Unfairness of A-levels judged by algorithm
After defending the methodology used to replace exam results in Scotland last week, Nicola Sturgeon has performed a complete about-face. The First Minister issued an unequivocal apology to more than 120,000 pupils who were marked down from grades predicted by their teachers and promised to “fix it”. This involves reversing the downgrading decisions taken by the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) which, just a few days ago, were said to be essential to underpin the credibility of the system.
The SQA moderated the predictions made by teachers in such a way that children in poor performing schools were marked down, including high achievers expected to do well. We said at the time that this was unjust and Ms Sturgeon has reached the same conclusion. She was right to observe that the tendency among politicians was to think too much about the overall system and not enough about the individuals within it.
The likelihood is that reviews will reinstate many of the predicted grades, which means this cohort of school leavers will have higher overall results than others. But as they have been uniquely affected by the Covid shutdown, why should they not also be treated differently from past generations? To add yet another handicap to those that already afflict them would be outrageous.
The English results are out tomorrow, and similar methodology has been used to model the outcomes, which means the same controversy is about to engulf Boris Johnson. Indeed, the scale of the downgrading is expected to be even greater than in Scotland, with 40 per cent of teacher predictions likely to be moderated.
One big difference is that, in England, individual students and their parents cannot appeal directly against a predicted result. They must go through the school and then only on technical grounds or if “discrimination or bias” is proven. The universities minister has written to vice-chancellors asking them to keep places open for pupils pursuing appeals – but this will only have any credibility if aggrieved high performers are given a direct chance to dispute a lower grade than expected.
Mr Johnson says he “understands” the anxieties felt by pupils and parents and hopes to get back to proper assessments in the coming school year. But that will not be good enough for youngsters who find their chances of attending a good university blighted by a computer algorithm.