Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

The results business is rather a disaster. The main problem is that the teacher estimates were so wildly out in the first place.  If they had been kept broadly in line with patterns that are established and reliable, then the SQA intervention wouldn't have been necessary.   As it is, that intervention took the form of using a tool too crude to prevent there being large numbers of genuine individual injustices.  

The reversal it's apparently necessitated though, is thoroughly unsatisfactory.

 

I personally think that some LAs have taken the absolute piss with their estimates - the advice given by some has encouraged grade inflation. One also has to seriously question the lack of quality assurance to allow these estimates to be submitted.  

 

 

Those LAs who did things by the book - adjusting estimates before they were submitted by SQA - should never have been treated the same as those who had clearly inflated estimates.

 

Why the hell did SQA sit on the estimates instead of flagging the issues at the start of June? They had more than enough time to challenge the more ridiculous estimates.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Less than a week ago they were dying on this hill, saying everyone could appeal, saying the predicted grades “lacked credibility” but now we are all wet eyed apologies and have your grades back.

There’s a very modern faux-empathetic emotionalism about Nicola Sturgeon. She wants to cry, she is furious, she gives heart felt apologies. It reminds me very much of Tony Blair “I’m a pretty straight sort of guy”, “this is the right thing to do”. But she knew they were downgrading results on these criteria, she knew the impact this would have, she calculated it wrong politically. That’s all this is. If the fuss had died down after a day or two she wouldn’t have done this. Utter, total cynicism of the worst kind. Interesting as well is that she would make that mistake and think she can brazen it all out. The lack of opposition has blunted the political instincts of those at the top of the SNP - a bunch of 17 year olds have defeated the government more than the Tories or the Scottish Labour Party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Those LAs who did things by the book - adjusting estimates before they were submitted by SQA - should never have been treated the same as those who had clearly inflated estimates.

I don't disagree, but if you're John SQA, looking at two sets of results from two schools you've never heard of let alone know, how do you differentiate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree, but if you're John SQA, looking at two sets of results from two schools you've never heard of let alone know, how do you differentiate?

You look at grade averages, grade trends and estimate data - it's quite clear that they did not do this.   

 

 

 

If they were predicting an average grade way above anything achieved in the previous 3 years then could be identified as potentially overestimating - at that point they should have been then asked to review or provide further justification fir their estimates.

 

It's how Dundee adjusted its estimates - they identified where they thought estimates were under or over and asked schools to go back and review them. They even developed a tool to analyse the data - it was really easy to use as a PT - you had a good idea if you were under or over-estimating.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

I personally think that some LAs have taken the absolute piss with their estimates - the advice given by some has encouraged grade inflation. One also has to seriously question the lack of quality assurance to allow these estimates to be submitted.

Those LAs who did things by the book - adjusting estimates before they were submitted by SQA - should never have been treated the same as those who had clearly inflated estimates.

Why the hell diyd SQA sit on the estimates instead of flagging the isduyes at the start of June? They had more than enough time to challenge the more ridiculous estimates.

The difficulty with only hammering the authorities clearly 'at it', is that within them there would also be cases of kids being very badly served.

I'm still a bit baffled that massively inflated grades could be submitted.  The process seemed to contain several stages designed to curtail such a thing.

I had hopes last week that the appeals process could largely fix this, allowing deserving grades to improve, while calling the bluffs of those who'd overreached.  I wondered about the scale of such a process in a logistical sense though.  It maybe needed overtaking in this way.

Perhaps hugely ambitious estimates should have been bumped back to schools when they reached the SQA.  That would certainly have been known in June.  

What we've got now really is a bloody mess.  Nobody emerges well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The difficulty with only hammering the authorities clearly 'at it', is that within them there would also be cases of kids being very badly served. I'm still a bit baffled that massively inflated grades could be submitted.  The process seemed to contain several stages designed to curtail such a thing. I had hopes last week that the appeals process could largely fix this, allowing deserving grades to improve, while calling the bluffs of those who'd overreached.  I wondered about the scale of such a process in a logistical sense though.  It maybe needed overtaking in this way. Perhaps hugely ambitious estimates should have been bumped back to schools when they reached the SQA.  That would certainly have been known in June.   What we've got now really is a bloody mess.  Nobody emerges well.  

 

 

 

 

Bumping back to schools in June is what should have happened. But some LAs should be bloody embarrassed that they let schools submit some of these estimates. They all had the historic data - if there was grade inflation it should have been dealt with by the relevant LA well before the 28 May deadline.

 

SQA also asked some LAs to pilot the process - Dundee was one of those councils - if they had an issue with estimates at that point (we had to submit by 20 May) then they did not raise this with thd LA or with the schools - yet last week we found that some of our pupils had been doubly penalised - estimate reduced after consultation with the LA and then reduced again by SQA - it was as if SQA has taken no account of this - despite paperwork informing them that a course had had its estimates adjusted downwards.

