Sqa

[hibsbollah]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

[Ozyhibby]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

The results this year are an improvement on last year so I don’t think they are punishing the kids for not having exams.
AABB and C seem like great results to me btw.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[speedy_gonzales]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.
I'm in a similar situation, and I don't know for a fact, but I feel my daughter's grades have suffered due to the school and historical results.
Seen posts elsewhere that schools in less affluent areas have suffered disproportionately.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm in a similar situation, and I don't know for a fact, but I feel my daughter's grades have suffered due to the school and historical results.
Seen posts elsewhere that schools in less affluent areas have suffered disproportionately.

All the results were based on previous performance. If they had just listened to the teachers then there would have been a 20% improvement on last year. That would have been ridiculed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Hopefully she can appeal if she has a strong case based on coursework and prelims but AABBC is still good going and something she should be proud of, and hopefully will be once the dust settles.

I seen something on Twitter that was highlighting the downshift in expected grades to actual grades and how it differed based on economic status of the schools - basically everyone was getting lower results than expected, but 2x more likely to occur in the lowest economic pools. The data did seem to show that overall the estimated grades were far higher than average across the board though and seemed like the estimates were unlikely to be awarded.

[Santa Cruz]

I'm in a similar situation, and I don't know for a fact, but I feel my daughter's grades have suffered due to the school and historical results.
Seen posts elsewhere that schools in less affluent areas have suffered disproportionately.

That's what I'm reading. A fair few teachers miffed that they put enormous efforts into assessing course work and prelim results with all this info being triple checked before being signed off by Senior staff.

[hibsbollah]

Hopefully she can appeal if she has a strong case based on coursework and prelims but AABBC is still good going and something she should be proud of, and hopefully will be once the dust settles.

I seen something on Twitter that was highlighting the downshift in expected grades to actual grades and how it differed based on economic status of the schools - basically everyone was getting lower results than expected, but 2x more likely to occur in the lowest economic pools. The data did seem to show that overall the estimated grades were far higher than average across the board though and seemed like the estimates were unlikely to be awarded.

Yeah, she’ll definitely be appealing. They are good results but she doesn’t see it that way unfortunately. She basically got her prelim results which she freely admits she didn’t study that hard for, 4 of her teachers thought she’d get A at exam but that’s not been taken on board.

[RyeSloan]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

Crying over 5 highers? Great she has high standards but wow I would have been greetin’ with happiness with that set of results!!

This was always going to be a hard one. On one hand I see the SQA’s stance re bell curving the estimates to previous years....on the other hand I’m not sure how they have done so and it appears rather arbitrary. Also why ask the teachers to go through such a long and laborious process (which it was!) to then discount the findings of that process to such a degree?

Your daughter for example sounds like she well deserves the expected grades (esp. if that’s what she got in prelims) and to be downgraded to suit an average is super harsh. No wonder she feels robbed.

I’d expect the appeals body to be rather busy over the next few weeks and months!

[weecounty hibby]

I would swap your daughter's AABBC for my son's results any day. To say I'm raging with him is an understatement.
Congrats to her and she should be proud of herself. I think it is true that the SQA were also taking into account historical school results as well as teacher recommendation so she should appeal if she has the proof that her prelims and course work deserve better.
I am going to ****ing kill my son when I get home from work!!!

[Santa Cruz]

Yeah, she’ll definitely be appealing. They are good results but she doesn’t see it that way unfortunately. She basically got her prelim results which she freely admits she didn’t study that hard for, 4 of her teachers thought she’d get A at exam but that’s not been taken on board.

They are very good results, but I can see her point. As I recall, prelims were a good warning reminder that you had to up your revision for the final exam, and this generation didn't get that opportunity. I don't know what her future career plans are, but sometimes that extra A can make all the difference in getting into a Uni of choice.

[Colr]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

Definitely worth getting organised, getting her case together and making a fuss. There will be some playing about at a macro level with the result so you can pull out why its unfair in her case.

Good results all the same. Hope they still het her where she wants to go next!

[DaveF]

I read that they amended 133,000 results and only 8% of them were upwards so they certainly were not being too generous.

My daughter did well but (and without sounding flippant) I expected her too, given the level of her coursework.

The only thing she was slightly quizzical about was her getting an A in English (she thought a B) and a B in Chemistry (she expected an A)

Edit, I'm on about Nat 5 rather than highers. That stress is next year.

[Tomsk]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

Could make a huge difference to the university/course open to her, if university is where she wants to go.

There are other factors taken into consideration but AAAAC makes life a lot easier than AABBC.

[lapsedhibee]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

Very well done for getting 5 highers at those grades at 16 and good luck appealing, if that's essential for her to get to do what she wants to do next.

[Jay]

My boy was expecting and A in his adv H maths but got a B. I was thinking he would be awarded a B as that's what he got in his higher, although his adv h prelim was better. He only needed a C for his uni course so not major but hes disappointed

[Billy Whizz]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53636296

[matty_f]

Does anyone else have a child affected by Higher downgrades today? I have a 16 year old in tears; having been told by her teachers after her prelim results she’d be getting AAAAC, she’s received AABBC this morning. I’m not pretending I understand all the machinations but it seems like teachers recommendations have been ignored. It seems totally arbitrary and punishing this age group for having their exams cancelled during a pandemic.

My son got AABBC as well, he was expecting the C but I think he was thinking he'd get As in the other two - not to the point where he feels like he's been hard done by, but he had hoped he'd done enough.

Hearing a few stories of folk getting much lower than they were expecting though.

[hibsbollah]

My son got AABBC as well, he was expecting the C but I think he was thinking he'd get As in the other two - not to the point where he feels like he's been hard done by, but he had hoped he'd done enough.

Hearing a few stories of folk getting much lower than they were expecting though.

Im going all Ann Budge on this, first step SQA appeal, then High Court, finally Strasbourg or Nuremberg or some such place :faf:

[matty_f]

Im going all Ann Budge on this, first step SQA appeal, then High Court, finally Strasbourg or Nuremberg or some such place :faf:

:faf::faf:

[Ozyhibby]

Im going all Ann Budge on this, first step SQA appeal, then High Court, finally Strasbourg or Nuremberg or some such place :faf:

Get in touch with Tom English, I’m sure he’ll be willing to promote your case. [emoji23]
Joking aside, the SQA have had a similar job to do as the SPFL. They have had to use the past performance of schools to judge this years outcomes. There will be many who feel they have been unfairly treated but there just isn’t a fairer solution out there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EH6 Hibby]

I think they will have gone on prelims and previous years averages in the first instance, but will look into each case if it’s appealed and will then look into the teacher’s recommendations.

[hibsbollah]

It beggars belief that Miss Bollah was expelled from the top tier this morning. The self congratulatory letter from the SFA i mean SQA was the most shameful part. Sadly I have no optimism that things will improve. Sadly I am not surprised. But im also shocked and surprised, and saddened. My rant is over for now. But as we all know IT IS WINNING THE WAR THAT COUNTS

[silverhibee]

It beggars belief that Miss Bollah was expelled from the top tier this morning. The self congratulatory letter from the SFA i mean SQA was the most shameful part. Sadly I have no optimism that things will improve. Sadly I am not surprised. But im also shocked and surprised, and saddened. My rant is over for now. But as we all know IT IS WINNING THE WAR THAT COUNTS

Get her some chips :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

It beggars belief that Miss Bollah was expelled from the top tier this morning. The self congratulatory letter from the SFA i mean SQA was the most shameful part. Sadly I have no optimism that things will improve. Sadly I am not surprised. But im also shocked and surprised, and saddened. My rant is over for now. But as we all know IT IS WINNING THE WAR THAT COUNTS

Will you be visiting other schools or are you withdrawing the bollah dollar?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aldo]

We have asked the school to provide a list of grades they sent to the SQA for our daughter. If the grades sent by the school are higher than given by SQA then she will appeal.

It would be interesting to see what percentage of pupils from the higher ranked schools had their grades downgraded.

Personally given the circumstances the school grades should have been awarded. This would not affect the schools rankings as I believe this has been suspended. Poor show imho!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Im going all Ann Budge on this, first step SQA appeal, then High Court, finally Strasbourg or Nuremberg or some such place :faf:

I think you should seek out another unhappy parent, perhaps in the Maryhill area, to form an alliance.

And don’t forget, unnecessary exclamation marks and ellipses add gravitas to any documentation you may wish to submit.

[Ozyhibby]

We have asked the school to provide a list of grades they sent to the SQA for our daughter. If the grades sent by the school are higher than given by SQA then she will appeal.

It would be interesting to see what percentage of pupils from the higher ranked schools had their grades downgraded.

Personally given the circumstances the school grades should have been awarded. This would not affect the schools rankings as I believe this has been suspended. Poor show imho!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they had went with the teachers grades then Marks would have been 20% higher. That would have made it very difficult for universities to judge the most capable kids. If everyone gets an A then how do you decide who gets on to each course? There would be lots of kids getting into courses they would not be capable for. Nobody benefits from that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aldo]

If they had went with the teachers grades then Marks would have been 20% higher. That would have made it very difficult for universities to judge the most capable kids. If everyone gets an A then how do you decide who gets on to each course? There would be lots of kids getting into courses they would not be capable for. Nobody benefits from that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I go get that but there would always be questions around that given they didn’t sit the exams. This to me is unfair and for me was wrong.

If the school have sent the results and it is what the SQA have awarded then do be it but I don’t think it is the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Future17]

Excuse my complete ignorance on this, but have the SQA stated what factors may lead to a downgrade?

[Ozyhibby]

Excuse my complete ignorance on this, but have the SQA stated what factors may lead to a downgrade?

It appears they downgraded based on a schools previous performance. If a school normally gets 35 kids passing in maths highers and they sent in 50 passes this year then the SQA adjusted accordingly.
You can see why teachers would have done this because it’s in their interest but the SQA have to try protect the integrity of the exams.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Excuse my complete ignorance on this, but have the SQA stated what factors may lead to a downgrade?Just watched it on the news, one element is past (poor) performance of the school. Seems really unfair

Edit, one case was the lassie that got a C in the prelim then didn't even get a D.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Just watched it on the news, one element is past (poor) performance of the school. Seems really unfair

Edit, one case was the lassie that got a C in the prelim then didn't even get a D.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Prelims are set by the schools and there can be huge differences in the standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Prelims are set by the schools and there can be huge differences in the standard.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkAh fair do's, maybe even set at a level to give the kids a bit of encouragement.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[CapitalGreen]

Ah fair do's, maybe even set at a level to give the kids a bit of encouragement.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

In my experience they were set harder to avoid making pupils overconfident and rest on their laurels for the final exam.

[Ozyhibby]

In my experience they were set harder to avoid making pupils overconfident and rest on their laurels for the final exam.

Different schools have different ideas. Some set it really high level to provide a kick up the back side while others set it slightly easier to help with appeals etc.
Easiest thing in the world would have been for SQA to go with the teachers marks and then the SG could have claimed they had fixed the attainment gap and everyone would have been delighted. Haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

Different schools have different ideas. Some set it really high level to provide a kick up the back side while others set it slightly easier to help with appeals etc.
Easiest thing in the world would have been for SQA to go with the teachers marks and then the SG could have claimed they had fixed the attainment gap and everyone would have been delighted. Haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know you speak from an informed perspective on this. Down in the Borders my understanding is that prelims are marked more harshly. There is also a different mindset to the central belt and Edinburgh though. Sport, rugby especially but also hockey for girls, is seen as very important and there seems to be a tacit acceptance that the area will always need people to work in agriculture, trades and light industry, so pushing for high levels of university rates isn’t necessarily a priority. By the same token, there are a number of pockets of affluence where parents are really demanding that their kids are equipped to go to uni.

My son did marginally better than he expected on his Nat fives, but marginally :greengrin. More importantly, he is fine for pursuing the path he wants to with his Highers, though I am constantly drumming into him that the gap between S4 and S5 is massive, compounded by the various distractions that creep in!

My read is that there is more funnelling or streaming from when I did my standard grades but I have no evidence really. It does sound like some of his peers were being steered in certain directions, whereas I took Higher French despite barely scraping it in fourth year.

[Rocky]

The breakdown shown in this tweet gives some extra context. Unfortunately the estimated grades submitted by teachers simply lack credibility compared to previous years (when looking at aggregated figures) and this shows that the level of "teacher optimism" is much higher in the most deprived schools compared to the least deprived. Teacher estimates in the most deprived schools were around 17% higher than historic performance, compared to 8% higher in least deprived. Both were pegged back by the SQA to within a percentage point or two of historic average. So in the aggregate at least it looks like the SQA have got it about right. I'd sincerely hope that the appeals process is very fair and comprehensive in picking up on individual exceptions and ensuring that no-one has been unfairly disadvantaged by this year's exceptional circumstances.

https://twitter.com/C4Ciaran/status/1290629367664652288?s=19

Of course this doesn't address the wider issue of the attainment gap between schools in different areas (although it has reduced slightly) but that issue clearly has much more complex root causes which need concerted efforts to address.

[DH1875]

So they downgraded 120k kids from lower ranked schools in poor areas but upgraded thousands of kids from affluent areas, schools. Daughter goes to one of worst schools in Glasgow (ranked over 250+), got a B in her Biology prelim and was told she was on course for an A and doing really well. She reckons there's about 40 kids in her year split between 2 classes doing biology. Every single one of them have failed and those who should have been passed have been marked down. She is gutted as has put her heart and sole into it and had a place in college waiting. Got freinds and family who's kids go to schools in near by Bearsden and Bishopbriggs who have all somehow managed to get loads of A's despite being as thick as kite and failing their prelims.

[Radium]

The first thing that has to be said is well done for the grades but based on the information today teachers have not done the SQA/ those awaiting results any favours.

There is a lot of noise around the corrections but this year, much more than any other, will rely on the appeal system to correct grades. It might not be being said but I expect that this safety net would have been part of the plan. This is where teachers can redeem themselves and it will likely lead to the record results improving.



That only 25% of grades were adjusted by an untested system made up during a pandemic where the core business of the organisation is exams that didn’t happen and when most people were trying to work out how to operate from home is not a failure. I just think that expectations are too high and the impacts very personal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Danderhall Hibs]

If they had went with the teachers grades then Marks would have been 20% higher. That would have made it very difficult for universities to judge the most capable kids. If everyone gets an A then how do you decide who gets on to each course? There would be lots of kids getting into courses they would not be capable for. Nobody benefits from that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you think that says about the standard of our teachers?

Who at the sqa marked the submissions - former teachers?

[Ozyhibby]

So they downgraded 120k kids from lower ranked schools in poor areas but upgraded thousands of kids from affluent areas, schools. Daughter goes to one of worst schools in Glasgow (ranked over 250+), got a B in her Biology prelim and was told she was on course for an A and doing really well. She reckons there's about 40 kids in her year split between 2 classes doing biology. Every single one of them have failed and those who should have been passed have been marked down. She is gutted as has put her heart and sole into it and had a place in college waiting. Got freinds and family who's kids go to schools in near by Bearsden and Bishopbriggs who have all somehow managed to get loads of A's despite being as thick as kite and failing their prelims.

