Exam Results

[phart]

15 hours ago, phart said:

Gifted pupils at bad schools got fucked and marked down, while mediocre students at good schools got to keep their grades. It's a policy straight out of the Tory playbook. What school you go to shouldn't affect the result by a difference of 2.5.

Downgrading individually historical A students to C students (2 bands) cause of the historical results of their schools to fit an anachronistic bell curve model who shouldn't have happened.

Anyone defending the outcome when it is so patently unfair and discriminatory cause of who is defending it or is responsible for defending it is part of the larger Political problem, like Alan they'll defend their party and decry the other parties no matter the problem. Rank partisanship is the major problem in politics with folk wiling to eat shite depending on who's arse it came out of.

I see Professor Lindsay Paterson agrees with me

One of Scotland's leading education experts, Prof Lindsay Paterson of the University of Edinburgh, says this means that "each school's attainment is constrained to look more or less the same as it has been in recent years".

Prof Paterson told the Scotsman newspaper that this was unfair because it could mean "an outstanding student in an average school will be likely to have had their grades pulled down".

“The core of the SQA’s methods is that each school’s attainment is constrained to look more or less the same as it has been in recent years.

“So an outstanding student in an average school will be likely to have had their grades pulled down. This is very unfair.

"The approach is also unfair because students in small schools or in unpopular subjects will be less likely to have their grades adjusted than students in larger groups. That’s totally arbitrary.”

Current chair of Royal Stastical Society Research Section, Professor Guy Nason explains in detail why it is wrong in this paper. http://wwwf.imperial.ac.uk/~gnason/Pers_SQA_Aug4.pdf

The Head of SQA  Fiona Roberston refutes it saying they did use hstorical attainment but they "don't accept" the statement. i know chief executive at the SQA

“The relative historic attainment of a school was a feature of our moderation but there were flexibilities attached to that historic attainment which allowed for constraints to be attached to every grade for every course and that did allow for variation in attainment.

"I wouldn’t accept the statement that has been made there because we were very aware, given the profile of entries for many subjects across Scotland that there were small numbers of entries in some schools and in some subjects and some inherent volatility as part of that.

"We were very conscious of the fact there were some subjects where there was some volatility. What we have tried to do is take an evidence based approach and the fact of the matter is some large subjects are more stable and some smaller subjects both at a centre level and nationally are more volatile because of the small numbers.”

Edited August 6, 2020 by phart

[Squirrelhumper]

20 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

In normal years it is mainly teachers who mark the exams. It's a reasonably lucrative wee sideline for teachers who want to put in a bit of extra work and earn some extra money. It will be those same folk who are dealing with the appeals. Only they will be dealing with the appeals during term time instead of marking papers in their holidays.

If your daughter fancies earning some extra money she should think about applying for next year. Although I think there is a decent chance we will be going through the same process again next year.

My mum marked papers as a part time teacher when we were kids to make ends meet, it's far from lucrative given the hours she put in when my dad wasn't working and he could watch us.

[ParisInAKilt]

“Prof Paterson told the Scotsman newspaper that this was unfair because it could mean "an outstanding student in an average school will be likely to have had their grades pulled down".”

Which to any ordinary voter is just ridiculous.

Funny watching the mental gymnastics some take to defend the government though.

[Squirrelhumper]

12 minutes ago, phart said:

Lets' fact check the assertion above

Lucrative? Let's open the dictionary.

adjective

adjective: lucrative

1. producing a great deal of profit.

    

   SCOTLAND'S national exams body is under the spotlight over whether it is paying teachers less than both the minimum and living wages for specialist marking duties.

   For assessing coursework in their own time, teachers are receiving a fee that is as low as £3.56 per paper from the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA). Some papers take an hour to mark.

   https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15182278.exams-board-faces-questions-over-whether-teacher-payments-meets-living-wage-level/

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

Orraloon just comes across as somebody who had one too many of the belt when he was at school.

[phart]

If the credibilty of results is all what matters then don't guess the results, like seriously WTF. Have exams or hold off the awarding of results. You can't hide behind the statement that the credibility of our measurements are what matter while simultaneously guesing those measurements.

[Orraloon]

11 minutes ago, phart said:

Lets' fact check the assertion above

Lucrative? Let's open the dictionary.

adjective

adjective: lucrative

1. producing a great deal of profit.

    

   SCOTLAND'S national exams body is under the spotlight over whether it is paying teachers less than both the minimum and living wages for specialist marking duties.

   For assessing coursework in their own time, teachers are receiving a fee that is as low as £3.56 per paper from the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA). Some papers take an hour to mark.

   https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15182278.exams-board-faces-questions-over-whether-teacher-payments-meets-living-wage-level/

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

OK "lucrative" is probably the wrong word. I don't think I should be allowed to mark English exam papers. 

They can make some extra money if they choose to do it. They don't have to do it if they don't want to.

 

[phart]

Just now, Squirrelhumper said:

Orraloon just comes across as somebody who had one too many of the belt when he was at school.

He's just wrong on this. Demonstrably.

