Low A level assessed grade from teacher who doesn't like DS - WWYD?

[Wonderwine]

DS has always had a problem with one of his A level teachers who doesn't seem to like him (a vibe we picked up early on at parents' evening).
Some of it is of his own making, as in Year 12 he was a bit disorganised/lazy and didn't do very well in his mocks. However he admitted this and has pulled his finger out and worked hard this year.

We had a bit of an issue with this teacher when A level grades were being predicted as he predicted a B for DS on the basis of his mock exam, whereas all his other work pointed to an A being appropriate. In the end we challenged it with the school as it was important for his UCAS application and the teacher reluctantly changed it. However he said that he 'saw DS as more of a 'B' sort of person' and that DS would need to do something very 'different' to change that .

Anyway, DS has worked hard this year, but still feel this teacher dislikes him (and us) for challenging the prediction.
As part of his A level he had a piece of internally assessed work
(20%) which this teacher has given a 'B' equivalent mark. It is a small class and DS knows it is the lowest mark. Knowing the usual quality of the work of some of his peers, he feels that he has been unfairly marked harshly.

What if anything can he do? The teacher is also the head of dept, so there is no higher teacher to appeal to.
I don't know if all the projects get moderated by the board, or just a sample of them.

DS has been told he can appeal to this teacher, but he has no information about why he has been given the mark he has, so doesn't know on what basis he would appeal?

4 x A Levels (including FM) is not extreme and is not the issue at stake here. I am always a bit baffled by the way posters pile in and attack someone who has raised what seems a legitimate concern. No one (even teachers who I respect hugely) is perfect and immune from making a mistake. When we adopt an unquestioning attitude to a whole class of individuals, we are heading for trouble. Year 13 is critical and what seems like a small thing can have big repercussions and so if there is a process by which OP can ensure that her son's work has been correctly marked, why would she not? If the original mark still stands, it should be no skin off anyone's nose and if not, then it was the right call.

I didn't say 4 A levels is extreme Ford I said it's a lot of work and not for the lazy.

FordPerfect

No-one has said that she shouldn't push for a remark, just that she should/may have to lay the blame somewhere other than the teacher.

Thanks FordPerfect and Helpmum - I was also a bit surprised by the turn this thread took!

BitOf - no, if you read my OP, you'll see that I said in Year 12 he was a bit disorganised/lazy and didn't do very well in his mocks and I later clarified that I meant end of summer exam, not mocks.

The link Kitty provided has convinced me that whatever is going on isn't being properly handled in process terms at least, and that is worth taking one step further.

Boney - if you read the JCQ document it specifically says "these materials could include a copy of their marked work" How can they decide if the mark is fair and reasonable if they can't see how it has been derived?

Mrskeats - you said that 4 A levels was part of the problem - we really can't know that.

I'm an exams officer - The new JCQ rules are that all NEA marks have to be given to each student and they have the right to request a remark if they feel the work has not been marked correctly according to the mark scheme. The work must be remarked by somebody different to the teacher who originally marked it. The A level marks have to be submitted in a couple of weeks so this will have to be done asap. There's loads of info about this on the JCQ website. You would be better off asking for the work to be remarked now than waiting until after the results, although the remarked grade is not guaranteed to go up and if it goes down it is the lower mark which will be submitted to the exam board.

Thanks user - that's really helpful. His teacher said that another teacher in the department reviewed their projects and his recommended marks and 'agreed with them.' However it should be noted that this other teacher is junior and reports to DS's teacher, so perhaps less likely to challenge/disagree?
Does this mean that a third (external?) person would need to conduct any requested review?

Unconscious bias is a thing. Teachers aren't immune, none of us are. I'd look into the remark for your own reassurance. Also don't see a problem at all in helping a 6th form student navigate this difficult territory, particularly if you're the one likely to be stumping up for any charges. Even if the mark doesn't change, I think you and DS would feel better for it.

This is an interesting question as this is the first year of this new rule. None of ours asked for their mark to be reviewed but I would be interested to know who would have reviewed it. Surely someone external?

Wonderwine

The pertinent word there is "could".

If you want the work remarked, which you do, you don't need a copy of the marked work. You have already decided that the work has been moderated wrongly.

Bobbybobbins

It will be interesting to see how they manage to get a competent assessor of some of the less main stream subjects.

Boney - yes, I take your point, but where does it say that a teacher can't provide a marked project? What other 'materials' would assist a student in considering whether to request a review?

You're making assumptions - we aren't necessarily saying that he'd definitely want a remark, he just wants to see if the marking has been consistent and fair in the first place/ if the mark scheme has been correctly applied etc.

It's a two-stage process.

Op you've already decided all that already. You know that your ds has only been predicted a B because the teacher is a. Biased and b. Incompetent. Nothing whatsoever to do with your ds dossing his way through y12

Strikes me either
a) the teacher has been over-marking all U6 year and latter part of L6 year where student was getting straight As and A*s and was predicted an A prior to one lower exam result
b) teacher has under-marked the coursework for some reason, and unconscious bias is a possible reason; that's not a slur, we are all subject to unconscious biases, however determinedly we try to apply objective criteria.
or
c) something went unusually wrong for the student in this particular piece of work compared to his other work, which could be explained to the student.

It's not unreasonable for a student who has been getting straight As and A*s all year to be surprised and consider a remark when they suddenly get a B on an assessment that they thought went well. If it was an exam you'd ask to look at the script if you could and check there were no obvious marking errors wouldn't you?

