Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160-179)
MONDAY 28 OCTOBER 2002
KATHLEEN TATTERSALL,
JOHN KERR
AND RON
MCLONE
160. It seems to me that if you had a robust
and, I would appreciate too, a more independent QCA, then having
determined that these exams are 50/50, that should be the end
of the argument; it seems to me that on this occasion, in what
seems to be a very fluid dialogue, still going on, one board has
accepted, in AQA, it was 50/50, whereas OCR is still. . .
(Mr Kerr) Edexcel were also very clear at 50/50.
161. And Edexcel; it seems to me that OCR is
still arguing the case. Now, if you are still arguing the case,
does that not affect, can I ask you, the way in which you are
dealing with this matter?
(Dr McLone) No. I do understand where you are coming
from; but, no. Our job has been to apply 50/50, and that is what
we have done, and that is why I have said that we are looking
for A2 to be a considerably higher standard than the old A level,
that is part and parcel of the 50/50. My argument was that if
we had gone for 40/60, if, then it would have made it easier to
deal with in a different way; and I think it would. But that is
not affecting the outcome now, we have to deal with 50/50, you
are quite right.
162. A last question. This newly constituted,
potentially, QCA would then have more power, or less power, vis-a"-vis
the Joint Council?
(Ms Tattersall) In terms of acting as a regulator
of the system, acting as a regulator laying down the rules for
the system, the powers would be similar to what they were, but
I think more clearly expressed, and I hope more clearly focused,
in terms of the way in which QCA activated those powers in respect
of the boards. That will be the cleanest and the most transparent
way of carrying out those responsibilities.
Jeff Ennis
163. All three witnesses have advocated that
we do need to change and redefine the existing role of the QCA
and make it more independent from Government, etc., etc. Could
I ask our three witnesses, do you have confidence in the QCA as
it currently stands, in their role and capacity as regulator of
the current exam system?
(Ms Tattersall) Clearly, QCA has had some difficulties,
both in terms of not having a Chief Executive and also its Chair,
only recently a new Chair being appointed. But I have to say that,
in terms of the general working relationship that we have with
QCA, at a very practical, logistical, technical level, we have
very good relationships and confidence in the people that we deal
with. I think, as Ron McLone has said, we now have an opportunity
to rebuild relationships at the political, as it were, level with
the new Chair and the new Chief Executive. So I have every confidence
that we will actually strike a proper relationship with the newly
constituted team and, if the QCA does change, with any newly constituted
QCA.
(Mr Kerr) I think I would agree with that. We have
a new Chief Executive in place now, and that all three boards
should work very closely with him to achieve some aims. But if
there is an opportunity to redesign QCA, perhaps it is removing
its role on the design of qualifications and focus much heavier
on the regulation side.
(Dr McLone) I agree with everything that has been
said; particularly I agree with Ken Boston, when in his speech
at the QCA Annual Conference he talked about the restructuring
of QCA that was necessary and the reconstituting of it, and I
think we have every confidence in Ken that he will deliver that.
164. It has already been said, Chair, that when
we adopt any new examination system you will get teething problems;
would it not be fair to say that one of the ways we could cut
down on the teething problems with new examinations being brought
in would be to cut down on the number of examination boards that
we have got, and cut down from either three to two, or even now
to one? I wonder what the witnesses have got to say about that,
Chair.
(Mr Kerr) The teachers tell us that they value the
choice and innovation that three exam boards bring.
165. I am not on about the teachers, I am on
about you?
(Mr Kerr) And we would echo that; we are here for
educational services to students and to the teachers, and I think
we continue as three boards.
(Ms Tattersall) I do not really think the main issues
that we are dealing with are problems arising from three boards;
what I think it is arising from is the problem of a new system,
and, inevitably, in a new system you do get the issues that we
have been talking about, about interpretation of standards, and
I am quite certain that would occur even if you had the one board
dealing with it. Furthermore, the volume of candidates that we
have in this country taking qualifications, I think, if you put
it all into one board, the risk of things going wrong will be
far greater than the risk of things going wrong with three boards.
(Dr McLone) We are, of course, talking about England
here, are we not, the English awarding bodies and QCA; but I do
not think I have to remind you about that.
Chairman
166. This Committee's remit is for England only,
not for Scotland.
(Dr McLone) But I do not have to remind you, I am
sure, about what happened in Scotland two years ago, when we had
one board and one set of problems; and it is not a matter of whether
it is three boards or not, one board can make all the problems.
And, in truth, if you have only got one board, you could argue
that it might all get hidden.
Mr Simmonds
167. You have all said, categorically, that
you think there was no either perceived or other pressure put
down upon you, as examining boards, from QCA; you have also stated
that very few grades were changed, at the end of the day. Do you
actually think the Tomlinson inquiry was necessary at all?
(Ms Tattersall) I think, by the time the Tomlinson
inquiry was set up, the lack of confidence, as it were, in the
public perception was such that there needed to be some objective
look at what had gone on, and some objective recommendations for
action. And, therefore, in that sense, I do think the Tomlinson
inquiry was necessary actually to break the deadlock, which we
had to, in terms of the public perception and the public confidence
in the system. As a board, we were very confident ourselves in
the grades that we had awarded, and, indeed, in the interventions
that I had made, as a chief executive, which, just to remind the
Committee, most of the interventions I made were to lower the
grade boundaries, not to raise the grade boundaries, in other
words, in favour of the candidates, we were very confident of
that, but, nevertheless, we felt it important that we co-operated
in full with the Tomlinson inquiry, in order to restore the public
confidence that was so necessary.
