Exam chiefs face heavy criticism over Sats fiasco

GOVERNMENT exam chiefs will be severely criticised today in a damning report on the chaos that engulfed this year's Sats.

Results for 1.2 million children were delayed after blunders hit the marking of the tests in one of the biggest exam failures of all time. Former chief schools inspector Lord Sutherland was publishing the findings of his inquiry to Parliament.

Ministers have abolished compulsory Sats for 14-year-olds in English, maths and science in the wake of the scandal. Tests for 11-year-olds in primary schools continue. Lord Sutherland is expected to lay much of the blame for the fiasco at the door of ETS Europe, the private firm hired to run the tests, and the exams quango, the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, which has overall responsibility for Sats.

ETS Europe has already lost its £156million five-year contract for delivering the tests and sources said the QCA was in for "a rough ride" and would be "heavily criticised".

After reading an advance copy of the report, QCA chief executive Ken Boston tendered his resignation at the weekend, but it is not yet clear whether it will be accepted. He could face suspension from his £328,000-a-year job and ultimately, the sack.

David Gee, managing director of the QCA's testing arm, the National Assessment Agency, is also expected to come under pressure. He took over when his predecessor quit over a less widespread Sats marking failure in 2004.

Ministers are expected to escape heavy criticism in the report. Schools Secretary Ed Balls was attacked for refusing to apologise for the fiasco. He insisted the QCA operated "at arm's length", stressing he was just as angry as parents, teachers and pupils.

However, Mr Balls gave his personal backing to the flawed new electronic marking system which is thought to have caused many of the delays. Teachers had to enter individual marks via a central database in a time-consuming process. Documents suggest ministers have now agreed the system should be ditched for next year's tests.

Problems included boxes of scripts lying unmarked in schools, papers sent to the wrong addresses, computer failures, and not enough markers recruited to clear the backlog.