Extra time

As an English Language and also Literature examiner, I can categorically state that writing more is actually a disadvantage. Candidates turn what could have been a succinct and sharp essay/piece of writing into an overly long, complex and dreary response. So anyone using extra time for this isn't benefitting.

I had a student 2 years ago who wrote 1200 words for a task that should have been around 400 words (we know this because we paid to get his paper back) and came out with a grade 5 when we thought he'd achieve a 9. He'd clearly bored the examiner to death with his overly wordy, faffy and overly elaborate waffle.

In order to "think" then you need the information. And as an invigilator you are told "today you are working with Jack, he has 25% extra time". It is not your place to ask WHY Jack has the 25% extra time, or to quiz Jack, or Jack's teachers, on his medical diagnosis or lack of. What an invasion of privacy. I am not told how many people are sitting a particular exam, and therefore what percentage of that total the additional arrangements people make up.

So actually, I have no way of reasoning whether there are more/less/the same number of people than last year.

How could she possible know this? I’m a teacher and I’d have to ask for those stats for my school - no student would know

Weak. It’s everyone’s job to think.

What do you think then?

And what exactly have I been told?

It is not my job to challenge anything. I know from personal experience and sitting in rooms for hours on end with young people that there are very valid reasons why some of them have extra time and other additional arrangements.

If you want the system changed, take it up with people who have the power to change it.

I haven’t commented on whether the current levels of extra time are a good thing or not… rather, I have presented my experiences as the parent of a child with extra time and an invigilator in a state school.

No I don’t, but I do think that questioning a system where levels of extra time are rising at ridiculous rates might be a starting point rather than swallowing everything you are told.

And yet here you are, defending the status quo, despite being in schools for three weeks a year.

Now you are being ridiculous!
Do you honestly believe that invigilators should be privy to data on all local schools (private and state) so that we can determine if the system is being abused by wealthy parents?

Wow! When probed there’s a lot of people who claim to not know a lot of things on topic they’ve come out strong for. If I was so sure that extra-time at the levels currently being allowed was a good thing, and was arguing to defend it, I’d make damn sure to know the lay of the land first.

Oh please. Invigilating is something I do for 3 weeks a year. It is not my "profession". I go in and support the kids allocated to me the best I can, I follow the rules as set by the exam board. And that's it.

You should know if you are going to come out swinging in defence of a system that actually helps to entrench privilege. You are an invigilator but have not chosen to look beyond the school you work in at the system as a whole. Of course, you don’t have to do that, but it’s advisable before coming on and advocating for such a system. A distinct lack of professional curiosity I’d say.

How would I possibly know if that happens or not?
I don’t know how many students have extra time at the private schools in my city. In my DD’s cohort about 10% had extra time- dd was in a room with extra timers so this is the only evidence I have.
i invigilate in a state school and for this year’s cohort it’s probably around the 10% mark. For the year 10s it’s higher.

It may well be the case that your child would still qualify. From what I’ve seen, I definitely feel that the system is far too lax and rewards the already privileged disproportionately.

How is she supposed to know? I invigilate in a state school too, albeit a state school in a very leafy suburb. Why would I know what parents at other schools are doing, whether state or private?

Yes, I’m not sure the posters on the thread have thought about this angle when defending generous extra-time allowances. See no evil, hear no evil etc.

I already said that English is right for time for all.
That is the 'fault' of the English GCSE exams, not of the concept of extra time.

It may well be that the criteria for who qualifies needs to be tightened. I think mine would still clearly qualify even under a more stringent system.

Are you disputing the fact that many private school parents do indeed do this?

My year 10 son gets the 25%, he has diagnosed inattentive ADHD, dyslexia and extremely slow processing speed. He is also in top sets for all subjects and is predicted 7-9’s across his GCSE’s.

him being able to achieve those grades is based far less on his academic ability rather, how he deals with the exam conditions on the day-he will have a prompter. I’m many ways the extra time is a torture to him, but literally reading and comprehending the question takes him significantly longer than children without his difficulties.

it’s still a possibility that he may zone out and miss massive chunks of his papers, results day is going to be interesting that’s for sure!

I invigilate in a state school. The only experience I have of private schools is my DD’s application for extra time which I detailed above. My Dd’s consultant (private following nhs treatment) provided details of her chronic health condition and she received extra time in two out of four subjects based on this letter and her mock results. My experience doesn’t support your argument of wealthy parents buying an exam advantage, does it?

Parents at independent schools can afford to pay thousands for diagnoses. As a teacher, I’ve never seen a single one of these come back without a diagnosis. Extra time then follows. Even if all these diagnoses are genuine, it is yet another way in which kids from wealthy families get a leg-up - whilst children from families who can’t afford to get these private diagnoses are waiting years to get help, often never getting it before they leave school. The whole system is a shambles.

If they don’t know the answers then all the time in the world won’t make a difference and neither would removing extra time. You only use extra time if you are able to tackle the question.

You are wilfully blind. Do you deny that wealthy students getting a private diagnosis that leads to advantage in exams is a problem? If this were going on, would you have an issue with it?