Pedants' Paradise

[gurnemanz]

I thought Irma was a hurric'n in this country. Now the Amercan hurry cane seems to be taking over.

[Pulcinella]

I thought Irma was a hurric'n in this country. Now the Amercan hurry cane seems to be taking over.

Perhaps one for Pronunciation watch, gurney (he wrote pedantically!)?

[ardcarp]

there was a philosophical view that average ability remained fairly stable, year on year. And what we were measuring was the relative ability of the candidates

One area of measuring (mainly) children's achievement which has not been dumbed down is music. I used to be an examiner for a certain well-known college of music, and we used to have to attend sessions at HQ every so often to standardise (that was the word used in those days) our marking. It was always drummed into us that we were judging things (insofar as we, frail humans, could) on an absolute scale, and that we should never be influenced by the playing of other candidates. Nor should we worry if at one particular centre in one particular year the standards might be lower/higher than we expected. We also had to guard against judging our own specialist instrument more severely than others. This came out very clearly, I remember, at one HQ session where 'specimen candidates' played in front of us as if taking an exam. We then had to fill in our mark sheets privately and only compare notes afterwards. One young oboist who to most of us showed exceptional musical flair was marked down quite heavily (not even getting 'Merit') by the oboe player on the panel.

I would find it very strange if, as FF suggests happens in A-levels, a fixed proportion of (say) Grade 8 violinists were to get Distinctions, a fixed proportion Merits, etc, etc. It must vary from year to year.The only marks we were banned from giving was one less than a Merit and one less than a Distinction. Otherwise it was down to our albeit 'standardised' judgement.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

One area of measuring (mainly) children's achievement which has not been dumbed down is music. I used to be an examiner for a certain well-known college of music, and we used to have to attend sessions at HQ every so often to standardise (that was the word used in those days) our marking. It was always drummed into us that we were judging things (insofar as we, frail humans, could) on an absolute scale, and that we should never be influenced by the playing of other candidates. Nor should we worry if at one particular centre in one particular year the standards might be lower/higher than we expected. We also had to guard against judging our own specialist instrument more severely than others. This came out very clearly, I remember, at one HQ session where 'specimen candidates' played in front of us as if taking an exam. We then had to fill in our mark sheets privately and only compare notes afterwards. One young oboist who to most of us showed exceptional musical flair was marked down quite heavily (not even getting 'Merit') by the oboe player on the panel.

This is exactly the sort of thing that happens in the marking of GCSE English papers. Every year, all the Exam. Markers congregate at an hotel near to the Exam. Boards' headquarters for a Standardisation Meeting, at which all are given the same batch of exam. answers to mark, all of which are genuine responses to the questions and all of which have been previously marked by the Chief Examiners. Each is then discussed and the features to look out for are then discussed. Then everyone goes home and marks their own set of scripts ( = the kids' answer papers) returning them to their individual Moderator for fine tuning. New Examiners are given extra guidance; experienced and trusted Markers' work is subjected only to random sampling. Scripts receiving Grades markedly different from those predicted by the Schools will also be looked at by the Senior Examiners.

The idea is that the same script will be given approximately the same mark by all Markers, even if individual responses might get a mark or two above or below the agreed Standard - all candidates should receive a final Grade that all Markers would agree upon.

[french frank]

I would find it very strange if, as FF suggests happens in A-levels, a fixed proportion of (say) Grade 8 violinists were to get Distinctions, a fixed proportion Merits, etc, etc. It must vary from year to year.

There was indeed the expectation that results would vary, but not that they would go up year after year until large numbers were getting top marks and candidates became indistinguishable from each other. (Especially as pressures were increasing on teachers, budgets were being squeezed, lower down classes were getting bigger. But, lo! grades got ever better.

A practical subject like music must be different, but considering that a couple of years (still less a decade) after taking exams in, say, history or English literature, students have little more than a vague memory of what they were taught (and what they revised frantically for before the exams), what exactly did the grades mean? Especially since they didn't study 'all' of history or 'all' of English literature but merely the year's curriculum, which varied from year to year. Gradually improving in instrumental expertise through teaching and practice is quite different.

[ardcarp]

The idea is that the same script will be given approximately the same mark by all Markers, even if individual responses might get a mark or two above or below the agreed Standard - all candidates should receive a final Grade that all Markers would agree upon.

If that is what happens I am reassured. I got the impression that the 'raw marks' which individual examiners award are scaled up or scaled down to fir the notion of average ability to which FF refers.

[french frank]

If that is what happens I am reassured. I got the impression that the 'raw marks' which individual examiners award are scaled up or scaled down to fir the notion of average ability to which FF refers.

We did what ferney said. All examiners marked perhaps a dozen or so scripts before the meeting to get an idea of the kind of thing candidates were writing; then we had a meeting in which a 'marking scheme' was drawn up after discussions about the marked scripts (e.g. 'do we take one mark off or half a mark for mistake x'); then all examiners marked another batch of scripts based on the agreed marking scheme and sent them in to Chief Examiners and Assistant Chief (me ). If one examiner's marks were seriously out of kilter with the scheme, they would have to do another test batch; and finally they would be 'relieved of duties' if they were unable to mark in conformity with the agreed scheme (it did happen once).

The whole idea was to standardise between different examiners as far as was humanly possibly, in one paper in one year. When thousands of scripts are being marked throughout the country, I cannot see what would change, year on year, that would result in a steady improvement in grades.

Now, it seems as if someone or something is 'to blame' if grades don't go up each year.

[jean]

The idea is that the same script will be given approximately the same mark by all Markers, even if individual responses might get a mark or two above or below the agreed Standard - all candidates should receive a final Grade that all Markers would agree upon.

They should receive a mark all the markers agree on.

Where the grade boundaries are set will depend on whether you are using norm or criterion referencing.

[french frank]

They should receive a mark all the markers agree on.

Where the grade boundaries are set will depend on whether you are using norm or criterion referencing.

That is correct. Markers [recte] give it a (standardised) numerical mark. Others take charge of the grades.

[ardcarp]

Gradually improving in instrumental expertise through teaching and practice is quite different.

Such a pity that other subjects cannot be taught with that special combination of rigour and delight. But I've never tried it, so don't really know what I'm talking about.

[kernelbogey]

Fellow pedants may enjoy this tweet:

"I see that you have made 3 spelling mistakes."

Last words of Marquis de Favras after reading his death sentence before being hanged (1790).

[Tweet from Klaas Meijer @klaasm67]

[Nick Armstrong]

[french frank]

Meanwhile, from elsewhere:

"the Brussels bumper stickers saying “mon patrie c’est Europe” …"

Clearly not French, anyway - two grammar mistakes in 4½ words.

[ardcarp]

...bit of a 'Life of Brian' crib, maybe?

[Sir Velo]

Fellow pedants may enjoy this tweet:

"I see that you have made 3 spelling mistakes."

Last words of Marquis de Favras after reading his death sentence before being hanged (1790).

[Tweet from Klaas Meijer @klaasm67]

Do we get the punch line or are you going to leave it hanging....