A secondary maths teacher who “recklessly” recorded marks for unmarked assessments - leaving pupils underprepared for an important exam - has been cleared to remain in the profession.

In May 2016, while employed at Kirkcaldy High School in Fife, Peter Marshall failed to mark pupils’ unit assessment papers for National 5 maths - broadly equivalent to a high-level GCSE in England - and “recklessly” entered marks on to the school system for assessments that had not been marked.

Only two pupils in the affected class passed their exam and Mr Marshall’s conduct was found by a General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) fitness-to-panel to have reduced their chances of achieving predicted grades; the panel “considered it likely that with proper marking, feedback and stronger preparation the pupils could have achieved better results”.

The panel’s verdict was that Mr Marshall’s “fitness to teach was impaired”. However, it also took into account “the significant progress he had made since the allegations”, including positive testimonials received from colleagues, among them his current headteacher, and decided that his conduct and behaviour no longer fell significantly short of the standards required of a teacher.

It did not see any “compelling evidence” that Mr Marshall had acted fraudulently, and, therefore, “did not consider that it could be said that his actions were dishonest”. Mr Marshall admitted the charges after they had been changed to reflect this.

Concerns arose over papers for a National 5 unit assessment that appeared not to have been marked - a colleague found them by chance in an unlocked drawer in Mr Marshall’s desk - yet marks had been entered into the school’s IT Seemis system, with all pupils recorded as having passed.

Teacher ‘genuinely confused’

One witness for the subsequent GTCS panel marked the papers herself and found that nine out of 20 pupils should have failed.

The GTCS panel’s verdict notes that, when the issue was brought to Mr Marshall’s attention, he “appeared genuinely confused and was unable to offer any explanation as to what had happened” but said that at the time, in May 2016, he was “under pressure with a new-born child and was suffering from a lack of sleep”.

Before being suspended in 2017, Mr Marshall had taught at the school since completing his probationary year there in 2008. The panel heard from the principal teacher of maths that he was an experienced marker whose marking capabilities had not previously been doubted.

Mr Marshall was dismissed after an internal disciplinary hearing involving the school and the local authority, then reinstated on appeal, but did not return to work at the school.

He was appointed to a full-time position at another school in August 2017, where he has been “open and candid” about the GTCS proceedings. A colleague of Mr Marshall told the GTCS panel that he is “popular with pupils and staff” and the school is “very happy with his progress”.

The GTCS panel found that Mr Marshall’s action amounted to misconduct, describing the failure to mark assessment papers for pupils being presented for a National 5 exam as “a serious breach” of a teacher’s professional duties.

It added that “the reckless conduct in supplying incorrect information for insertion into the school system and forwarding to the SQA (Scottish Qualifications Authority) contributed to the pupils not being properly prepared or adequately tested in advance of the examination”.

The panel also stated that his “lack of organisation and poor record keeping” resulted in his “not meeting the requirements expected of a registered teacher”.

Steps had been taken to remedy his conduct and “the risk of repetition was low”, but, while he had developed some insight and shown “genuine remorse for his conduct”, the panel found that he “had not demonstrated that he fully appreciated the seriousness or consequences of his behaviour”. Without support, he was “vulnerable to falling back into his previous poor working practices”, including disorganisation, poor record keeping and “general workplace untidiness”.

The panel imposed a reprimand and a conditional registration - both for three years, which will require annual reports on Mr Marshall’s teaching practice - and said this was the most severe sanction it could impose short of removing Mr Marshall from the teaching register.