1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

sending SATS back for remarking!!

Discussion in 'Primary' started by gully, Jun 29, 2011.

  1. Yes I completely agree - we spend countless hours teaching children this, yet on the day some of these things simply disapper from their minds!

    We had one child who wrote a script as if he was a live reporter at the scene and another child who recounted her own recount breaking experience. [​IMG]
    All you can do is look in frustration.

    I don't however like the fact that the mark scheme has its own secret formula as to what actually makes a perfect piece of writing. I also found out from a colleague who marked writing papers in 2007, that marker are given strict guidelines on how to interpret the mark scheme. I find it a bit unfair and is one of reasons why we are often baffled that the marks given don't correlate with the mark scheme.
  2. razziegyp

    razziegyp New commenter

    Believe me, many many kids all over the country did that- but we were told not to mark them down too much for this, as it's a style of journalism that children in fact would be very familiar with- in magazines etc.
  3. jeb4green

    jeb4green New commenter

    It definitely is £9 for each paper returned but you only get charged if the remarking does not change the level.
    You can send back reading, writing or both if you feel that it will change the level for that element or English overall.
    One thing I learnt last year was not to make any notes or marks on the papers you are sending back.As a novice, I merrily went through the papers putting stars by sections or questions where I thought errors had been made - only to be told later it could lead to the papers being returned without being looked at! Use post-it notes which you can remove before you send them off. Some of our returned papers last year were awarded an extra 3 marks which did change levels.
  4. We were told to Mark them down!
  5. jnet51

    jnet51 New commenter

    Wary of sending papers back, as last year we had a borderline level 3/4 (1 mark short) whose spelling had been marked incorrectly - 1 of the words that had been marked as incorrect was spelt correctly and this took him into the next spelling band. Clear cut case - or so we thought. When the paper came back re-marked, the child had been awarded 1 more spelling mark but deducted 2 marks on his composition and effect!!!!
  6. markuss

    markuss Occasional commenter

    It happens! You have to take the rough with the smooth.
  7. Not to mention the ones who missed the point completely and wrote a nice little story about how Johnny broke a record, then went to bed, then got up and went to school and went on holiday... and you get the picture!
    Or the ones who spent about 30 minutes colouring in the little picture of the trophy (which was just tempting them really putting that on the paper!). Mind you - a relative marks GCSE maths and got a pretty much empty script once, with a wonderfully drawn naked lady on the back page that obviously took up the entire exam time limit!
  8. markuss

    markuss Occasional commenter

    Oh, lovely!
    The "prove it in a test" model is so obviously so seriously flawed for NC English Writing, you must point it out over and over to children, parents, SLT, governors etc!
  9. I've marked English SATs in previous years and the extra detail and information that markers are given on their training days can really sway you from one band to another. More specific detail can be cascaded down from supervisors and those above very late in the day which can have a huge impact on the marks you award. As teachers we're not in on these little secrets. Acceptable answers for the reading paper are added during the training day which teachers don't see and the DNA can be very difficult to distinguish from those examples given in the mark scheme.
    Very frustrating all round but I also totally agree with the appalling and random application of the mark scheme on our papers - no pattern or sense and as stated above lots of crossing out on the front of the reading paper which does nothing for confidence!
    PS. Edexcel seemed particularly desperate to have me sign up again this year - can't understand why they're struggling to recruit markers!
  10. I also feel reassured of everyone's frustrations having experienced an awful few days, feeling gutted for children at our school, which is clearly a fantastic school. About one quarter of our writing papers are going to have to be sent back, mainly borderline level 4 to 5's, but a few level 3 to 4's. The handwriting has generally been awarded 1's (unworthy) and the writing is off the map, with composition and effect greatly undermarked as well as punctuation (only half marks eventhough a wide range of advanced punctuation has been used). It is frustrating and extremely unfair to see children who have worked their socks off and consistently produced level 5 work across genres, looking like they are a 3a/4c!
  11. Lots of our seemed to get high marks for text structure and organisation (lots of 7s originally) then were marked down later on, they had a flash, by-line, lead paragraph, caption for the photo etc and we can't see why they've now only been awarded 2 or 3 for that section! Not too much direct speech, inclusion of reported speech etc! Been teaching year 6 for quite a few years and never had such a problem with marks before! I know the same marker marked all of them but they don't seem to have been very consistent.
  12. razziegyp

    razziegyp New commenter

    Virtually no particular features of journalistic writing were mentioned in the mark scheme or training (exception being direct quotes), so, rightly or wrongly, markers were not specifically looking for these and were certainly not directed to look out for them and tick them off as evidence of good writing. With TS &O it was much more about cohesion and coherence.

  13. Forgot to add that you need to click on Reviews [​IMG]
  14. Thanks, works perfectly!
  15. I agree with this in part. I teach a Y5/6 mixed class and as a result I am quite tough with my interpretation of the mark schemes (not to then inflate Y6 results, but to be accurate and realistic). I find the reading, for most children, quite fair when compared with my teacher assessment, but the writing seems inflated no matter how strict I am. Last year our literacy co-ordinator moderated my Y5 writing and increased the levels of some children. I had 3A's becoming 4A's!

    We haven't had our SATs results back, but we have had the papers. Generally they look OK, but I'll wait for the results before I relax.
  16. I expect he'd overlook the odd "should of / could of..."
  17. Surely the word is 'have' not of...
    Anyway what was OP?
  18. markuss

    markuss Occasional commenter

    If spelling's not being marked, then there'll be no penalty for "should of", surely. (More likely grammar credit if "should" is used appropriately.)
  19. otters258

    otters258 New commenter

    Indeed once we got past the headline shockers: the Level 5s given 13 marks for long writing etc we decided some hard evidence was needed to support our belief that this was a complete mess up. So we have had copies of all our long writing re-marked by a SATs marker and 3/4s of the children were awarded higher marks the second time and not just 1 or 2 extra but lots of 3s, 4s, and 5s and even a couple of examples of a 7 and 8 mark increase!!
    We are going to send all ours back on the basis that the mark scheme has not been applied properly across the whole cohort. We know it will get us nowhere (only 244 individual appeals were upheld last year) but we think saying the whole lot is a fiasco makes a stronger statement to everyone: children, parents, governors etc.
    Haven't even looked at the short and the reading yet. Same marker of course.

Share This Page