B1505 – Protection of Public Examinations Bill 2019 Watch

This discussion is closed.
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#21
Report 1 month ago
#21
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
The Tories' record on education becomes worse by the term, first they restrict education and increase indoctrination in schools in the name of preventing indoctrination, now we see them wanting to de facto set school budgets to nil or even have negative budgets.
The centres in question, for both aspects, would be highly limited in number; the educational indoctrination bill works to prevent the perverse indoctrination of children in schools with proscribed ideologies - I, again, do not see a genuine basis for opposition on grounds of principle. This Bill works to ensure that adequate procedures are in place for examinations.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#22
Report 1 month ago
#22
On a side note, it's nice to see some debate actually happening...something sorely missed last term.
0
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#23
Report 1 month ago
#23
(Original post by 04MR17)
Some say the chap was a tad harsh. :dontknow:

Then I'd suggest you ask exam boards to strip the content from their specification, since that tells students what to expect on the paper. :yy:
Mussolini is still completely irrelevant to this bill and I fail to see why you bring him up, unless this is a new version of Mornington Crescent.

You knew what I meant. The specification is a available to all, so everybody knows what might come up. They still don’t know what will come up. Hence the equal playing field the Mogg mentioned.
0
TheRadishPrince
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#24
Report 1 month ago
#24
(Original post by ns_2)
But, stop pointing to a different issue, which you, as the Government, ought to be tackling.
This issue is something that your government would also have been trusted by many to 'tackle' during the long stint your party had in various power agreements in recent elections and it's still an issue because you, nor your party did anything substantial about it.

Mind this is merely me pointing this out to you, not an attempt to justify in advance us doing nothing also which I am hopeful will not be the case this term.
2
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#25
Report 1 month ago
#25
(Original post by ns_2)
Whilst I agree there are disparities in terms of status, again, this does not warrant the negation of other solutions and policies. The penalties are there to deter, as is the case with many other fines; and if the issue is the extent of the penalty, this is something that can be revised. But, stop pointing to a different issue, which you, as the Government, ought to be tackling.
So you admit where the far far larger problem is, but refuse to do anything about it.Instead you choose to concentrate on a very specific issue, which doesn't have widespread effect and the legislation doesn't have any supporting evidence to solve the very very small problem it's trying to.

And we get criticism that in a week the government hasn't resolved entrenched social problems. As I suggested in the other thread, give us a reasonable time frame to produce items before asking us to do the impossible.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#26
Report 1 month ago
#26
(Original post by Andrew97)
Mussolini is still completely irrelevant to this bill and I fail to see why you bring him up, unless this is a new version of Mornington Crescent.

You knew what I meant. The specification is a available to all, so everybody knows what might come up. They still don’t know what will come up. Hence the equal playing field the Mogg mentioned.
My response to the ludicrous equal playing field argument is visible throughout the thread. Society and Education are grossly unfair playing fields anyway, what this does to equal it when I can't really imagine anyone being prosecuted under this bill is beyond me.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#27
Report 1 month ago
#27
(Original post by ns_2)
The centres in question, for both aspects, would be highly limited in number. This Bill works to ensure that adequate procedures are in place for examinations.
Adequate procedures are in place for examinatjons. Some individuals simply don't follow them. This has occurred for decades. The basic procedures outlined in your earlier post all schools operate. If a member of staff forgets to lock a door, this bill seeks to bankrupt the school. What you're essentially admitting here is "yes we would wish to bankrupt schools, but not many of them".
0
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#28
Report 1 month ago
#28
(Original post by 04MR17)
My response to the ludicrous equal playing field argument is visible throughout the thread. Society and Education are grossly unfair playing fields anyway, what this does to equal it when I can't really imagine anyone being prosecuted under this bill is beyond me.
As I said, it’s equal in terms of nobody having seen the paper beforehand. The society and education points are different to the one I’m making. Of course you are going to grt some schools better than others, some children smarter than others etc. But they are all equal in the sense that they haven’t seen the examination paper before.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#29
Report 1 month ago
#29
(Original post by Andrew97)
As I said, it’s equal in terms of nobody having seen the paper beforehand. The society and education points are different to the one I’m making. Of course you are going to grt some schools better than others, some children smarter than others etc. But they are all equal in the sense that they haven’t seen the examination paper before.
In marking, if a centre has been subject to a leak these papers are analysed as to whether the pupils have experienced an advantage or not. If the data demonstrates that the paper outcomes are not what the board would expect, action is usually taken to moderatethe papers accordingly to adjust for this advantage. So any advantage a pupil may have is subsequently removed.

