Papers should be pushed through several examiners and at the end of the day, if the examiners in general feel as though the person at hand deserves the mark and understood and answered the question correctly, even if it were through fluke or some ill-found method, so be it. I also think that there should be more marks given for extenuating circumstance, and that there should be more option for the exam to be taken in a smaller room than some large exam hall. For my AS exams I had a panic attack in one of my exams (I had never been submitted to such a large exam, and have always felt a little bit worrisome of large amounts of people; panic attack ahoy and I got 20% on my exam, besides scoring over 90% on the other exam for my AS; I was denied access because I had no note from a psychiatrist, and getting one would have taken too long.
I realise that last point was partly my fault, but forcing someone to have panic attacks just to get through an exam is a little bit harsh.
There's a big drama at my school at the moment relating to marks on a particular question on the most recent AQA philosophy AS level paper. On this one particular 9 mark question I got 8 out of 9. A girl in my class, who we can safely assume knew more of the stuff than me when she went into the exam because she never sodding stops revising, got 3 out of 9. When she got the paper remarked her mark on the question I'm on about didn't change.
The department bought both of our papers back off the exam board, and anybody that's seen both my paper and hers, including the philosophy teacher, has testified that me and her wrote pretty much exactly the same thing, and it wasn't wildly different from another person in the year who got 9 out of 9.
The entire paper didn't have many marks available, were she to have got 8 or 9 on that question she would've likely got an A, or at least a much higher B. Either she's been grossly under-marked by 5 or 6 marks twice, or I've been given 5 marks more than I should've. How do you manage to mess up that badly?
The amount of mistakes made in marking essays when I bought my papers back was ridiculous, think essays should have to be marked my multiple examiners and then an average score found.
The marking system can never been fair.
Examiners get paid by how many scripts they can mark in a certain amount of time. Most of them will skim through answers and can miss or unfairly award marks.
Some people will get their scripts marked by a nice examiner and some are not as fortunate. It may not make a massive difference in raw marks, but a few marks can result in a change of grade.
There is so much subjectivity, especially in essay based subjects like English, History etc, they are so heavily dependent on what the individual examiner believes is a 'good answer'. An A* answer to one examiner might just be an A to another.
Maybe have standards for markers - so they’re not hungover and constantly just skimming over papers.
In the exam season just gone, I got a U in my English lit paper (8/80 raw marks apparently) although my coursework was kept at A* and my AS grade was an A. Got it remarked and got an A. Held an offer for Kings, safe to say this monumental error in marking totally screwed everything up for me. I think that English lit is so subjective and what one examiner thinks is credible another may not. It actually bewilders me how I was awarded a U - I had written over 7 pages, a D/E therefore would have been more realistic.