They downgraded kids from affluent schools as well. Schools got marks in line with previous years results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

They downgraded kids from affluent schools as well. Schools got marks in line with previous years results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It will come as no surprise to some that im bringing politics into it. But 'affluent schools' in terms of attainment shouldnt even be a thing. I dont know why we tolerate it. It affects housing, rent and property prices, everything. I think the notorious Edinburgh postcode snobbery makes this even more of a factor.

[DaveF]

They downgraded kids from affluent schools as well. Schools got marks in line with previous years results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's classed as affluent? My daughter goes to west Calder and it hardly draws from affluent areas. I was surprised to see it was 25th in whatever table of results they keep.

[marinello59]

They downgraded kids from affluent schools as well. Schools got marks in line with previous years results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Richest kids pass rate downgraded by 6.9%.
Poorest kids pass rate downgraded by 15.2%.
23842

[CapitalGreen]

They downgraded kids from affluent schools as well. Schools got marks in line with previous years results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The worry is that an outstanding pupil from a low performing school would be disproportionately downgraded compared to a mediocre pupil from a high achieving school.

Pupil A from low performing school has achieved good marks in course work and prelim and was expected to get an A no problem in the final exam. Their teacher submitted an A grade for that that pupil.

Pupil B from high achieving school submitted mediocre course work throughout the year and got a B in the prelim but they had potential to reach A if they put more effort in and studied hard for the final exam. Their teacher submitted an A grade for that pupil.

Pupil A would be considered an outlier at their school for achieving an A grade while Pupil B’s A would sit within the normal distribution of grades at their school.

[Rocky]

It will come as no surprise to some that im bringing politics into it. But 'affluent schools' in terms of attainment shouldnt even be a thing. I dont know why we tolerate it. It affects housing, rent and property prices, everything. I think the notorious Edinburgh postcode snobbery makes this even more of a factor.
I agree entirely but sadly, for many reasons, there is still an attainment gap linked to relative affluence. One point to consider is that I think there's a good chance that the attainment gap would have grown this year had final exams been permitted to go ahead. In a home learning environment the kids with plenty space to work, a laptop each, high speed broadband etc are bound to do better than those without on the whole. As it's turned out the estimated grades process has narrowed the attainment gap a little.

The most important thing when the schools go back is that every child gets the support they need to help make up for the gap in schooling.

[degenerated]

Richest kids pass rate downgraded by 6.9%.
Poorest kids pass rate downgraded by 15.2%.
23842Or alternatively, passes increased by 6% in lower 20% and by just over 3% in the top 20% compared to results from prior year.



Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

I agree entirely but sadly, for many reasons, there is still an attainment gap linked to relative affluence. One point to consider is that I think there's a good chance that the attainment gap would have grown this year had final exams been permitted to go ahead. In a home learning environment the kids with plenty space to work, a laptop each, high speed broadband etc are bound to do better than those without on the whole. As it's turned out the estimated grades process has narrowed the attainment gap a little.

The most important thing when the schools go back is that every child gets the support they need to help make up for the gap in schooling.

Yes good points, especially around digital access. It’s going to make a massive difference for those trying to study during Covid.

[easty]

There was never going to be an outcome everyone was happy with, and no outcome was going to be “fair” in everyone’s eyes.

I do think some grades had to be dropped though. You can’t have kids not sitting exams, but there still being a huge increase in pass grades. What about next year? When kids work hard, revise and sit exams, then the overall pass rates are lower? What if your kid doesn’t get into uni next year cos thier place went to some kid who took a gap year before uni, but gets in cos the grades the got for exams they didn’t even sit were better?

The different rules for rich or poor kids...that’s nothing short of a disgrace though.

[Sir David Gray]

The worry is that an outstanding pupil from a low performing school would be disproportionately downgraded compared to a mediocre pupil from a high achieving school.

Pupil A from low performing school has achieved good marks in course work and prelim and was expected to get an A no problem in the final exam. Their teacher submitted an A grade for that that pupil.

Pupil B from high achieving school submitted mediocre course work throughout the year and got a B in the prelim but they had potential to reach A if they put more effort in and studied hard for the final exam. Their teacher submitted an A grade for that pupil.

Pupil A would be considered an outlier at their school for achieving an A grade while Pupil B’s A would sit within the normal distribution of grades at their school.

Surely that's where the appeals panel comes into play though and then looks at pupil A's work more closely before giving a more personal mark.

Sure it's not going to lower the mark for any pupil who has done better than expected as they're obviously not going to appeal but it does help the smart pupil who feels they have been hard done by.

It's far from ideal and I feel for any pupil who is having to go through this. This time in a young person's life is stressful enough without adding this into the mix. However in the absence of an exam I'm not sure what the alternative is. If we went with what the teachers had scored, it wouldn't have done many people any favours.

[Ozyhibby]

I think it’s a bit unfair to expect schools to close the attainment gap themselves. There are a lot of factors that are out with the control of a school that lead to poor exam performance.
Saying there shouldn’t be an attainment gap is fantasy. There can be an attainment gap within one class with the same teacher if there are two kids going home to very different home lives.
The attainment gap can be narrowed though but not by just giving them higher marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

There was never going to be an outcome everyone was happy with, and no outcome was going to be “fair” in everyone’s eyes.

I do think some grades had to be dropped though. You can’t have kids not sitting exams, but there still being a huge increase in pass grades. What about next year? When kids work hard, revise and sit exams, then the overall pass rates are lower? What if your kid doesn’t get into uni next year cos thier place went to some kid who took a gap year before uni, but gets in cos the grades the got for exams they didn’t even sit were better?

The different rules for rich or poor kids...that’s nothing short of a disgrace though.

What rules are different?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[easty]

What rules are different?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you’re poor you’re more likely to have your work downgraded.

Rule is maybe the wrong word, but that’s what happened.

[Rocky]

I think it’s a bit unfair to expect schools to close the attainment gap themselves. There are a lot of factors that are out with the control of a school that lead to poor exam performance.
Saying there shouldn’t be an attainment gap is fantasy. There can be an attainment gap within one class with the same teacher if there are two kids going home to very different home lives.
The attainment gap can be narrowed though but not by just giving them higher marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think anyone is expecting schools to close the attainment gap themselves as there are much more complex socioeconomic factors at play. However I still think there should be a real focus on closing it so that all children have the opportunity to achieve their potential without hitting a glass ceiling based on their socioeconomic status. That will involve taking action in all manner of different areas, from housing to benefits policy to education to community support etc etc etc.

[Ozyhibby]

If you’re poor you’re more likely to have your work downgraded.

Rule is maybe the wrong word, but that’s what happened.

Because those schools were more likely to inflate the grades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Speedy]

Or alternatively, passes increased by 6% in lower 20% and by just over 3% in the top 20% compared to results from prior year.



Sent from my SM-G977B using Tapatalk

Has to be asked why the estimates were overstated

Are teachers in more deprived areas liars? Are they poor judges of their students? Are the prelims at those schools not set at the required level?

[Ozyhibby]

I don't think anyone is expecting schools to close the attainment gap themselves as there are much more complex socioeconomic factors at play. However I still think there should be a real focus on closing it so that all children have the opportunity to achieve their potential without hitting a glass ceiling based on their socioeconomic status. That will involve taking action in all manner of different areas, from housing to benefits policy to education to community support etc etc etc.

There also simpler things that can be done such as lengthening the school day in under performing schools so that homework can be done at school where help is available. Appointing ambitious heads who are willing to insist on higher standards helps as well. Won’t happen but there is no way the EIS would allow any of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Has to be asked why the estimates were overstated

Are teachers in more deprived areas liars? Are they poor judges of their students? Are the prelims at those schools not set at the required level?

Could be all three.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Barney McGrew]

Has to be asked why the estimates were overstated

Are teachers in more deprived areas liars? Are they poor judges of their students? Are the prelims at those schools not set at the required level?

I think that teachers will naturally want the best for their students, so if they had a student sitting somewhere between say a B or a C then they’ll naturally edge towards predicting the better grade. This year of all years it was probably worth doing in the hope some more kids would get the better mark, and given that the overall pass numbers are up across all the demographics then it’s worked.

[JeMeSouviens]

Richest kids pass rate downgraded by 6.9%.
Poorest kids pass rate downgraded by 15.2%.
23842

If you put it the other way round and take the teachers’ assessments at face value then you have to believe that the attainment gap suddenly closed a massive amount in one year.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume schools’ relative performance to one another would be similar from one year to the next?

That the attainment gap exists at all and is so large is obviously a problem but we can’t just wish it away.

[Aldo]

SQA didn’t even look at course work which is part of the grades for some subjects.

SQA have stated (as has Swinney) that things have been done fairly. I disagree and I think you will find thousands will appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Speedy]

I think that teachers will naturally want the best for their students, so if they had a student sitting somewhere between say a B or a C then they’ll naturally edge towards predicting the better grade. This year of all years it was probably worth doing in the hope some more kids would get the better mark, and given that the overall pass numbers are up across all the demographics then it’s worked.

Would be interesting to know what the variance between actual and predicted grades are in prior years.

[danhibees1875]

Would be interesting to know what the variance between actual and predicted grades are in prior years.

Did they have to do the same predictions in previous years or were these only done to such a level due to the pandemic?

I know I sat prelims and done coursework before my final higher exams but not sure if they amounted to a "predicted grade" in the way they seem to have this year.

It certainly looks like the estimates given are very high when compared across the 4 previous years - increases of 26% and 10% for the lowest and highest Smid bands respectively compared to averages.

I'm certainly thankful that I got the chance to sit my final exams as I done better in them all apart from English. That was only because my English prelim was set at an easier standard and deliberately focused on the 1 text and 1 poem that my English class had actually studied (the lower of the 2 classes). I was happy enough that my A had only fallen to a C and I didn't have to do it all again in sixth year!

[hibsbollah]

SQA didn’t even look at course work which is part of the grades for some subjects.

SQA have stated (as has Swinney) that things have been done fairly. I disagree and I think you will find thousands will appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:agree: I don’t think it makes sense to take into account the previous years Nat 5 performance, which will be on a completely different set of topics in some cases, and not coursework from the current year, which reflects current topics and current levels of diligence!

[Aldo]

:agree: I don’t think it makes sense to take into account the previous years Nat 5 performance, which will be on a completely different set of topics in some cases, and not coursework from the current year, which reflects current topics and current levels of diligence!

Yip. Postcode lottery imho!

As I mentioned in an earlier post, performance rankings have been suspended this year.

Rather unfair and a bit of a power trip imho. Whose to say results wouldn’t have been that good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scouse Hibee]

So kids get passes in exams they never actually took yet there may be appeals as the pass marks they got in the exams they never actually took are lower than they expected or predicted by teachers, who of course want to prove their own well taught pupils were very successful.

[DaveF]

So kids get passes in exams they never actually took yet there may be appeals as the pass marks they got in the exams they never actually took are lower than they expected or predicted by teachers, who of course want to prove their own well taught pupils were very successful.

You missed out the part where kids submitted high quality coursework throughout the year in preparation for those exams. I know my kid worked hard, was upset when exams were cancelled and has worried for weeks about her results.

[McD]

Because those schools were more likely to inflate the grades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Has to be asked why the estimates were overstated

Are teachers in more deprived areas liars? Are they poor judges of their students? Are the prelims at those schools not set at the required level?


Could be all three.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I get you're the one who's defending this position Ozy, which is fair enough. Do you have any proof that teachers from less affluent areas are more likely to inflate grades, or lie?
or the flip side of that suggestion is, teachers from more affluent school areas didn't bother projecting their pupils to their best potential.


It seems rather disingenuous to cast doubt on some teachers over others, based on where they work. I would expect any teacher to nudge their pupils up towards their upper potential, regardless of whether they're deemed to be from more affluent backgrounds or not.

[Ozyhibby]

Are people forgetting that the amount of kids who passed has actually risen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I get you're the one who's defending this position Ozy, which is fair enough. Do you have any proof that teachers from less affluent areas are more likely to inflate grades, or lie?
or the flip side of that suggestion is, teachers from more affluent school areas didn't bother projecting their pupils to their best potential.


It seems rather disingenuous to cast doubt on some teachers over others, based on where they work. I would expect any teacher to nudge their pupils up towards their upper potential, regardless of whether they're deemed to be from more affluent backgrounds or not.

The proof is in the document. Teachers in the least affluent schools predicted a 20% rise in their students marks from previous years. 20%!
Unless you believe that this year, for some previously unexplained reason they were actually going to deliver a 20% rise in pass marks and wipe out the attainment deficit in one year? That would have been one amazing achievement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[easty]

You missed out the part where kids submitted high quality coursework throughout the year in preparation for those exams. I know my kid worked hard, was upset when exams were cancelled and has worried for weeks about her results.

Yeah, but...kids do that every year. The kids this year didn’t work harder throughout the year than last years kids did, or harder than next years kids will. The kids from other years had to do the hard work, and still have to pass the exam. The exams still have to matter. Otherwise just scrap them, and judge all future years against the course work and prelim.

Teachers will obviously want the best for the pupils, and will put them forward for as high a grade as they possibly could try to justify, but reality says not all kids would have got that.

I’ll be interested to see what happens next year. Will the exams be easier? Will the pass marks be lower? They really can’t have less kids passing next year than this, how could that possibly be fair on kids who actually did the exams?

[JeMeSouviens]

Did they have to do the same predictions in previous years or were these only done to such a level due to the pandemic?

I know I sat prelims and done coursework before my final higher exams but not sure if they amounted to a "predicted grade" in the way they seem to have this year.

It certainly looks like the estimates given are very high when compared across the 4 previous years - increases of 26% and 10% for the lowest and highest Smid bands respectively compared to averages.

I'm certainly thankful that I got the chance to sit my final exams as I done better in them all apart from English. That was only because my English prelim was set at an easier standard and deliberately focused on the 1 text and 1 poem that my English class had actually studied (the lower of the 2 classes). I was happy enough that my A had only fallen to a C and I didn't have to do it all again in sixth year!

Yes, we can see why. :wink:

[DaveF]

Yeah, but...kids do that every year. The kids this year didn’t work harder throughout the year than last years kids did, or harder than next years kids will. The kids from other years had to do the hard work, and still have to pass the exam. The exams still have to matter. Otherwise just scrap them, and judge all future years against the course work and prelim.

Teachers will obviously want the best for the pupils, and will put them forward for as high a grade as they possibly could try to justify, but reality says not all kids would have got that.

I’ll be interested to see what happens next year. Will the exams be easier? Will the pass marks be lower? They really can’t have less kids passing next year than this, how could that possibly be fair on kids who actually did the exams?

You state the obvious but if my kid worked hard, should her efforts be ignored or downgraded? Personally I couldn't understand why they didn't sit exams by simply spreading them out over a longer period of time. I think they rushed into a cancellation but that's easy to say in hindsight I suppose.

[hibsbollah]

Are people forgetting that the amount of kids who passed has actually risen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, but passes tend to rise most years, and the debate is around how the passes were awarded and on what basis.

[Peevemor]

Here in France, the near equivalent of Highers/A levels is the Baccalaureate. Although this is based on a few different subjects, only the average mark counts. Above 10/20 you pass, below you fail. You either have the "bac" or you don't, there's no passing 4 exams & failing one, it's all lumped together.

