Control assessment remark

[swingofthings]

I'm sorry for asking for advice that has probably already been shared a number of times, but couldn't find anything.

Is it possible to ask for a control assessment to be remarked and if so, how would I go about it?

Story is that DD is a high achiever pupil in all subjects, finished year 9 with a 7a level in English Literature, expected an A at GCSEs since Year 7. Year 10, she got a newly graduated teacher who had no experience of teaching GCSEs. Very quickly a number of issues with her teaching came to light (by a number of parents). I gave her the benefit of the doubt. However, we only found out in February that DD got a B/C grade at the control assessment she took in November. This came as a real surprise especially as DD thought she had done well and she normally is a good judge of her expected results. We have now received her results and not surprisingly, she got two As at the exams in June, but got a final C at the final grade for her control assessment giving her a final total grade of B. It is not the end of the world, but it has surprised everyone has she was always expected an easy A, and a slight concern as she is determined to go to Medical School, and unfortunately, the ridiculous competitive entry access mean that a number of the schools do look at GCSEs grades.

I don't know much about the whole system, but I was told yesterday that for control assessment grades it is the decision of the teacher, with only a few top grade papers being reviewed by the Board Administration. Is this indeed the case for all subjects? If so, in light of all the complaints with this teacher, I am seriously considering a remark.

DD got a score of 157 (AQA). I understand that 160 was an A, but I don't know what was the cut off mark for an A.

In light of the above circumstances, would you advise going through the remarking route?
Thanks

Haven't read the whole thread, so someone may have already made this point.

Controlled assessments should have been moderated in school before submitting to the awarding body. For example, the head of department or other experienced teacher should have looked at top, middle and bottom papers and agreed with the results.

To appeal teacher-moderated papers, the whole cohort would need to be remoderated, and no one with an A or A* is going to agree to this.

Well I would assume those target grades are for if she had sat the exam in year 11? You wouldn't expect to go from level 7 to a grade A in two terms?

Ds just finished yr 9 at level 8 in English but I wouldn't call him a cert for a grade A if he sat it in year 10 (especially controlled assessments two weeks in).

So a student on a level 7 would expect a C grade if they sat their GCSE right then.
So your DD was a high C at the end of Y9, thus getting a high B at the end of Y10 is good progress.*

No, that's incorrect. Not sure how different schools use different levels, but she definitely finished year 9 with an expected A grade at GCSE and this remained all the way for year 10 in the two reports we received.

You say she is newly qualified, which means she is constantly supervised, monitored, moderated, assessed, will be making very few decisions alone, will not be teaching a full timetable, have a supervisor and most likely a mentor, be in a constant feed back loop, etc etc etc.

Indeed, and that is exactly what other parents complained to the school about because she wasn't. Without going into detail, the school has gone through an upheaval last year, and the turnover of teachers was very high all within a few months, and they had to rush a recruitment drive, then the Head Teacher left etc... They operated under massive pressure and just tried to hold things up which is a pity as it has always been an excellent school. So yes, she was teaching a full-time table and DD confirmed (100% attendance) that after the first week or so, there was never anyone else in the class. According to DD, the problem isn't in terms of her knowledge of the subject, but her total lack of organisation. She would say one thing one session and then claim she never said it the next. Her class was slow, they kept going over the same thing, missing out on others etc...This is what led to her telling DD to finish her control assessment at home.

Anyway, we are heading off towards a different tangent to what the thread was about and I don't want this to become a 'let's defend the teacher who couldn't possibly be as bad as OP claims'. Thank you to those who've been very helpful. If it is of any interest to anyone, I will come back to post about the outcome of my meetings with the HoD and exam officer.

I'm a bit confused- but surely a 7a at the end of year 9 indicates a potential A at the end of year 11, not at the end of year 10? That's certain,y how it goes in our school.

Swing, the school might have predicted her an A grade in GCSE at the end of year 9, but that's just finger in the wind stuff, not a guarantee. A student on a high level 7 in English at the end of Y9 would statistically be expected to achieve A*/A at the end of Y11. A school could say that they would expect her to get an A at the end of Y10, but that's a gamble, because the extra year would bring extra maturity which is important in English.
So your DD got As in the exam but fell down on the coursework.

I expect that the school is looking at FFT and predicting GCSE grades without taking into account that taking the exam a year early will have an effect on grades.

It would be interesting to know the outcome yes.
By the way support for NQT isn't in the form of someone in the class every lesson, although she should have been observed more regularly than other teachers.

How would you know she was teaching a full timetable?

it sounds to me from your description that she has gone above and beyond for the school, so shafting her is extremely unfair.

If she really has been left in the lurch the way you describe she has performed a bloody miracle to still be standing by Easter

Said I wouldn't go back on the discussion of levels, but it is quite interesting as a whole discussion. I don't if I have mentioned but I am not from this country originally so although in the UK for over 2) years, I am learning as the kids go through education about the UK system.