 

I know Swinney has taken a lot of flak over this but this would have happened no matter the political party in charge. For me it is symptomatic of the worst of SQA - like an oil tanker that can't change direction it ploughed on regardless of the facts staring it in the face.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The results business is rather a disaster.
The main problem is that the teacher estimates were so wildly out in the first place.  If they had been kept broadly in line with patterns that are established and reliable, then the SQA intervention wouldn't have been necessary.   As it is, that intervention took the form of using a tool too crude to prevent there being large numbers of genuine individual injustices.  
The reversal it's apparently necessitated though, is thoroughly unsatisfactory.
Teacher estimates weren't wildly out everywhere though - in my school we were about 80% accurate while in another school in the region they were just over 50% accurate. There are plenty of pupils in my school who are going to miss out because we did things properly and downgraded some pupils to fit better to the previous grades. In my Advanced Higher class, one pupil I know failed the prelim but in any other year she'd gave got at least a C (she knew what she did wrong, she had a tutor, the prelim had a lot more questions from her weakest area than the final exam would have, etc.) but since we didn't have the evidence to put her in for C, because our AH numbers vary wildy (low of 7, high of 20 in the last 5 years) and because it was a good year group (2 kids applied to Oxbridge, we had twins who are amazing at everything - music, sport, academic subjects etc) as a department we felt we couldn't estimate a C even though we were extremely confident she could have got that. Now I wish I just put her in for a B just for the sake of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:
1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:
The results business is rather a disaster.
The main problem is that the teacher estimates were so wildly out in the first place.  If they had been kept broadly in line with patterns that are established and reliable, then the SQA intervention wouldn't have been necessary.   As it is, that intervention took the form of using a tool too crude to prevent there being large numbers of genuine individual injustices.  
The reversal it's apparently necessitated though, is thoroughly unsatisfactory.

Teacher estimates weren't wildly out everywhere though - in my school we were about 80% accurate while in another school in the region they were just over 50% accurate. There are plenty of pupils in my school who are going to miss out because we did things properly and downgraded some pupils to fit better to the previous grades. In my Advanced Higher class, one pupil I know failed the prelim but in any other year she'd gave got at least a C (she knew what she did wrong, she had a tutor, the prelim had a lot more questions from her weakest area than the final exam would have, etc.) but since we didn't have the evidence to put her in for C, because our AH numbers vary wildy (low of 7, high of 20 in the last 5 years) and because it was a good year group (2 kids applied to Oxbridge, we had twins who are amazing at everything - music, sport, academic subjects etc) as a department we felt we couldn't estimate a C even though we were extremely confident she could have got that. Now I wish I just put her in for a B just for the sake of it.

Absolutely.

The effect of today's switch is that kids who had accurate grades submitted on their behalf, have effectively been penalised.  

It's most unfortunate, but at this stage It probably had to happen, unless some mammoth appeals process could be undertaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

Congrats to all the kids who got the results they deserve.

Hope exam reform is coming since it seems politicians now see how they are structurely biased against poorer kids.

Have you actual evidence that properly structured assessment systems that don't use exams, have the effect of closing the poverty gap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hard to believe that in just over 4 weeks crowds (of some description) will be back at games. Really think the Aberdeen players, the Celtic guy and the increase in cases could play right into the SG hands and they’ll turn around and say spectators being allowed will be put on the back burner. Hope I’m just misjudging them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SlipperyP said:

OK one the dreegres of sooocitityy

@NotThePars

 

 

Clyde One were playing One More Time today. I'm nostalgic for that period where everything sounded like Daft Punk's Discovery even though I was about 8 when it came out.

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

Less than a week ago they were dying on this hill, saying everyone could appeal, saying the predicted grades “lacked credibility” but now we are all wet eyed apologies and have your grades back.

There’s a very modern faux-empathetic emotionalism about Nicola Sturgeon. She wants to cry, she is furious, she gives heart felt apologies. It reminds me very much of Tony Blair “I’m a pretty straight sort of guy”, “this is the right thing to do”. But she knew they were downgrading results on these criteria, she knew the impact this would have, she calculated it wrong politically. That’s all this is. If the fuss had died down after a day or two she wouldn’t have done this. Utter, total cynicism of the worst kind. Interesting as well is that she would make that mistake and think she can brazen it all out. The lack of opposition has blunted the political instincts of those at the top of the SNP - a bunch of 17 year olds have defeated the government more than the Tories or the Scottish Labour Party.

"The SNP are the true heirs to Blair" is my troll take that I 100% sincerely believe

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...