This year, with the final exams cancelled, almost everyone was awarded their bac, giving a significantly higher success rate than usual.

The problem with this is that there will always be a doubt over many who have the bac 2020.

At least in Scotland, it would appear that the decision makers have been to severe if anything. While I understand that many kids may feel hard done too, at least their results haven't been devalued as they have in France.

[Ozyhibby]

No, but passes tend to rise most years, and the debate is around how the passes were awarded and on what basis.

They were awarded based on school performance, same as they are every year. When you start a new school in first year you know the chances of you passing your highers within a few percent. It’s why house prices near good schools are higher. Whether that’s right or wrong doesn’t matter. If it’s a problem, it can’t be fixed by the stroke of a pen during a pandemic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Yes, we can see why. :wink:

:greengrin

[weecounty hibby]

Nothing was ever going to be accepted as the right thing to do. Even when exams are taken there are appeals. I think it is completely unrealistic to think that there would have been a 20% improvement in one year so I can see why the SQA downgraded marks. The appeals process is there to help sort that out if your child has the evidence to show that they would have attained a higher mark.
Sadly no amount of appealing will help my son's results out. Total waste of a year for him I'm afraid

[Rocky]

I get you're the one who's defending this position Ozy, which is fair enough. Do you have any proof that teachers from less affluent areas are more likely to inflate grades, or lie?
or the flip side of that suggestion is, teachers from more affluent school areas didn't bother projecting their pupils to their best potential.


It seems rather disingenuous to cast doubt on some teachers over others, based on where they work. I would expect any teacher to nudge their pupils up towards their upper potential, regardless of whether they're deemed to be from more affluent backgrounds or not.

Teachers in the least affluent areas submitted estimates that were 17% higher than the 4 year average for their schools (85.1% vs 67.6%). Do you really think that's credible? Teachers from the most affluent areas "inflated" estimates too, by 8% compared to 4 year average (91.5% vs 83.1%). In the end the least affluent schools returned a 2.3% increase over average, compared to 1.5% in the most affluent. I don't think there's anything in the high level numbers to suggest the process was fundamentally flawed but of course there will be exceptions, and that's where the appeals process is crucial.

[easty]

You state the obvious but if my kid worked hard, should her efforts be ignored or downgraded? Personally I couldn't understand why they didn't sit exams by simply spreading them out over a longer period of time. I think they rushed into a cancellation but that's easy to say in hindsight I suppose.

Her efforts shouldn’t be ignored, it’s just a really unfair situation for kids this year.

I agree, they should have found a way to have the exams sat.

[lapsedhibee]

Teachers in the least affluent areas submitted estimates that were 17% higher than the 4 year average for their schools (85.1% vs 67.6%). Do you really think that's credible? Teachers from the most affluent areas "inflated" estimates too, by 8% compared to 4 year average (91.5% vs 83.1%).

Teachers in the more affluent areas would have inflated their estimates by 17% too, if they hadn't noticed that the baseline was already over 83%.

[CapitalGreen]

Teachers in the least affluent areas submitted estimates that were 17% higher than the 4 year average for their schools (85.1% vs 67.6%). Do you really think that's credible? Teachers from the most affluent areas "inflated" estimates too, by 8% compared to 4 year average (91.5% vs 83.1%). In the end the least affluent schools returned a 2.3% increase over average, compared to 1.5% in the most affluent. I don't think there's anything in the high level numbers to suggest the process was fundamentally flawed but of course there will be exceptions, and that's where the appeals process is crucial.

And therein lies the problem, you can’t assign individual grades from a high level using an arbitrary adjustment. A high achiever in a low performing school will be disproportionately downgraded in comparison to an average achiever in a high performing school.

[weecounty hibby]

And therein lies the problem, you can’t assign individual grades from a high level using an arbitrary adjustment. A high achiever in a low performing school will be disproportionately downgraded in comparison to an average achiever in a high performing school.

And the appeals process should be able to sort that out using the evidence that will be there for high achievers

[easty]

And the appeals process should be able to sort that out using the evidence that will be there for high achievers

So, the exceptional kid from the poor school has to wait for the evidence to be sorted out, but the average kid in the rich school doesn't have to prove anything?

[Ozyhibby]

And therein lies the problem, you can’t assign individual grades from a high level using an arbitrary adjustment. A high achiever in a low performing school will be disproportionately downgraded in comparison to an average achiever in a high performing school.

A high achiever in a low performing school is disadvantaged every year. Everyone thinks it’s terrible but nobody is willing to do anything to change it.
It’s why people move house just to get in certain catchment areas. Or put down grandparents address’s.
My cousin lived in a house that was too small for them in Buckstone for 5 years just to get his kids into Boroughmuir. The minute the youngest one started 1st year they moved across the other side of Comiston road to a decent sized bungalow (Firhill catchment) and it worked out a cheaper house even though it was much bigger. It was about a 3 minute walk between the houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CapitalGreen]

A high achiever in a low performing school is disadvantaged every year. Everyone thinks it’s terrible but nobody is willing to do anything to change it.
It’s why people move house just to get in certain catchment areas. Or put down grandparents address’s.
My cousin lived in a house that was too small for them in Buckstone for 5 years just to get his kids into Boroughmuir. The minute the youngest one started 1st year they moved across the other side of Comiston road to a decent sized bungalow (Firhill catchment) and it worked out a cheaper house even though it was much bigger. It was about a 3 minute walk between the houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree

In normal circumstances, a high achiever in a low performing school receives good grades despite the disadvantages they face.

With an arbitrary downgrading based on historical school performance, a high achiever in a low performing school receives lower grades because of the disadvantages they face.

[Speedy]

Are people forgetting that the amount of kids who passed has actually risen?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Arguably that makes it twice as bad for those who have been marked down. On an individual level they aren't getting what they expect (deserve?), and it has gone up overall so they face more competition for university places.

Overall you can see why the results have been moderated but there certainly seems to be a balls up at some point along the way.

[matty_f]

You missed out the part where kids submitted high quality coursework throughout the year in preparation for those exams. I know my kid worked hard, was upset when exams were cancelled and has worried for weeks about her results.

:agree: Amongst other things, if you've got teachers who are apparently over-estimating how well their students have done, then perhaps this shines a light on an ineffective exam system - where results on the day may not be indicative of the pupil's knowledge and understanding of a topic that they've demonstrated throughout the year.

I think that the teacher's estimates should have been used, I understand the reason for balancing the grades but I don't agree that it was the right thing to do.

How can it possibly be justified to downgrade a kid that's worked hard, been competent and understood the subject without knowing that child? To just coldly do it because of the school they go to is horrendously unfair.

At the end of the day, my view is that if the results meant that this year's exams were seen by some as devalued then so be it - those people need to take into consideration that the kids have had to cope with Covid and lockdown as much as everyone else has.

In the grand scheme of things, does a one year blip really matter?

[Ozyhibby]

:agree: Amongst other things, if you've got teachers who are apparently over-estimating how well their students have done, then perhaps this shines a light on an ineffective exam system - where results on the day may not be indicative of the pupil's knowledge and understanding of a topic that they've demonstrated throughout the year.

I think that the teacher's estimates should have been used, I understand the reason for balancing the grades but I don't agree that it was the right thing to do.

How can it possibly be justified to downgrade a kid that's worked hard, been competent and understood the subject without knowing that child? To just coldly do it because of the school they go to is horrendously unfair.

At the end of the day, my view is that if the results meant that this year's exams were seen by some as devalued then so be it - those people need to take into consideration that the kids have had to cope with Covid and lockdown as much as everyone else has.

In the grand scheme of things, does a one year blip really matter?

Devalue the whole exam system? That would mean if a uni was looking at two applicants, one from 2019 and one from 2020 they would always go for the 2019 kid. It would make all of this years marks meaningless.
Personally think we need a long hard look at the quality of the nations teachers that they have no clue as to how the pupils will do every year. It’s about time we started to raise some standards there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

Devalue the whole exam system? That would mean if a uni was looking at two applicants, one from 2019 and one from 2020 they would always go for the 2019 kid. It would make all of this years marks meaningless.
Personally think we need a long hard look at the quality of the nations teachers that they have no clue as to how the pupils will do every year. It’s about time we started to raise some standards there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's on the uni's to understand the situation - they're going to devalue them anyway "that kid got an A, what school were they at? Oh, a good one? They're probably not at that level then..."

The system used devalues the results, they're a sham.

[Ozyhibby]

That's on the uni's to understand the situation - they're going to devalue them anyway "that kid got an A, what school were they at? Oh, a good one? They're probably not at that level then..."

The system used devalues the results, they're a sham.

I don’t think they are and the SQA don’t either. They did this specifically so that universities could have faith in the results. That was the whole point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rocky]

And therein lies the problem, you can’t assign individual grades from a high level using an arbitrary adjustment. A high achiever in a low performing school will be disproportionately downgraded in comparison to an average achiever in a high performing school.
I'm not sure I follow - there will still be high achievers in all schools, and high achievers in all schools will still receive A grades. Are you saying that you think the least affluent schools have genuinely improved exam performance by 17% in one year? That they've gone from c.68% passes in each of the last four years to 85% this year? What do you think would drive such a massive improvement in one year?

[matty_f]

I don’t think they are and the SQA don’t either. They did this specifically so that universities could have faith in the results. That was the whole point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How can they possibly have faith in the results if they know and understand that some kids have been marked down or up indiscriminately based on their school?

[McD]

The proof is in the document. Teachers in the least affluent schools predicted a 20% rise in their students marks from previous years. 20%!
Unless you believe that this year, for some previously unexplained reason they were actually going to deliver a 20% rise in pass marks and wipe out the attainment deficit in one year? That would have been one amazing achievement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Teachers in the least affluent areas submitted estimates that were 17% higher than the 4 year average for their schools (85.1% vs 67.6%). Do you really think that's credible? Teachers from the most affluent areas "inflated" estimates too, by 8% compared to 4 year average (91.5% vs 83.1%). In the end the least affluent schools returned a 2.3% increase over average, compared to 1.5% in the most affluent. I don't think there's anything in the high level numbers to suggest the process was fundamentally flawed but of course there will be exceptions, and that's where the appeals process is crucial.


Thank you both for your replies, you've increased my understanding of this :aok:

[Stairway 2 7]

Daughter got 8 A's in her nat 5s delighted as lower achievement school and was worried when news was breaking. Nat 5s just stepping stone to highers though so next year will be the one's that count.

[Scouse Hibee]

You missed out the part where kids submitted high quality coursework throughout the year in preparation for those exams. I know my kid worked hard, was upset when exams were cancelled and has worried for weeks about her results.

No I get that completely but regardless of how good the coursework submitted was, there has always been an exam to take which ultimately is a high pressured situation for students that can in many cases can cause unexpected results. It’s a very unique and unprecedented situation and I reckon complete harmony was never achievable in basically allocating a result on course work and teacher opinion.

[CapitalGreen]

I'm not sure I follow - there will still be high achievers in all schools, and high achievers in all schools will still receive A grades. Are you saying that you think the least affluent schools have genuinely improved exam performance by 17% in one year? That they've gone from c.68% passes in each of the last four years to 85% this year? What do you think would drive such a massive improvement in one year?

Nope, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying it’s unfair to make adjustments to an individual within a group by applying different levels of adjustment to different sections of the group. I understand the need to normalise what are obviously overestimates by teachers, however in any distribution during normal times there will be outliers. In low performing schools these outliers will have been disproportionately downgraded compared to their peers at high achieving schools. Essentially the adjustment of an individual’s grade is determined by the achievement of their school which is strongly driven by the socio-economic status of it’s pupils.

[Rocky]

Nope, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying it’s unfair to make adjustments to an individual within a group by applying different levels of adjustment to different sections of the group. I understand the need to normalise what are obviously overestimates by teachers, however in any distribution during normal times there will be outliers. In low performing schools these outliers will have been disproportionately downgraded compared to their peers at high achieving schools. Essentially the adjustment of an individual’s grade is determined by the achievement of their school which is strongly driven by the socio-economic status of it’s pupils.
Sorry, I'm still not following and I'm honestly trying to as I feel like I'm missing something. What makes you say that the outliers in low performing schools will be disproportionately "downgraded" compared to high performing schools? The top performers in both will still get As, although there will be fewer "A" performers in low performing schools than in high performing ones, as is the case in every other year whether we like it or not. The "algorithmic" approach will clearly throw up anomalies but that's what the appeals process is for.

Ultimately there's only an imbalance in the "downgrades" because there was an imbalance in the "upgrades" provided by teachers.

[G B Young]

SQA didn’t even look at course work which is part of the grades for some subjects.

SQA have stated (as has Swinney) that things have been done fairly. I disagree and I think you will find thousands will appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Judging by the front pages of the Scottish papers today, there's a 'tsumami' of appeals on the way:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53660931

This girl's family certainly feel she was marked down due to where she lives:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-53653683

Major headache for Swinney and I'm not sure he's up to handling this well.

[DaveF]

Daughter got 8 A's in her nat 5s delighted as lower achievement school and was worried when news was breaking. Nat 5s just stepping stone to highers though so next year will be the one's that count.

Can you take 8 NAT 5's? Great results for her though!

[G B Young]

How can they possibly have faith in the results if they know and understand that some kids have been marked down or up indiscriminately based on their school?

Presumably they can't. The situation, though, is unprecedented and without exams there was never going to be a solution that replicated the usual way of assessing results and the flak flying around today was probably always going to happen. This is going to rumble on for a long time.

[Aldo]

Judging by the front pages of the Scottish papers today, there's a 'tsumami' of appeals on the way:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53660931

This girl's family certainly feel she was marked down due to where she lives:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-53653683

You hear of pupils getting all A’s in their prelims yet they have been downgraded!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Can you take 8 NAT 5's? Great results for her though!

Some schools can. Lower performing schools often just do 7 in order to try and improve their marks by not overloading the children.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

You hear of pupils getting all A’s in their prelims yet they have been downgraded!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Prelims are set by the schools and not every school has the same standards in their prelim exam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Aldo]

Prelims are set by the schools and not every school has the same standards in their prelim exam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Indeed Ozy but still not right imho!

All friends on what school you go to, which is wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[G B Young]

Prelims are set by the schools and not every school has the same standards in their prelim exam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I imagine that is something many pupils and parents are unaware of and will only add to the confusion. What is the thinking behind that? If the exams themselves are of a uniform standard across the board how can a school with 'lower' prelim standards expect kids to understand why their grade doesn't necessarily match what they might ultimately achieve?

[Stairway 2 7]

Can you take 8 NAT 5's? Great results for her though!

thanks yeah she was allowed to do three sciences as always had heart set on medicine.

[RyeSloan]

Prelims are set by the schools and not every school has the same standards in their prelim exam.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which seems to be first place to start re reviewing this mess. As others have said if the actual exams are standard then why are the prelim/ practice exams not standard as well?

Seems to me that there are two problems here.

1) They put in place a process to assess the pupils performance and estimate their exam results. That process lead to a huge discrepancy to previous years and the need for 1 in 4 estimates to be revised so clearly this approach was not for for purpose.

2) To correct 1) the SQA has used previous performance of the school. This means that current pupils are being downgraded on previous pupils performance. That in itself is clearly unfair. You then add in the privileged / under privileged element and some pupils are facing a double whammy of bias against them.

A real mess all round then.

[Ozyhibby]

Which seems to be first place to start re reviewing this mess. As others have said if the actual exams are standard then why are the prelim/ practice exams not standard as well?

Seems to me that there are two problems here.

1) They put in place a process to assess the pupils performance and estimate their exam results. That process lead to a huge discrepancy to previous years and the need for 1 in 4 estimates to be revised so clearly this approach was not for for purpose.

2) To correct 1) the SQA has used previous performance of the school. This means that current pupils are being downgraded on previous pupils performance. That in itself is clearly unfair. You then add in the privileged / under privileged element and some pupils are facing a double whammy of bias against them.

A real mess all round then.

It’s more likely the pupils were not unfairly downgraded, rather that they were unfairly upgraded by their teachers in the first place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Judging by the front pages of the Scottish papers today, there's a 'tsumami' of appeals on the way:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-53660931

This girl's family certainly feel she was marked down due to where she lives:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-53653683

Major headache for Swinney and I'm not sure he's up to handling this well.

I don't think John Swinney has to handle the appeals process personally. :wink:

[speedy_gonzales]

I'm a little frustrated in that we (as parents) were told that the indicative grades submitted to the SQA by the schools were based on prelim results but primarily on submitted course work.
It now seems a lot of weighting has been given to the individual schools historical exam returns.

I'm starting to feel guilty for the impact my socialist leanings have had on my daughter. I've never agreed with folk sending kids out of catchment, I've always thought it was a selfish pursuit and does not remedy any perceived issues with failing schools (ultimately, they receive less funding).
At 5 years old we had a choice between two primary schools in our area, we choose the closest school even though the other (outwith catchment, but we are on the boundary) had a slightly better attainment.
Come secondary choices, our daughters P7 class was split down the middle between two High schools, again, we chose the nearest, even though it was more socially diverse and on paper didn't have the same attainment as the other option.

Fast forward 5 years, my daughter has been gifted lower grades than her peers and friends that chose the other high school, even though all the kids had similar attainment in the social group for their Nat 5's and prelims.
My daughters school had their prelim in Jan/Feb meaning they covered more course work, but the exam itself was tougher as the school liked (?) to give their pupils a gentle shock to nudge them to work/study harder.
The other local High school carried out their prelims in Nov/Dec, with less course work and, according to my daughter who went over their Higher Chemistry & Maths papers, their exams were slightly easier.

I'm assuming most kids in S4/5/6 will be similar in that they have group chats for friends, study groups, registration classes. From what I've heard so far, virtually all of my daughter's peers are appealing their grades. I have concerns this could overwhelm the teachers & SQA, but I'm also concerned this may be driven by a level of entitlement amongst the parents and pupils.
Personally, I'll support my daughter in whatever she chooses to do but I don't want her to come across as a spoilt individual who simply gets results by stamping her feet.

[Speedy]

I'm not sure I follow - there will still be high achievers in all schools, and high achievers in all schools will still receive A grades. Are you saying that you think the least affluent schools have genuinely improved exam performance by 17% in one year? That they've gone from c.68% passes in each of the last four years to 85% this year? What do you think would drive such a massive improvement in one year?

Tongue in cheek, but all the decent kids (and teachers) being able to get on with it without being distracted by the nutters?

[Speedy]

A high achiever in a low performing school is disadvantaged every year. Everyone thinks it’s terrible but nobody is willing to do anything to change it.
It’s why people move house just to get in certain catchment areas. Or put down grandparents address’s.
My cousin lived in a house that was too small for them in Buckstone for 5 years just to get his kids into Boroughmuir. The minute the youngest one started 1st year they moved across the other side of Comiston road to a decent sized bungalow (Firhill catchment) and it worked out a cheaper house even though it was much bigger. It was about a 3 minute walk between the houses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Catchment areas are mad in Edinburgh, well worth a look at the map. Boroughmuir goes all the way up there as you say, despite Firrhill being much closer. Then you've got Roseburn primary which is the closest primary school to Tynecastle High going to Craigmount instead.

[Ozyhibby]

Catchment areas are mad in Edinburgh, well worth a look at the map. Boroughmuir goes all the way up there as you say, despite Firrhill being much closer. Then you've got Roseburn primary which is the closest primary school to Tynecastle High going to Craigmount instead.

They tried to change the Roseburn catchment a couple of years ago and the parents kicked up a massive stink and they backed down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I'm a little frustrated in that we (as parents) were told that the indicative grades submitted to the SQA by the schools were based on prelim results but primarily on submitted course work.
It now seems a lot of weighting has been given to the individual schools historical exam returns.

I'm starting to feel guilty for the impact my socialist leanings have had on my daughter. I've never agreed with folk sending kids out of catchment, I've always thought it was a selfish pursuit and does not remedy any perceived issues with failing schools (ultimately, they receive less funding).
At 5 years old we had a choice between two primary schools in our area, we choose the closest school even though the other (outwith catchment, but we are on the boundary) had a slightly better attainment.
Come secondary choices, our daughters P7 class was split down the middle between two High schools, again, we chose the nearest, even though it was more socially diverse and on paper didn't have the same attainment as the other option.

Fast forward 5 years, my daughter has been gifted lower grades than her peers and friends that chose the other high school, even though all the kids had similar attainment in the social group for their Nat 5's and prelims.
My daughters school had their prelim in Jan/Feb meaning they covered more course work, but the exam itself was tougher as the school liked (?) to give their pupils a gentle shock to nudge them to work/study harder.
The other local High school carried out their prelims in Nov/Dec, with less course work and, according to my daughter who went over their Higher Chemistry & Maths papers, their exams were slightly easier.

I'm assuming most kids in S4/5/6 will be similar in that they have group chats for friends, study groups, registration classes. From what I've heard so far, virtually all of my daughter's peers are appealing their grades. I have concerns this could overwhelm the teachers & SQA, but I'm also concerned this may be driven by a level of entitlement amongst the parents and pupils.
Personally, I'll support my daughter in whatever she chooses to do but I don't want her to come across as a spoilt individual who simply gets results by stamping her feet.

You shouldn’t have to make those choices.
I don’t think that failing schools receive less funding than any other. In fact I think the one size fits all funding model is part of the problem. They should receive far more funding to allow them to make up for some of the disadvantages they face. The most disadvantaged schools usually have poorer quality teachers. It’s unavoidable. It’s a harder job but the pay is the same. If Gillespies advertises for a teacher they likely get dozens (maybe hundreds) of applications. When the WHEC does the same it will be very different. Less choice means they have to accept lower quality. Allowing these schools to higher better quality teachers by offering higher wages and insisting on higher performance would help to start closing the attainment gap. Will never happen though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekduval]

You shouldn’t have to make those choices.
I don’t think that failing schools receive less funding than any other. In fact I think the one size fits all funding model is part of the problem. They should receive far more funding to allow them to make up for some of the disadvantages they face. The most disadvantaged schools usually have poorer quality teachers. It’s unavoidable. It’s a harder job but the pay is the same. If Gillespies advertises for a teacher they likely get dozens (maybe hundreds) of applications. When the WHEC does the same it will be very different. Less choice means they have to accept lower quality. Allowing these schools to higher better quality teachers by offering higher wages and insisting on higher performance would help to start closing the attainment gap. Will never happen though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Schools receive additional funding called PEF (Pupil Equity Fund) based on their SIMD cohort to help close the attainment gap.
Teachers are just as good and bad in all schools. Regarding poorer quality teachers in disadvantaged schools it could also be argued teachers in so called higher achieving schools like Boroughmuir and Gillespies have the luxury of being able to rely on parents who tend to place a greater value on education and will help and pay for private tutors to ensure kids pass exams.
Also there is strict criteria on the questions and topics required in a prelim and the allocation of marks allowed for each so prelims should be of a similar standard and would fail at the appeals stage if they did not meet this criteria.

[hibsbollah]

Here’s the appeals guidance, link received today
https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/files_ccc/post-certification-review-information-for-centres.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTmpkak5UYzVZMkkxTURrNS IsInQiOiJQNzZqNDNYUGExbXdQdWw3SUlYMEE5eHRKMEpMb3hH RlhEOCs3eFRzd2hCTWxpMitOdDI2aStPZUdveHZYRzZzcXMwYk lSOVwvYlRId0J0WnI5OWI1WDM0Z0tmdTA4NjVpSm5ZWWVIZTYz OTJoY29sdEhtNlU1UWxUdGpIZWRMY0YifQ%3D%3D

[Mon Dieu4]

Here’s the appeals guidance, link received today
https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/files_ccc/post-certification-review-information-for-centres.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTmpkak5UYzVZMkkxTURrNS IsInQiOiJQNzZqNDNYUGExbXdQdWw3SUlYMEE5eHRKMEpMb3hH RlhEOCs3eFRzd2hCTWxpMitOdDI2aStPZUdveHZYRzZzcXMwYk lSOVwvYlRId0J0WnI5OWI1WDM0Z0tmdTA4NjVpSm5ZWWVIZTYz OTJoY29sdEhtNlU1UWxUdGpIZWRMY0YifQ%3D%3D

Can you appeal grades from 25 years ago, asking for a friend :faf:

[Ozyhibby]

Schools receive additional funding called PEF (Pupil Equity Fund) based on their SIMD cohort to help close the attainment gap.
Teachers are just as good and bad in all schools. Regarding poorer quality teachers in disadvantaged schools it could also be argued teachers in so called higher achieving schools like Boroughmuir and Gillespies have the luxury of being able to rely on parents who tend to place a greater value on education and will help and pay for private tutors to ensure kids pass exams.
Also there is strict criteria on the questions and topics required in a prelim and the allocation of marks allowed for each so prelims should be of a similar standard and would fail at the appeals stage if they did not meet this criteria.

PEF is spread so thinly that just about every primary school in Edinburgh is getting cash out of it no matter where they are.
I stand by my point on teachers. The best schools get the first pick of teachers. You can’t tell me that does not result in them getting a higher quality staff. I agree that that is not the only reason why some schools do better than others. My point was that we need to fund disadvantaged schools much better and allow them to bring in the very best teachers and to do that they may have to pay them more. You can’t do that with PEF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

Can you appeal grades from 25 years ago, asking for a friend :faf:

:greengrin I have a few E grade and no mentions in science subjects I might appeal if it goes back to the late 1980s...

[Ozyhibby]

:greengrin I have a few E grade and no mentions in science subjects I might appeal if it goes back to the late 1980s...

I’d be lucky to get those grades on appeal.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekduval]

PEF is spread so thinly that just about every primary school in Edinburgh is getting cash out of it no matter where they are.
I stand by my point on teachers. The best schools get the first pick of teachers. You can’t tell me that does not result in them getting a higher quality staff. I agree that that is not the only reason why some schools do better than others. My point was that we need to fund disadvantaged schools much better and allow them to bring in the very best teachers and to do that they may have to pay them more. You can’t do that with PEF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your point was

‘In fact I think the one size fits all funding model is part of the problem’

PEF is additional funding so it is not a one size fits all model. Wether PEF is enough to close the attainment gap which I don’t think it is is a different story but is certainly not down to poorer quality teachers in these schools.

[Ozyhibby]

Your point was

‘In fact I think the one size fits all funding model is part of the problem’

PEF is additional funding so it is not a one size fits all model. Wether PEF is enough to close the attainment gap which I don’t think it is is a different story but is certainly not down to poorer quality teachers in these schools.

You don’t think that getting first pick of teachers is helpful in securing the best staff for your school?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekduval]

You don’t think that getting first pick of teachers is helpful in securing the best staff for your school?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don’t get first pick. You advertise, interview and select the strongest candidate for the role/school based on what’s required. Teachers don’t just jump for a job at South Morningside. Do you think Watson’s and Heriots have the best teachers?

[Ozyhibby]

You don’t get first pick. You advertise, interview and select the strongest candidate for the role/school based on what’s required. Teachers don’t just jump for a job at South Morningside. Do you think Watson’s and Heriots have the best teachers?

I assume the reason Watson’s etc pay their teachers more is because they want to be able to pick the best although they also have to work longer hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekduval]

I assume the reason Watson’s etc pay their teachers more is because they want to be able to pick the best although they also have to work longer hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wanting and getting are to different things. Would be interesting to see the timesheets as well.

[Ozyhibby]

Wanting and getting are to different things. Would be interesting to see the timesheets as well.

Certainly appears a popular strategy in most industries when it comes to recruitment. Works for Celtic in football.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[derekduval]

Certainly appears a popular strategy in most industries when it comes to recruitment. Works for Celtic in football.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unions wouldn’t allow it. Also PEF allows you to employ additional staff on middle management salaries to provide specific support to targeted groups to help close the attainment gap which was my original point. Cheers

[Smartie]

Private/ public and pay can often be misleading - it isn't always how it seems.

Are the teachers at private schools better than the teachers at state schools? I would suggest not, teachers are teachers, there will be good and there will be bad, although I can't imagine a bad teacher would be allowed to last long at a private school. What will set teachers at private schools apart from teachers at state schools is that they will have more resource in order to be able to succeed - they'll have better equipment, be able to spend more time individually with each kid and the kids who are there in the first place will, on the whole, probably be keener to learn rather than just piss about.

Do teachers at private schools earn more? I don't even know, but I'd be surprised. The decision to work privately is often motivated more by how you want to spend your days and who you want to spend then with rather than money, otherwise I'm not convinced you'd be attracting the right people at all.

[Ozyhibby]

Private/ public and pay can often be misleading - it isn't always how it seems.

Are the teachers at private schools better than the teachers at state schools? I would suggest not, teachers are teachers, there will be good and there will be bad, although I can't imagine a bad teacher would be allowed to last long at a private school. What will set teachers at private schools apart from teachers at state schools is that they will have more resource in order to be able to succeed - they'll have better equipment, be able to spend more time individually with each kid and the kids who are there in the first place will, on the whole, probably be keener to learn rather than just piss about.

Do teachers at private schools earn more? I don't even know, but I'd be surprised. The decision to work privately is often motivated more by how you want to spend your days and who you want to spend then with rather than money, otherwise I'm not convinced you'd be attracting the right people at all.

They do get paid more. They also work longer hours and are expected to do extra curricular activities. Also, if they are not any good they are moved on sharpish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[McD]

Catchment areas are mad in Edinburgh, well worth a look at the map. Boroughmuir goes all the way up there as you say, despite Firrhill being much closer. Then you've got Roseburn primary which is the closest primary school to Tynecastle High going to Craigmount instead.


In West Lothian, secondary school kids are bussed from East and Mid Calder, right past the front door of one secondary school (James Young) to attend West Calder High School. This has been the case since at least I was at high school (far too long ago to think about), and I've always thought it was daft

[Jay]

In West Lothian, secondary school kids are bussed from East and Mid Calder, right past the front door of one secondary school (James Young) to attend West Calder High School. This has been the case since at least I was at high school (far too long ago to think about), and I've always thought it was daft

No they aren't. Well it's a bit of a stretch to say they go right past the front door.

