MSPs have voted to debate a motion of no confidence in the Education Secretary on Thursday.
John Swinney will face a vote against him over the handling of secondary school exam results after almost 125,000 teacher estimates were downgraded.
The motion was passed unanimously by MSPs.
With the coronavirus crisis forcing the cancellation of Scotland’s exams for the first time in 130 years, pupils’ marks were instead based on the judgments of their teachers.
However, all of those predicted marks had to be vetted by the SQA’s national system of “moderation”.
The body said this process – the detail of which was kept under wraps until results day – was put in place to maintain “standards and credibility”.
Controversially, the exams body did this in part by looking at each school’s previous history of results.
Around 133,000 entries were adjusted. Students in Scotland’s most deprived areas had their Higher pass rate reduced by 15.2% while their peers in more affluent areas had their rates reduced by just 6.9%.
That revelation sparked outrage, with pupils taking to the streets in protest. A petition started by one teen calling for the “classist marking scheme” to be discarded has now been signed by more than 43,000 people.
READ MORE: John Swinney withdraws all grades marked down by SQA moderation process
Speaking in the parliament today, Swinney apologised to the pupils impacted.
He told MSPs: “We set out to ensure that the system was fair, we set out to ensure that it was credible, but we did not get it right for all young people.
“Before I go any further, I want to apologise for that. And speaking directly to the young people affected by the downgrading of awards, the 75,000 pupils whose teacher estimates were higher than their final award, I want to say this, I am sorry.
“But as sorry as I am, I know that an apology is not enough.”
He said the process was implemented in a bid to tackle grade inflation that "would run the risk of undermining the value of qualifications in 2020".
READ MORE: Scottish Greens apologise for taking credit for SQA grade changes
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel