Achi news desk-
While it is of course always useful to have the experts on hand, the refusal to share materials in advance made it difficult to ask useful questions about specific responses. It also led to some confusion which might not have been the case if everyone had the numbers in front of them. For example, the SQA presentation included a comment that “care experience and ethnicity had no significant effect on learners’ views.” Although it was technically true, it missed the important context that only 97 of the nearly 2,300 students questioned had experience of care.. We also talked in detail about how a quarter of teachers do not understand the standards, only to be told afterwards that that was not quite right. the case.
Read more:
‘Stop calling them appeals’: Students, teachers unconvinced by SQA process
Exam results: how does the SQA decide my grades?
Why the SQA felt it necessary to call this type of meeting, only to refuse to provide the information that would have made it useful, is unclear, although it is probably worth noting that this kind of thing has happened before.
As for the actual reports, the headline figures are amazing. We are now in a situation where the SQA has had to admit, according to its own research, that large numbers of teachers and pupils reject the idea that the current appeals process is fair.
The SQA seeks to minimize this issue in two ways: firstly, by engaging in a poorly articulated philosophical debate about the nature of fairness; secondly, by drawing attention to the fact that his own staff and senior appointees “think the appeals process is fair for all learners”. Given that one of the most common criticisms of the SQA is that the institution does not trust teachers to make assessment judgments about students, it is terribly ironic to see its employees marking their own homework and then, in a move that will surprise absolutely no one. , awarding themselves a pass with flying colours.
After reading through the reports it is clear that there is a profound lack of connection between the SQA and the people it is supposed to serve. When asked about this, the SQA said they were listening to concerns about fairness and clarity when deciding the 2024 system. They also found that teachers value consistency (hardly surprising after the ongoing chaos they have experienced since the results scandal 2020) and it is clear that this won out in the end.
Despite the responses from teachers and students, it appears that the system for this year will be the same as the one that was in place last year. That means, once again, students whose exam scores are below expected levels, and whose grades do not accurately reflect their ability, will have no option to request alternative evidence to be consider
Appeals
Learners will be able to appeal against any of their final grades by requesting a review of their SQA marked assessment components. In line with last year, the service will continue to be free and available for learners to access directly. Alternative assessment evidence will not be required and those appointed by SQA have told us that this will ensure fairness for all learners. The appeals service will include a priority service for learners with conditional offers for further education, training or employment. We continue to work closely with UCAS to ensure that the outcome of priority appeals will be released before their closing date.
SQA website, 7 March
The SQA website states that “alternative assessment evidence” will not be required for appeals, but another way of phrasing that would be that alternative assessment evidence is not receive. The marks awarded for an exam paper can be reviewed, but if a student has a really bad day, perhaps after a whole year of producing amazing A-grade work, then there is nothing they can do. The examination is, in almost all cases, absolute.
Is such a system fair? Should it even be called an ‘appeals’ system? It is clear that not enough people think.
Another question to ask is whether this ‘evaluation’ was carried out in good faith or not. Ask yourself: if the report had said that everyone thought the system was unfair, and so much pressure had been raised that even an organization like the SQA didn’t feel it could ignore people’s wishes in really, what could he really have done about any of that? the end of March, just a few weeks out from the start of the exam period? We asked the SQA how the processes for appeals or the EECCS in 2024 might have been changed based on these surveys, but they refused to answer.
Ultimately, this feels like more of the same from an organization that was deemed so dysfunctional that the Scottish Government promised to scrap and replace it by 2025 – a promise which, according to a Scottish Government spokesman, remain an “intention”.
Unfortunately, that means students and teachers can also expect more of the same over the coming exam period.
Read more:
Call to review exam appeals over fears of widespread ‘differences’
SQA under pressure to refuse to disclose reasons for unsuccessful appeals