I think during year 12 4 A levels is a lot and it requires hard work and application.
Strikes me whatever anyone says it’s the teachers fault. Not no effort in year 12.
Crack on then.

he was concentrating on his AS levels in Maths/Further Maths which actually count towards his A2s

Not anymore it doesn’t. They’ve gone Linear since Sept 2017. Do check this with your school.

And no, that link doesn’t contradict what he has been told re the time to review (two weeks is what most are giving) or that teachers must give breakdowns of the mark-we don’t, only the mark scheme to aid him in assessing the work. However, yes, the review must be done by someone else. Which is why most schools are charging a substantial fee to pay someone else to review it.

Is it a Computer Science NEA?

oh god, scrap my last post-of course your son is year 13

Wonderwine

You say that you don't necessarily want a remark, but you won't be happy unless you get exactly what you want in the way that you want it.

At the moment you are able to request a remark at no cost to yourself as long as you do it with in the 2 week time frame.

Your bias against the teacher means that you won't be happy with anything else.

Can only speak for my subject but it's not uncommon that a group of able, but not phenomenal, students think that because they are clever they will walk their coursework, don't engage with feedback properly etc and then come out a grade lower on coursework (which we then end up having to do endless support to pull them up because they were too lazy to start with and think they are entitled to an A). Our coursework is different to the exam and requires much more development over time. Those that want a quick A and a spoon fed grade don't get it.

The teacher could be biased, but it's not in their interest to pull NEA down. We moderated before Easter and I pulled some down by a mark or 2 becauae the teacher had been too generous abd also added marks to some where I felt we could push to the next band. Schools want thr safety net of good NEA marks.

I never get this but the teacher doesn't like me. Who has the inclination to take a personal dislike to a child and then do thina which affect their own results/workload/reputation negatively?

The following wording is being used in policy documents at several state schools I've just looked at in relation to internal appeals (I've left the school name in - a state school in Kingston) - but note that some schools inserted different time scales:

^1. The Hollyfield School will ensure that candidates are informed of their centre assessed marks so that they may request a review of the centre’s marking before marks are submitted to the awarding body.

1. The Hollyfield School will inform candidates that they may request copies of materials (for example, a copy of their marked work, the relevant specification, the mark scheme and any other associated subject-specific documents) to assist them in considering whether to request a review of the centre’s marking of the assessment
2. The Hollyfield School will, having received a request for copies of materials, promptly make them available to the candidate within 5 calendar days.
3. The Hollyfield School will provide candidates with sufficient time in order to allow them to review copies of materials and reach a decision.
4. Requests for reviews of marking must be made in writing within 5 calendar days of receiving copies of the requested materials by completing the internal appeals form and handing it to Mr ... ... Deputy Headteacher(page 7 of this document).
5. The Hollyfield School will allow 7 calendar days for the review to be carried out, to make any necessary changes to marks and to inform the candidate of the outcome, all before the awarding body’s deadline.
6. The Hollyfield School will ensure that the review of marking is carried out by an assessor who has appropriate competence, has had no previous involvement in the assessment of that candidate and has no personal interest in the review.
7. The Hollyfield School will instruct the reviewer to ensure that the candidate’s mark is consistent with the standard set by the centre.
8. The candidate will be informed in writing of the outcome of the review of the centre’s marking.

10. The outcome of the review of the centre’s marking will be made known to the head of centre and will be logged as a complaint. A written record will be kept and made available to the awarding body upon request. Should the review of the centre’s marking bring any irregularity in procedures to light, the awarding body will be informed immediately.^

The op could look at recent examiner's reports for the relevant coursework element of the qualification/exam board her ds is taking - they usually detail what was good/bad about each year's coursework and where candidates lost marks etc. - plus they make comments on teacher marking.

You really are determined that the grade is wrong and it's all down to the teacher's bias aren't you? Not your DS's laziness / disorganisation? Or that he didn't actually produce a grade A piece of work. So go for a remark if that's what you want.

BitOut - I'm beginning to find your posts quite aggressive and offensive now.
Where exactly is your evidence on this thread to support comments like this:
your ds dossing his way through y12

I said in Year 12 he was a bit disorganised/lazy and didn't do very well in his mocks (and later clarified that should have been summer exam)
NB - in year 12, not throughout ALL of year 12, he was a bit disorganised and he didn't do very well in ONE exam. He has had A*/A grades in everything else.

By all means contribute to the thread, but please read the facts and don't make up random bullshit to suit whatever agenda it is you have .

As I said before, I came on here to explore and discuss what options he might have. I/We haven't decided anything. I'm not convinced of anything. I'm interested only in making sure that the marks are fair and reasonable.
Thanks to the posters who have provided useful thoughts, perspectives and links. Probably best I step away from this thread now as clearly some MNers have issues with it.

I wonder why the JCQ introduced this new ruling? Did they have concerns about inconsistent marking of teacher assessed coursework at a local level? From what I've just been reading - external moderation only deals with consistency of marking at a national level - does an external moderator ever change a single candidate's marks without amending all the marks at the same centre?

I wonder why the JCQ introduced this new ruling? Did they have concerns about inconsistent marking of teacher assessed coursework at a local level?

No, it was to stop the amount of students demanding remarks on 'coursework' in August, with rarely no changes made to the marks on offer. This is in direct contrast to exam scripts that do often change upwards or downwards on individual papers and parents/students assume the same for NEA (or old controlled assessments) which is not the case.

JCQ's reasoning is to reduce the amount of admin required (all NEAs/Coursework for that cohort needs to be reviewed rather than just one candidate, in August) in direct response to the shortage of exam moderators for little to no benefit to the student.