The Dative That Was Not in the Key
A 10-item grammar test, each item 2 marks, asks for a specific case form of a prescribed noun. Item 8: 'Give the dative singular of satthar (teacher).' The answer key, prepared by a colleague, gives satthussa. Of the 34 scripts, 21 write satthuno, 9 write satthussa, and 4 write satthārā. The prescribed prose lesson contains the line ... satthuno ... (you may treat this as a known context), and the grammar appendix lists both satthuno and satthussa as dative/genitive singular. The 4 scripts with satthārā have confused instrumental and dative. The school's moderation policy says that any form accepted by the prescribed grammar may be credited, but the key is the primary reference. You must finalise the marking before scripts go to external moderation.
1. Are the 21 scripts that wrote satthuno correct? Give the grammatical reasoning and the mark.
Read the worked answer
Yes. Satthar is an r-stem; its dative singular is satthuno, and the same form also serves as genitive singular. Satthussa is a competing dative/genitive form also accepted by the prescribed grammar. The two are not free variants in every syntactic context, but for a paradigm item asking for the dative singular, both are creditable. Award 2/2 to the 21 scripts. The reasoning should be stated in the moderation note: the key was under-specified, not the students wrong. This is a case where the primary reference and the prescribed grammar conflict; the school's policy says any form accepted by the prescribed grammar may be credited, so the key cannot be used to penalise a form it failed to list. The 9 scripts with satthussa also get 2/2. The episode should not be treated as a student error at all; it is a key-construction error.
2. How should the 4 scripts with satthārā be marked, and what diagnosis belongs in the record?
Read the worked answer
Award 0/2 for item 8. Satthārā is instrumental/ablative singular, not dative. The error is not a spelling slip; it is a case-function confusion, probably caused by the identical ending -ārā in several r-stem cases and by rote memorisation of a single column. In the record, diagnose it as 'case syncretism: instrumental/ablative substituted for dative'. The intervention is a vertical paradigm drill with sentence frames: satthuno deti ('gives to the teacher') versus satthārā kataṃ ('done by the teacher'). Do not simply tell the student to relearn the table; make them choose the case from a verb's argument structure. If the same four students also missed item 3, which asked for the instrumental, the pattern is confirmed. The distinction matters for remediation: a table-recitation error and a case-function error need different follow-up.
3. What should you do about the key and the moderation policy before external moderation?
Read the worked answer
Amend the key to read 'satthuno / satthussa' and add a one-line grammatical note citing the appendix. Record the change in the moderation log with the number of scripts affected, 21, so the external moderator can see that the change was applied consistently. Tell the colleague who prepared the key that the issue was under-specification, not student error. The policy's phrase 'the key is the primary reference' cannot override the prescribed grammar when the key is incomplete; otherwise the school would penalise a correct form. Going forward, build grammar keys from the appendix and have a second reader check paradigm items. This is also a useful precedent for other r-stem and nt-stem items where variant forms exist. The log entry should be phrased neutrally, because the purpose is transparency rather than criticism of the colleague.