Actually reading through the Ofqual/DfE consultation rather than what has been said about it by others. It's not making me feel any better.

But, but, but...! This is such an unreasonable question!
Just hold the **** exams, for God's sake!
This passage makes zero sense to me. It's like a Boris announcement on the importance of following guidance. NEA is important, but only if the kids have all done it. It's the only evidence you can use in Art, but it's ok if it's not very good. Oh, and you can just make it up.
Oh, and if all else fails, just make it up using whatever stuff you can find to justify what you want to give.
Ah good, that's fixed the concerns over paper integrity. Nothing could possibly go wrong with these robust measures in place.
I'm sure nobody will do anything dodgy if this happens.
It's ok guys. Who cares that the whole plan doesn't work since they're going to give us some training!
And if it all goes wrong, it's you they'll be appealing to! Enjoy!
To be fair, I don't really blame Ofqual for this complete mess. The parameters they were given were impossible. Nobody could have come up with anything sensible from them. But we'll be the ones who have to pick up the pieces.

More from Education

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x