From the perspective of northern Britain, it might seem that a single national exam board is a better model than the fractious, competitive variant south of the border. However, the fact that no one in Scotland appears to be complaining about examination questions does not necessarily justify self-satisfaction.
I am aware of exam issues in three of the humanities subjects alone. Take this example from the Standard grade Credit modern studies exam. The question had two sources, both tables of election statistics, followed by a quote from Peter Dougan: "In the 2005 and 2010 general elections, only one country had voter turnout below the UK figure. The country with the smallest increase in turnout between 2001 and 2010 would have had fewer Conservative MPs in 2010 if single transferable vote had been used."
The four-mark question then stated: "Using only the information above, give one reason to support and one reason to oppose the view of Peter Dougan."
The question was ambiguous, as 2005 and 2010 could be taken separately or together. The SQA meant to convey the idea that only one country fulfils the statement in both years, so it should have read: "In both the 2005 and 2010 general elections ..." If pupils read the question as two separate and independent general elections, they were unable to fulfil the rubric of the question. Hence the question is invalid.
Soon after the exam, I contacted the qualification manager for modern studies, who responded: "The principal assessor and the setting team ... have confirmed that Question 1(c) as it stands is valid". No justification was given. The SQA even acknowledged that "there could be an alternative way of interpreting this question".
Where can teachers turn if they are dissatisfied with the SQA's in-house response, since Scotland does not have an independent exam scrutiny body? I contacted the chief executive of the SQA, only to receive a stock answer that the matter was being dealt with through the SQA's post-examination procedures and no pupil would be disadvantaged.
Now we have the external assessment report that states: "The wording of this question caused difficulty with many candidates. A number of candidates achieved full credit, but most did not. A change to the marking instructions allowed for different interpretations of the view. This allowed many candidates, who would otherwise have been awarded zero marks, to achieve two marks."
So those candidates who interpreted it differently were given a maximum of two marks and were disadvantaged because of the SQA's poor setting of the question.
What the SQA should have done was to declare the question invalid and discount the marks for all candidates. Instead, it has published the question unamended in the 2012 past papers section of its website, thereby compounding the issue for any of this year's candidates who may face it in a practice test.
Donald Morrison, PT humanities, Ellon Academy, Aberdeenshire.