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?

It asks what you can tell from the graph. Nothing ambiguous, nothing warped.

Being able to read graphs is an important skill.

The question just asked about what those five data points indicated. It did not ask the candidate to evaluate the method or suggest improvements, or suggest activities for further enquiry. It could have, had it been a 6 mark question, but it wasn't.

Unfortunately, students (or their parents) don't have the luxury of dictating which questions are asked.

Knowing factoids is considered less important, in these days of instant access to information.

Making sense of information, processing it, and evaluating it are all higher order skills.

For a top grade, it is important to know (state/describe) the material, but also connect the facts, and explain/evaluate/suggest. If a student cannot do these higher order skills, then they should not get a top grade, even if they do have encyclopaedic knowledge.

You can't tell the always from the graph. You can only tell that in this experiment (light type, plastic material) it is larger. The graph starts to curve at the edges, so it shows that the relationship changes. Even the graph is evidence that always in not correct. Always is plane wrong.

The fact you you insist on it only shows that the distorted assumptions and mythology is so deeply embedded in your thinking, that you cannot separate fact from assumption. It should not be my DS 's problem.

The explanation that follows in your post is a pile up of flawed patronising assumptions leading to a flawed conclusion that my DS doesn't know science. He does, the examiner is the one who does not understand a thing but has the power..

hismum I think you are over thinking this.

You are wrong, hismum.

Refraction is always either larger or smaller until the critical angle is reached (at and beyond the critical angle you no longer have refraction). It can't sometimes be larger and sometimes be smaller. It doesn't matter that the relationship is not linear.

There is nothing wrong with the mark scheme in that example.

Knowing lots of facts and no means to process them is a C-grade performance.

Can't you let your DS's best be good enough?

How can you conclude that DS knows a lot of facts but can't process them? How do you know?

This is just speculation and mythology.

You go on to suggest DS is not good enough. This is just discriminatory smear. It is not evidence based.

The mark scheme is arbitrary. The word always doesn't belong there and AS DS is at a disadvantage for no good reason. The system should not be discriminatory.

You don't seem to want to help your DS, but rather whine about the system and have no respect for the professionals who are passionate about what they do.

Bye bye and good luck to your DS.

hismum I totally share your frustration with the exam system and would like things to change but sadly it is what we are landed with and as I said before though DDis capable of misreading a How as a Why, and moreover does not have a scientific brain, her strengths are on the EQ side, she did get an A in Double Science, actually only a couple of marks off A*. I am sure your DS will do well, or as well as the latest meddling with the mark scheme allows.

We have to support our DCs to do their best with their strengths and to find ways to cope with their weaknesses. I am not sure that this level of over thinking is helpful. I think that even if anthracite and others don't necessarily understand the challenges our DCs face there are some useful hints here, some of which I know helped my Dd to get the marks to compensate for where she will undoubtedly have lost them due to her SpLDs.

The professionals fail to engage with the fact that the distorted questions and arbitrary answers put at a disadvantage DS with a particular disability.

Not being able to address the argument, some professionals can't offer anything better then an offensive label based on assumptions.

AS DS cannot decode "How - read-'explain' or 'why' or 'how' = Why or How (give further evidence or knowledge using subject-specific language)" This is what over-thinking is.

DS answers the questions that is asked - How. He can only answer the question as he understands it -How? If the questions is asked transparently and require analysis or synthesis, DS would go on and show all the knowledge and higher order skills. The teacher writes it is his strength in the report. He just cant show this through exam marking scheme.

I already thanked Antracite for tips earlier in the thread.

Thanks again.

Don't call disabled DC stupid if you can't understand their problems.
Everybody should challenge discrimination, not just desperate parents.

Slightly off-topic, but does anyone else wonder how the hell we've got ourselves into this situation?? When I did my GCSEs back in 1990, my DM's attitude was "oh, DD is doing GCSEs - must make sure she's in bed nice and early and has regular food breaks". It just wouldn't have been within her comprehension to know what I was studying/what the examiners were looking for/what the grade boundaries were.

OP - I hope you manage to support your son to do well.

Bramshott I tend to degree and ALL my kids have SEN (and I do myself). Exam technique is taught at schools. Exhaustively. I don't think parents should be getting involved at the sort of granular level being displayed here. We can't do it for them. It's not in their interests. Or indeed ours.

Agree. Phone. Sorry.

Bramshott if you want a good idea about why there has been a growth of overinvolvement of parents in their child's education have a read of this.

I actually think we can do more harm than good if we try to become experts on what the examiners want to support our DCs, inevitably subjectivity based on our own experiences of past exams and in my own case current university academia, creeps in, and the teachers are at the coal face now, they really do know better.

I make sure my DDs get the support they need, have a nice place to work, decent food and facilitate my dyspraxic DD to keep everything in some sort of order and to plan her work, but when they say that I don't know what it is like now, they are right.

And russians is right we can't change the world to suit their differences, though we can try when it is downright unfair and discriminatory, but we can help them to find their own ways to cope and exploit their strengths. And we can make sure they know that means they are always going to have to work harder and smarter, SpLDs are a disability, not an excuse.

Shouldn't we really do something?

On the pragmatic distortion and bias in the science exams, I seriously think we should demand that they develop better structured more correctly defined questions and answers.

For starters they should have more rigorous validation and serious way to assess impact on various disability groups.

I think it is very reasonable to expect that:

• The questions and mark schemes are piloted with an over-quota of each SN group

• Grade boundaries are defined using suitable over-quota of students for each special need group.

• Questions and answers are assessed by an expert panel of scientists (those who really do science)

• ~ an expert panel of people on autistic spectrum and each other SN groups, who know their science, to see how they react to those questions #(it is not enough that some managers from charities just tick the box that it is OK for them)

• Evaluate the impact of these questions on vulnerable minorities - how many extra hours AS DS should spend "learning exam technique" and rehearsing papers? How much time teachers should teach exam technique instead of science? How much parents would have to pay in public school and tutor fee? This is what it comes down to isn't it?

• How do distorted questions affect grade boundaries and GCSE "standards"? Maybe without woolly questions more DC would gain good qualifications and become good electricians, plumbers and mechanics?

The system should be free of distortion and bias, it shouldn't put any disability group at a disadvantage.

Where we can be of help is in ensuring their teachers understand the particular challenges our kids have. Because no two kids with SEN issues are identical. Once that's achieved then the teachers are the ones who have the skills and experience to identify how to help them in the school/exam context.

I'm afraid my shopping list of 'demands' would look completely different. I also think you are singularly failing to grasp the fact that there is no typical AS child, no typical dyspraxic, no typical dyslexic, and so on.

But nobody wants to understand the particular challenges. Everybody just fires off labels and assumptions because they are not AS themselves. They can't see where the problem is, so they explain it away, now by attacking the mother

So put up your list of demands.

The system demands so much from parents and DS. Why can't we have a voice?

Yes that's exactly what we are doing. Because none of us have AS kids.......oh. Wait....

Russians so your AS DC would be less well off if questions were straight?

What would be the disadvantage of validating the questions?

None of my DC perceive the questions as not being straight. Nor do I.

So you are just not personally concerned. I 've seen you being quite granular and involved about issues you are passionate about, like grammar schools etc.