In long-running specifications the exam writers run out of ideas and re-word historical questions. So if like me, someone did the 20 A Level Maths past papers from 2005 to 2017 (20 for each exam unit, of which there are 6) then you've basically already had access to the question and mark scheme. However, under current specifications this point will take a while to reach.
0
Baron of Sealand
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#30
Report 1 month ago
#30
(Original post by 04MR17)
So a school should be bankrupted for the negligence of a single staff members.

And somebody should be jailed for 10 years for profiting from an exam leak.

Hot take: Mussolini was relaxed on exam regulations.
Are you saying you have more in common with Fascists than we do?
0
LiberOfLondon
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#31
Report 1 month ago
#31
Aye (oh and [unparliamentary language] Pearson for providing crap papers to Year 7s).
0
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#32
Report 1 month ago
#32
Strengthening the security of examinations should be the first part of such a Bill, sanctions the second. This Bill does little or nothing about the first, and I think the wrong kind of sanctions for the second.

Start with a designated person being responsible for the security and integrity of the exam process in every exam centre, and in all parts of the exam boards. Have certain requirements of them (so at a school have someone senior, but not someone whose child is at the school). Include a qualification they must obtain or some form of certification where they demonstrate knowledge of all security measures. Use voice or face recognition, two-factor authentication in contact with exam boards and in certain other circumstances. Have inspections of every centre and/or 'mystery shopper' type of test.

So the designated person faces sanctions as well as any other identified individual. Dismissal the main one as well as existing offences. Where an exam centre compromised or deliberately leaked an exam's content, sanctions could include outside management of all exams for a period, and/or requiring exams to be sat at another location. Take away the perpetrator's phone, phone number, internet access and other digital communications for a period of time. Maintain a register of such cheats, perhaps requiring them to report to a neutral place at exam start times for several years.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#33
Report 1 month ago
#33
(Original post by 04MR17)
Adequate procedures are in place for examinatjons. Some individuals simply don't follow them. This has occurred for decades. The basic procedures outlined in your earlier post all schools operate. If a member of staff forgets to lock a door, this bill seeks to bankrupt the school. What you're essentially admitting here is "yes we would wish to bankrupt schools, but not many of them".
If adequate procedures are in place, then, the centre will not be found liable. I draw your attention to this clause:

"Where the sanctity of public examinations has been compromised by an individual, or group of individuals, and where inadequate mechanisms were in place to mitigate the extent of such a compromise..."

The main premise of this Bill is not to always punish centres for the wrongful actions of their employees, but first and foremost to punish to a large extent the individuals who believe it right to leak and compromise the sanctity of examinations. However, there are circumstances where centres have not followed the guidance issued, in such circumstances the centre is being wilfully negligent, and must be tackled as such.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#34
Report 1 month ago
#34
(Original post by TheRadishPrince)
This issue is something that your government would also have been trusted by many to 'tackle' during the long stint your party had in various power agreements in recent elections and it's still an issue because you, nor your party did anything substantial about it.

Mind this is merely me pointing this out to you, not an attempt to justify in advance us doing nothing also which I am hopeful will not be the case this term.
Whilst I admit we could have done more to tackle 'social mobility', a cause I genuinely hold dear to my heart given personal circumstances, that does, again, not negate the implementation of other policies.

In regards to 'social mobility', I look forward to working with you on this matter throughout the next term.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#35
Report 1 month ago
#35
(Original post by 04MR17)
So you admit where the far far larger problem is, but refuse to do anything about it.Instead you choose to concentrate on a very specific issue, which doesn't have widespread effect and the legislation doesn't have any supporting evidence to solve the very very small problem it's trying to.

And we get criticism that in a week the government hasn't resolved entrenched social problems. As I suggested in the other thread, give us a reasonable time frame to produce items before asking us to do the impossible.
*cough* Edexcel Mathematics papers for the past three years - one of, if not, the most popular A-level affecting the futures of a significant proportion of each and every cohort *cough*

Again, I am aware of the short time scale; my point isn't that the government has failed to resolve these issues, but that just because these issues exist doesn't mean we cannot implement other items to resolve other issues. Focusing primarily and solely on one issue at a time in government is not suitable. I, nonetheless, look forward to working with the government in tackling these 'entrenched social problems' - an issue I hold dear.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 1 month ago
#36
(Original post by 04MR17)
My response to the ludicrous equal playing field argument is visible throughout the thread. Society and Education are grossly unfair playing fields anyway, what this does to equal it when I can't really imagine anyone being prosecuted under this bill is beyond me.
Imagine this a race with different cars, at different start lines, with the same finish line.

