The SQA has today released the results of exam appeals.

Details of appeal outcomes have been issued to schools and colleges who can now inform students whether or not they have been successful.

The appeals system allowed those unhappy with their grades to request that their exam paper is checked but did not involve a full remarking of those papers.

There was no facility for students to submit additional or alternative evidence as part of a standard appeal.

Full information about appeals, including overall submission levels and success rates, will not be published until December.

However, the SQA has also admitted that an investigation into problems with the marking of Higher History, which was supposed to conclude last week, is still ongoing, leaving students in this subject unsure if their grades are indeed final or could yet be changed as a result of the review being undertaken.

Our sister title The Herald has asked the SQA if it is able to confirm when the review of Higher History marking will be concluded, but has only been told that information will be provided “as soon as we can”.

In August, The Herald revealed that teachers, including current exam marks, had accused the SQA of ‘moving the goalposts’ and subjecting students to an ‘unfair’ marking process for this year’s Higher History exam.

They explained that more detailed answers had been demanded than has previously been the case, and that no warning of the change had been provided. As a result, the SQA was accused of “moving the goalposts” after the exam had taken place.

Critics argued that this altered approach was behind a 25% drop in pupils’ performance levels in the Scottish History part of the exam, and a thirteen percentage point decline in the overall pass rate.

The SQA had insisted that marking has been “consistent with previous years”, and that the sudden falls in test scores and pass rates was simply down to poorer performance from students. Education secretary Jenny Gilruth initially refused to intervene, but ultimately bowed to pressure and demanded a meeting with SQA leaders.

However, during this meeting, the SQA confirmed that it had u-turned and that an investigation had been launched. No public announcement of this decision had been made.

Concerns have been raised that the investigation lacks credibility and independence as it is being carried out by an SQA official rather than an external expert.

Gavin Yates, Executive Director of national parent group Connect, said: “It’s imperative for public confidence in the SQA that these matters are resolved as quickly as possible. Being open and transparent with data is key to improving that confidence.

 “It is really disappointing that the Higher History issue has not yet been resolved and I’m hopeful that the SQA leadership will agree with me that providing clarity for learners should be their absolute top priority.”

The SQA was approached but refused to comment.