Effect of Coronavirus

[Long John Baldy 880]

12 minutes ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

20 hours ago, oaksoft said:

I guess we can look forward to endless months of panic-driven local lockdowns from governments.
Lovely.

Surely preferable to a national lockdown. Very few countries not dealing with it this way, seems to be the accepted preferable method of controlling it now.

I would agree.

Remember this is only down to the public, not the government.

If nothing else it should remind us here in Scotland we are not immune and can f**k it up as well as the English. 

[antrin 4,371]

3 hours ago, Long John Baldy said:

I would agree.

Remember this is only down to the public, not the government.

If nothing else it should remind us here in Scotland we are not immune and can f**k it up as well as the English. 

Sue Denim is sure to nick in soon and post his stats once again that show how Scotland has been f**kin it up as badly as Boris.

[oaksoft 12,588]

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".

[Russian Saint 1,200]

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’ve heard a few reports of kids being downgraded, against the recommendations of the teachers. If this is correct then someone needs their arse felt. This is people’s futures being jeopardised.

[Cookie Monster 749]

I’ve heard a few reports of kids being downgraded, against the recommendations of the teachers. If this is correct then someone needs their arse felt. This is people’s futures being jeopardised.

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?

[oaksoft 12,588]

44 minutes ago, Russian Saint said:

 

I’ve heard a few reports of kids being downgraded, against the recommendations of the teachers. If this is correct then someone needs their arse felt. This is people’s futures being jeopardised.

 

At least we're not in England.

Apparently down there you can't appeal a grade on an individual basis. Only if the school is an "improving" one can the entire school appeal.

So glad my kids are out of this farcical system.

Edited August 8 by oaksoft

[FTOF 10,965]

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 August 8 by FTOF

[theknickerwetter 185]

 

[theknickerwetter 185]

Everyone wore masks during the 1918 flu pandemic. They were useless.

April 2, 2020 at 4:32 am Updated April 2, 2020 at 5:42 am

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 1 of 5 | Police officers in Seattle wear masks made by the Red Cross

[RichardBuddie 379]

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.

[Cookie Monster 749]

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.

[RichardBuddie 379]

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.

[Cookie Monster 749]

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.

 

SQA moderated for 29.6% which will increase with appeals.

 

 

 

[Cookie Monster 749]

https://metro.co.uk/2020/08/04/working-class-students-predicted-fail-exams-schools-historic-results-13081838/

Journalists and newspaper editors not checking before stuff gets published.

Top student given F after exam is marked ‘based on school’s poor history’


Eh, an "F' I dont think so.

[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.

[oaksoft 12,588]

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 August 10 by oaksoft

[DougJamie 6,766]

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

[oaksoft 12,588]

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.

[Ayrshire Saints 4,405]

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 !

[guinness 699]

Did teachers not simply vastly overestimate students marks?

[oaksoft 12,588]

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.

[bazil85 3,150]

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. 

[theknickerwetter 185]

https://www.facebook.com/janeygodleyfanpage/videos/294646331798979/?t=32

 

[oaksoft 12,588]

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 August 10 by oaksoft

[theknickerwetter 185]