GCSE review of marking vs remark (guide for dummies please)

[bookienh]

So I have read numerous times that, with the new GCSE guidelines, it is now a “review of marking” and not a remark, and that this is a significant change. But I am not sure I really understand the difference. Can someone wiser help me out?

My basic understanding is:

Review of marking: A check if the mark scheme has been applied correctly. So I assume that means that someone looks over the original marking for any mistakes, e.g. wrong level/band, missed marks, marks awarded incorrectly, marks tallied incorrectly.

Remark: A brand new marking of the paper, presumably without seeing the original marking?

Have I got it totally wrong?

[TeenTimesTwo]

My understanding:

With essay subjects such as English, marks are awarded in bands.
e.g. if there are 16 'technical accuracy' marks for an question it may be:
0-5 many simple words incorrect, missing full stops and capitals, other punctuation non existent or mis-used
6-10 simple words spelled correctly but errors on more complex words. Correct use of capitals and full-stops and some other punctuation.
11-16 Good range of punctuation to good effect. Spelling sound, even complex words.

Under a remark, an examiner could say - previous person gave this a 7 but I think it is worth 10.
Under a review of marking the examiner has to think it is actually banded incorrectly, so either they think it is worth at least 11 or it stays as a 7.

(NB totally made up example of banding).

[House1999]

This is very helpful information.

My daughter has just had a review of 3 religious studies papers. The grade and marks stayed the same.

I then decided to look at the scripts and have noticed she has been awarded marks that are at the bottom of each band.

So for example a 15 mark question she has been given a mark of 7. But in the same band it went up to 11. She has only been awarded the bottom of each band.

Is it worth me requesting a preliminary investigation?

Or is this acceptable?

Thank you

[MrsHamlet]

A review looks at whether there has been

• a clerical error - a page not scanned, marks added incorrectly
• a misapplication of the mark scheme - something marked incorrect that was correct, marks awarded for something that was incorrect
• a unreasonable exercise of academic judgement. So if the candidate has demonstrably shown all of the qualities of band 3 but been given a mark at the bottom of band 1, that might be unreasonable. But of their answer isn't quite secure in band 3, a mark in band 2 might be reasonable.

A mark of 7 at the bottom of a band when the band goes to 11 could be reasonable depending on the quality of the answer.

After a review, the next stage is an appeal. But reviews are carried out by senior examiners.

[JaffavsCookie]

MrsHamlet speaks the truth
remarks are not about what you would have given the paper, but more was the original marking unreasonable. This was an ofqual alteration to stop those with loads of ££ being able to gain an advantage by asking for lots of remarks.

[Flossiemoss]

Oh this is helpful. Thank you for starting this.
so ds is 7marks off a 4- they are sending it for a remark- so am I right in understanding from this they aren’t looking for extra marks as such but working out if the remarked agrees with the banding?

[JaffavsCookie]

Absolutely Flossiemoss. Fingers crossed for your ds.

[percypig]

The above posts are good summaries, the only thing I’d add is that for each question there is a tolerance level, which is connected to the level of reasonable academic judgment.

So if the tolerance is +/- 3 on a task and my mark would have been +4, then it will change for that task, because the mark awarded is not within the range of reasonable academic judgment. If my mark was +3 however, then it won’t change, because although I might think the original marker applied the mark scheme a little harshly, it’s within the tolerance.

This is why I’d always suggest the HoD should look at scripts before requesting a Review of Marking. I looked at some GCSE scripts earlier and I think 1 was very harshly marked on 1 question in particular, so will recommend a RoM. Another one, while I would like to ‘find’ an extra mark or 2, I don’t think it would change because it’s not an unreasonable mark, because it’s within tolerance.

[House1999]

@percypig

The above posts are good summaries, the only thing I’d add is that for each question there is a tolerance level, which is connected to the level of reasonable academic judgment.

So if the tolerance is +/- 3 on a task and my mark would have been +4, then it will change for that task, because the mark awarded is not within the range of reasonable academic judgment. If my mark was +3 however, then it won’t change, because although I might think the original marker applied the mark scheme a little harshly, it’s within the tolerance.

This is why I’d always suggest the HoD should look at scripts before requesting a Review of Marking. I looked at some GCSE scripts earlier and I think 1 was very harshly marked on 1 question in particular, so will recommend a RoM. Another one, while I would like to ‘find’ an extra mark or 2, I don’t think it would change because it’s not an unreasonable mark, because it’s within tolerance.

Thank you for explaining.

How could I find out the tolerance level for each question?

Who decides on the tolerance level?

[MrsHamlet]

Tolerances are set in the marking process for each question. But reviews don't consider tolerances in the process. The question is simply whether a mark was reasonable.

[catndogslife]

The other aspect of the review is to make sure that all pages and questions have been marked. These days different questions or sections on the paper may be marked by different examiners, so it is important that everything is collated correctly. There are suitable notations to use if question / page has been read and no marks have been awarded.
Blank pages and any extra sheets of paper used must also be checked.

[MadameMinimes]

It’s not as simple as having to be in the wrong band. It just has to be unreasonable or the marking criteria or instructions have to be misapplied.

For example, the last time I marked for Edexcel GCSE history there was a key mark point for each level. That was the default starting point for a mark in that level. If you gave less than the KMP in a level you had to justify why in the annotation. If a marker was awarding marks lower than the KMP without reason then it might go up on review without the level changing.

Another example might be an examiner applying the wrong mark ceiling for an error. So if they were meant to limit to 7/12 for not going beyond the stimulus but they were capping at 6 by mistake then that could also go up on review.