To think that the Scottish government should not have caved over exam results?

[Notthemessiah]

So the Scottish government have caved in and have given their students the grades that their teachers have said they should get, despite the fact that overall they are massively inflated compared to previous years actual real results.

AIBU to think that this will massively penalise those pupils at schools where teachers were actually honest and realistic about their students likely results and instead benefit those who chose fantasy figures either through actual deceit, sheer wishful thinking or believing that the grades would be downgraded by some kind of system anyway.

Everyone was bleating about how it was unfair that pupils going to worse-performing schools got their results downgraded, but the stats don't lie - theirs were much more inflated compared to previous years that those from better-performing schools and it's ridiculous to think that all of them were suddenly going to improve this year.

It was always going to be an unfair system whatever happened but this just turns this year's results into a total joke - how universities, employers etc are expected to interpret them and compare them to other years is anyone's guess.

I hope that this doesn't happen in England and Wales too but it's hard to see how it can't - otherwise it puts Scottish students at a big advantage over their English and Welsh compatriots.

@noblegiraffe

Becky Allen confirms Scotland’s statistical process was less robust than England’s because the Scots don’t have KS2 SATs data (Or GCSE data?).

So England could have held the line on that basis...

Obviously not GCSE data but Scottish kids do exams at 16 too @noblegiraffe, they used to be called Standard Grades and are now called Nat 5s.

Yes, Cheetas but it doesn’t appear to have been used.

I shall work on another one noble!

I feel the need to point out that I had a bursary and am not from Bearsden!

Well she had to bottle it didn't she? Sturgeon said to judge her on education in Scotland. What happened made her look completely incapable. Although the solution just makes her look like a pushover.

Great leader...

Highers are sat by students from two different years though, so would need to look at N5 results from two years not one. N5 can be sat in two (or even three) years as well.

^noblegiraffe
Becky Allen confirms Scotland’s statistical process was less robust than England’s because the Scots don’t have KS2 SATs data^

Dd doesn't have key stage 2 SATs results either. She does have GCSEs but no SATs at her school.

I'm concerned about mock grades as they were done in a really poor way at her school, the day after the Christmas holidays, not proper exam conditions, not normal papers, confirmed harsh marking, and took no account of coursework or elements already done, even for subjects where that was a significant part of the whole grade. The year 12 exams, although still not full content, would have been a better judgement.

The whole thing in England and Scotland seems to be a mess.

Why didn't they just grade the actual on the way they performed in the mocks- surely thats the fairest way for all?

@kerrymucklowe2020

Why didn't they just grade the actual on the way they performed in the mocks- surely thats the fairest way for all?

Because there's no calibration between schools for mock exams. Each sets their own. Some don't set any at all. Some use prelims as a chance to set papers that are harder than the real exam (train hard, fight easy). Some don't.

Using prelim results couldn't work. They sit them in January when they haven't even completed the courses. January to April/May is a long time to learn more and improve.

The Scottish government had to do something, why should children in deprived areas be marked down in 15.2% of cases whereas children from more affluent areas only be marked down in 6.9% of cases.

You make it sound like they deliberately chose to mark down kids more in the deprived areas, which of course is total rubbish.

They marked them down more because the teachers at schools in those areas inflated the predicted grades more than the teachers in less deprived areas. That's it - there is no conspiracy, they are not penalising kids for being poor - they are just following the figures and the (admittedly rubbish) system they originally decided on.

So many people here saying how bad it is to penalise kids from poor backgrounds who worked hard, but it's exactly the same for kids from any school - if they had worked harder and would have got better results than was usual for that school compared to previous years, then they would have lost out, regardless of what school they went to or what background they were from.

Now of course it's the middle class kids whose teachers didn't give them fantasy grades who lose out - but who cares about them right? Their parents can just pay to make it better, just like they already pay for everything else in this country anyway.

They marked them down more because the teachers at schools in those areas inflated the predicted grades more than the teachers in less deprived areas.

Upthread I posted a theory that they inflated the predicted grades in exactly the same way as teachers in less deprived areas but it had more impact because they had more students on the pass/fail borderline due to their intake being generally lower attaining.

Why didn't they just grade the actual on the way they performed in the mocks- surely thats the fairest way for all?

Mocks aren't a fair representation as not all schools do mocks in the same way.

They are held at different points of the year - some in year 12, some in year 13, some early int he year, some before christmas, some the day after the holidays, etc.
They aren't the same format necessarily - due to noe havingcovered the full content they are often mock ups, partial papers, only one out of two papers, etc.
Some are done in full exam conditions, some are done as open book, some are done fairly relaxed.
Marking can often be harsher than normal - to frighten the kids into pulling up their socks for the real thing, hence why lots of kids go up one or two (or more) grades for the real thing.
Not all schools the coursework and previously done elements of the course into account when giving mock grades - DD's school based the mock grade on the paper element only, even for subjects where the coursework element makes up a significant part of the course.

