Jump to content

Effect of Coronavirus


faraway saint

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:
I don't know if it is still the case that examination boards move the banding parameters, because of the difficulty level of the exam once they have all the results.

Likewise if the prelims were deemed to be too easy then that could also be taken into consideration.

Do all schools sit the same prelim test?

Prelim papers are the choice of department. You can make them up using past papers or there are companies who you can buy them from for some subjects. If a prelim is deemed too easy, any appeal will fail

Appeals as most people know them have not been used, except for extenuating circumstances, for a couple of years now. As this year was cut short, most schools will not have sat a second prelim to support the first one. So, any evidence, apart from a first prelim, will consist of class tests etc. The problem is that the quality of prelims and class tests will vary enormously between schools. The SQA will have to deal with a huge amount of assessment materials sent from schools. Judging by colleagues who have already read their emails, it is going to be total carnage on Monday morning and that's without all the H&S considerations.

Also, it seems that a lot of pupils who are saying that they were predicted a certain grade are actually referring to a target grade, which is often different from a predicted grade. Certainly in most LA's, official predicted grades would not have been discussed with pupils.

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Does anyone on here work with the SQA?
I've just heard through my daughter of one person who scored an A in her prelim and was awarded a D and scores of people talking about being downgraded from C to an outright fail in many subjects.
This is making me very suspicious indeed and I would be interested in knowing whether a computer algorithm was used to assign grade adjustments in Scotland. This has all the hallmarks of the blanket use of a "magic algorithm".

I would absolutely love to know the criteria for A, choosing which child gets ‘Moderated’, B, the subject that gets moderated. And C the actual method? It’s my understanding that a random 25% were subject to ‘Moderation’ and that 93% of that 25% were downgraded.

My daughter scored highest in her school for the physics prelim but got ‘modified’ down to a B, we checked with the school and they proposed an A1, we will appeal and likely win (since the supporting data is there), however as you say, what is the criteria or indeed the algorithm for moderation.

To say I am disgusted is an understatement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites




I would absolutely love to know the criteria for A, choosing which child gets ‘Moderated’, B, the subject that gets moderated. And C the actual method? It’s my understanding that a random 25% were subject to ‘Moderation’ and that 93% of that 25% were downgraded.

My daughter scored highest in her school for the physics prelim but got ‘modified’ down to a B, we checked with the school and they proposed an A1, we will appeal and likely win (since the supporting data is there), however as you say, what is the criteria or indeed the algorithm for moderation.

To say I am disgusted is an understatement.


Are you able to clarify your understanding (source)?

One of the considerations that was taken into account, was the previous record of what a teacher/school had submitted.

If your daughter did achieve a A1 result in the prelim and was supported by her other work, you'd expect that a A pass would be the result of the appeal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites






Are you able to clarify your understanding (source)?

One of the considerations that was taken into account, was the previous record of what a teacher/school had submitted.

If your daughter did achieve a A1 result in the prelim and was supported by her other work, you'd expect that a A pass would be the result of the appeal.

I think it will be ok on appeal, what I don’t get is that after the teachers submitting their recommendations (based on prelim / general performance etc) is the random intervention (by SQA I assume) and subsequent ‘moderation’.

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m being selfish and purely looking out for my daughters best interests, but for others (5th year for example) this is wrecking dreams.

I just don’t understand how they can moderate (predominantly downwards) with no evidence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would absolutely love to know the criteria for A, choosing which child gets ‘Moderated’, B, the subject that gets moderated. And C the actual method? It’s my understanding that a random 25% were subject to ‘Moderation’ and that 93% of that 25% were downgraded.

 

My daughter scored highest in her school for the physics prelim but got ‘modified’ down to a B, we checked with the school and they proposed an A1, we will appeal and likely win (since the supporting data is there), however as you say, what is the criteria or indeed the algorithm for moderation.

 

To say I am disgusted is an understatement.

Had a look and seen that 380 centres (schools/colleges....) were used with 8401 folk sitting the Physics exam.

 

331 centres had adjusted figures, 2920 downgraded and 148 upgraded.

 

 

The figures for a A pass have ranged from a low of 28.2% to a high of 28.7% in the years 2016-2019

 

This year, teachers predicted 41% would gain a A pass. [emoji848]

 

SQA moderated for 29.6% which will increase with appeals.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS

I think it will be ok on appeal, what I don’t get is that after the teachers submitting their recommendations (based on prelim / general performance etc) is the random intervention (by SQA I assume) and subsequent ‘moderation’.

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m being selfish and purely looking out for my daughters best interests, but for others (5th year for example) this is wrecking dreams.

I just don’t understand how they can moderate (predominantly downwards) with no evidence.
SQA asked schools to provide estimated grades for each pupil. The teachers were asked to rank each pupil for each subject from 1st to last.
There was guidance given to teachers and also an online tutorial or learning for them.

The estimates that came in from schools would have resulted in around 15 - 20% increase in awards for this year compared to last year or any of the previous 5 years.

Moderation involved looking at what school's previous pass rates had been over the previous 3 years.

The methodology has been published by sqa.

Some teachers have indicated that the guidance and online learning from SQA was confusing or contradictory.

There's no doubt that the blanket approach has affected individual pupils and the appeals process needs to address that.
At the same time such a huge increase in awards (passes) would also be unrealistic and unfair on those who sat exams previously.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK so as I suspected, Sturgeon has confirmed that they used a software algorithm to downgrade students based on their school rather than the individual. Whoever thought that up is guilty of staggering incompetence.

