Because the pupils did not sit the exams. Usually, that correction would presumably happen

due to pupils performing badly on the day of the exam through nerves, mistakes or just generally falling apart (or other circumstances effecting their performance).

But you simply cannot tell which pupils those would have been through an algorithm.

As a lawyer do you really think its rational (or not wednesbury unreasonable) to give a kid who was predicted a C but couldn't sit the exam, an E grade because the bottom 2 pupils (who may have done f**k all work or barely attended school) in the equivalent year group last year got E's? Or even in some cases kids have been given U's. Because that's what they did.

I think the whole algorithm thing absolutely stinks and is manifestly unfair and although i can see what they were trying to do and don;t think they did it on purpose or to favour the independent schools (who have also seen plenty of grades downgraded) I just think its staggering that nobody said "hang on a minute surely this isn't right" either very early on in the process or once the results became evident.

Posted By: Jim, Aug 17, 15:31:42