[McD]

No they aren't. Well it's a bit of a stretch to say they go right past the front door.


a slight exaggeration, but they are bussed past one high school to go to another

[Jay]

a slight exaggeration, but they are bussed past one high school to go to another

But if the calders kids went to JY still needing a bus then kids from dedridge, Murie etc would all have to be bussed to WC. Doesnt make sense

[Rocky]

Nearly 40% of A-level result predictions to be downgraded in England

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/aug/07/a-level-result-predictions-to-be-downgraded-england

If you thought our setup was bad look at the nick of this, with no individual right to appeal

[GlesgaeHibby]

40% of A-level grades to be downgraded. Wonder if the Scottish Tories will be as vocal about that

[weecounty hibby]

Same happening in Wales. The whole of normal life has changed and nothing is the same as before. Decisions are being taken with the best of intentions whether on education, health, employment etc. Will mistakes be made, of course they will but some of the hysteria drummed up by the opposition parties has been party political and nothing more. None of them have come up with what they would have done differently and in fact in Labour led Wales and in Tory led England the same thing has happened

[Rocky]

Same happening in Wales. The whole of normal life has changed and nothing is the same as before. Decisions are being taken with the best of intentions whether on education, health, employment etc. Will mistakes be made, of course they will but some of the hysteria drummed up by the opposition parties has been party political and nothing more. None of them have come up with what they would have done differently and in fact in Labour led Wales and in Tory led England the same thing has happened
I've said elsewhere I'm a Labour man at heart but I've been really disappointed in the Labour bandwagon jumping up here. They'll never win me back with cheap point scoring.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Apparently some young lad in Glasgow tweeted this morning laughing how he got straight As despite failing his prelims.

The only way they can sort it is by actually marking the papers submitted instead of letting teachers over estimate and the SQA to randomly punish?

[Future17]

Apparently some young lad in Glasgow tweeted this morning laughing how he got straight As despite failing his prelims.

The only way they can sort it is by actually marking the papers submitted instead of letting teachers over estimate and the SQA to randomly punish?

Which papers? As I understand it, there's no suggestion the prelim exams were marked incorrectly; the problem is that each school sets the difficulty of its own prelims, so there's no consistency across the country.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Which papers? As I understand it, there's no suggestion the prelim exams were marked incorrectly; the problem is that each school sets the difficulty of its own prelims, so there's no consistency across the country.

The essays etc that were used. My daughters school were submitting more than just a prelim as evidence (for the reason you say).

Most subjects would have more than a prelim to submit?

[calumhibee1]

Apparently some young lad in Glasgow tweeted this morning laughing how he got straight As despite failing his prelims.

The only way they can sort it is by actually marking the papers submitted instead of letting teachers over estimate and the SQA to randomly punish?

I’d be laughing as well to be fair. Fail your prelims, don’t even have to sit the final exam and get straight A’s. Take it and run.

[Sir David Gray]

I’d be laughing as well to be fair. Fail your prelims, don’t even have to sit the final exam and get straight A’s. Take it and run.

It doesn't really help in the longer term though if he's being accepted onto university courses or given a job that he's not actually capable of doing.

[Future17]

The essays etc that were used. My daughters school were submitting more than just a prelim as evidence (for the reason you say).

Most subjects would have more than a prelim to submit?

Ah right, I think I get you. That would be a massive undertaking to do for every exam-age pupil in Scotland though and would likely cause delays for those who need their appeal results ASAP.

[DH1875]

Like I said earlier, we stay in a poorer area of Glasgow inbetween Bishopbriggs and Bearsden. We've family/friends who stay in both areas and who's kids go to the high schools there. As a group we've all being talking and it does seem as if their kids have gotten a better deal. All past exams with A & B and while most probably deserve it, some 100% shouldn't have and that's coming straight from their own/parents mouth. On the other hand, loads of kids at my daughter's school have failed exams they were expected to pass. We are appealing her biology result and have actually got a meeting with her school (along with some other parents) as it really is a weird one. My daughter got a B in her prelim and according to her teacher was on course/pushing for a A. They straight up failed her, No mark down to even a C or even a D, failed. To put this into context she has gotten an A in chemistry????? This set alarm bells ringing and we (her, myself, my wife) have been doing a bit of digging.
Long story short. They have FAILED every kid in the school who was supposed to sit a biology exam. Not just in my daughter's year but in 5th and 6th year to. How is it possible that out of around 80 kids due to sit a biology exam not one of them have been given a pass mark? My daughter was due to go to college to study science but now that's not happening. The school have already told us that she will be allowed to sit higher biology despite her failing the exam. Can't be to often that a pupil who fails their standard grade is allowed to take higher. We are lucky in way but we've a friends daughter who was doing her higher biology. She has always wanted to be a vet and had a place all lined up for leaving school. This grade A biology student who's passed every test or exam she has ever taken, failed. No mark down to b or c, straight up fail. She is appealing but good knows what's she is gonna do if it fails.

[McD]

But if the calders kids went to JY still needing a bus then kids from dedridge, Murie etc would all have to be bussed to WC. Doesnt make sense


whereas it does make sense to bus kids past one school to another? Ok then



what would make sense is building a school to serve the increasing population of the Calders and Kirknewton

[Danderhall Hibs]

Ah right, I think I get you. That would be a massive undertaking to do for every exam-age pupil in Scotland though and would likely cause delays for those who need their appeal results ASAP.

Yeah - if only they’d used the time between March-August to get it done.

[Future17]

Yeah - if only they’d used the time between March-August to get it done.

I can think of a few problems with that though, not least how the teachers would have obtained and sent the coursework.

[Andy Bee]

whereas it does make sense to bus kids past one school to another? Ok then



what would make sense is building a school to serve the increasing population of the Calders and Kirknewton


They have, in West Calder and I believe they're also building a new school at some point to service the new development in Mossend.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I can think of a few problems with that though, not least how the teachers would have obtained and sent the coursework.

They should’ve been collating it through the year so would have it to hand.

[Future17]

They should’ve been collating it through the year so would have it to hand.

I get that, but I don't think teachers have been in schools during lockdown and all the coursework would have to have been scanned and sent electronically.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I get that, but I don't think teachers have been in schools during lockdown and all the coursework would have to have been scanned and sent electronically.

That could’ve been sorted though - schools had staff in classed as key workers throughout, they could’ve added more if required to ensure it was all done.

Leaving teachers to score the kids was never going to work - the results reflect on them so they’ll over mark. I said it jokingly in conversation a few times back In March/April that “this years exam results will be another record breaking year”.

[Future17]

That could’ve been sorted though - schools had staff in classed as key workers throughout, they could’ve added more if required to ensure it was all done.

Leaving teachers to score the kids was never going to work - the results reflect on them so they’ll over mark. I said it jokingly in conversation a few times back In March/April that “this years exam results will be another record breaking year”.

But, listening to the discussion over the past few days, I don't think it was intended to work in isolation - it was always intended that it would be part of a process.

I think the process they've used is probably the most efficient overall.

[Rocky]

That could’ve been sorted though - schools had staff in classed as key workers throughout, they could’ve added more if required to ensure it was all done.

Leaving teachers to score the kids was never going to work - the results reflect on them so they’ll over mark. I said it jokingly in conversation a few times back In March/April that “this years exam results will be another record breaking year”.
I'm not really clear what you're suggesting - are you saying that classroom / home work from August to March could be assessed in a standardised way?

[Danderhall Hibs]

I'm not really clear what you're suggesting - are you saying that classroom / home work from August to March could be assessed in a standardised way?

Why not? I’d like to think the teachers that put the grades forward assessed it in a standardised way - all this would be is a “neutral” or someone with no vested interest looking at the submissions and rating it.

[Ozyhibby]

Why not? I’d like to think the teachers that put the grades forward assessed it in a standardised way - all this would be is a “neutral” or someone with no vested interest looking at the submissions and rating it.

They didn’t assess it in a standardised way though. Unless you actually believe they were about to deliver a 20% rise in performance in a single year? The teachers massively overestimated the performance of the kids they teach. Have they done these kids any favours by doing this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Danderhall Hibs]

They didn’t assess it in a standardised way though. Unless you actually believe they were about to deliver a 20% rise in performance in a single year? The teachers massively overestimated the performance of the kids they teach. Have they done these kids any favours by doing this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we agree. Teachers assessed the kids work and that grading would reflect on them (the teacher). A neutral doing it would take any emotion out of it and also the element of marking your own homework.

[LaMotta]

They didn’t assess it in a standardised way though. Unless you actually believe they were about to deliver a 20% rise in performance in a single year? The teachers massively overestimated the performance of the kids they teach. Have they done these kids any favours by doing this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think we agree. Teachers assessed the kids work and that grading would reflect on them (the teacher). A neutral doing it would take any emotion out of it and also the element of marking your own homework.

:agree::agree:

Lots of people on Twitter/Facebook saying that all teachers should have been trusted and it's a disgrace they haven't heen listened to - well the overestimated marks proves that SQA were right not to completely do so.

Appeals process should hopefully sort out the real errors.

[Rocky]

Why not? I’d like to think the teachers that put the grades forward assessed it in a standardised way - all this would be is a “neutral” or someone with no vested interest looking at the submissions and rating it.

I have to say that sounds unrealistic to me in terms of the sheer amount of work involved and I'm not clear how it would be an improvement on what's already been done. As it stands around 80% of results were in line with the expectations that had been set and there's an appeals process for the rest. At a guess maybe 20% of those appeals will be successful because the wrong grade has been awarded. So for the sake of possibly around 5% incorrect grades I can't see any logic in reviewing millions of hours of coursework, nor can I see how reviewing non standardised coursework is likely to give a more accurate assessment of grades than teachers' assessments did. So we'd still be looking at thousands of appeals being raised.

The SQA were probably at fault for not setting clearer guidelines to prevent teachers from inflating so many grades but once that die was cast this outcome was inevitable in my opinion.

[Bristolhibby]

It’s the outliers I feel sorry for. The ones who pull their socks up, or are great students from a poorly performing school.

J

[Ozyhibby]

It’s the outliers I feel sorry for. The ones who pull their socks up, or are great students from a poorly performing school.

J

The great students at poorly performing schools will still get good marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[speedy_gonzales]

The great students at poorly performing schools will still get good marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From what I'm hearing/seeing/reading, that is not the case for all.
A small group of pupils at our local school were predicted A's & B's but awarded C's & D's for Higher Chemistry (to my knowledge, nobody got an A). Our neighbouring school has a group of similar pupils that up until now had very similar attainment, they got their A's & B's.
I certainly hope the appeals process is fair & robust.
I'm starting to get a bit peeved when I keep reading dismissive posts re the lowering of marks when the initial grading was based on course work submitted but the SQA are "downgrading" based on the schools historical exam returns,,,, those are not the same measures of a pupils ability.

[Rocky]

From what I'm hearing/seeing/reading, that is not the case for all.
A small group of pupils at our local school were predicted A's & B's but awarded C's & D's for Higher Chemistry (to my knowledge, nobody got an A). Our neighbouring school has a group of similar pupils that up until now had very similar attainment, they got their A's & B's.
I certainly hope the appeals process is fair & robust.
I'm starting to get a bit peeved when I keep reading dismissive posts re the lowering of marks when the initial grading was based on course work submitted but the SQA are "downgrading" based on the schools historical exam returns,,,, those are not the same measures of a pupils ability.

I'm getting peeved with people continuing to repeat that with no evidence to support it. The grade inflation was higher in lower performing schools so it seems only natural that the correction would have to be bigger too. Plus lower performing schools ended up with a bigger improvement over prior years than higher performing schools did, so the gap between lower performing and higher performing has actually narrowed. If anyone actually believes that lower performing schools really improved from 65% pass rate to 83% pass rate then that's a different subject but I'd be interested to hear what people think led to such a massive improvement in one year as we need to keep doing it, whatever it is.

[Future17]

From what I'm hearing/seeing/reading, that is not the case for all.
A small group of pupils at our local school were predicted A's & B's but awarded C's & D's for Higher Chemistry (to my knowledge, nobody got an A). Our neighbouring school has a group of similar pupils that up until now had very similar attainment, they got their A's & B's.
I certainly hope the appeals process is fair & robust.
I'm starting to get a bit peeved when I keep reading dismissive posts re the lowering of marks when the initial grading was based on course work submitted but the SQA are "downgrading" based on the schools historical exam returns,,,, those are not the same measures of a pupils ability.

But how do you suggest measuring a pupil's ability in the absence of final exams?

[speedy_gonzales]

But how do you suggest measuring a pupil's ability in the absence of final exams?

By the teachers grading the submitted course work, as was intimated. Those gradings are now being tweaked to reflect historical exam results.
They are not the same metrics so it is unusual/unfair to treat them as such.

[speedy_gonzales]

I'm getting peeved with people continuing to repeat that with no evidence to support it.


I'm looking at this from a very focused and specific point of view. A relatively small group of peers (approx 20) that have had very similar testing results through their two different high schools.
The grades submitted by their teachers (most teachers have fed back but not all are available) were in line with prelims and pupil expectation, the pupils from School A have received awards in line with the teacher grading (with the exception of one pupil that has had a very poor result by his standard) but all the pupils in School B have been awarded grades lower than submitted. Not one single higher A in my daughter's close peer group where they were all A's & B's for last year's Higher and previous Nat 5's.



The grade inflation was higher in lower performing schools so it seems only natural that the correction would have to be bigger too.


Again, the grading was based on submitted course work and previous exam returns, it wasn't a grade picked out of thin air but that grade has been re-graded based on historical exam performance by former pupils.

[Rocky]

I'm looking at this from a very focused and specific point of view. A relatively small group of peers (approx 20) that have had very similar testing results through their two different high schools.
The grades submitted by their teachers (most teachers have fed back but not all are available) were in line with prelims and pupil expectation, the pupils from School A have received awards in line with the teacher grading (with the exception of one pupil that has had a very poor result by his standard) but all the pupils in School B have been awarded grades lower than submitted. Not one single higher A in my daughter's close peer group where they were all A's & B's for last year's Higher and previous Nat 5's.



Again, the grading was based on submitted course work and previous exam returns, it wasn't a grade picked out of thin air but that grade has been re-graded based on historical exam performance by former pupils.

If you're talking about specific cases then that's what the appeals process is for. I thought you were talking about the overall process, apologies.

[Ozyhibby]

From what I'm hearing/seeing/reading, that is not the case for all.
A small group of pupils at our local school were predicted A's & B's but awarded C's & D's for Higher Chemistry (to my knowledge, nobody got an A). Our neighbouring school has a group of similar pupils that up until now had very similar attainment, they got their A's & B's.
I certainly hope the appeals process is fair & robust.
I'm starting to get a bit peeved when I keep reading dismissive posts re the lowering of marks when the initial grading was based on course work submitted but the SQA are "downgrading" based on the schools historical exam returns,,,, those are not the same measures of a pupils ability.

