2 weeks Ago By Calum Ross
A review of this year’s Higher History has upheld the “integrity” of the exam and blamed the “poor standard” of pupils for a major drop in the pass rate. Inquiries into the fall revealed that 81 per cent of markers of the Scottish History exam paper reported that the performance of candidates was lower or much lower than in 2023, and 90 per cent said it was lower or much lower than 2019. The review was carried out by the head of standards at the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA), with the findings scrutinised externally by the Welsh exam board.
Concerns were raised after 65.7 per cent of Higher History students attained an A, B or C grade in August this year, a drop of 13.1 percentage points when compared to 2023.
The pass rate had been was 78.7 per cent in 2023, having risen from 72.8 per cent in 2019, before the Covid pandemic.
Last year marked the return of coursework element of qualifications, for the first time since the coronavirus crisis. From the outset, the SQA said there had been “no change to the approach or standard of the Higher History question papers”, but that there had been a “drop in learners’ performance in the question papers”. However, following concerns from parents and teachers, and a meeting with Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth in September, the qualifications body announced a review of the way the History papers were marked, which was later expanded to look at the entire course.
The process was expected to take a few days but ended up taking almost two months. A 51-page report has now concluded that all stages of SQA’s normal processes were followed “rigorously and robustly” and that the Higher History exam team “acted with integrity throughout this process”. It also said the standard set in the assessments, including a particular paper on Scottish history that was the subject of concerns, was not higher than that for previous years.
However, the review did find that the marking instructions, developed alongside question papers, were “intentionally more detailed than in 2023”, and that teachers were “not aware of the more detailed marking instructions for 2024”. The report said candidates were not expected to be more specific when answering in order to gain marks than in previous years. “There is evidence that following the markers’ meeting, some markers were not clear about the standard to be applied in marking QP 2 (question paper 2).
There is no evidence that these concerns were raised strongly enough for the principal assessor to judge that further clarification of the marking instructions was required following the meeting,” the review said. It added: “Feedback from markers, who are all teachers, provided in their reports to SQA was overwhelmingly focused on the poor standard of responses provided by learners in this year’s examinations.” Despite the conclusions, the review found “areas for continuous improvement which could strengthen the way the education community works”.
This includes a consideration of whether there should be fewer options on exam papers for Higher History and potentially of other humanities subjects. It also urged the SQA to review the way feedback is provided by markers, and how this is considered and used appropriately. As part of this, the SQA should consider seeking formal, written feedback from markers immediately following every markers’ meeting instead of waiting until the end of the marking period.
The report also found that the SQA should ensure, when making changes to course specifications, that the intended consequences for teaching and learning “are made clear to and clearly understood by teachers”. The layout and presentation of marking instructions should also be reconsidered “to ensure clarity”. Martyn Ware, SQA director of policy, analysis and standards, said: “Our review of Higher History has been rigorous and robust with a wide range of evidence gathered and analysed.
“While the concerns raised by teachers and others were focused on the standard of marking, in practice this is just one stage in the process of standard-setting so the review looked at the full range of processes and procedures relating to marking and grading. “All of these processes and procedures were followed rigorously and the standard set in Higher History was not higher than in previous years.” Richard Harry, executive director of qualifications and assessment at WJEC, Wales’ largest awarding body, provided external scrutiny of the review.
He said: “I am content that the report’s conclusions are supported sufficiently”. The SQA has faced a series of controversies in recent years, including over the way it downgraded thousands of pupil grades when exams were cancelled in 2020. Then, in August this year, bosses at the agency were left red-faced when blank exam result emails were sent out to 7,500 learners.
The SQA is due to be replaced by Qualifications Scotland next year..