BUT our politicians are human. All we should demand is that when they f**k up, they apologise and fix it.

In fairness to Sturgeon, she has done exactly that today and deserves a huge amount of credit.

Particularly impressive was her saying that this didn't need the kids to get involved and that the government broke it so they'll fix it.

Hopefully this can be done very quickly and obviously more detail will come tomorrow but the lesson here is that you should never fully delegate tasks to computer algorithms. The way software is designed these days (Agile) you can never fully trust them. I hope that lesson gets learned really quickly.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, DougJamie said:

Yes and there is the difference of our devolved Gov, its honest and when they get it wrong, they admit it. I hope Sweeney got a boot in the stones though

Yep. He might not actually survive this but we'll need to see what he says tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK so as I suspected, Sturgeon has confirmed that they used a software algorithm to downgrade students based on their school rather than the individual. Whoever thought that up is guilty of staggering incompetence.
BUT our politicians are human. All we should demand is that when they f**k up, they apologise and fix it.
In fairness to Sturgeon, she has done exactly that today and deserves a huge amount of credit.
Particularly impressive was her saying that this didn't need the kids to get involved and that the government broke it so they'll fix it.
Hopefully this can be done very quickly and obviously more detail will come tomorrow but the lesson here is that you should never fully delegate tasks to computer algorithms. The way software is designed these days (Agile) you can never fully trust them. I hope that lesson gets learned really quickly.
Those not happy can sit an actual exam in October....imagine the scenes if that was the remedy !
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:
5 hours ago, oaksoft said:
OK so as I suspected, Sturgeon has confirmed that they used a software algorithm to downgrade students based on their school rather than the individual. Whoever thought that up is guilty of staggering incompetence.
BUT our politicians are human. All we should demand is that when they f**k up, they apologise and fix it.
In fairness to Sturgeon, she has done exactly that today and deserves a huge amount of credit.
Particularly impressive was her saying that this didn't need the kids to get involved and that the government broke it so they'll fix it.
Hopefully this can be done very quickly and obviously more detail will come tomorrow but the lesson here is that you should never fully delegate tasks to computer algorithms. The way software is designed these days (Agile) you can never fully trust them. I hope that lesson gets learned really quickly.

Those not happy can sit an actual exam in October....imagine the scenes if that was the remedy !

The remedy was to have made the kids sit those exams in June but that's water under the bridge now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, guinness said:

Did teachers not simply vastly overestimate students marks?

Difficult to generalise I suppose given the numbers we are talking about.

Certainly enough individual cases in the public eye that suggest there are at least a reasonable sample of students where the teachers haven't overestimated and the algorithm has indeed not been fair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, guinness said:

Did teachers not simply vastly overestimate students marks?

Yes but thatś no justification for punishing high performing kids at poor schools.

I think there needs to be an investigation into any school fraudulently and blatantly caught attempting to fluff grades without evidence to back those estimated grades. People should lose their jobs over this if that has been found to have happened.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All modified exam results cancelled and pupils will now get what their teachers predicted.

There will be some grade inflation but IMO this is just a side effect of a bad decision to cancel the exams in the first place.

New certificates to be issued and universities told to ignore old results. It will be as though the problems of the last week had never happened.

The only reasonable outcome IMO and the government deserve credit for fixing this.

Fantastic news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Swinney should NOT be sacked for this. We must encourage an atmosphere where clear mistakes are allowed to be fixed. We've seen how not having that leads to politicians digging their heels in (Westminster) and making a situation worse.

If the guy makes one mistake after another then fair enough but one mistake (howler though it was) should not see him sacked and Labour and the Tories need to pipe down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's unbelievable that at a time like this there are people moaning about not getting pay rises.

You mean like the nurses the UK Government claimed were so important in the covid pandemic and are now shafting?

2 minutes ago, Slarti said:

You're right. I'm not complaining. Then again, I got my pay rise, don't know if that makes a difference. :whistle

Me too. And my annual bonus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites






Me too. [emoji16]

And I got a week extra paid holidays to take in the next year. [emoji14]

And loads of OT because of all you steamers. [emoji2958]


I got to carry 10 days (2 weeks since I only do 5 days) so that makes 59 days off next holiday year (inc public/bank holidays and 2 weeks over xmas/new year). Holiday year starts next month. And I'll still be "working" from home for the foreseeable future.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2020 at 4:04 PM, oaksoft said:

IMO Swinney should NOT be sacked for this. We must encourage an atmosphere where clear mistakes are allowed to be fixed. We've seen how not having that leads to politicians digging their heels in (Westminster) and making a situation worse.

If the guy makes one mistake after another then fair enough but one mistake (howler though it was) should not see him sacked and Labour and the Tories need to pipe down.

It is one howler after another though.

The decision to close schools was a howler. The decision to cancel exams was a howler. Being party to the lockdown policies which have killed 000s, wrecked the economy and destroyed livelihoods was a howler.

The Scottish and UK governments collectively will go down as the worst in this country’s history.

Not only should they all resign, they all face prosecution for crimes against humanity. 
 

Life imprisonment with no opportunity for parole and nothing less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Slarti said:
23 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:





Me too. emoji16.png

And I got a week extra paid holidays to take in the next year. emoji14.png

And loads of OT because of all you steamers. emoji2958.png

 

I got to carry 10 days (2 weeks since I only do 5 days) so that makes 59 days off next holiday year (inc public/bank holidays and 2 weeks over xmas/new year). Holiday year starts next month. And I'll still be "working" from home for the foreseeable future.

How do clean the bogs in Burger King from your house? 😜

Edited by Sue Denim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...