The State Examinations Commission (SEC) has refused a Freedom of Information request for details of how it altered its marking scheme for a controversial Leaving Cert paper last summer.
The commission, which came under the scope of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act last April under an extension of that legislation, said granting full transparency over the marking process would be “detrimental to broader educational goals”.
It said: “In order to carry out its functions effectively on behalf of the Minister and in the public interest, some aspects of the examination process need to remain confidential”.
The SEC was responding to a request from The Irish Times for the original marking schemes for this year’s Leaving Cert ordinary level maths exam, prior to their adjustment by the chief examiner.
Ordinary level Paper 1 attracted widespread criticism from students and teachers who claimed it was unreasonably hard, and had strayed in places off the syllabus.
The SEC said it took on board concerns raised by parents and others, including Minister for Education and Skills Jan O’Sullivan, when finalising the marking scheme, and the outcome was a much reduced failure rate this year compared to 2014.
Manipulation
The controversy highlights the question of
[ whether Leaving Cert grades are manipulatedOpens in new window ]
by the SEC to meet a predetermined distribution, and whether grades can legitimately be compared between years.
The SEC publishes the final version of the marking scheme for exams once the results are released but it says the disclosure of how it prepares this scheme would undermine confidence in the state exams.
In rejecting the FOI request, it sets out public interest arguments both in favour and against the release.
While acknowledging a need to hold public bodies accountable, and a need to ensure such bodies properly followed their own publicly stated procedures, it said: “It is a well-established view among educators that focusing too much attention on the minutiae of marking schemes and data on examination results is detrimental to broader educational goals”.
‘Inappropriate focus’
Making the records requested “generally available to the public is likely to facilitate further inappropriate focus on the work of the examinations”, it said.
“The commission has determined that the aspects of examiners’ work which relate to the finalising the marking scheme, training of individual examiners, the quality assurance of their work and the standard-setting process for the examination as a whole, need to remain confidential in the interest of maintaining the integrity and fairness of the examinations and public confidence in them.”
The Irish Times is appealing the decision.
The SEC has previously acknowledged that a draft marking scheme is applied to a sample of scripts.
This is done in order to determine “the extent to which an examination and its marking scheme may be too hard or indeed too easy” and adjustments are then made.
Regarding this year’s ordinary level maths Paper 1, it said “contrary to the commentary that followed the examination which suggested that [it] was ‘undoable’ or ‘impossible to pass’, it was clear from the outset that candidates had no more difficulty than usual”.
