13th August 2016 1:00
By Blue Tutors
This week, eagerly awaited exam results will be announced after weeks of various exam boards furiously marking thousands of scrips; but, that isn’t the end of the story. Exam results can be appealed if a school decides to return scripts that they feel were inaccurately marked. There has been a dramatic rise in the number of scripts being sent back for remarking in recent years, putting increasing pressure on the system to complete remarks in time.
So why are so many scripts being sent back? Surveys have shown that teachers’ confidence in exam marking has fallen over the last few years. On top of this, recent research has found that markers tend to be more generous the second time around. Although only one in five remarked exams resulted in a change in grade last year, the greater leniency means that while marks can go either up or down, they tend to increase on remarking. The incentive for the student is clear, with a couple of marks sometimes making the difference between admission to a top University or missing their offer. There is also increasing pressure on schools to deliver against targets, resulting in many schools sending back borderline scripts with no obvious errors for remarking if they are a just shy of a higher mark in order to improve their own statistics. Ofqual, the regulatory body for the examination boards across the UK, says that this practice undermines the entire marking system.
This year, in an attempt to “clamp down” on appeals, Ofqual have changed the rules surrounding remarking. Marks will only be changed if there is a clear administrative error or the examiner has not followed the marks scheme. This eliminates the possibility of scooping up extra marks through a more generous interpretation of the marks scheme by the second examiner, which particularly affects long answer questions and language or humanities papers. The changes are meant to minimise the problems caused by the intrinsic subjectivity of marking, and streamline the appeals system, making it “clearer, more consistent and fairer”. With a lower chance of an increased mark, the new system will hopefully make schools more cautious as to which papers they submit for remarking. This in turn will speed up the process which currently takes up to three weeks, by which time university places and accommodation are often full.
Many claim that this will further disadvantages those in state schools. Remarking is charged at up to £50 per script, with schools baring the cost. If a mark is changed, the school is refunded the fee, however state schools are much less likely to take the risk than independent schools that can invoice parents to recuperate the loss. Even lower chances of success means that students at more risk-averse state schools will be affected more than those at private, fee-paying institutions. Parents, teachers and schools have also criticised Ofquad for its rushed implementation of the changes. The new system is being phased in, starting with physics, religious studies and geography this year, in order to allow exam boards time to adjust. However, having only been announced as schools broke up for the summer, the last minute changes are causing confusion. Head teachers argue that bring in the changes so fast will cause uncertainty and inconsistency, which could have lifelong consequences for this year’s students. What is more, making it more difficult to appeal grades does not solve the crisis of faith in the marking system as a whole. The general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers demands more rigorous, transparent marking, and insists that we need to incentivise exam boards to get it right the first time round, rather than penalising schools for trying to ensure that their students’ hard work is recognised and rewarded.