Any other AS DC struggling with GCSE science mark scheme because of pragmatics? Is it discriminatory?

[HisMum4now]

DS has a statement because of his AS, specific language impairment and pragmatic difficulties. He is going into Y11 and doing relatively well in his mock GCSEs. He is really good at maths and sciences. He understands the science, but struggles to score marks because of theory of mind and pragmatics.

If you ask him explicit specific questions he would explain everything giving specialist terminology. But the questions in the exam papers are wage, indirect and convoluted. The marking scheme looks completely illogical, arbitrary to DS. From his point of view he answered correctly the question asked, but within the explicit question there were two other hidden questions and he really couldn't see them - how is he supposed to guess which other questions he is supposed to answer? There are too many other questions he could comment on, but these don't logically follow from the question asked on paper. He feels it is unfair.

For example:
Question: "Why radiator is painted black?"
DS answer: "Because black surfaces are better emitters of infrared radiation then light surfaces"
Marks: 1 out of 3. He needed to add "so higher rate of energy transfer" For DS this is self evident and contained within his answer "better emitters". He would never guess to add this. So he scores about a third of the marks!

Another example:
Question: "How would gas and nuclear power stations be used to meet the demand for electricity within 24 hours?"
DS answer: "The nuclear power station is used for baseline demand. The gas station is used to generate extra power when demand increases"
Mark: 2 out of 3. He needed to add "because of short start up time". But the question was How, not Why!

Often out of many possible valid answers the examiner only gives marks for one narrow specific answer that looks arbitrary, random to DS (even to me) in relation to the question asked. For example:

Question: "Vaccination against measles virus will not protect the child against rubella virus. Why?"
DS?s answer: "Because measles and rubella are different pathogens"
Marks: zero... not correct ???
I don't even know what the "correct" answer is but nothing in the way the question is articulated suggests that other answer. I can see what DS means by arbitrary and random mark scheme.

DS's problem is not with knowledge and understanding, but with guessing what the examiner wants. Theory of mind.

DS works very hard - 5 hours of homework and revision every day. Most of this time is dedicated to getting sense of pragmatics and mark schemes. However it doesn?t pay off. It looks to me that with exam papers like these higher marks are just unattainable for ASD DS because of pragmatic bias built in the questions.

Is DS the only one having this problem?
What can be done?

[Anthracite]

An oral language modifier basically rephrases the questions. The student does the writing.

[HisMum4now]

So the oral language modifier would be able to add "explain why" to the question how the power stations are used?
Would the TA acting as oral language modifier know how to rephrase the question?

[Anthracite]

The oral language modifier would be his science teacher.

[bruffin]

this explains an oral modifier role

[HisMum4now]

The comprehension threshold "measured by standard test" for OLM is too rigid and deliberately set unrealistically low though. It doesn't serve the brighter disabled pupils. In practice students with the comprehension that low wouldn't cope with the higher science papers anyway.The pragmatic problem would be muddled with the broader issue of ability. The test is not measuring the problem. DS understands the words "how" and "why", but doesn't understand that when asked "How the power stations are used", he should explain why.

There are no effective reasonable adjustment for high functioning AS pupils with specific language difficulties.

[Anthracite]

There are other access arrangements. OLM was just an example of what is available.

The objective of the exam system is to enable students to achieve their very best, and not to let any disability get in their way. Access arrangements designed to compensate for or cancel out the effects of a disability.

You should definitely go over what is available with the exams officer and/or Senco.

A key principle of access arrangements is that they have to be a normal way of working, so they have to hit the ground running in September to collect sufficient evidence, and for him to get enough practice in this way of working.

There may be other, simpler, access arrangements such as reading aloud to himself that might be sufficient for him to get his ideas on paper.

[Anthracite]

If your DS doesn't know the difference between how and why, then OLM should help him.

You've missed out the key word in your OP questions.

