Talk:Advanced Higher

Article title

The qualification is called "Advanced Higher", not "Advanced Higher Grade". (See comments on Talk:Higher Grade) I think in this case, "Advanced Higher" is an unambiguous enough title for a page.

...but I don't know how to change a page's title...

Would it be OK to move this to Advanced Higher, do you think? (I'll learn how to move it, I'm just checking if other people agree with me that it should be moved) -- Mendor 10:00, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Requested Move to Advanced Higher (Scottish)

The reasons for move copied from WP:RM

• Advanced Higher Grade - (rename to) - Advanced Higher (Scottish)

Corrects name and avoids ambiguity. Davidkinnen 08:04, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• Supporter

It is correctly called Advanced Higher not Advanced Higher Grade, adding (Scottish) prevents ambiguity. Davidkinnen 08:04, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

• Support

for same reasons as at Talk:Higher Grade, though I really don't think AH would need disambiguation — Mendor 21:06, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

• Support

I agree, it is called Advanced Higher, and adding the scottish b=it will help too i'm sure.

• Support —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.194.172 (talk) 21:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, I'm sitting my Advanced Highers this year, not my Advanced Higher Grades. It makes sense to have three levels, standard, higher and advanced. Someone should also mention that they used to be called Higher Stills.--The Wizard of Magicland 18:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think you'll find (to the best of my knowledge) that Higher Still refers to the Non-Standard Grade NQs i.e. the Access, Intermediate and Higher (including Advanced) courses. The previous name for the Advanced Highers was CSYS (Certificate of Sixth Year Studies) FeralWolf 11:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Errrm yes, Higher Still does refer to the entire spectrum of courses, from Access 1 to Advanced Higher.--NeoNerd 22:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

HIgher Still refers to the project of implementation of the National Qualifications framework, it's not the title of the framework itself. 86.11.166.108 (talk) 09:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Comparison of Advanced Highers and A-Levels

I am somewhat surprised to read this article as the tone suggests that advanced highers are somewhat more difficult than the corresponding A-level in a particular subject. Although there is a lack of dedicated reading material for A-H qualifications this is generally offset by the exams at the end of the course being relatively straightforward (easy?) compared to the A-level exams. This can easily be verified by comparing the appropriate exams papers. Scientific style exams will generally have a greater complexity in the problem solving than the AH exams, and other subjects, such as English, generally expect a greater degree of insight and understanding to be displayed in the exam. It's also notable that people with AH qualifications will find that they are behind (in terms of knowledge) a similar student who studied A-levels, even though the exams are supposed to be equivalent. This is painfully obvious for scottish students who move to study for a degree in England.

Should this be mentioned on the main article?

If you can source it, fine. However, what you are saying sonds a bit like original research, which is, of course, not allowed under WP:OR. Hope this helps. --NeoNerd 09:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

There is not only a lack of reading material, also a lack of teachers. I studied three Advanced Higher science subjects and was taught only one of them. I must disagree that this is offset by easier exam questions. I imagine that you are correct that Advanced Higher questions will be slightly more straightforward than the equivalent A-level, however you must remember that an Advanced Higher paper is designed to examine three times as much work as an A-level one (one paper covers a year's work as opposed to three papers per year at A-level) and as such to expect the same level of detail as an A-level paper would be impossibly hard. The format is also inherently more difficult (as discussed in the main article) - in most subjects a single paper defines your grade, with no chance to boost it up with better performance in other units (or by resitting some of them) as in A-level.

Furthermore, as an Oxford undergraduate I must disagree with the sentiment that "people with AH qualifications will find that they are behind" those with A-levels if they study in England. While I did notice there were minor differences in syllabus content compared to my peers this was very much in both directions - some areas were given more weight at Advanced Higher, others at A-level (others still at IB). To be honest it really didn't matter- my course was designed with this in mind, and the "playing field" was level within about a fortnight (of a 4 year course) anyway. 81.151.240.173 12:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I too am an Oxford undergraduate. I did AH Biology and have found that I know a lot more than those who have completed A level Biology, at least in certain topics. As 81.151.240.173 suggests, this isn't because the Scottish syllabus goes into more depth, rather, it is because it has covered certain areas more in depth, whereas A-level syllabuses may have focused on other areas. The assertion that they are "behind" may simply be because they have not covered those topics relevant to a particular syllabus at a given university in England.