Predicted by who? The teachers who over estimated the number of pass results by 17%. I think those kids need to be looking at their teachers rather than the SQA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[speedy_gonzales]

Predicted by who? The teachers who over estimated the number of pass results by 17%. I think those kids need to be looking at their teachers rather than the SQA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The teachers were asked to submit grades on course work completed, a combination of prelim grade, homework grade, classwork grade, etc.
This grade has, in some cases, been amended to reflect historical exam results.
They are not the same thing.

Clearly, these are special times, if pupils cannot sit an exam, the grading must be done in a different way, perhaps that's why some schools have differing levels of revisioning within the grades. For all we know, the "poorer" schools may have submitted excellent course work but due to lack of support/confidence/resource, they collapse when it comes to final exams. To judge this year's pupils on lasts, isn't correct.
Over the years(well, since the early 90's), we have moved slowly away from one off, final exams, and moved towards assignment/completed-work assessment grades.

I'm heartened to hear that John Swinney is going to address the issue in Parliament on Tuesday;

"Every student deserves a grade that reflects the work they have done, and that is what I want to achieve. I have been engaged in detailed discussions over the way forward and I know that we need to act and act quickly to give certainty to our young people."

[hibsbollah]

Predicted by who? The teachers who over estimated the number of pass results by 17%. I think those kids need to be looking at their teachers rather than the SQA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You keep repeating this ‘overestimation’ line without seeming to understand the factors at play. There were no exams. Teachers were asked to estimate how each kid would perform. It’s obvious that this unique circumstance would lead to a statistical increase in the pass rate, NOT because the teachers were deliberately inflating pass rates for nefarious reasons as you seem to be suggesting, but because there are always kids who crash at exam and perform worse than expected, and obviously this isn’t going to happen in 2020. Teachers can’t predict which kids will fail spectacularly and it obviously wouldn’t have been fair to do so.

The issue is, how to be fair to the kids who have had their opportunity to shine academically taken from them. I hope the appeal system is successfully applied, but I also think taking schools past performance into account and then applying it across the board to ALL KIDS at that school is grossly unfair. Coursework should have been given more emphasis, prelims less. But it’s the individual cases that are important, and only the teachers can really assess that.

[Speedy]

Predicted by who? The teachers who over estimated the number of pass results by 17%. I think those kids need to be looking at their teachers rather than the SQA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Which kids should they have failed? What could they have used to make that determination if the coursework and prelim indicated a pass?

[Future17]

By the teachers grading the submitted course work, as was intimated. Those gradings are now being tweaked to reflect historical exam results.
They are not the same metrics so it is unusual/unfair to treat them as such.

Which teachers? I'm genuinely not trying to be obtuse by the way.

[speedy_gonzales]

Which teachers? I'm genuinely not trying to be obtuse by the way.

I'm not sure how I can make this any plainer.
The teacher of the pupils subject, have been asked to provide estimate grades based on the pupils performance over the school year, this estimate was not based on potential or historical exam results.

[Ozyhibby]

Every school in the country improved their results on last year. If kids missed out then it’s because teachers gave other kids better grades than they deserved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Future17]

I'm not sure how I can make this any plainer.
The teacher of the pupils subject, have been asked to provide estimate grades based on the pupils performance over the school year, this estimate was not based on potential or historical exam results.

So (and I apologise if I'm still not getting your point of view) you're suggesting teachers submitted estimated grades that were different from the grades achieved in the coursework which was completed?

[hibsbollah]

Every school in the country improved their results on last year. If kids missed out then it’s because teachers gave other kids better grades than they deserved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You seem to be totally incapable of engaging with what anyone has else has clarified for you, to and just repeat what you were saying pages and pages ago.

[speedy_gonzales]

So (and I apologise if I'm still not getting your point of view) you're suggesting teachers submitted estimated grades that were different from the grades achieved in the coursework which was completed?

Actually, the complete opposite. I'm suggesting teachers submitted grades (estimated) based on submitted course work from their pupils as was what they were tasked to do. Those grades, in some cases, have been revaluated by the SQA based on historical exam results which have zero equivalence to the submitted course work.

You say you're not being obtuse, if you aren't then you're not following the thread, if you are, then I'd kindly ask why you're pushing against a premise that's being put forward by many pupils and parents and even being followed up by the Education Minister himself?

[Future17]

Actually, the complete opposite. I'm suggesting teachers submitted grades (estimated) based on submitted course work from their pupils as was what they were tasked to do. Those grades, in some cases, have been revaluated by the SQA based on historical exam results which have zero equivalence to the submitted course work.

You say you're not being obtuse, if you aren't then you're not following the thread, if you are, then I'd kindly ask why you're pushing against a premise that's being put forward by many pupils and parents and even being followed up by the Education Minister himself?

Ah, apologies. I've tried to follow the thread but this is clearly an emotive issue for many (understandably) and, possibly as a result, not all the points being made have seemed particularly clear to me as an "outsider" (not being a pupil, parent of a pupil, or a teacher).

If I'm understanding your point now, you would simply have had the SQA agree with all the estimated grades, despite the massive increase in attainment compared to previous years? If so, do you not see how unfair that could be to those who sat exams in previous years, or will do in future years?

Also, if that approach was acceptable, why have exams at all in any year? There's clearly a need for an independent assessment process as teachers have a conscious and unconscious interest in giving higher grades to children they have taught.

[Bristolhibby]

You keep repeating this ‘overestimation’ line without seeming to understand the factors at play. There were no exams. Teachers were asked to estimate how each kid would perform. It’s obvious that this unique circumstance would lead to a statistical increase in the pass rate, NOT because the teachers were deliberately inflating pass rates for nefarious reasons as you seem to be suggesting, but because there are always kids who crash at exam and perform worse than expected, and obviously this isn’t going to happen in 2020. Teachers can’t predict which kids will fail spectacularly and it obviously wouldn’t have been fair to do so.

The issue is, how to be fair to the kids who have had their opportunity to shine academically taken from them. I hope the appeal system is successfully applied, but I also think taking schools past performance into account and then applying it across the board to ALL KIDS at that school is grossly unfair. Coursework should have been given more emphasis, prelims less. But it’s the individual cases that are important, and only the teachers can really assess that.

And as a crash and burner I can put my hand up to this one. Ironically I still would have been annoyed at my inflated estimates grades, that’s how bad I ranked at A-Levels.

Thank **** I pulled my finger out at Uni.

J

[marinello59]

Every school in the country improved their results on last year. If kids missed out then it’s because teachers gave other kids better grades than they deserved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? No empathy at all for kids who don't go to schools in the more affluent areas or to private schools?
I'm glad my son finished school last year. In 4th 5th and 6th years his prelims were all car crashes yet his results in the exams matched pretty much exactly what his teachers had been predicting. His school is one of those where pupils will have seen those predictions marked down, how can that be seen as fair by anyone?
There is a real problem here and it needs to be sorted quickly. I'd start by ditching Swinney, he makes some of the worst performers in the Westminster cabinet look almost competent.

[One Day Soon]

I feel this has been really appallingly handled - both in terms of the 'system' applied to grading and the response to the disquiet about the outcomes.

Our daughter was due to sit highers at Holyrood. She worked bloody hard and was disappointed and then nervous when it was anounced exams would not go ahead. As it turns out she was given good grades but we have no way of knowing how close she and others in her school (it's ranked about 220 in Scotland so not high performing) came to being above or below an algorithmic cut-off which determined results in ways that bear no relation at all to an individual pupil's own ability, application and performance.

This isn't the kind of unfairness that comes from something like a tax cut for the wealthy in a given year, or even the kind of unfairness that might come from five years of a government which isn't interested in aiming for social justice. This is the kind of inequality out of the starting blocks that lasts a lifetime, institutionalised as policy.

It is an exceptional year and exceptional measures should have been adopted. If the teacher evaluations meant an improbable improvement in lower ranked schools why would it have been a greater injustice to go ahead and award the grades on that basis than it is to favour kids in higher ranked schools by assuming that they individually should benefit from the doubt on the basis of their school's historical performance?

If children from wealthier backgrounds were going to get the advantage of assumptions being made about their performance based upon exam marks attained in their schools in previous years by people who were not them, why not at least address the disadvantage of those having negative assumptions made on the basis of their school's poorer performance in previous years by carrying out more in-depth pupil based assements in those schools to give those children a greater chance of not being discriminated against?

Alternatively why not check in much greater depth the support information for pupils in any school where the variation from the previous subject norm is greater than a certain percentage? At least that way if teacher recommendations were reduced in grade - or indeed sustained - there would be some more coherent argument in favour of how those results were arrived at.

To be algorithmed out of your best life chance as an individual because it is statistically more accurate overall to do so is - particularly if you are from a lower income or disadvantaged background -just wrong in the most fundamental way possible.

[RyeSloan]

I feel this has been really appallingly handled - both in terms of the 'system' applied to grading and the response to the disquiet about the outcomes.

Our daughter was due to sit highers at Holyrood. She worked bloody hard and was disappointed and then nervous when it was anounced exams would not go ahead. As it turns out she was given good grades but we have no way of knowing how close she and others in her school (it's ranked about 220 in Scotland so not high performing) came to being above or below an algorithmic cut-off which determined results in ways that bear no relation at all to an individual pupil's own ability, application and performance.

This isn't the kind of unfairness that comes from something like a tax cut for the wealthy in a given year, or even the kind of unfairness that might come from five years of a government which isn't interested in aiming for social justice. This is the kind of inequality out of the starting blocks that lasts a lifetime, institutionalised as policy.

It is an exceptional year and exceptional measures should have been adopted. If the teacher evaluations meant an improbable improvement in lower ranked schools why would it have been a greater injustice to go ahead and award the grades on that basis than it is to favour kids in higher ranked schools by assuming that they individually should benefit from the doubt on the basis of their school's historical performance?

If children from wealthier backgrounds were going to get the advantage of assumptions being made about their performance based upon exam marks attained in their schools in previous years by people who were not them, why not at least address the disadvantage of those having negative assumptions made on the basis of their school's poorer performance in previous years by carrying out more in-depth pupil based assements in those schools to give those children a greater chance of not being discriminated against?

Alternatively why not check in much greater depth the support information for pupils in any school where the variation from the previous subject norm is greater than a certain percentage? At least that way if teacher recommendations were reduced in grade - or indeed sustained - there would be some more coherent argument in favour of how those results were arrived at.

To be algorithmed out of your best life chance as an individual because it is statistically more accurate overall to do so is - particularly if you are from a lower income or disadvantaged background -just wrong in the most fundamental way possible.

Your last paragraph sums it up perfectly.

I suggested earlier in this thread that if 25% of the teacher grades needed to be revised then that process must have been hugely flawed.

But you cannot correct such a flaw just by then bell curving the life out of the output based on prior results....sure you end up with something that looks a bit like an average year but you have completely ignored the fact that each and every result is meant to be based on an individuals capability, not a freakin’ statistical average from years gone by.

So to my mind it has been effectively admitted that none of the teacher estimates could not be relied upon....so whoever put that process in place without he checks and balances required needs to fess up and own up to this huge debacle. I’ve not seen one piece of contrition or ownership of this area from anyone.

Then there is the ludicrous decision to just bell curve the flawed estimates. Knowing that this will be an imprecise and impersonal process that will impact those from poorest performing schools most. This is then compounded by them thinking that just chucking out ‘ach let the appeals process sort it out’ as some sort of solution is in any way acceptable.

Finally I found Surgeons comments along the lines of ‘well whatever we did people would have moaned’ rather ridiculous. I don’t think her or Swinney seemed to grasp what people were saying about this at all.

Disgraceful from start to finish.

[Smartie]

I don't have any vested interest in this situation, but from the outside looking in it has been handled appallingly and I really feel for the kids involved.

Whilst understanding that we're in a difficult situation and that almost any solution would be deemed unsuitable to some, it is hard to accept that this was the best, fairest answer.

On paper, many people would consider my academic achievements to be pretty decent but I have to say that in possession of all of the certificates etc I am slightly ambivalent about the true value of it all.

It will be of no consolation to the individuals involved, but I would give almost anything to be in my late teens, in possession of a slightly disappointing set of exam results and with a determination, anger and sense of grievance about what I'd been put through. Certain doors will be closed, but many, many more remain open and channelling energy in the right direction will still see the kids who were always going to succeed, succeed in a different way.

I know this means nothing, but amongst my group of mates (and most people at my school) there is absolutely no relationship between exam results achieved at school and career success as an adult/ general happiness. In fact, those who achieved more have been left wondering what the f****** point was by and large, although at age 43, the final whistle is still hopefully a wee bit away with plenty yet to play for.

[Ozyhibby]

I don't have any vested interest in this situation, but from the outside looking in it has been handled appallingly and I really feel for the kids involved.

Whilst understanding that we're in a difficult situation and that almost any solution would be deemed unsuitable to some, it is hard to accept that this was the best, fairest answer.

On paper, many people would consider my academic achievements to be pretty decent but I have to say that in possession of all of the certificates etc I am slightly ambivalent about the true value of it all.

It will be of no consolation to the individuals involved, but I would give almost anything to be in my late teens, in possession of a slightly disappointing set of exam results and with a determination, anger and sense of grievance about what I'd been put through. Certain doors will be closed, but many, many more remain open and channelling energy in the right direction will still see the kids who were always going to succeed, succeed in a different way.

I know this means nothing, but amongst my group of mates (and most people at my school) there is absolutely no relationship between exam results achieved at school and career success as an adult/ general happiness. In fact, those who achieved more have been left wondering what the f****** point was by and large, although at age 43, the final whistle is still hopefully a wee bit away with plenty yet to play for.

The last paragraph could not be more true. [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lucky]

The system seems flawed and has clearly disadvantaged kids fro poorer areas. My daughter attended High School in Livingston and from her year 4 of them went Edinburgh uni to study law. They all did well with their exams and got their places. But I do wonder if they might have had that chance snatched away from them if this system had been around. The government response has been very poor, instead of defending the SQA they should have launched an immediate enquires into why so many grades were marked down. The SQA and John Swinney clearly don’t trust the views of teachers. This shambles needs sorted ASAP and that should start with the removal of Mr Swinney from his Education portfolio.

[matty_f]

It is a shocker, I can’t accept that unilaterally decreasing or increasing grades based on school is in any way appropriate.

The kids at the better schools have already enjoyed an advantage from day one in life, this reeks of keeping folk in their place.

I can accept that there wasn’t a perfect way to do it, but i can’t accept that is fair that a poor performing student in a “good” school can have their grades increased while a high performing student in a “poor” school has their grades decreased is in any way appropriate or fair.

As I said before, it’s an exceptional year and if it meant pupils who were already massively disrupted in their most important school years got better grades than they might have, then so be it.

It might have meant that some kids from poorer schools got the opportunity to go into further education that they’d have missed out on by virtue of being unlucky enough to live in a postcode that puts them in with less chance of getting the education they’d have got off they were born a few streets away instead.

[Bristolhibby]

Got my popcorn ready for when the A-Level results are published on Thursday.

I expect the exact same grievances to be played out on a much larger scale.

The appeals process is there folks. If your kid has been hard done by, use it.

Still regret being 2 marks off a C in my Geography A-Level, not chucking in an appeal.

My mate appealed his whole set of exams, went up a grade in two of the three A-Levels!

He took a year out, went to reading and came out with a First in Economics.

