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

SQA why just why?

Discussion in 'Scotland - education news' started by subman68, Aug 4, 2020.

  1. subman68

    subman68 Occasional commenter

    Ok you have all seen what they have done. Sqa have created a massive workload for school sqa coordinator and lots of departments. Just how have they done the results. Without giving to much we have over 600 results that art down from the estimate. Brilliant sqa. Just brilliant
     
    aypi and bigjimmy2 like this.
  2. offhegoes

    offhegoes New commenter

    The tricky part is that the time limits for informing the SQA of intention to appeal include a substantial period of time with teachers still on holiday. Those 600 results could quickly be narrowed down since many probably don’t have the evidence required to back them up enough for an appeal.

    The only people who can quickly answer this in most cases are class teachers. I do feel sorry for SQA Coordinators right now, who are likely fielding concerns from pupils/parents, collating everything and then essentially waiting for class teachers to return to see what can be done.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  3. subman68

    subman68 Occasional commenter

    I think it says a lot about what the sqa think about teachers. The have ignored teacher estimates in the tens of thousands across Scotland
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  4. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    I wouldn't feel sorry for the SQA Coordinator at all. They'll be a DHT and getting paid a good whack, dealing with "frustrated" parents and children shouldn't be too much of a burden - time-wise yes, but workload, nope, sorry.

    Besides at my last school the Coordinator basically dictated estimated grades; of course, if they were too low we would be "forced" to up them (I didn't do this, and told my FH to do it herself so there was traceability).
     
    sicilypat likes this.
  5. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    You'd think the SQA was there to serve the education system and not the other way round.
     
    aypi and autoq like this.
  6. offhegoes

    offhegoes New commenter


    Perhaps I’m more inclined to sympathy as our SQA Coordinator went with the estimated grades even though our estimates were a fair bit up on previous years (although we had been improving year on year anyway). I think he (and our subject PT) felt the SQA would trust the estimates given. I really don’t want to know how many grades were adjusted down across the school.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  7. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Lead commenter

    Ours in a maingrade teacher who just gets some protected time.
     
    Marisha and bigjimmy2 like this.
  8. subman68

    subman68 Occasional commenter

    25% of grades changed 97% of those put down. 3% up. Now just how do you put estimates up?
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  9. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    £20 a week to deal with something the SLT can't be bothered with and knows comes with a lot of hassle for little recognition?
     
    sicilypat likes this.
  10. Effinbankers

    Effinbankers Lead commenter

    The don't rally give a flying eff about what teachers think. We've hated what it has become for years. No empathy for the workload they have created, its way or the high way, its secretive come into my club ways, and its kevlar vest approach to valid criticism. And I haven't mentioned the over long exams, the units and the utterly ghastly assignments

    It has become an organisation more intent on making money and sending its employees to Kuwait and China instead of what it was formed to do.

    It needs overhauled, its main board and executives should be removed and its processes radically overhauled. Or in common parlance, abolished.

    I am sad what I've seen today? Yes. Pupils getting downgraded to fit a bell curve standard deviation graph. Pandering to schools in affluent areas.
    Am I surprised? No.

    As Jimmy, I think has been saying (sorry Jimmy if it's not you) - why would anyone want to do any work for this mob? By being on their payroll you condone what they are. All teachers should resign en masse.
     
    autoq, Marisha, borges33 and 3 others like this.
  11. bigjimmy2

    bigjimmy2 Lead commenter

    Don't know if it was me, effin. I certainly agree though!
     
    Effinbankers likes this.
  12. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Lead commenter

    Some people are doormats. Same folk who come WTA time say "oh I don't pay any attention to it so I voted in favour".
     
    Marisha and bigjimmy2 like this.
  13. AckyWacky

    AckyWacky New commenter

  14. AckyWacky

    AckyWacky New commenter

    I'm trying to get my head around what has happened. If the pass rates are up how come so many pupils had their grades lower than the estimates?
     
  15. grayst

    grayst Occasional commenter

    One of the (many) things wrong with SQA (note I do not dignify them with a "the") is that it is, quite literally, out of control.

    England has multiple exam boards, regulated by Ofqual.

    Wales has WJEC, regulated by Qualifications Wales.

    N Ireland has CCEA, which at least claims that its "CCEA Regulation" arm operates independently of the rest.

    Only in Scotland - which has a significantly larger education system than Wales or NI - are we stuck with a unitary "authoritah" which regulates itself and marks its own homework.

    And yes, their antics do often remind me of Eric Cartman.

    (I really liked the story of them paying £800 a night for hotel rooms for a doomed sales expedition to some backwater city in China. Can't help thinking that in that sort of place, £800 a night would buy significantly more than a room, dinner and breakfast....)
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  16. alendra

    alendra New commenter

    Depends on what they were estimated. They may have been estimated an A, but got a B. It's a pass, just lower than the estimated grade. From data I've seen, which admittedly is limited to my centre, higher estimates are more likely to have been downgraded than lower ones.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  17. subman68

    subman68 Occasional commenter

    Lots of A downgraded to B. Lots of C now D. D is now a pass (it is not). This is the one that hit the poorer kids the most. They were hoping for a higher but get a D.

    the one I do t get is the ranking. My school rank 1,2,4,5 get the grade but pupil ranked 3 goes down. That had happens in a number of subjects. Yip enjoy the workload first week back doing appeals.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  18. Effinbankers

    Effinbankers Lead commenter

    The pass rates and grade suppression are kind of two separate issues (only when a kid gets punted down to an F does it show). It's the latter that I think has caused more concerns - whole swathes of kids averaging 85% through the year and ending up with Bs and Cs which doesn't show up of the headline pass figures.

    The whole things is a fustercluck. I remember the 2000 fiasco and this is up there with rank incompetence.
     
    Marisha and bigjimmy2 like this.
  19. grayst

    grayst Occasional commenter

    In that case the whole exercise is seriously FUBAR'd and there needs to be an enquiry.

    My own little example is that their methodology document says, in plain black and white, that if a centre has no prior history of running a course then its estimates will be accepted unchanged.

    I presented a candidate for a course we had never, ever run before. His result was changed - only from A1 to A2, but it still shouldn't have happened. I intend to appeal this one on principle.
     
    bigjimmy2 likes this.
  20. BillyBobJoe

    BillyBobJoe Lead commenter

    I think that is at least easy to explain. I think we all know that some proportion of our students will screw up and do less well than expected. They sometimes overperform but rarely to the same extent (you might well have an A candidate drop to a C but far less often the other way). So when you make your estimates you are inclined to assume everyone does "as expected". Problem is, in a normal year not everyone does "as expected", and you can't be expected to guess who would have bombed the exam, so you end up with everything being moved down a few notches to match the data with past years. I can't see a good way of doing it, sad to say.
     

Share This Page