The one thing that I find baffling is the liberty of schools to do what they want despite the fact that their choice will impact of a nationally recognised qualification, especially shocking from my perspective when there is so little choice with school selection. I can see more and more why parents are desperate to play the system to make sure their child attends the best schools.

In this instance, if indeed it is the case that DD was expected an A grade at GCSE at end of year 11 rather than 10, then surely the school is failing pupils by giving them no choice but to take the test a year earlier. If I was to extrapolate with a bit (a lot!) of drama the consequences of this, if she failed to get an offered for a place at medical school because of that B, the blame could be put on the school for allowing pupils to take the test early when having taken it when it is EXPECTED to be so could have made the whole difference...all this because of 3 points out of 200?

I really don't agree at all with this system which gives way too much onus on schools. Schools don't care about individual pupils aspirations, they care about their own results. The school is probably delighted that DD got a B putting her in the A-C mark.

Anyway, this is where we are, and I am confident that it won't come to that scenario and thankfully still many options.

it sounds to me from your description that she has gone above and beyond for the school, so shafting her is extremely unfair Really :) How did you reach the conclusion that she has gone above and beyond for the school from what I've written? Why do you think there have been a number of complaints if it is me and me only who is being unfair to her?

If she really has been left in the lurch the way you describe she has performed a bloody miracle to still be standing by Easter I actually wouldn't be much surprised if she didn't remain for much longer.

OP, I've only read this thread quickly, but the poster who asserted that marks do not go up is incorrect - at least for the board I work for. It's true to say that marks are more often reduced, but it makes a nice change to be able to put them up.

I don't like the idea of using the system just to fit an aim of getting an overall better outcome. It should be there is place when there really is doubt about the initial outcome, when it is significantly lower than what was fairly expected (which is where I stand with the CA). The marks she received at the exam is in line with what we thought it would be, so I'm quite reluctant to use the system just in the hope she gets an extra 3 points to get her than overall A, that's not what remarking is about. I am not keen on that route right now, but will see what the exam officer/HoD advise.

Arg, back to thinking about it all now! If DD was to decide that she was prepared to retake the whole thing, how would that work? I understand how it would with the exams, but what about the CA part? Is it something she would need to do next year or could she do this outside of school in college for instance?

It might not be what remarking is about, but you pay quite a lot for a remark and the grade will only go up if the paper was incorrectly marked in the first place.
There have been a lot of complaints about English marking.

The exams officer won't advise on re-marks, I wouldn't have thought. Ours would forward any queries to me. I am answering emails this weekend from parents, so worth getting in touch with HoD perhaps, although there is no real urgency wrt re-marks.

"I really don't agree at all with this system which gives way too much onus on schools. Schools don't care about individual pupils aspirations, they care about their own results. The school is probably delighted that DD got a B putting her in the A-C mark."

They wouldn't if it indicated that she hadn't made expected progress from year 7- schools are judged on that as well now.

What used to happen is that some schools put kids in early if they were expected to do well. If they did well, they could then do another subject in year 11. If they didn't, they could retake. This is changing now that a) schools will be judged on a candidate's first attempt only and b) there is much more emphasis on exams being taken in a single sitting.

It's irrelevant really why your dd got her B, particularly as the course work element can't be remarked. The question really is whether she should retake the whole exam to try for an A. If she's aiming for medicine, for example, or for Oxford, then probably she should. Otherwise one B isn't going to make much difference in the scheme of things.

Presumably there will be others in her year who didn't take the subject early? Wouldn't she just do a resist along with them?

Yes, the school has failed your DD by forcing her to enter for her exam a year early.

Here's the DfE research on early entry if you're interested:

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/184109/DFE-RR208.pdf

The new rules about only the first entry counting in the GCSE league tables was specifically introduced in order to discourage early entry. The school is unlikely to support your DD in retaking her GCSE to get an A because it won't count in performance measures, only her B will. They will probably advise concentrating on her other subjects.

Yes, the school has failed your DD by forcing her to enter for her exam a year early.
^ Yes this with knobs on.Especially so in an analytical subject where an extra year's maturity can make a real difference.

Schools don't care about individual pupils aspirations, they care about their own results.

That just isn't true -certainly at my DCs school which is a Grammar School so you would think they would be hot on results.What is best for each child is at the centre of all they do.

The early entry is likely to be at the bottom of all this. There's a reason we do not and have never done this.

Really smile How did you reach the conclusion that she has gone above and beyond for the school from what I've written? Why do you think there have been a number of complaints if it is me and me only who is being unfair to her?

well, for a start, you assert she had taken on a full time table, which she was under no obligation to do, in fact her union would have advised against it.

Sadly it is demanded that teachers take on work loads beyond what they can be humanly expected to actually achieve, in the end most burn out, and quickly - fewer than 75% make it to their fifth year.