[TDYER63]

22 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

In normal years it is mainly teachers who mark the exams. It's a reasonably lucrative wee sideline for teachers who want to put in a bit of extra work and earn some extra money. It will be those same folk who are dealing with the appeals. Only they will be dealing with the appeals during term time instead of marking papers in their holidays.

If your daughter fancies earning some extra money she should think about applying for next year. Although I think there is a decent chance we will be going through the same process again next year.

She already does this exam marking, she has been marking the papers for the last few years, I mentioned it in my first post. That is why I said  she knows what the SQA are looking for and why she was pissed off so many of her pupils were downgraded. 
 

[phart]

2 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

OK "lucrative" is probably the wrong word. I don't think I should be allowed to mark English exam papers. 

They can make some extra money if they choose to do it. They don't have to do it if they don't want to.

 

That was 2017 guess what happened the next year.

Teachers marking exam scripts hit with 13 per cent pay cut

Teachers in Scotland marking examination scripts have had their payment cut by 13 per cent without warning.

 

Edited August 6, 2020 by phart

[phart]

If no teachers marked exam papers who would mark them? What would you do?

It's like debating a Tory on this issue. Clueless on the struggles of the working class and what it means to have a vocation rather than just a source of income.

There's no work why don't they just get their parents to do a gap year in Morocco...

Edited August 6, 2020 by phart

[Squirrelhumper]

7 minutes ago, phart said:

If the credibilty of results is all what matters then don't guess the results, like seriously WTF. Have exams or hold off the awarding of results. You can't hide behind the statement that the credibility of our measurements are what matter while simultaneously guesing those measurements.

Exactly.

 

1 minute ago, phart said:

If no teachers marked exam papers who would mark them? What would you do?

It's like debating a Tory on this issue. Clueless on the struggles of the working class and what it means to have a vocation rather than just a source of income.

Perhaps Orraloon could do it in his spare time.

[phart]

4 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:

 

 

Perhaps Orraloon could do it in his spare time.

It's very lucrative i hear. After studying 5 years at university and attaining several years of experience in the field you'll be able to almost earn minimum wage if you're a quick marker.

[aaid]

21 minutes ago, ParisInAKilt said:

“Prof Paterson told the Scotsman newspaper that this was unfair because it could mean "an outstanding student in an average school will be likely to have had their grades pulled down".”

Which to any ordinary voter is just ridiculous.

Funny watching the mental gymnastics some take to defend the government though.

Which is an anomaly that will no doubt be addressed via an appeal. 

[phart]

Just now, aaid said:

Which is an anomaly that will no doubt be addressed via an appeal. 

Can you guarantee the appeal will sort all cases and that it won't affect university placements?

The result might be fixed but the consequences of it might not be.

Which is the crux of the problem.

[Orraloon]

14 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Orraloon just comes across as somebody who had one too many of the belt when he was at school.

Never did me any harm. 

In my day teachers had to go out to the berries and the tatties to earn some extra money during the holidays. Some of them nowadays don't know how lucky they are, 27K a year straight out of college. That's a not too bad starting wage.

 

[aaid]

2 minutes ago, phart said:

Can you guarantee the appeal will sort all cases and that it won't affect university placements?

The result might be fixed but the consequences of it might not be.

Which is the crux of the problem.

Can I give an absolute guarantee, no.  

Do I have faith that genuine cases where people have been downgraded will be dealt with correctly, then yes I do.

Will there be some people who following appeals still feel they've been unfairly treated, Yes.  

Will they be justified in that view, without knowing the full details it's impossible to say 

[Orraloon]

7 minutes ago, phart said:

It's very lucrative i hear. After studying 5 years at university and attaining several years of experience in the field you'll be able to almost earn minimum wage if you're a quick marker.

That's money is on top of their salary. Extra money if they choose to do extra work. Nobody is forcing them to do it. 

Anyway I've dragged to thread off the topic that was being discussed. I'll stop moaning about moaning faced teachers now. 

 

 

[thplinth]

As someone said above, you are trying to measure something without measuring it. No system is going to be able to replace people sitting the exams. All going to be flawed so which is the least flawed and thus least likely to bite you badly on the bum.

First choice I woul just not have had the exams, second choice rely on the prelims. At least then the responsibility of the result is back on the student and not some outside third party making arbitrary adjustments from afar. Sure it would fuck the late studiers but the prelims are the only really concrete thing you have. So use them or dont bother as guaranteed everyone will hate you otherwise (and as we are about to see). Be interesting to see how this goes in England. If they handle it better it could intensify the rage up here. The SNP must be praying they have a mare.

It is pivotal time in a teens life. If the government is seen as unfairly fucking them over they are going to hate you with a passion. And then you get to the over protective parents.... Aye, good luck with all that.

edit: could this be legally challenged if shown to be discriminatory?

Edited August 6, 2020 by thplinth

[slasher]

The best route out of this for the SNP is surely through the appeals process now. Whatever they do, they best step back from some of the rhetoric of the last couple of days.... its going down like a lead balloon! 

