MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
One thing nobody has asked where are all these uni courses coming from, will some unis, be open or even in business this time next year, quite a few are saying online lectures only and a lot of students only want to go to uni to be away from home and for the social buzz, add in social distancing,reduced space in hostels,and class rooms,and with forecasts of unis going bust or closing whole departments to save cash.
Going to be a very interesting few years in education, then add in lack of part time jobs for students and ones doing gap years,or unis not accepting current awards and setting their own entrance exams/criteria, going to be testing for all
the inflation of grades that would have resulted from awarding teacher estimates was seen as threatening the integrity of the awards and many disadvantaged kids took the hit on that. But the inflation of grades by the things wealth and privilege can provide does not threaten the integrity of the awards and is in fact seen as normal.
Surely the role of the teacher was to give an honest and accurate asssessment of the grade the pupil was likely to get in an exam, not attempt to right the perceived wrongs of the examination system.
The last part of Swinney's announcement isn't getting the attention it deserves: that they'll be looking at changing the next diet of exams in a variety of ways. I think this is a good thing as the levels of engagement through lockdown varied widely and what group in society were less likely to have engaged with online learning and therefore have fallen behind? Yup those pesky kids from disadvantaged areas.
Yup, the new decision fixes one issue but opens up a whole other can of worms. What will happen to contextual admissions this year, and what happens to, frinstance, previous years' pupils now applying for university and college?
I don't know enough about the actual model used to say if it was right or not but it definitely seems like the biggest errors have been in messaging. The goal of keeping this year's results comparable to previous years' seems to have been completely lost and ignored. In any normal year, if we had this level of increases in grades there'd be an outcry about dumbing down and grading after all.
imnotverygood
SubscriberSurely the role of the teacher was to give an honest and accurate asssessment of the grade the pupil was likely to get in an exam, not attempt to right the perceived wrongs of the examination system.
Yes. But teachers are human. And tbf the whole process of grading and then admissions is really pretty complex, because of all of the history, existing biases, and previous fixes- and if you're in a low progression school, there's a good chance you don't know about all of the things that are done to try and offset that. I've met a number of high school teachers and guidance people who don't really know how contextual admissions works. Not surprising since there's outright misinformation out there, and since low progression schools have to focus so much more attention towards the non-further-education cohort.
(I am absolutely not an expert on this; it's not central to my day job, I need to understand it but I'm not usually the person dealing with it or educating others on it. But I was still sometimes the best source of information a particular teacher had ever had on the subject. And in that situation, well, you're getting chinese whispers and and half understood bulletins that you've not got time to read properly because you're overworked, and newspaper articles.
Really frustratingly, the Scotsman ran a story the other day where a candidate had been "nominated" for straight As, but had been downgraded to AAABB, and that "there's no way she'll get a place in medicine with that". But as a widening access student from a SHEP school, she absolutely would- AAABB with the right courses would give her an excellent chance on place on MBChB at Edinburgh frinstance. In fact she'd probably have a better chance with her AAABB than a kid from a normal background with AAAAA
I don't think the journalist was trying to be misleading but that's all the same problem. Their example of "a child being failed" was actually a perfect example of the system working as intended. Depending on what happens next, it's totally possible that the normal contextual admissions system gets waived for this year and she ends up instead of having low grades with a boost, she ends up having high grades but competing with everyone else with the high grades (of which there will be more than usual this year). I hope they don't do that as it'll screw individual pupils, but I think it's probably the fairest option now for the entire cohort so it could happen.
All a bit STW.
One thing nobody has asked where are all these uni courses coming from
All those Scottish kids can take the places of the lucrative foreign students that won't be coming now. Surely the unis will be delighted with that?
Johnson's head should be a spike (for many, many things) for cancelling exams at a moment's notice with no plans yet making sure pubs reopened. Nicola Sturgeon's should now be on a spike for craven political cowardice.
I get why teachers inflated grades, consciously / unconsciously, it was bound to happen, they were put in a terrible position, in their shoes I would have erred on the side of caution as well knowing my guesstimate might affect a child's future. Moderation was the correct and normal way of making it fair.
The argument over disadvantaged schools being disproportionately hit is a red herring (and I've seen no numbers to back this up), schools improving will have been hit but not by much and that's a minority.
Please no, there are so so many ways they could get that wrong! Better to get perhaps a lower grade in a course with integrity, than a better grade in a ‘watered down’ course. I do agree though that the disadvantaged, will be even more so. There is little that can be done about this imho by ‘tweaking’ things - without the removal of poverty and other disadvantages things will not improve and the gap will continue to grow, despite the lip-service to the contrary.