For mocks to be fair they'd need to be set at the same time and in the same way across all schools, and take into account paper weighting and coursework elements.

Wow OP that's a bit of a chip. The affluent middle classes are never, comparatively speaking, the losers in society.

@Piggywaspushed

Wow OP that's a bit of a chip. The affluent middle classes are never, comparatively speaking, the losers in society.

No, it's just the 'it doesn't matter about the middle class kids' attitude from some posters here. I'd like to see them walk up to one of those kids and tell them they don't care if they worked hard and were hard done by - working hard only matters if you're from a deprived area.

And yes, comparatively the middle classes (you snuck in affluent there, don't think no-one noticed) are better off - does that mean their kids shouldn't bother working hard, or that they should just let things like this slide? "Be grateful for what you've got" - sounds familiar somehow.

I don't think that's what happened here.

Are middle class kids not more affluent that deprived children then?

I am trying to figure out what your gripe is... and why.

To be honest, your own post is loaded with derision for the deprived students' teachers, school and families.

@Piggywaspushed

To be honest, your own post is loaded with derision for the deprived students' teachers, school and families.

Where? Your chip appears to be showing too.

The facts may not be to your liking, but teachers from schools in the most deprived areas inflated grades more than those from other areas.

I'm not deriding anyone, other than those who claim it was some kind of deliberate ploy to penalise kids from deprived areas (and maybe the teachers who picked the most unrealistic grades). If you can point out where in my post I have a go at kids or families, then go ahead

Teachers didn't pick fantasy grades . As noble ahs explained the inflation is around grade boundaries,. It doesn't mean all grades of all students in the school were inflated at all. Someone worked out upthread the impact a few students in a few schools have on grade inflation.

So.. fantasy grades : demeaning to teachers and those kids and

working hard only matters if you're from a deprived area sounds derisive to me.

they already pay for everything else in this country anyway. sounds like one of those benefit scrounger type comments to me!

As I pointed out upthread I was privately educated in Glasgow, so it's definitely not my chip.

As I said, trying to work out what your skin in this game even is. I don't think you are Scottish, and you have already said you have no DC of exam age?

Some teachers definitely did pick fantasy grades. Not saying that was entirely in schools from certain areas as obviously there was siginifcant inflation in all areas, but still (and I did acknowledge already that I was deriding them). How you can see that as deriding the kids I have no idea - they had nothing to do with it.

That quote was paraphrasing what some posters have been saying earlier in the threads - that it doesn't matter if you're a middle class kid hard done by the system as your parents will look after you. It certainly is a derisive attitude to have though, I agree.

The middle classes do pay the overwhelming amount of personal taxes collected in this country - not sure why saying that should automatically mean that you deride anyone that isn't middle class. Besides, if I had to pick a group to resent, I'd aim upwards.

Do I have to have skin in the game to care about it? Isn't it enough to point out what you believe to be unfairness even when it doesn't directly affect you or your family? The world is already in a sorry enough state because people only care about themselves - is that the way you'd prefer it?

Some teachers definitely did pick fantasy grades
Prove it.

@Mistressiggi

Some teachers definitely did pick fantasy grades Prove it.

lol - no, you prove they didn't.

Teachers don’t need to have picked fantasy grades to devalue the system, they just needed to err on the higher side for every pupil they consider. This would be out of kindness, professional pride, and pressure from the school for good marks. It might not be a positive decision either. But the collective impact of this is to devalue the grades.

Honestly I can’t see what else they could do.

They have to have a blanket policy because there’s so many people. But a blanket policy is never going to be appropriate for everyone.

How are you so sure that less affluent areas the teachers inflated the grades?

Google something called the "burden of proof". The person who asserts something is the one who needs to prove it. It's like telling an atheist they have to prove God does not exist.
Clearly you cannot.

@Notthemessiah they deliberately targeted children in deprived areas due to schools past performance, however individual children shouldn’t be graded on schools performance and on their own individual performance!

Speak to any child from a more affluent area and I can guarantee you the majority for majority got predicted grades or better with only 6.2% downgraded.

My dd goes to a good school that in a more deprived area and was downgraded on 4 out of 5 exam results how can this be fair? How’s many pupils in a more affluent school were downgraded with 4 out of 5 results? How’s can my daughter who has worked at Mainly A grades end up with B’s and a C, I can assure you if you had a child that this had happened too you would be angry too at the treatment of pupils in less affluent schools,

Sqa had stated at the beginning that marking and predicted grades had to be real as the would be doing spot checks on work from schools who were saying they performed way better than a normal school.