Hi, we need to decide whether to appeal one of DD’s A-levels (MFL).
Her school did formal exams (the same as if actual A-levels were happening) and stated in their policy that grades would be 100% based on these exams.
So her marks in the assessments were -
Writing paper - 38/40
Listening and Reading Comprehension - 50/60
Speaking - 38/40
So this is 95% for the writing and speaking exam and 83% for the listening and comprehension paper.
She was awarded grade A, but feels that in a normal year, these marks would have achieved an A*.
There were no grade boundaries this year. The school said that instead, they looked for evidence of certain criteria in the papers when assessing grades. But it is not clear to anyone (apart from the teachers) what this evidence / criteria actually was.
We have had the Centre Review and the outcome was that the grade remains unchanged.
Our feeling is that the marks must reflect whatever evidence they required - otherwise what was the point of marking the papers and giving these marks to students on results day? If the ‘evidence’ wasn’t there - how did two papers come to be marked at 95%? It makes no sense.
We are thinking to appeal, but worried in case the grade goes down. How possible is this?
Please any teachers with advice or advice from anyone else would be very welcome!