Surely the role of the teacher was to give an honest and accurate asssessment of the grade the pupil was likely to get in an exam, not attempt to right the perceived wrongs of the examination system.
I think you've misinterpreted that. I think his point was that poor kids results being inflated was seen as a threat to the integrity of the awards but rich kids results being inflated is situation normal.
Been interesting watching this developing up in Scotland - Jnr is waiting for an AS result this week when the A level results come out down here in England. He's pretty phlegmatic, accepts that any system replacing exams was bound to cause a problem somewhere and somehow.
He did wonder if the number of people disappointed with their exam results this year under this system would actually be any different to the number of people disappointed in a normal exam year. I'm not convinced that's the best way of judging the success of the procedures though.
I have such an awful memory, but no doubt someone will remember. Years ago the SQA deemed some schools as being ... ( forgotten the word)... if they consistently predicted their predicted grades accurately. Something along those lines may have been useful.
Please no, there are so so many ways they could get that wrong! Better to get perhaps a lower grade in a course with integrity, than a better grade in a ‘watered down’ course. I do agree though that the disadvantaged, will be even more so. There is little that can be done about this imho by ‘tweaking’ things – without the removal of poverty and other disadvantages things will not improve and the gap will continue to grow, despite the lip-service to the contrary.
I'm afraid I disagree with you there. If it's clear the disadvantaged will be further disadvantaged by keeping the same exam set up (which seems likely to me) then the exam set up needs to change. That doesn't remove the underlying issues but it does help deal with the one-off issue created by the pandemic. In my own subject (geography) I can see ways it could be done but it might not be so simple across the board and I'm not sure I trust the SQA to do it!
He did wonder if the number of people disappointed with their exam results this year under this system would actually be any different to the number of people disappointed in a normal exam year. I’m not convinced that’s the best way of judging the success of the procedures though.
Your boy is clearly a Utilitarian!
Teaching maths I don’t see any easy way to do this. If you removed topics, well schools teach them in different orders - so we may have spent a few weeks during lockdown teaching that topic only for it to be removed, whilst others benefit from having made different choices. The more advantaged will overcome any confusion via extra tuition etc.
Also, more selfishly we’ll spend all year rewriting prelims and tests that will yet again only be used once. Without the benefit of comparing results in these with previous years.
You may be right, I’m not known for being positive. I guess we’ll see eventually. It’s not like anyone will take much notice what either of us think, however wise ; )
Saying that: moving the exams into June would be very helpful. I’d say that’s all I/we need to get the year done and my school is one of the more disadvantaged.
so we may have spent a few weeks during lockdown teaching that topic only for it to be removed
He mentioned having more optional questions which could help deal with that issue. So in geography that might be answer the glaciation question or the atmosphere one. We did glaciation in lockdown so we just wouldn't cover the atmosphere topic giving us more catch up time. But of course we'd need to know what those options would be PDQ! The other thing mentioned was less course work elements but that could go both ways in terms of levelling the field and you don't have a coursework component in maths do you?
Saying that: moving the exams into June would be very helpful. I’d say that’s all I/we need to get the year done and my school is one of the more disadvantaged.
Yes, an extra month would probably suffice.
the Scotsman ran a story the other day where a candidate had been “nominated” for straight As, but had been downgraded to AAABB, and that “there’s no way she’ll get a place in medicine with that”
If its the same girl that was on the BBC she hasn't done biology according (Maths, physics, chemistry, English & PE) to her dad as a higher so she isn't going to medical school with 5As anyway (assuming Scottish uni).
This is worth reading. And is a link from the previous page on the methods.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53580888
Forget the headlines and look at the methodology. Surprisingly children from poorer backgrounds did slightly better than they had in previous years. It suggests that teachers from some schools (Most likely in wealthier areas) were gaming the system. The algorithm looks fair and well-tested. As is the modification of grades (75% or more than +/- one standard deviation were S teacher predicted). I bet there was a skew in the 25% though and I’d like to see the data of course because I’m a geek.
But the knee-jerk u-turn is misplaced.
I did wonder about optional questions after I’d posted - I’ve not seen them for a long time. I guess that might be a reasonable idea. It’s the sort of thing that can throw pupils though, there’d be no past paper examples to hone their skills. It took maths pupils a good while to get used to the multiple choice questions we used to have, actually I’m not sure they ever did.
No coursework thank goodness.
This year is going to be crazy enough as it is. We might even go into lockdown again. As few changes as possible for me please. But we’ll see.
poah
MemberIf its the same girl that was on the BBC she hasn’t done biology according (Maths, physics, chemistry, English & PE) to her dad as a higher so she isn’t going to medical school with 5As anyway (assuming Scottish uni).
Could be the same person then, ffs! In that case I'm going back on what I said, anyone using her as an example either knows it's bullshit, or isn't well informed enough to report on the subject.
TiRed
SubscriberForget the headlines and look at the methodology. Surprisingly children from poorer backgrounds did slightly better than they had in previous years. It suggests that teachers from some schools (Most likely in wealthier areas) were gaming the system
I think "gaming the system" is the wrong way to think of it. Trying to do right by their students, is going to be the reality in most cases. And feeling that the system usually screws you for going to, say, Beath High and that this year they have a chance to fight back against that a bit.
The algorithm looks fair and well-tested
Fair in that it produced something broadly similar overall to actual exam results. Unfair in that it wasn't based on an individual's performance or abilities.
No coursework thank goodness
A little bit of me dies every year doing the coursework. It's a great idea in principle but the way the SQA have set it up is hard for pupils to understand and massively open to abuse.
Unfair in that it wasn’t based on an individual’s performance or abilities.
No it was based on a teacher’s prediction. When I say gaming, I’m happy to believe that some or even much of it was subconscious bias. But the difference this year was dramatic. I could also say it’s equally unfair to everyone. But (shock!) exams aren’t for absolute performance measurement. They are for ranking to peers. If they were for absolutes, then results would match a standard curve every year.
then results would match a standard curve every year
They adjust the grade boundary percentages so they do, broadly speaking, match a standard curve.
I taught philosophy for a few years, the notional % for an A is 70% but some years it has been adjusted as low as 56% (I think) so that the proportion of pupils at each grade was more like a normal distribution.
But (shock!) exams aren’t for absolute performance measurement. They are for ranking to peers. If they were for absolutes, then results would match a standard curve every year.
It is amazing how little this is understood. Not sure if it's general ignorance or poor statistical numeracy of the general population. It's like the story of the two men running from a lion and the one turning to the other and saying 'it's no use, we can't outrun it!' and the other saying 'I'm not trying to out run it, I'm just try to outrun you!'. The winners in the first days of lockdown were the kids that did everything in their power to provide evidence to their teachers of their ability to get further up their teacher's class ranking even if it did not change the school generated grade.
If its the same girl that was on the BBC she hasn’t done biology according (Maths, physics, chemistry, English & PE) to her dad as a higher so she isn’t going to medical school with 5As anyway (assuming Scottish uni).
Can't speak for all unis but I know Dundee no longer stipulate which science highers to take so those subjects would be OK.
I also had pals studying medicine in Bristol who had A level chemistry but not biology.
It is amazing how little this is understood. Not sure if it’s general ignorance or poor statistical numeracy of the general population.
I was told this when I was 15. I just assumed everyone else was too.
The winners in the first days of lockdown were the kids that did everything in their power to provide evidence to their teachers of their ability to get further up their teacher’s class ranking
Are you a teacher convert (just curious!)? We were told quite explicitly not to be generating or even considering new evidence but only to use evidence from prior to the announcement of school closure.
Are you a teacher convert (just curious!)? We were told quite explicitly not to be generating or even considering new evidence but only to use evidence from prior to the announcement of school closure.
I am, but my role for the last few years meant I was not as teaching orientated and didn't teach yr13 students or lead a department. The ofqual guidance was not quite as you say. It was not to use any new work generated after whatever the date was. But students assisting teachers with evidence gathering was acceptable. We were up and running on Teams within 48hrs and the motivated kids were scanning copies of their marked essays and homework, uploading unmarked essays (completed before the date). How much difference it made to the teachers ability to do their job I don't know but it certainly lifted their position in the teacher consciousness for the ranking.
Are you a teacher convert (just curious!)? We were told quite explicitly not to be generating or even considering new evidence but only to use evidence from prior to the announcement of school closure.
And there's another variable. I suspect (no I don't, I know since teachers talk to each other) that what teachers were and were not asked/instructed to do varied wildly between schools. Just in our local area from 'do nothing other than produce a list of grades and rank order based on work already completed and assessed' to 'plan and set a range of new remote learning tasks explicity to gather evidence for your grades and make sure students know that's what they're for'.