We are proposing that we, at least, put the cars on the same start line; you seem to want to rectify both issues or neither.
0
ns_2
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#37
Report 1 month ago
#37
(Original post by barnetlad)
Strengthening the security of examinations should be the first part of such a Bill, sanctions the second. This Bill does little or nothing about the first, and I think the wrong kind of sanctions for the second.

Start with a designated person being responsible for the security and integrity of the exam process in every exam centre, and in all parts of the exam boards. Have certain requirements of them (so at a school have someone senior, but not someone whose child is at the school). Include a qualification they must obtain or some form of certification where they demonstrate knowledge of all security measures. Use voice or face recognition, two-factor authentication in contact with exam boards and in certain other circumstances. Have inspections of every centre and/or 'mystery shopper' type of test.

So the designated person faces sanctions as well as any other identified individual. Dismissal the main one as well as existing offences. Where an exam centre compromised or deliberately leaked an exam's content, sanctions could include outside management of all exams for a period, and/or requiring exams to be sat at another location. Take away the perpetrator's phone, phone number, internet access and other digital communications for a period of time. Maintain a register of such cheats, perhaps requiring them to report to a neutral place at exam start times for several years.
The principle reason this Bill does 'little or nothing about the first' is that the security of examinations is already strong, if the regulations issued by the Joint Council for Qualifications are followed. Issues surrounding the security of examinations tend not to result due to a hole in the regulations but in a lapse of implementation.

For example, the regulations state that: "Question papers and pre-release materials, as issued by the awarding bodies, must always be stored in the centre’s secure storage facility, e.g. safe, security cabinet, at the centre’s registered address in a secure room. The secure room will be solely assigned for the purpose of administering secure examination materials, restricted to two to four key holders only. This is commonly referred to as a “box within a box”.

And, "In order to avoid potential breaches of security care must be taken to ensure the correct question paper packets are opened. An additional member of centre staff, who can be an invigilator, must check the day, date, time, subject, unit/component and tier of entry, if appropriate, immediately before a question paper packet is opened"

So on and so forth...

The sanctions are necessary to force implementation given the current lack of distinct crime; most 'leaks' are prosecuted (if they end up being prosecuted in the first instance) under crimes of theft, or fraud - which does not truly reflect the crime.

That being said, if the sanctions are where the main concern arises from, I am more than happy to work with the House on this matter.
0
CoffeeAndPolitics
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#38
Report 1 month ago
#38
(Original post by 04MR17)
So a school should be bankrupted for the negligence of a single staff members.

And somebody should be jailed for 10 years for profiting from an exam leak.
(Original post by 04MR17)
Mechanisms and mitigation in this context are not defined and are therefore open to interpretation. With the state of school funding as it is any fine in the 6 figure sum would leave a school unable to educate the students enrolled.
Hear Hear! I also share the same concerns about Sections 3 and 4. Otherwise, I'm happy to support this since exam malpractice is a serious offence that needs to be treated seriously to ensure everyone has a level playing field.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#39
Report 1 month ago
#39
(Original post by ns_2)
If adequate procedures are in place, then, the centre will not be found liable. I draw your attention to this clause:

"Where the sanctity of public examinations has been compromised by an individual, or group of individuals, and where inadequate mechanisms were in place to mitigate the extent of such a compromise..."

The main premise of this Bill is not to always punish centres for the wrongful actions of their employees, but first and foremost to punish to a large extent the individuals who believe it right to leak and compromise the sanctity of examinations. However, there are circumstances where centres have not followed the guidance issued, in such circumstances the centre is being wilfully negligent, and must be tackled as such.
Yes, you're repeating exactly what you said earlier. And all centres have their own policies, written down, which exactly match the "procedures" you're going on about. Does this make them all exempt according to this bill?
Or if one member of staff makes a mistake, does this mean the centre is in breach of procedure?
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#40
Report 1 month ago
#40
(Original post by ns_2)
*cough* Edexcel Mathematics papers for the past three years - one of, if not, the most popular A-level affecting the futures of a significant proportion of each and every cohort *cough*
The leak this year was 1 centre. That's less than 100 people. Very few affected.

My point is that this isn't an issue...
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What's your favourite genre?

Rock (150)
24.79%
Pop (146)
24.13%
Jazz (26)
4.3%
Classical (35)
5.79%
Hip-Hop (106)
17.52%
Electronic (42)
6.94%
Indie (100)
16.53%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed