Letter from Kathleen Tattersall, Director-General,
AQA, to Sir William Stubbs (QCA 28)
AS/A-LEVEL AWARDS
2002
Following our discussions on 26 July 2002, I
am writing about some of the important matters which emerged during
the meeting.
First, there is the matter of the exchange of
entry information amongst the Awarding Bodies. You made it clear
that you would expect this to take place as a matter of course
for all future summer examinations. I am writing to confirm that
the Awarding Bodies will exchange this information for all future
GCE, GCSE, VCE and GNVQ examinations. Consideration will be given
as a matter of urgency following the publication of the results
of the 2002 examination to the mechanism for the exchange, which
we shall be putting in place and how the data might best be analysed
in order to provide as much information as possible about likely
outcomes.
The matter is not, however, quite as straightforward
as it might appear at first sight. The closing date for entries
for the Summer Examination was 21 March 2002. As you will appreciate,
this is a week after the date for the publication of results of
the January tests. During the period for Enquiries about Results
(up to mid-April), centres are allowed to cancel or amend entries
in the light of the outcome of any enquiries. April is, realistically,
the earliest at which an exchange of data could take place. There
is, of course, a much more fundamental problem in reaching a position
where entry information can be regarded as finalised. This stems
from the continuing problem of centres making late entries and
amendments to entries on an extremely large scale. Indeed, late
entries continue to be made up to the day of the examination.
Ron McLone illustrated the scale of the problem from OCR's perspective.
All Awarding Bodies have had similar experiences.
You will know that the Regulatory Authorities
issued a statement to all centres in April supporting the earlier
letter to centres from the JCGQ explaining that late and amended
entries created serious risks for the timely delivery of the examination.
Because this problem has continued this year, despite strong representations
to centres, the Awarding Bodies are considering other ways of
tackling it. I think it highly likely that we shall be seeking
further support from the Regulatory Authorities. The new agreement
to exchange and interpret entry information adds a further imperative
to the task of reducing to the absolute minimum the volume of
late entries.
We fully understand your concern that, despite
the extensive work which has been carried out by the Awarding
Bodies, much of it in close collaboration with the Regulatory
Authorities, in preparation for the awards this year, our analyses
of likely outcomes had not taken account of the changes in student
entry patterns in the new AS/A2 structure. We appreciate that
it would have been helpful had the emerging picture of an increase
in the numbers of candidates being awarded Grade E and above been
anticipated in the statistical modelling that preceded the awarding
period. As we made clear on Friday, we stand ready to meet with
the Secretary of State or her Ministerial colleagues to discuss
the issues. We will, of course, be discussing these issues with
officials at the Department with whom we have been in close contact
in the preparation for the publication of results. In the knowledge
that you have alerted the Department to this issue, a copy of
this letter is being sent to Celia Johnson at the Department.
A further matter which emerged at our meeting
on 26 July was your view that QCA should launch an enquiry into
the outcomes of this year's examination. We were glad that you
recognised the sensitivities for candidates and parents and agreed
to work with the Awarding Bodies on the timing and nature of any
public announcement. It would, as I am sure you will agree, be
extremely damaging to public confidence in the system as a whole
were any announcement of an enquiry to suggest that you had fundamental
concerns about the process or the outcomes. The word "enquiry"
is unsettling and, as I am sure you will also agree, it is essential
that no further doubts are cast on the integrity of the public
examination system.
Clearly the Regulatory Authorities will wish
to evaluate the first awards of Curriculum 2000 prior to the review
following the 2003 examination announced in David Hargreaves's
Report of December 2001. We would wish to work closely with the
Regulatory Authorities as you carry out any such evaluation. It
would be helpful if we could discuss the timing and nature of
any announcement you will be making when we meet on 6 August.
We fully accepted your point that misunderstanding
or misinterpretation of the results should not undermine the success
of this first cohort. We have already, as agreed at our meeting
on 26 July, provided a draft statement on the key issues relating
to the A-level award and will continue to work with your colleagues
as we prepare for the publication of results.
30 July 2002
|