[TDYER63]

33 minutes ago, thplinth said:

As someone said above, you are trying to measure something without measuring it. No system is going to be able to replace people sitting the exams. All going to be flawed so which is the least flawed and thus least likely to bite you badly on the bum.

First choice I woul just not have had the exams, second choice rely on the prelims. At least then the responsibility of the result is back on the student and not some outside third party making arbitrary adjustments from afar. Sure it would fuck the late studiers but the prelims are the only really concrete thing you have. So use them or dont bother as guaranteed everyone will hate you otherwise (and as we are about to see). Be interesting to see how this goes in England. If they handle it better it could intensify the rage up here. The SNP must be praying they have a mare.

It is pivotal time in a teens life. If the government is seen as unfairly fucking them over they are going to hate you with a passion. And then you get to the over protective parents.... Aye, good luck with all that.

edit: could this be legally challenged if shown to be discriminatory?

Seems it will be a similar issue in England, difference being it looks like they will be able to sit the exam if they are not happy with the  grade they are given. Though I imagine that will still be too late for anyone hoping to get into Uni or college. 

What about the rest of the UK?

Pupils in England, Wales and Northern Ireland will find out their grades later this month, with A-level results to be published on 13 August and GCSEs on 20 August.

As in Scotland, exams were cancelled this year and teachers were asked to estimate pupils' grades.

The watchdog Ofqual says the number of students getting good grades in England is expected to be 2% higher at A-level and 1% at GCSE this year.

The predicted grades suggested by teachers would have been far higher, but were knocked back down by exam boards.

Students who are not happy with their results will be able to sit exams in all subjects in the autumn .

[phart]

1 hour ago, thplinth said:

 

edit: could this be legally challenged if shown to be discriminatory?

There was a fiasco in 2000, 120k appeals which took till October to sort out (SQA will have a similiar number but can apprently sort it by August during a pandemic this time) Ron Tuck resigned as head of SQA at the time and solicitors were actioned.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12156520.pupils-parents-may-sue-sqa-over-lost-university-places/

[scotlad]

15 hours ago, Kirk said:

See at the end of the day, all this they should have got an A stuff is nonsense, the only way to guarantee it is to do the exam. I didnt give a fuck in school and got a few Cs, failed a couple of exams that I got As and Bs in prelims and didnt get appeals.

People perform different on the day. 

If you didnt get the grades and dont get them on appeal then you'll need to do a year of college or whatever to get what you need.

 

The system does seem a bit daft but the worlds fucked at the moment get on with it.

Exactly. It's a flawed, imperfect system but these are imperfect times. Everything is in a state of flux at the moment.

I thought that "rounding up" the grades might have been kinder; that is, erring more in the students favour if at all possible. But then that devalues the whole grading system. If a school goes from, say, a 50% pass rate to a 70% pass rate in one year, that's just improbable,  especially as it more than likely will drop back to 50% once exams start again! There is, of course, a wider issue there about why the attainment gap isn't being closed.

I feel bad for any kid who's lost out because of this (I'd be raging if I was in their shoes) but the appeals process, while not flawless, is still there. If they've robust evidence that they should have received a higher grade than they were awarded, then it should be a relatively straightforward appeal to overturn.

[Parklife]

19 hours ago, phart said:

Gifted pupils at bad schools got fucked and marked down, while mediocre students at good schools got to keep their grades. It's a policy straight out of the Tory playbook. What school you go to shouldn't affect the result by a difference of 2.5.

Downgrading individually historical A students to C students (2 bands) cause of the historical results of their schools to fit an anachronistic bell curve model who shouldn't have happened.

Anyone defending the outcome when it is so patently unfair and discriminatory cause of who is defending it or is responsible for defending it is part of the larger Political problem, like Alan they'll defend their party and decry the other parties no matter the problem. Rank partisanship is the major problem in politics with folk wiling to eat shite depending on who's arse it came out of.

Spot on, phart. This has been a fucking shocking way to handle this. 

Ordinary, hard-working kids who go to schools with a large proportion of deprived catchment areas are being absolutely fucked over. 

[Parklife]

11 minutes ago, scotlad said:

Exactly. It's a flawed, imperfect system but these are imperfect times. Everything is in a state of flux at the moment.

I thought that "rounding up" the grades might have been kinder; that is, erring more in the students favour if at all possible. But then that devalues the whole grading system. If a school goes from, say, a 50% pass rate to a 70% pass rate in one year, that's just improbable,  especially as it more than likely will drop back to 50% once exams start again! There is, of course, a wider issue there about why the attainment gap isn't being closed.

I feel bad for any kid who's lost out because of this (I'd be raging if I was in their shoes) but the appeals process, while not flawless, is still there. If they've robust evidence that they should have received a higher grade than they were awarded, then it should be a relatively straightforward appeal to overturn.

"Do you have robust Evidence that you'd have got a better grade than the one someone who's never met you guessed?" 
 

[scotlad]

3 hours ago, Parklife said:

"Do you have robust Evidence that you'd have got a better grade than the one someone who's never met you guessed?" 
 

I think these exams are usually marked by people who don't know the students personally, but yeah, robust evidence, such as prelim results, results of testing throughout the year etc.