The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) today attempted to allay concerns that students’ grades could be dragged down from what their teachers believe they deserve, if performance at their school or college is better than in previous years.

But MSPs were less than reassured, with one saying he was now “more distressed than ever” by the processes replacing this year’s cancelled exams, which he described as “profoundly unfair and utterly statistically flawed”.

SQA chief executive Fiona Robertson, appearing at the Scottish Parliament’s Education and Skills Committee today, insisted that the grading process would have “fairness at its heart”, but critics said her attempts at reassurance were vague and verbose, and did not show enough faith in teachers’ judgement.

Also today: Students who cram will suffer this year, warn teachers

Sturgeon: Qualifications process ‘very clear’

Coronavirus: ‘Cancel next year’s exams,’ says teaching union

Opinion: ‘It’s impossible to meet the SQA grading demands’

Ms Robertson, who is also chief examiner, said that “I do think the assertion that somehow we will fail a young person because of the school they go to - that feels an unfair statement”.

Labour education spokesperson Iain Gray then asked Ms Robertson if the SQA would ask a school why grades were better than in the past, and accept that explanation rather than awarding grades in line with previous years.

She replied: “We are looking, in finalising the process, whether there is a professional dialogue that we can enter into with a school, if the shape or distribution - or indeed the volume of attainment this year -  looks very different to how it has historically looked, either in one direction or another.”

She added “teacher judgment” was “at the heart of our moderation process” every year.

Ms Robertson also said: “There’s not a presumption here that we are going to overturn teacher estimates, but what I do have a responsibility to do is ensure that there is broad consistency across the country.”

But some MSPs and commentators indicated that they had not been given the reassurance they sought.

The Scottish Greens’ education spokesperson, Ross Greer, tweeted: “I’m now more distressed than ever by the system the SQA has set out to replace this year’s exams. Profoundly unfair and utterly statistically flawed”.

University of Glasgow education researcher Barry Black tweeted: “A chance this morning for the SQA to instil confidence in their plans. Missed. It’s clear now that previous school attainment will be used, and disadvantaged young people will lose out.”

Mr Greer contrasted previous assurances from deputy first minister and education secretary John Swinney with today’s meeting, where - regardless of Ms Robertson’s attempts at offering reassurance -  the SQA was still indicating that schools’ historical attainment data “will be a data point used directly in the moderation of individual pupils’ grades”.

He added: “Logic would then suggest…that that is going to disproportionately disadvantage in less-high-achieving areas which correlate directly with deprivation.”

MSPs also called for the SQA to be more transparent around its decision making and to show how it would ensure that students in disadvantaged areas would be treated fairly.

On the issue of contingency planning, Ms Robertson said today that, before coronavirus, the SQA had established arrangements for a scenario where exams were cancelled. However, she added that there was not an “off the shelf” solution that could be applied to Covid-19, as the “scale and complexity” of the difficulties it presented were “simply unprecedented”.

And she revealed that, before this year’s exams were cancelled on 19 March, other options explored included delaying exams or setting extra papers for some qualifications.

Commenting on today’s meeting, EIS union general secretary Larry Flanagan said: “The EIS is very clear that the professional judgement of teachers must have primacy over all other factors in determining students’ grades for this year’s SQA qualifications. As we have made clear to the SQA, and in our submission to the Education and Skills Committee, the EIS has absolute trust in the ability of teachers and lecturers to exercise professional judgement in making the required estimates of student performance.”

He added: “The SQA’s moderation processes should be used only to bring added reassurance to the system, not to overturn professional judgements. If apparent anomalies are thrown up by analysis, that should trigger a professional dialogue between the SQA and the school or college to ascertain the reason for any variation.

“It would be disastrous to the integrity of the awards if the judgements of teaching professionals were being overturned by statistical modelling. Apart from anything else, this would simply lead to evidence-based appeals from the schools concerned.”

Next Wednesday, the Education and Skills Committee will put questions to John Swinney.