The question will not be "How do power stations....", but either "State how power stations..." Or "Explain how power stations". He may be given state answers rather than explain answers. When he has to explain something he needs to follow up the fact with a because. The marks for the question are a good guide - one mark for state, 2-3 marks for explain.

NT children fall short on this too. It is exam technique and attention to detail.

[Copthallresident]

Anthracite. I think you have missed upthread that the exam boards have tightened up on access arrangements with the prevailing principle being that if a pupil has average or above scores in areas of weakness, even if they represent a significant disability because of the gap with their high ability, they will not get extra time etc. In the case of bright Dyslexics all the various charities and representatives of the Ed Psychs etc have met with Ofqual, and whilst they accepted it was an issue, they were not prepared to do anything about it because "many candidates who do not have dyslexia or a specific learning difficulty would like more time in which to complete their exams and might also gain higher marks if they had more time to complete and check their work" www2.ofqual.gov.uk/how-we-regulate/90-articles/864-extra-time-in-qualification-examinations-and-assessments-for-learners-with-dyslexia-or-other-specific-learning-difficulties

I agree with OP that we should be doing something to put pressure on the D of E, Ofqual etc to stop this discrimination but I am not sure what given that they are not prepared to listen to the various professional; bodies and experts. I am starting by writing to my MP but would welcome other suggestions. It is so frustrating that after a lifetime of struggling with my own SpLDs but thinking that my own DDs would be able to achieve their potential it seems that for those that follow it will be back to ground zero. I don't think many parents or teachers have realised that yet.

[RussiansOnTheSpree]

copthall Well, I would imagine that all the parents whose kids took public exams this year realise it. :(

I think it's possible that you don't quite realise how much more difficult it has been for some time in the state sector for the very high performing kids with SEN issues. We now have a formalised, stamped with the Govian imprimatur, discriminatory policy - but for some time it's been at best hit and miss for those in the state system. From what you have posted about the arrangements for your DDs at their private school they have had a lot better care than any of my kids ever have - however my LEA is spectacularly rubbish at dealing with some issues (although a leader in dealing with others - I guess it's a case of you can't have everything, maybe....) It makes me weep. In a way things are worse for my girls than they were for me, I think - because the less bright kids with their issues will get the help that all the kids with their issues deserve. And now they know that the government does completely know what dyspraxia is and it has decided that actually, it doesn't care.

[Copthallresident]

russians I am perfectly aware of the very patchy nature of support in state schools and that, given the shortage of resources, it is even harder to get support for a bright child with SpLDs. Though better, frankly it is pretty patchy in private schools as well, there are private schools around here that will ask you to leave with a diagnosis and DDs prep school just denied she had a problem though she had an Ed Psych dx and came from her previous (International ) school with a clear account of the the intensive intervention there had been to get her reading and writing to average level, which as far as the prep was concerned meant she couldn't have a problem, after all they had Dyslexics who had worse spelling etc (because the school hadn't given them the benefit of that sort of tailored intervention). Our local borough send 20 boys to a specialist private school for Dyslexics because they don't have the provision in specialist units, but there is no equivalent for girls. There are some amazing examples of best practise in the private sector but more often the staff member responsible for supporting SpLDs did a course once and is more of an administrator of the processes needed to go through to get extra time with the help of motivated parents with the time and money to do the rest.

There is still a long way to go to make sure that the school system enables those with SpLDs to fulfill their potential. It's just I didn't expect it to go backwards and start discriminating against the brightest, and as you rightly say, since new hoops are being introduced, particularly against the brightest without the benefit of school and parents with the resources to support them.

[HisMum4now]

For the moment the JCQ regulation and in the style of questions create a systemic discriminatory disadvantage for high achieving SEN DC. The regulation is inconsistent with the Equality act. The logic is so flawed and full of holes that it would only take a test case to blow it apart.

Parents have every right to demand equality. It is not a question of "we can't please everyone". The consistent legal argument needs to be put forward.

I can only speak about AS, but parents of DC with other disabilities would explain how it affects their DC.

The system argument is that discrimination is eliminated by exam concessions. However those concessions are made ineffective by the blanket JCQ regulation. The blanket arrangements do not address the individual impairment and therefore do not work as reasonable adjustment under the law. The argument that everybody would like more time is disingenuous. Current arrangements do give an advantage to the low comprehension group, i.e. those who meet the very low threshold of the regulation, but it is difficult to filter precisely the effect of disability from the underlying effect of low ability. This is inconsistent with the principle of reasonable adjustment. The adjustment is supposed to filter out, compensate the effect of the disability and it is only reasonable in so far as it doesn't compromise the ability to perform the skill, i.e. to apply science to a high standard. High ability group is equally entitled by law to a reasonable adjustment that is effective for them. The law provides that the precise test for the reasonable adjustment is on individual basis - case by case. The blanket arbitrarily low thresholds in the JCQ regulation are contrary to the Equality act.

[RussiansOnTheSpree]

Hismum They know this. They don't care.

[HisMum4now]

They never did. All the SEN provisions are fought by sword through tribunals.

If the dyslexic community managed to gather a deputation of specialists, maybe they could gather a few lawyers as well and chop up the arrogant "we can't please everyone".

This is a very serious attack on equality when spoken from the government agency. Equality is not a bone from the table.

[Anthracite]

I think it would be very difficult to prove that your son's failure to address higher level learning skills is any worse than a typical child without LDD.

A typical Y10 student doing practice GCSE questions will often miss the extra marks for a question. By the time they get to the end of Y11, they are far more astute and will understand the command words and the need to make sure they make a new point for every mark available.

Access arrangements are there to make sure that your DS is not disadvantaged by his LDD. They are designed to get what is in his brain out onto paper.

A lot of your DS's shortcomings are down to the same struggles with exam technique that most students have. These will be ironed out with the natural maturity between Y10 and Y11.

I think you have to be very careful in judging that your DS's best is not good enough.

Is there a particular barrier due to your DS's AS that he does not appreciate that a question with 3 marks need 3 novel points?

[RussiansOnTheSpree]

HisMum They want to reduce the number of people getting top grades. They don't think kids with SEN should be getting the top grades. They know well what they are doing. And they don't care.

[Copthallresident]

russians I don't think that is the all of it. They also want to reduce the number of pupils getting extra time, in response to a belief amongst some that the increase in the numbers of pupils getting extra time is due to schools and Ed psychs corruptly diagnosing DCs in response to pressure to improve exam results, pushy parents or money, rather than the fact that schools are just getting better at spotting problems, and that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that plenty of Pupils with SpLDs are still going undiagnosed and unsupported. Quite why the way to tackle this is to leave the field wide open for all these corrupt educationalists, providing the pupils are not of high ability I don't know. However it is clear from those minutes that logic, evidence and expertise are not guiding these policies

hisMum I would imagine the Dyslexia /Dyspraxia charities are looking at this. It was clear from DDs Ed Psych that there is a lot of anger but at the end of the day they are charities and like the schools have limited resources and a lot of severely affected pupils to help.

[HisMum4now]

I agree with Russians. There is an element of protecting "the natural order", keeping SEN children behind. Disability vigilantism.

I also find that most current policies seem to result in reduced competition for DC in public schools getting more university places.

[HisMum4now]

Antracite, you need to analyse assumptions built into your reasoning.

What do you mean by novel points? Three discoveries worthy of Nobel prize? Invention of Windows? IVF? Twitter? That what novel means to me.

Do you mean novelty jumper with Rudolf on the front?

It sounds like education speaks a different language.

The question about power station asks how. In normal English the answer cannot be why, unless it is the exam speak for teachers. Why not who, when and how much?

The questions about vaccines is worth 1 mark, so the answer is one point - "pathogens". The explanation about specific antigens and antibodies goes into 3 points - this contradicts the logic of 1 mark - one point. Misleading, inconsistent. Flawed.

Here is the mark scheme answer that is firmly in charlatan territory. Would be curious to hear from moonbells. The question in AQA Physics paper. The student investigated refraction and made five measurements. He drawn a graph. "What two conclusions could be drawn from the graph?"
Mark scheme answer - angle of refraction is always smaller then the angle of incidence." For starters AQA textbook states on page 282 that the angle of refraction from glass into air is always grater then the angle of incidence. So the answer is plainly false without even going into complex concept of scientific method where a conclusion so far reaching as always can never be drawn from this one experiment alone, can only be demonstrated through theory and mathematical models. People who written the question and the answer don't understand a thing about the scientific method.

"Higher level learning skills" is a fantasy routed in teaching collective mythology. A group think, an accepted belief. A euphemism for transferring the burden of systemic incompetence onto the students.

They are higher then what?
Please, this is important, explain what higher learning means?


The exam papers and answers clearly are written in a particular subset of language where meaning is far distorted from normal English, from scientific terminology and from scientific method. DS cannot access this language due to impairment in pragmatics, theory of mind, etc.

The "exam technique", the "what examiner wants" and the "higher level learning skills" are not intrinsic to the thinking process neither in learning, nor in science, nor in exams. They go cross purpose actually.

There is no GCSE "Syllabus", GCSE "Exam technique", GCSE "Higher level what examiner wants skills". It is not timetabled in DS school week. The Exam technique and Higher level what examiner wants skills are not part of science syllabus either. There isn't any legitimacy in this expectation.

The very self evidence that DS should have those skills to succeed in science is discriminatory. It is as self evident as that women and black people do not have the skills to have the right to vote.

[Anthracite]

How isn't a command word.

Command words are state, explain, suggest.

He needs to get to grips with these so that he can answer the question in order to access all the marks.

The question about refraction is asking what conclusions can you draw from the graph, not from your wider knowledge of the topic. It's a How Science Works assessment objective, not knowledge/understanding of the behaviour of waves.

As basic exam technique, this is all about reading the question, and answering the question that is asked. Writing wonderful statements about something that wasn't asked won't yield any marks.

When I said about novel points, I meant do not just keep listing the same type of point, eg making a list of factors. The novelty would be in offering an explanation. Because and therefore are very useful words.

[gobbin]

I helped my son prepare for his exams this year by marking past papers for him in all his subjects from the official mark schemes.

It is quite clear that for GCSE level candidates are required to respond to questions in a variety of ways depending on the question, but that across nearly all subjects there is a common hierarchy of skills:

a) describing what you see/interpret directly (e.g. From graphs, charts, photos, maps etc) without particular reference to prior knowledge - this is the 'duh, but that's too obvious' bit that my son was previously omitting but is required for GCSE, as an exam that caters for all grades - it allows weaker pupils to respond and gain marks before moving on to questions that require more detail and background knowledge;
b) Command word 'describe' = What;
c) Command word 'explain' or 'why' or 'how' = Why or How (give further evidence or knowledge using subject-specific language);
d) Command word 'evaluate' = State first one, then the other side of an argument or point, include any effects these points may have on people, substances, places, policies, characters, populations etc. (depending on subject) THEN STATE YOUR OWN CONCLUSION/OPINION for the highest marks.

In conjunction wtih looking at how many marks a question was worth, I got my son into the habit of thinking 'What - How/Why - Effects - Conclusion' for all questions worth two or more marks ('What - How/Why' is usually enough for a 1 mark question).

In English they were taught PEE - Point, Evidence, Explain.
In Historty they were taught OSK - Origin, Source, Knowledge and COPR - Content, Origin, Purpose, Reliability.

All of the above is exam technique which all schools should be teaching (it was clear from doing past papers with son that some depts. were doing this but not consistently across subjects).

Even when taught, kids still don't always 'get' it - my boy is a decent grade A/B candidate but CONSTANTLY needed reminding when doing past papers to remember the command words and DEVELOP his answers i.e. points c) and d) in my list above (develop being a key word used on markschemes esp humanities).

I don't know how much more difficult it would be to try to get a pupil with Additional Needs to understand what is required when answering exam questions as that is outside of my personal experience, but there we have it - for good or evil, this is how pupils are required to respond at GCSE level. The exam technique needs to be taught, whether by school or home, in order to access papers as expected by exam boards. To be honest, there are many similarities with the old O Levels I took, it's just that there is more explanation and writing expected in Science exams these days.

[Anthracite]

Good post, gobbin :)

[HisMum4now]

I am grateful for the tips and the detailed explanation of the exam technique. I will certainly use that and am already doing most of this with DS.

The translation was particularly useful. This is akin the code of the Enigma machine.
How - read-'explain' or 'why' or 'how' = Why or How (give further evidence or knowledge using subject-specific language)

On practical level I will have to do this with DS and this is why it is discriminatory.

[titchy]

I'm not sure it's really discriminatory - you have to do this exam technique stuff with ALL kids. They don't just magically know....

[HisMum4now]

Antracite, every of your points makes it obvious how twisted and distorted the logic of the examiner is and how far it is removed from science and normal human higher order thinking process.

The question about refraction is asking what conclusions can you draw from the graph, not from your wider knowledge of the topic. It's a How Science Works assessment objective, not knowledge/understanding of the behaviour of waves.

This is obviously a statement from the examiner's world of collective mythology and beliefs confused for reality.

The question does not state to ignore wider knowledge.
DC cannot possibly separate the science exam from the wider knowledge of GCSE science. Are DC taught to not trust their teachers? They can't think that the question is not testing "understanding of the behaviour of waves". Why would they state something they know to be false, i.e, always?

The question asks how. There are no state, explain, suggest in the question.

Real people don't share the same set of flawed assumptions and accepted myths. The whole "exam technique" is about identifying the myth and assumptions of the examiner and prioritizing them over the higher order thinking skill of understanding how real science works. This is not a legitimate exam expectation.

Maybe 'normal' DC can learn this twisted thinking you call exam technique, but AS couldn't. It is impossible for AS DC to focus and follow through with this twisted pathway without running into paralysis. DS is just trying to think for himself and answer science questions. It puts disproportionate additional demands on him and the family which are not justified by the science.


There is a pragmatic distortion and bias in the questions and mark scheme which is not justified by the science and has discriminatory effect on AS DS. The exam system shouldn't put at a disadvantage a particular disability group.

[HisMum4now]

There is no justification for the flawed arbitrary mark scheme.

Teaching the scientific inquiry, the method, is absolutely integral to learning science. Creating exam questions and answers that violate the scientific method can never be justified.

It is not possible to draw the conclusion always from the graph. It is only possible to conclude that in this experiment it is larger. I should add that the AQA textbook on page 282 does not state always. Science does not use this word.

The AQA IGCSE specification states on page 5:
"A scientifically literate person should be equipped to question ? the evidence? The validity of evidence depends on ? whether the research answers the question?
Evidence must be approached with a critical eye. It is necessary to look closely at how measurements have been made and what links have been established [or not]... These ideas pervade all of the scientific process."

If you go to the local pond and see five white swans, you cannot conclude that all swans are white. This experiment is only designed to answer the question "what swans can I see in this pond?" All you can say is 5 swans in this pond are white. The black swan can be hiding in the swan house. The experiment wasn't designed to check all swans. If you observed 1000 white swans in Essex, you still can't conclude that all swans are white. It only shows you haven't seen your first black swan because your sample is not representative.

So this IGCSE "scientific process" objective basically means to teach DC not to conclude always from a limited experiment design. The GCSE exam only grants marks for the conclusion always. How is this possible? This is unethical.