The ofqual guidance was not quite as you say.
I was talking Scotland as that's what the thread was about!
don’t know but it certainly lifted their position in the teacher consciousness.
Sounds like the instructions we were given were an attempt to avoid exactly that.
I know since teachers talk to each other) that what teachers were and were not asked/instructed to do varied wildly between schools.
Indeed - we were at it for 3 weeks solid. Teachers evidence gathering and generating a 'portfolio' of evidence for each subject. Pastoral leads (that was me) writing detailed extenuating circumstances reports for each student. It was full on. However I know teachers in schools that were given 2hrs to generate the grades and send them in and there was no further analysis of the teacher estimates before being sent off.
I was talking Scotland as that’s what the thread was about!
very true - I'm currently in the twilight zone between the two!
Indeed – we were at it for 3 weeks solid
!
We (in England BTW for clarity) were somewhere in between. Teachers asked for grades and rank (given a week to put this together but no explicit guidance on how to do this or what evidence to use /generate). These then went to HoDs for scrutiny and discussion with the teacher (who was only ever asked to provide verbal justification). These 'corroborated' grades then went to SLT who put them in the whole school context and any changes were openly fed back to teachers for another discussion if needed.
I think we got it about right in terms of the process...
Thinking about why the teacher estimates were above what exams would have been. I largely went with the prelim results as that seemed like the best evidence I had. Where I had other evidence pupils had improved dramatically from the prelim I put them up a little. I don't think I downgraded anyone from their prelim as I had no evidence of a drop in performance and not having a crystal ball I didn't feel comfortable making the call that a certain pupil might mess up the exam.
I suppose that some teachers/schools put in inflated estimates but I wonder if lots did pretty much what I did and that the generally higher estimates are due to teachers bumping a few up from the prelim (because that always happens and it's usually pretty obvious who'll do it) but not allowing for the few that always mess up the exam and bomb.
Colournoise, looks like all your considered work is now out the window you could have just submitted mock results. Just when you think it can't get any worse Johnson and team make more decisions on the fly leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces.
Changing the process on the day the results are released to schools (they have already been released to universities to allow them to manage next year's intake) is just mental. The appeals process will now collapse as well as the exam management teams in many schools who have to process the appeals just when they're trying to cope with the extra resits planned for the Autumn that havent been finalised either.
very true – I’m currently in the twilight zone between the two!
I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on the differences.
I’d be very interested to hear your thoughts on the differences.
Give me a year and I'll let you know!
But the English news on using mock grades - FFS
So it's OK to used unmoderated/UMS tweaks mock grades but not unmoderated/UMS tweaked teacher assessed grades. Mock marking is notoriously useless, done without ad hoc by departments with no national moderation, often with papers chopped up for bit of the syllabus not yet covered. Bat. Shit. Mental.
Just as an aside, the public schools mostly deliver Cambridge International syllabuses, easier than the main exam boards but prohibited in state schools. The league table of appeals against the awarding process reads like the league table of status: Eton at the top and so on.
Half the town here gets recruited to invigilate those boarding school kids who somehow have been defined as needing a room on their own, extra time etc. The mistake many people make is to blame the exam boards when it should be the DoE, so the wrong people get the flack. Results!
Cambridge International makes the situation in Scotland look measured. The exam officers Facebook forum went into melt down yesterday when they released results. Totally random grading, not just adjusted by a grade or 2.
Don't forget the it's the parents who appeal normally, not the school. I know of parents who spent over £800 on appeals last year, basically tried it on in every subject. Maybe worth it if you're close to the next grade up, pointless for most results and really dangerous if you're close to the lower grade. People do get downgraded as well.
Eldest got his English bumped up to an A from a B (nat 5) His school is higher up the SIMD for reference
Colournoise, looks like all your considered work is now out the window you could have just submitted mock results
I teach Art/Photography, so no real mock to speak of - we (like most Art departments I know) use whatever time we are allowed for a 'mock' to give students a taste of what's it like to work on an extended piece for their coursework. Our exam is 10 hours plus c.12 weeks of prep so no way we can properly 'mock' that. Result of that is that the work they did for their 'mock' has already been factored in to my teacher awarded grades.
Plus, there's so much wrong with using mock exams as the basis for any appeal I don't even know where to begin... EduTwitter is rightly on fire today, and it's safe to say Gavlar W isn't the most popular politician at the moment amongst UK educationalists...