I have also completed A level past papers to practice for Scottish exams and do not agree that (in the sciences at least) the A level papers are harder, I think they're about the same. Nor does the passage claim that Advanced Highers are more difficult - Advanced HIghers aren't harder, it's just that resources for them are a bit more limited, and that's the point of the passage. I'm reversing the removal of the passage pending further discussion and consensus. It would be good to have qualifications on the views in the passage rather than complete deletion.

[[Special:Contributions/oxon-alex] (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

To the above, AH biology is an absolutely atrocious course :p. I'm yet another Oxford student (the only people that ever gave a damn about AH's were those applying to English unis, and I suppose Oxbridge is one of the few places people feel is worth the fees). I would go further than saying that AHs are harder, and suggest that in the last year of scottish school the education system completely falls apart - most of the students don't need any grades from it. Hence in a class the only people doing any work at all will be the one or two with conditionals from England, and even more terribly, many subjects just won't be taught. My school's no longer teaching Biology, which means I simply could not be doing the degree I'm on now, and many other subjects (History, Physics, Chemistry, Further Maths, Geography, various languages) either aren't taught, or are in classes in another school, which requires the incredible hassle of taxi-ing to and from schools in the middle of the day. 25 November 2008

Using the Sunday Times as a resource is not really sufficient. It is well known the English press love to have a 'bash the A Level' article - it sits well with middle class England who love to think A Levels were more harder in their day. The article sounds silly and is poorly slanted towards Scottish qualifications. Colliver55 (talk) 10:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

All of this opinion and original research is no good without some evidence - and the simple fact is that 97.2% of A levels were passed in 2008, compared with only 75.8% of Advanced Highers. The higher fail rate with Advanced Highers clearly shows that they are more difficult. The statistics come from the Scottish Qualificatons Agency website: http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/33683.html and from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7560654.stm Fwapper (talk) 17:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I think what it really comes down to is what the universities think - they classify Advanced Highers as exactly the same as Advanced Levels. Thats the truth. Given that most Scottish schools base their Emphasis on the Highers rather than Advanced Highers it could be that they are simply not prepared as well. Stop trying to make a 'Scotland is better than England' argument. It sounds rather feeble. Colliver55 (talk) 19:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC) Have you also considered, that as A-Levels are modular, only those who are fairly certain of passing enter for matriculation? Talk about cherry-picking statistics. Colliver55 (talk) 19:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

To the person who left the comment on the 25 Nov 2008, I absolutely agree with you. It's a national nightmare, though it only really affects people trying to get into English universities. Colliver55, that's what we are saying. We're not saying Scots qualifications are harder, we're saying that they are of the same difficulty but you can't compare the grades without looking at the situation in schools, and the fact is that schools often have crap resources for AH and often don't prep people for AH as well as they do for Highers. People who rely on the paragraph in the article will be able to discern this. Fwapper - regarding the 97.2% pass rate, I think that's because A-level grades D and E would be considered a fail at AH level. There are only passing grades A to C and an A-level grade C is, under the UCAS tarriff, equivalent to an A-level grade C.Ox-alex (talk) 16:47, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I took this discussion out of the article. It needs to be sourced and concisely written if it is to return. --John (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect statement

The following statement in the article:

(b) the qualification has poorer resources, mostly with no specially written textbooks

is a little loose. There are specially written textbooks for maths. MP ^{(talk•contribs)} 21:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Outdated List

The list of subjects available at AH is VERY out of date. I know for a fact that Advanced Highers in Philosophy and Psychology were discontinued in 2003, and I'm sure the same is true for a lot of other subjects that had lower numbers at that time. Neezes (talk) 11:08, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Advanced Higher. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061001203658/http://www.scqf.org.uk/table.htm to http://www.scqf.org.uk/table.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)