all my numbers and letters the same...

 

I clicked on the link in post one and it mentioned Grammer..... for Christs sake....ER!!!! what a bunch of plonkers.
In the 50s and 60s we learned English without all the crap spouted nowadays.We didn't get fancy disabled names when we made a mess of it.We got a bollocking for not paying attention.
All these fancy names for educational brilliance....and they still can't spell or put a sentence together to save their lives.

My qualifications in English from school?....sod all...but I can beat the socks off all the clever gits on here.

That's really quite brave and like Metame I suspect a fair few would beat you people just don't care on a forum :lol:

Not all of us who get good grades have no writing skills. I think mine aren't half bad. The errors I make are because when using my iPhone it does auto correct and corrects things wrongly