Watching the news, schools, pupils and others are challenging the fact that many in the summer didn’t the grade that I understand they had been told they would get. The fact the winter exams were over graded is neither here nor there. One pupil said he was getting (not predicted - getting) a C in English. Surely he meant predicted. My kids were predicted grades, some they got and some they didn’t. At no point after did we think there’s something wrong, as what you get in terms of exam grades is pretty much (or should be) what happens on the day. If we have reached a point where kids are being TOLD not predicted you will get this grade and base everything thereafter on being told this, education in this country has reached an all time low. You should go into an exam, answer the questions, wait for the result and go on from there. Of course you can have predicted grades, I did, but I didn’t base any job applications on the predicted grades.
Yes I know that they changed the grade boundaries, but then that’s another fault of the system, ie having absolute boundaries. In my day exam grades were determined on percentiles after all results were known, which OK might not be fair in some eyes, but it was how it was.
Maybe too much emphasis and too many marks are placed on “coursework” for academic subjects. Maybe the way forward is that coursework for academic courses can only account for a maximum 10% of the exam mark, so that performance in the exam is key, or, it’s all exam and coursework is only called on if the exam mark is too close to the boundary and good coursework can get the grade bumped up.
It does seem that a dramatic overhaul of exam grading is needed, with only summer exams and at the same time league tables abolished.
the sweet irony is i believe the student in question meant “predicted” but doesnt have the English skills to comprehend the different meaning in his chosen vocab
I’d just like to point out that exams can be incorrectly marked, as well as coursework.
Personally I think that coursework is far more beneficial than exams.
Person A starts their coursework two weeks early, takes the time to research around the topic, and gets a good understanding of the themes and issues. They produce an excellent piece of work which is a pleasure to read, that they are proud it because it really shows off their talent in that subject.
Person B starts their coursework the night before it’s due, and it shows.
Person A starts revising two weeks early, but still has to write their essay in 90 minutes. Their answer is good, but they are capable of producing a far better piece of work. Unfortunately they had to spend their time memorising things rather than researching all the different issues that they found interesting.
Person B revised a bit, the night before. Their answer is fairly reasonable, and because they aren’t expected to go into as much detail, their lack of real understanding about the subject is never shown.
I think that coursework is a much more accurate form of assessment because the differences in understanding are much more clearly shown.
Having recently left education, I would agree that coursework is the ‘easy option’. But that’s not a problem with the assessment format, it’s a problem with the questions. Coursework projects just need to be more difficult.
If done properly, coursework relies on personal motivation, and requires the student to think for themselves a lot more. It has the potential to foster a genuine interest in the subject.
I’ve got no issue with these appeals at all. There should at least be consistency in grading through an accademic year, with the same expectations marked in the same way accross the board for everyone. At the very least, those taking summer exams should have been told as soon as possible (but certainly prior to exam season) of the grading errors made earlier in the year so that they could adjust their expectations accordingly, and revise more. What is the point of changing grading boundaries and not telling anyone? That just sounds like OFQUAL or whoever trying to hide something!
It isn’t the fault of the pupils and they should not be penalised for something completely outwith their knowledge or control.
But surely the exams should be graded in a way whereby teachers are unable to say, as seems to be implied, you will get a particular grade. The fact they are suggests that the schools know far too much about the grading system and what’s required to get a particular mark.
When I took school exams, you were predicted a grade based on your classwork, whether you achieved it or not was a matter for exam performance.
As for coursework, I did projects over 2 years and reports for field trips, where the maximum award was between 10% and 15% of the total mark. However you didn’t submit and resubmit, you handed it in once and got it back after the exam had been sat, with a teachers comment and no mark. So how well you did in them was a mystery, even to this day.
The only reason teachers are upset is because they (as are schools) are judged/assessed on exam grades. When they seemingly have so much control over the grading, to lose this control will jeopardise their performance reviews.
As for the pupils had they done better in the exam rather than coasting based on pre-exam grade assurance, then this wouldn’t be a problem.
I think that the boy you spoke to might just have used the wrong word, or not been listening when the teachers explained what a predicted grade was.
I can’t understand how it could be a bad thing for schools to know how their pupils are going to be assessed…
That is still the case. What has led you to believe otherwise?
Are you trying to say that this ‘black box’ system is better? Mistakes happen, and exam marking is a subjective process in nearly all situations. I had two of my A-level papers re-marked, and went up from a C to an A in both of them, because I knew I had done better than that.
The existing moderation process does not allow teachers to control the grading like this. A few samples of each teachers’ marking are taken and checked. If the marks differ, all of the teacher’s marks are adjusted by that amount.
For example, if a teacher has over-marked by an average of 3 marks, all work marked by that teacher will have 3 marks deducted, and the teacher will have to answer to the exam board or the headteacher. Good school departments usually run an internal moderating process as well, where teachers check each others’ marking (anonymously).
Students shouldn’t be using predicted grades like this. At my school, it was very clearly explained that the predicted grade was the grade I should expect to get if I carry on putting in the same amount of effort.