J

[pollution]

I feel this has been really appallingly handled - both in terms of the 'system' applied to grading and the response to the disquiet about the outcomes.

Our daughter was due to sit highers at Holyrood. She worked bloody hard and was disappointed and then nervous when it was anounced exams would not go ahead. As it turns out she was given good grades but we have no way of knowing how close she and others in her school (it's ranked about 220 in Scotland so not high performing) came to being above or below an algorithmic cut-off which determined results in ways that bear no relation at all to an individual pupil's own ability, application and performance.

This isn't the kind of unfairness that comes from something like a tax cut for the wealthy in a given year, or even the kind of unfairness that might come from five years of a government which isn't interested in aiming for social justice. This is the kind of inequality out of the starting blocks that lasts a lifetime, institutionalised as policy.

It is an exceptional year and exceptional measures should have been adopted. If the teacher evaluations meant an improbable improvement in lower ranked schools why would it have been a greater injustice to go ahead and award the grades on that basis than it is to favour kids in higher ranked schools by assuming that they individually should benefit from the doubt on the basis of their school's historical performance?

If children from wealthier backgrounds were going to get the advantage of assumptions being made about their performance based upon exam marks attained in their schools in previous years by people who were not them, why not at least address the disadvantage of those having negative assumptions made on the basis of their school's poorer performance in previous years by carrying out more in-depth pupil based assements in those schools to give those children a greater chance of not being discriminated against?

Alternatively why not check in much greater depth the support information for pupils in any school where the variation from the previous subject norm is greater than a certain percentage? At least that way if teacher recommendations were reduced in grade - or indeed sustained - there would be some more coherent argument in favour of how those results were arrived at.

To be algorithmed out of your best life chance as an individual because it is statistically more accurate overall to do so is - particularly if you are from a lower income or disadvantaged background -just wrong in the most fundamental way possible.


Very well written.

You should send this to Ms Sturgeon, she who will be judged by education in Scotland.

[Ozyhibby]

Sturgeon has now climbed down and changed to be announced tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

Sturgeon has now climbed down and changed to be announced tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thankfully common sense has prevailed, it’s not often you see a politician apologise like that and admit they got it wrong. It’s a few days overdue, but at least they’re going to sort it out.

[marinello59]

Sturgeon has now climbed down and changed to be announced tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like she disagreed with your take on it then. :greengrin
She should be sacking Swinney as soon as she can.

[CapitalGreen]

Sturgeon has now climbed down and changed to be announced tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good, as many of us have been saying from the start, applying blanket grade adjustments to the grading of individuals based on historical School performance is wrong and inherently unfair. I’m glad the government has now recognised this and that changes are afoot.

[Speedy]

Very well covered by NS today. Now they just need to get their finger out and actually fix it.

[Tomsk]

The system seems flawed and has clearly disadvantaged kids fro poorer areas. My daughter attended High School in Livingston and from her year 4 of them went Edinburgh uni to study law. They all did well with their exams and got their places. But I do wonder if they might have had that chance snatched away from them if this system had been around. The government response has been very poor, instead of defending the SQA they should have launched an immediate enquires into why so many grades were marked down. The SQA and John Swinney clearly don’t trust the views of teachers. This shambles needs sorted ASAP and that should start with the removal of Mr Swinney from his Education portfolio.


The Scottish Government will have been all over this process from start to finish. It's actually an appalling lack of judgement on its part, of the social implications. the impact on individuals and the political ramifications, that they didn't see this ****-storm brewing. The best I can say in their defence is they may have been distracted by recent events. However, at the very least Swinney should go. A resignation seems in order, followed by a clear plan for clearing up this mess.

[Tomsk]

Thankfully common sense has prevailed, it’s not often you see a politician apologise like that and admit they got it wrong. It’s a few days overdue, but at least they’re going to sort it out.


Well, she had absolutely no other option.

[lord bunberry]

Well, she had absolutely no other option.
Agreed, but there’s different ways politicians rectify their mistakes, mostly they’ll claim it’s not a uturn and will waffle on and deflect from their mistakes.

[Hiber-nation]

It's going to be really interesting to see the reaction when the English results are issued.

[Ozyhibby]

Looks like she disagreed with your take on it then. :greengrin
She should be sacking Swinney as soon as she can.

Or she is motivated by something other than protecting the exam system? This is a political decision. They will hand out loads of A’s and everyone will be happy.
Of course if you want to study Law next year it might be hard getting on the course when every kid is sitting with a bunch of A’s in their hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

Or she is motivated by something other than protecting the exam system? This is a political decision. They will hand out loads of A’s and everyone will be happy.
Of course if you want to study Law next year it might be hard getting on the course when every kid is sitting with a bunch of A’s in their hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How can that be when this was announced on one of her totally non-political corona-virus briefings? :greengrin

[weecounty hibby]

Or she is motivated by something other than protecting the exam system? This is a political decision. They will hand out loads of A’s and everyone will be happy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Except the Tories and Labour in Scotland who will claim that it is a way of falsely closing the attainment gap and showing that schools are improving. They are ****ing hypocrites when their own governments in England and Wales have done EXACTLY what the SQA have done. I feel sorry for every kid who has been affected by this but the opposition parties are interested only in political capital, proven by the fact that the Welsh Labour and English Tories have done the same

[marinello59]

Agreed, but there’s different ways politicians rectify their mistakes, mostly they’ll claim it’s not a uturn and will waffle on and deflect from their mistakes.

She has been waffling on for the last twenty minutes putting her own (non-political) spin on things. I think she will regret backing Swinney. If this isn’t a sacking offence then what is?

[Speedy]

Or she is motivated by something other than protecting the exam system? This is a political decision. They will hand out loads of A’s and everyone will be happy.
Of course if you want to study Law next year it might be hard getting on the course when every kid is sitting with a bunch of A’s in their hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Doesn't really matter whether it is politically motivated or not.

Applying a blanket curve and downgrading people based on no individual evidence isn't right.

[lord bunberry]

She has been waffling on for the last twenty minutes putting her own (non-political) spin on things. I think she will regret backing Swinney. If this isn’t a sacking offence then what is?
I think he has to go now, he’s lost any credibility he had.

[Rocky]

If this turns into a full political capitulation and a massive uplift in exam results for this year I feel sorry for the genuine straight A students, regardless of which school they go to, who miss out on university places because it was politically expedient to upgrade others. Hopefully that won't come to pass.

[Smartie]

What do people think is actually a fair solution here?

We can all agree that what was agreed upon was totally unfair, but what is the better option that doesn't have similar consequences?

I'd wondered about drawing a line through exams for the whole year and having everyone just repeat the year. Obviously this will have a knock on effect at universities etc but they'll have their own issues trying to put a curriculum on this year and next.

Honestly - it's a minefield, and it's easy to criticise proposed solutions without having to come up with something yourself.

[weecounty hibby]

What do people think is actually a fair solution here?

We can all agree that what was agreed upon was totally unfair, but what is the better option that doesn't have similar consequences?

I'd wondered about drawing a line through exams for the whole year and having everyone just repeat the year. Obviously this will have a knock on effect at universities etc but they'll have their own issues trying to put a curriculum on this year and next.

Honestly - it's a minefield, and it's easy to criticise proposed solutions without having to come up with something yourself.
Very well put question and something I haven't seen answered anywhere by anyone. Good point made above by someone saying about genuine A students being penalised when some may get As now that wouldn't have in an exam. My son did badly and failed two subjects but the school said they put him forward for passes. If I am being completely honest, he would have failed those subjects but now looks likely to get passes. Is that fair? Obviously on a personal level I am glad that it looks like he will get passes, but he wouldn't have normally as he didn't work hard enough or take it seriously enough. But that is what we look to be heading towards, pupils passing on teachers say so.
No answer will be right for stuff like this during this crisis. I

[Sir David Gray]

If this turns into a full political capitulation and a massive uplift in exam results for this year I feel sorry for the genuine straight A students, regardless of which school they go to, who miss out on university places because it was politically expedient to upgrade others. Hopefully that won't come to pass.

Yep.

Giving thousands of people As who really won't deserve it doesn't seem fair at all and it doesn't actually help the students concerned as they will go onto university courses or get jobs that they are not capable of doing.

There's undoubtedly concerns about downgrading students' results based on their school but surely that's where the appeals process comes in and those students who have a legitimate claim for getting their results reviewed can have their work looked at on their own merit and they can be scored accordingly.

[speedy_gonzales]

I'd wondered about drawing a line through exams for the whole year and having everyone just repeat the year.

I said as much to my daughter, back in March. Forget about the grading/results, but pupils in all years have missed out on a lot of the syllabus,,,, home-schooling can only go so far!

Maybe we should just reset the calendar and do 2020 over again,,,, football season included 🙄

[Colr]

The last paragraph could not be more true. [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bollocks.

Exam results where the difference between my dad going down the mines and me going to uni.

Educatiin makes a **** of a difference to life chances overall.

[Rocky]

Yep.

Giving thousands of people As who really won't deserve it doesn't seem fair at all and it doesn't actually help the students concerned as they will go onto university courses or get jobs that they are not capable of doing.

There's undoubtedly concerns about downgrading students' results based on their school but surely that's where the appeals process comes in and those students who have a legitimate claim for getting their results reviewed can have their work looked at on their own merit and they can be scored accordingly.
There's a real risk of unintended consequences here too, given the fact that estimates appear to have been inflated most in the 'underperforming' schools. As a consequence I imagine it's likely that universities will treat grades from the 'better' schools as having more credibility than those from the lower performing schools. So now you could have a situation where genuine straight A students from poorer schools are passed over in favour of students of similar ability from wealthier areas.

What a mess and it all could have been avoided if teachers had been told at the start of the process that each school would be expected to deliver results in line with previous years, and any major deviation from prior years' performances had to be backed up with solid evidence. Getting into a situation where estimates were 20% higher than previous years was a recipe for disaster.

[speedy_gonzales]

If I'm understanding your point now, you would simply have had the SQA agree with all the estimated grades, despite the massive increase in attainment compared to previous years?


With all due respect here, I think you have a question you want to ask or a statement you want to make but are beating around the bush.
I've said before, the teachers were asked to submit a predicted grade based on individual pupils submitted work for the term so far. If the authorities don't trust a teacher to submit an honest appraisal, then they shouldn't have asked them.
For the governing body to then edit grades (in a non-comparative way, coursework did not equal exam) based on little more than a postcode lottery, is unfair to both teachers and pupils.





If so, do you not see how unfair that could be to those who sat exams in previous years, or will do in future years?

Which do you think is worse to the individual and/or society, giving a poor performing pupil an artificially high result or a high achieving pupil an artificially lowered result?




Also, if that approach was acceptable, why have exams at all in any year? There's clearly a need for an independent assessment process as teachers have a conscious and unconscious interest in giving higher grades to children they have taught.

I think a lot of subjects are moving to continual assessment rather than final exam, Standard Grades followed by CfE is a move towards this. Perhaps we're moving to a Baccalaureate system?
As for teachers giving their pupils higher grades, not in my opinion, if you look at predicted grades for CfE on the pupils progress reports, there's a healthy mix from top down to bottom, they're certainly not all A's.

EDITED TO ADD: it looks like following John Swinney's tweet last night and Nicola Sturgeons statement today, that there will be a review of matters tomorrow. There will be "no onus on pupils to submit appeals".
I won't and can't make this a political matter as it's a very unique situation, just feel it could have been handled in a better way.

[Bristolhibby]

She has been waffling on for the last twenty minutes putting her own (non-political) spin on things. I think she will regret backing Swinney. If this isn’t a sacking offence then what is?

God we hold Scottish politicians to high standards (rightly).

Just baffled with the string of clangers here down South (and U.K. wide) that they just crack on regardless without so much as an apology.

J

[Rocky]

I've said before, the teachers were asked to submit a predicted grade based on individual pupils submitted work for the term so far. If the authorities don't trust a teacher to submit an honest appraisal, then they shouldn't have asked them.
I think the root of the problem is that the SQA did trust teachers to submit predicted grades. Then when they saw what teachers came up with it was totally unrealistic so they had to get into a panic and figure out a solution. It's simply not credible that the lowest quintile schools improved pass rates by 17% in one year, or that the top quintile improved by 9%. So those got knocked back down to something more realistic and ended up as a 2.3% improvement in bottom quintile and 1.5% in top quintile.

[speedy_gonzales]

I think the root of the problem is that the SQA did trust teachers to submit predicted grades. Then when they saw what teachers came up with it was totally unrealistic so they had to get into a panic and figure out a solution. It's simply not credible that the lowest quintile schools improved pass rates by 17% in one year, or that the top quintile improved by 9%. So those got knocked back down to something more realistic and ended up as a 2.3% improvement in bottom quintile and 1.5% in top quintile.

Again though, we're comparing apples with pears here. The teachers predictions were based on course work, but were measured against historical exam results.

Hopefully, the relevant authorities will revisit this tomorrow and come up with a solution that ensures that all students receive grade based on merit.

[Rocky]

Again though, we're comparing apples with pears here. The teachers predictions were based on course work, but were measured against historical exam results.

Hopefully, the relevant authorities will revisit this tomorrow and come up with a solution that ensures that all students receive grade based on merit.
Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude but I still don't understand the point you're making about comparing course work vs exam results. Of course we're comparing apples with pears, exams were cancelled due to a pandemic - the whole problem is that we can't compare apples with apples. The teachers predictions should have been based on what the predicted exam results would be, based on any evidence they had available (course work / class tests / prelims). They weren't being asked to assess the quality of the course work.

I'm not sure if you're suggesting they should have been compared for accuracy against previous years course work? How would that even work, go back and examine / assess 4 years of course work from other pupils to see how it compared?

[Smartie]

Bollocks.

Exam results where the difference between my dad going down the mines and me going to uni.

Educatiin makes a **** of a difference to life chances overall.

At 53 I think you're of an age where this was certainly the case during your formative years.

At 43 I just about straddle the border where it goes from being that to something else.

Most of my mates were shuffled off to Uni so the school could get points and their parents could be proud. It got them debt and a qualification they've either never used or never completed.

An education is in many cases now a millstone around your neck rather than something that is actually of any use whatsoever.

There are certain lines of work where I accept you don't get anywhere without one, and it's a very good fun way to spend a few years before the grown up world hoofs you in the knackers so I'm not totally against education.

It's quite depressing, but the greatest success stories out of my mates have involved inheriting a business from parents or losing a limb and getting a tidy pension and lump sum to invest. The "nose for an opportunity" is also something that the success stories I know all have, and you don't learn that at any educational establishment.

The world has changed. The "clever kids" at school are not the ones who do the best at life. The ones who do the best are the ones who are prepared to tear up perceived wisdom and deal with what is front of them, and change.

[RyeSloan]

I think the root of the problem is that the SQA did trust teachers to submit predicted grades. Then when they saw what teachers came up with it was totally unrealistic so they had to get into a panic and figure out a solution. It's simply not credible that the lowest quintile schools improved pass rates by 17% in one year, or that the top quintile improved by 9%. So those got knocked back down to something more realistic and ended up as a 2.3% improvement in bottom quintile and 1.5% in top quintile.

The predicted grades were submitted ages ago though so they had plenty of time to understand what had happened.