It just sounds to me that she was hugely over worked, and then had the likes of you blaming her that she couldn't achieve miracles. I am not a teacher any more, I resigned when my average working hours on a weekday in term time reached 20. But I still work in schools, and see teachers being treated as if they are disposable. The harder working, more committed, more skilful you are, the heavier and heavier burden is piled on to you, until eventually you just break The n you are replaced by a new one, who is treated just the same.

So your complaints about an NQT, who should have been supported, but apparently wasn't who should have been on a reduced time table, but apparently wasn't, who should have got the backing of the parents, but apparently didn't, who sounds like she has been treated with contempt by pupils, yes, have lead me to sympathise with the NQT

I would advise her to leave teaching immediately, and do something more achievable, and more rewarding with her life.

Unfortunately so many thousands of teachers are doing just that that we now cannot staff our schools. Up to a 60% shortfall in some subjects!

leaving side the NQT, your daughter plain and simple didn't do as well as you hoped. She could have performed better, possibly if she had taken more responsibility for her own learning, and used the teacher as a resource, but she didn't. She could have postponed taking the exam for a year, especially once you knew her CA was only a C, but she didn't. It's done now, she just needs to be a bit more proactive in her other GCSEs.

fewer than 75% make it to their fifth year.

sorry, my mistake, that should have read fewer than 25% make it to their fifth year. Actually it is fewer than 20%

It just sounds to me that she was hugely over worked, and then had the likes of you blaming her that she couldn't achieve miracles

No offense but you are making a lot of assumptions to reach this conclusion. You know even less of her than I do! It sounds like you are using your own experience to infer on the performance of this teacher who is a stranger to you. By the way, I fully agree with you about teachers being overworked and I have all sympathy for this profession, but I am sure you yourself have met in your career at least once a teacher who just wasn't up to the job or are you going to say that they don't exist?

leaving side the NQT, your daughter plain and simple didn't do as well as you hoped*.

That is definitely a possibility, although I would say that it wasn't so much as I'd HOPED but as she was expected to.

I've just picked DD up from a week-end away and I asked her again about how the rest of the class did. She confirmed that out of 26 pupils in the top set class, only 4 got an A in their CA, that is fewer than the middle set class that was taught by the HoE. So you are very welcome to form your opinion about the performance of this teacher, but I'll stick to mine!

She could have postponed taking the exam for a year, especially once you knew her CA was only a C, but she didn't
Just to add, I wasn't aware that this was an option. Pity that the teacher couldn't be bothered to inform me that this was an option considering what her target was, but I'm sure you will say that it wasn't her role to suggest it to DD, let alone me. As to be pro-active in her other GCSEs, she got 7 A* and 2As, at year end exams (mock GCSEs), so not sure what else she can do but continue to work hard.

In this instance, if indeed it is the case that DD was expected an A grade at GCSE at end of year 11 rather than 10, then surely the school is failing pupils by giving them no choice but to take the test a year earlier.

That's right, and Gove and particularly his advisor Dominic Cummings repeatedly said that, and eventually dropped a hammer of schools in order to stop the practice. Ofsted now regard early entry as ipso facto poor practice unless there is positive evidence of children doing better in the subjects concerned.

Unfortunately, early entry, along with doing lots of GCSEs or worse, dubious "equivalent" qualifications is popular with parents who don't understand the system but think it sounds aspirational. If you look at private, high-attaining schools they will enter fewer GCSEs, and will take them at 16, with the possible exception of maths which they will do early in order to take FSMQ additional maths (there's a whole debate there which as I recall noblegirrafe has views on, but at least when that's done most of the students involved get top grades in the GCSE, although I suspect that the FSMQ will fade away with the new changes to GCSE maths). The students from such schools end up with a clutch of top-grade GCSEs in good subjects, and everyone is happy.

Unfortunately, early entry is popular in schools that are/were playing games with resits and multiple entry, and it leads to parents who don't have a full understanding thinking that (a) more GCSEs at lower grades are better, or at least as good, as fewer GCSEs at higher grades and (b) that there is some sense in which an A at 15 is equal to an A* at 16, which is just flatly wrong.

Perhaps if the parents at your child's school had focussed a bit less on the NQT and a bit more on trying to stop the early entry, everyone would be better off. But I'd bet a small round of drinks that at least some of them would have seen abandoning the early entry policy as a bad thing. It plays straight into the "my child's so advanced" meme, sadly.

that is fewer than the middle set class that was taught by the HoE but, even if your information about grades is correct, and I see no reason your DD would know? it was surely the HoEs job to monitor the NQTs class?

I am not defending the NQT per se, I am simply pointing out that she had neither the power, not the authority to have much influence over your DDs grade. She is only and NQT, the decisions, the marking, the lessons even the planning would have not really been down to her. Or they shouldn't have been.