Hello all
This thread has gone quiet now, but here are a few thoughts about the matters
of principle which it raised when it waas current.
It is a good idea to highlight inaccuracies in publications and to air
problems amongst a newsgroup. I welcome the light shed, however there have
been times when we seem to have created more heat than light.
I am not qualified to comment on the ZBB questions. But as far as books are
concerned, it is best to write to the author/editor concerned as most authors
are glad to sort out errors and ommissions. It should not be assumed that
authors belong to newsgroups, or that they prefer this sort of arms length
discussion to a direct contact.
It would be comforting to think that we had authors of god-like authority.
The reality is quite different. There are no authors who make no mistakes and
if you are waiting for one to appear you will have to do without books.
Something similar might be said of chief examiners. The number of people who
are prepared to put themselves out all summer for the money on offer is
pitiful. We are very lucky to have as chief examiners people who are capable
in their subject and understanding of the realities of students in the
relevant age group. Some academics have better subject knowledge, but fail to
accept the limitations of the 18-year old brain. They have little knowledge
of what can be expected of the D/E student. They would not be of great
advantage to us even if they were available, which at the present time they
are not. Peter Maunder is a notable exception, being well aware of the
realities.
I do know from working with him that Ian Marcouse has a definite policy of
avoiding overly complex explanations and simplifying terminology wherever
possible. I suspect this is at the root of at least a part of this discussion.
QCA scrutinies are designed to ensure that QCA guidelines are followed at all
times. They require that students are given credit for good answers and that
mark schemes are discussed at standardisation. I personally have from time to
time found mistakes in the questions or the mark schemes AQA, Edexcel and
OCR. Some of these i know to have been put right in the correct way at
standardisation or later.
It is vitally important that all teachers who have an objection to something
write direct to the relevant party, author/exam board or whoever it may be.
But keep in mind that examiners have a duty to provide teachers who are often
not too well qualified with rules of thumb which will see them through
without confusion and to avoid overly complex explanations which students
will not understand.
There is a desperate shortage of good examiners in general at the present
time. If you care about this issue and have the relevant experience, sign up.
You will be paid at hospital cleaning rates but you will get valuable
experience which may help you to become influential in the long run.
Nancy Wall
|