If the process of doing the predicted grades was flawed (as the SQA seems to think it was) then the answer was to go back to that process and re-assess what had happened and do it over. Quite clearly however the predicted grades process should have had enough control in it in the first place to ensure it was actually reflective of what would have been if the exams had taken place...it’s there that the issue started and it’s there that there should have been substantially more care and attention given to ensure that was as accurate as possible.

But now have a situation where the SQA thinks the assessment process was fundamentally flawed then used a obviously flawed one size fits no one process to ‘correct’ it.

As for the oh aye but why about England posts...seriously is there no subject of debate on here that doesn’t end up with that line being trotted out?

[Santa Cruz]

There's a real risk of unintended consequences here too, given the fact that estimates appear to have been inflated most in the 'underperforming' schools. As a consequence I imagine it's likely that universities will treat grades from the 'better' schools as having more credibility than those from the lower performing schools. So now you could have a situation where genuine straight A students from poorer schools are passed over in favour of students of similar ability from wealthier areas.

What a mess and it all could have been avoided if teachers had been told at the start of the process that each school would be expected to deliver results in line with previous years, and any major deviation from prior years' performances had to be backed up with solid evidence. Getting into a situation where estimates were 20% higher than previous years was a recipe for disaster.

Re: your first paragraph, it won't just be uni's, employers will do the very same.

[Ozyhibby]

Be interesting to see if teachers can deliver these amazing results again next year. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

Not sure there was ever going to be a perfect solution to this and still not sure what the fix will actually be. Definitely a difficult one for the teachers as more than likely going to predict the very best a pupil could get. Seemed like there was confusion initially with kids being told to submit evidence then being told not to and that it wouldn't be considered anyway which seems odd. Also looks like some schools were accepting evidence where others weren't. As indicated previously likely to be unintended consequences and employers likely to be sceptical of exams grades and given likely less job opportunities will be more choosy than they might have been.

[G B Young]

Agreed, but there’s different ways politicians rectify their mistakes, mostly they’ll claim it’s not a uturn and will waffle on and deflect from their mistakes.

No matter what we she tries to dress it up as it will be deemed a 'screeching U-turn' across tomorrow's front pages.

She may also be trying to claim it's a 'non political' matter but Douglas Ross could do worse than focus on the SNP's education record if he wants to make some political headway in next year's Holyrood elections. Sturgeon has often stated it's what she wants to be judged on and thus far it's not been impressive.

Granted, this particular situation is a massive challenge for any government but as others have said it's been especially badly dealt with here.

[matty_f]

Be interesting to see if teachers can deliver these amazing results again next year. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So what if they don’t? What’s the damage done by having a year where kids, who’ve had to deal with home schooling etc, get the benefit of the doubt with their results?

My employer won’t be treating results gained this year any differently than results gained any other year, and I’d be amazed if, in this day and age, any half decent employer would.

[speedy_gonzales]

Sorry, I'm not trying to be rude but I still don't understand the point you're making about comparing course work vs exam results. Of course we're comparing apples with pears, exams were cancelled due to a pandemic - the whole problem is that we can't compare apples with apples. The teachers predictions should have been based on what the predicted exam results would be, based on any evidence they had available (course work / class tests / prelims). They weren't being asked to assess the quality of the course work.

I'm not sure if you're suggesting they should have been compared for accuracy against previous years course work? How would that even work, go back and examine / assess 4 years of course work from other pupils to see how it compared?

I'm well aware of where we are and why we're here, that point doesn't need to be made.
The teachers were charged with making an honest grade assessment of their pupils based on the work completed/submitted during this curtailed school year. We have to assume it was honest, to question that would be a whole other argument.
This grade, in some cases was moderated by the SQA with a disproportionate effect on pupils from schools that had previously presented fewer successful pupils for exams.

The teachers assessed the school work and gave a predicted grade, that grade was then moderated against previous exam performance.
They were not the same thing.

This means that two pupils, with exactly the same ability in a subject, could end up with completely different grades based on nothing more than what school they attended.
That can't be fair.


As I said earlier, the government now seem to be acknowledging that the process may have been unfair.
All I'm asking as a parent of a pupil that is directly affected, I hope each pupil is assessed in a way that they are awarded a grade they merit & deserve, nothing more, nothing less.

I think I'm going to have to tap out of this conversation as a few folk keep asking similar points and I just don't have the persuasive vocabulary to get my point across.

[marinello59]

Be interesting to see if teachers can deliver these amazing results again next year. [emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not so sure the teachers can be blamed for what has been spectacularly bad mismanagement by the Scottish Government. This has been brewing away for several months now and they simply weren't up to the task. You could also point to the the SNP administration's long term failure to do enough to close the attainment gap. Their record on education has been poor to say the least. Swinney has to go.

[Smartie]

I'm not so sure the teachers can be blamed for what has been spectacularly bad mismanagement by the Scottish Government. This has been brewing away for several months now and they simply weren't up to the task. You could also point to the the SNP administration's long term failure to do enough to close the attainment gap. Their record on education has been poor to say the least. Swinney has to go.

There has been a catastrophic failure somewhere in the area between the teachers and the first minister for her to be having to take this serious, necessary and very embarrassing action and I'd be amazed if Swinney managed to survive this. He must surely carry the can.

[Ozyhibby]

So what if they don’t? What’s the damage done by having a year where kids, who’ve had to deal with home schooling etc, get the benefit of the doubt with their results?

My employer won’t be treating results gained this year any differently than results gained any other year, and I’d be amazed if, in this day and age, any half decent employer would.

If a student from this year takes a year out then they will have an advantage when it comes to uni places over next years kids who will not have as good marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I'm not so sure the teachers can be blamed for what has been spectacularly bad mismanagement by the Scottish Government. This has been brewing away for several months now and they simply weren't up to the task. You could also point to the the SNP administration's long term failure to do enough to close the attainment gap. Their record on education has been poor to say the least. Swinney has to go.

Given there is no such thing as a poorly performing teacher in Scotland then it is indeed the SNP’s fault.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

If a student from this year takes a year out then they will have an advantage when it comes to uni places over next years kids who will not have as good marks.


Likewise this year, against students from 2019 who've already taken their year out. Easily sorted though - unis can just mark down all potential entrants with 2020 results.

[One Day Soon]

I'm not so sure the teachers can be blamed for what has been spectacularly bad mismanagement by the Scottish Government. This has been brewing away for several months now and they simply weren't up to the task. You could also point to the the SNP administration's long term failure to do enough to close the attainment gap. Their record on education has been poor to say the least. Swinney has to go.

Regretably I think that is the case. This is chaotic and speaks to Swinney having taken his eyes off the ball on an issue that is about as fundamental as it gets. For a long time he has been their safest pair of hands and a good steadying influence but I think the decision to try to use their best Minister to fix their toughest problem - education - has ended up in the issue polluting the Minister rather than the Minister fixing it. He's a decent guy but that doesn't cut it in this context.

They will hang on to him though, the Greens will ensure that. Politically they will want to have him around for when the schools go back fully because if that goes wrong they won't want a new Education Minister taking the rap so early on.

Much more importantly than all this though, what will the 'fix' be?

[Ozyhibby]

Likewise this year, against students from 2019 who've already taken their year out. Easily sorted though - unis can just mark down all potential entrants with 2020 results.

Yip, all the 2020 marks will now be devalued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LaMotta]

What do people think is actually a fair solution here?

We can all agree that what was agreed upon was totally unfair, but what is the better option that doesn't have similar consequences?

I'd wondered about drawing a line through exams for the whole year and having everyone just repeat the year. Obviously this will have a knock on effect at universities etc but they'll have their own issues trying to put a curriculum on this year and next.

Honestly - it's a minefield, and it's easy to criticise proposed solutions without having to come up with something yourself.


Very well put question and something I haven't seen answered anywhere by anyone. Good point made above by someone saying about genuine A students being penalised when some may get As now that wouldn't have in an exam. My son did badly and failed two subjects but the school said they put him forward for passes. If I am being completely honest, he would have failed those subjects but now looks likely to get passes. Is that fair? Obviously on a personal level I am glad that it looks like he will get passes, but he wouldn't have normally as he didn't work hard enough or take it seriously enough. But that is what we look to be heading towards, pupils passing on teachers say so.
No answer will be right for stuff like this during this crisis. I


Yep.

Giving thousands of people As who really won't deserve it doesn't seem fair at all and it doesn't actually help the students concerned as they will go onto university courses or get jobs that they are not capable of doing.

There's undoubtedly concerns about downgrading students' results based on their school but surely that's where the appeals process comes in and those students who have a legitimate claim for getting their results reviewed can have their work looked at on their own merit and they can be scored accordingly.

:agree::agree::agree:

Well put by all of you.

[CapitalGreen]

Yip, all the 2020 marks will now be devalued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But it was ok when it was just the poor schools having their 2020 marks devalued?

[Rocky]

But it was ok when it was just the poor schools having their 2020 marks devalued?
"Poor" schools got a bigger uplift from previous years through this process than "wealthy" schools did.

[Hibrandenburg]

Thankfully common sense has prevailed, it’s not often you see a politician apologise like that and admit they got it wrong. It’s a few days overdue, but at least they’re going to sort it out.

It'll never catch on, imagine what would happen if every politician who ****ed up held up their hands and said "you know what? I was wrong, let's do it differently".

[marinello59]

"Poor" schools got a bigger uplift from previous years through this process than "wealthy" schools did.

Why have you put poor and wealthy in quotation marks? Do you not believe that inequality exists?

[jonty]

I'm not so sure the teachers can be blamed for what has been spectacularly bad mismanagement by the Scottish Government. This has been brewing away for several months now and they simply weren't up to the task. You could also point to the the SNP administration's long term failure to do enough to close the attainment gap. Their record on education has been poor to say the least. Swinney has to go.

Is the SQA a government department?
The SQA get bad press almost every year so its not surprising. But they do use experienced teachers for marking and appeals.
Asking all teachers (if that's what has happened) to mark students isn't something they'll have experience in and they should have been guided by the more experienced teachers and management in the school (who I haven't seen mentioned so far). Heads are responsible for school performance and you cant tell me that some haven't chanced it.

No-one would have been able to predict the right grades in a 'normal' year - there are always surprises (and hence appeals) so it really shouldn't be any surprise its more contentious this year. Bu as asked above - what's the alternative?
Cancel the year and make it null and void? Most of the teaching phase of the year was complete, so its not been a completely wasted year.

Have any of the stats been broken down and published by individual school?

[Hibrandenburg]

How can that be when this was announced on one of her totally non-political corona-virus briefings? :greengrin

The problem wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Corona, therefore it's fair to address it in the briefing. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

Why have you put poor and wealthy in quotation marks? Do you not believe that inequality exists?

It certainly does. And this won’t fix it either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[matty_f]

If a student from this year takes a year out then they will have an advantage when it comes to uni places over next years kids who will not have as good marks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’m sure we can cope with the handful of students that will apply to.

[marinello59]

It certainly does. And this won’t fix it either.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Have they announced what they are going to do?

[Rocky]

Why have you put poor and wealthy in quotation marks? Do you not believe that inequality exists?
Because "poor" was a quote from the post I was replying to. I'm not really comfortable using these rich / poor / over performing / under performing badges that everyone else is bandying about so I've used quotes a lot. The actual wording I would use is "bottom / top quintile of the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation" but that's a tad wordy for general conversation.

[marinello59]

The problem wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Corona, therefore it's fair to address it in the briefing. :wink:

She also spent three quarters of a briefing last week non politically defending the original decision taken. :wink:

[JeMeSouviens]

Why have you put poor and wealthy in quotation marks? Do you not believe that inequality exists?

The SQA's algorithm didn't actually work on any measure of deprivation. If you took 2 schools from identical wealth backgrounds but one had worse exam results for other reasons, then it would be downgraded more.

To be honest, I think they should have just waved the kids through with the "devalued" results. It's such a bizarre outlier of a year that Unis and employers will, or at least definitely should be, using their own means of assessment for anyone they consider to be anywhere near the border line attainment-wise.

[hibsbollah]

To be fair to Swinney, he does have immaculately shiny shoes. There was a ferocious glare off them earlier, perhaps reflected by his bald napper.

Not that I’m trying to trivialise the issue.

[JeMeSouviens]

To be fair to Swinney, he does have immaculately shiny shoes. There was a ferocious glare off them earlier, perhaps reflected by his bald napper.

Not that I’m trying to trivialise the issue.

Tim Robbins would never have made it out of Shawshank if you'd been on the case! :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

Tim Robbins would never have made it out of Shawshank if you'd been on the case! :greengrin

´John Swinney, who crawled through a river of **** and came out clean on the other side...’

[Bristolhibby]

TBH, if the appeal process is there, use it.

Would taking a gap year help? Going to Uni this September will be crap anyway. Too much social distancing, remote classes, etc.

Work for a year get the remarks and reapply.

J

[Sir David Gray]

But it was ok when it was just the poor schools having their 2020 marks devalued?

I don't think anyone's saying that but the Higher pass rate for the 20% most deprived areas based on teachers' estimates was going to be 85%. Last year it was 65%. That sort of jump from one year to the next is just impossible.

There's clearly work to be done in addressing opportunities for those of a poorer background but giving this one year group a hugely increased number of passes compared with the pupils who sat the same exams last year just isn't right. Most probably the same will apply to the pupils who sit the same exams next year when the pass rate goes back to roughly the same as the average, how is that;

1 - Fair on the pupils from the classes of 2019 and 2021, who are of a similar academic standard to this year's students, who get lower grades just because they have to sit an exam and those in 2020 didn't?

2 - Fair on the pupils from the classes of 2020 who appear to be getting their grades increased who won't really deserve it and will potentially end up doing a university course or job that they aren't actually capable of doing? It does them no favours.

3 - Fair on the students (from all backgrounds) who do deserve good grades and who are now competing with an increased number of people for university courses and jobs, many of whom won't be equipped for sitting the course or holding down the job?

As I've said already, with the way the SQA have dealt with it there will undoubtedly be bright pupils from poorly performing schools who will have had their grades unfairly downgraded based purely on the past performance of their school. That is where the appeals process comes into play and the student is judged purely on the work they have submitted rather than simply the school they attend.

[marinello59]

The SQA's algorithm didn't actually work on any measure of deprivation. If you took 2 schools from identical wealth backgrounds but one had worse exam results for other reasons, then it would be downgraded more.

To be honest, I think they should have just waved the kids through with the "devalued" results. It's such a bizarre outlier of a year that Unis and employers will, or at least definitely should be, using their own means of assessment for anyone they consider to be anywhere near the border line attainment-wise.


I agree with that.

[marinello59]

TBH, if the appeal process is there, use it.

Would taking a gap year help? Going to Uni this September will be crap anyway. Too much social distancing, remote classes, etc.

Work for a year get the remarks and reapply.

J

I suspect Sturgeon has shifted on this partly because they have realised the appeals process is not going to be able to cope with volume of appeals that would be coming in. It was interesting to hear Sturgeon say that not every pupil involved in this will have to enter the appeals process now. Despite some stating categorically here that this will lead to all results being devalued we don't actually know what Swinney intends to do yet.