(Mr Kerr) There is no real other effective mechanism
for reviewing grade boundaries. The inquiries by results procedure
will look at re-marking only. So this was the only mechanism really
to try to demonstrate to the public how the grade boundaries were
set, and, as Kathleen said, to diffuse what was clearly a tension
out there.
(Dr McLone) I think we all welcomed the fact that
we had the Tomlinson inquiry. I think the most important thing
that was unfortunate was that the whole expectations had been
raised of so many students that we had to do something; and the
sad thing, and which we are all concerned about, is how many students
have had, as it were, two goes, having their expectations raised
and then dashed. That clearly is very sad.
168. There does seem to be a contradiction also
in what the three of you are saying about the future confidence
that you have in the QCA. On the one hand, you seem to be saying
that you prefer it to be an independent body that is responsible
to Parliament, and yet, on the other hand, at the same time, you
are saying you are happy with the new team that is there, you
are happy to continue as it is existing. Perhaps you could explain
that contradiction?
(Ms Tattersall) I think we are facing the situation
as it is, namely, QCA as it is; there is no indication, as far
as I am aware, that QCA is going to be changed in the near future.
And I think it is right that we, as examining boards, work in
a proper, professional way with the body which exists to regulate
the system, with all its other activities, which we somewhat question.
So I do not see, myself, a contradiction between a willingness
to make the system work as it is, but also saying, as certainly
we did in February, when we made our submission to the quinquennial
review, that we would prefer to see a QCA that was totally independent,
in the way we have been talking.
169. Before the other two gentlemen reply, could
I just say that my question was whether you would have more confidence
if it was independent, rather than a willingness to work with
what is there already?
(Ms Tattersall) Yes, we would certainly feel that
the system could be accounted for and be demonstrated to be more
transparent and free of any sort of interference if it were a
new system; so the answer is yes.
(Mr Kerr) The answer is, very simply, yes, we would
have more confidence with an independent regulator.
(Dr McLone) We certainly would.
Chairman
170. Can I just take you back for a moment to
the unhappiness that so many students felt in the summer, because,
in a sense, I get the feeling that it is not that you want to
sweep it under the carpet, any of you, but you would rather get
on with looking at the future rather than what happened in the
past. Something that members of this Committee expressed to me,
privately, has it really come out of Tomlinson or anywhere else,
why. And next Wednesday, Wednesday week, we will be having Sir
William Stubbs and representatives of the headmasters' organisation
in both the independent sector and the state sector, to talk to
them; those people, the heads' associations, they got very, very
unhappy about what was going on, in an unprecedented way. Now
was that all nonsense; can you explain to us why there was this
deep unhappiness? Dr McLone, you were in the forefront of that,
were you not?
(Dr McLone) I think there was deep unhappiness because
many people were unsure, just not clear, about what was happening
and why it was happening; and I understand that.
171. But, Dr McLone, they had good students,
they had predicted they had good results, who did not get them?
(Dr McLone) With due respect, some schools are like
that, a good deal of the time; if we take a look at our forecast
grades, we would never say, I do not think any of us would say,
they have an expert prediction of what the outcomes will be, and
that has always been the case.
172. But you have the whole university system
of acceptance, the whole university allocation system is based
on predicted grades?
(Dr McLone) It is, it is; but we have done an analysis
of the forecast grades, and some of them are very good and some
of them are not so good, and it depends, and that has always been
the case. It has been true that there have been some people very,
very unhappy; there have been some people, I have to say, who
have been very happy. We have had a number of letters saying how
well they thought the thing had gone, with us. I go back to the
fact that a lot of the students out there have done very well,
a lot of the colleges worked very hard, and there was a demand,
in some way, with Curriculum 2000, that, as an organisation, you
gave commitment to Curriculum 2000. And there is a good deal of
evidence, on what we have seen, that those organisations that
spent time with their students, worked out how they were going
to do it over the two years, put some people in for the first
January, then into June, then into January, then into June, have
actually done very well; the colleges, I have to say, some of
them, in particular, have done very well, because they planned
it. Not everybody planned it.
173. Is that the reason why some colleges found
that students that were performing exceedingly well in terms of
their examination results got an unclassified mark for their coursework?
(Dr McLone) There are very few of those. I know there
has been a lot in the press about it, but we did an analysis for
QCA, in their inquiry, and, as you will have seen in that report,
there are actually very few who actually got a U in coursework;
and, in fact, in English, which was the subject which was most
under review, nobody got a U in coursework who got As in the examination,
when you actually analysed the results. So I do not think that
there is actually an issue which goes along with what we are talking
about.
Paul Holmes
174. As a result of all that has happened over
the last few months, you have got a lot of teachers out there
who are not at all sure whether they are teaching the right things,
whether they understand the system, and yet, within the next few
weeks, they have got to predict grades for the students who want
to sit modules in December. What are you doing collectively to
train, to work with those teachers, to reassure them about what
is going on, to avoid all this happening again?
(Dr McLone) First of all, the most important thing
is that we are working with QCA exactly on looking at the main
points that we need to do to establish confidence and to give
guidance; that we have to do fast, and I know Ken Boston says
we have got to do it fast, and we will want to do that. We are
establishing many more INSET sessions, to be able to advise teachers
and to give teachers help. That sort of thing is very important.
It is also done subject by subject; it is not done, as it were,
globally, we are giving advice to individual subjects where we
know there are issues out there.
175. And how well is that being co-ordinated
across the three of you? And, again, I can remember teaching the
first year of AS levels and teachers were coming back from different
INSET, in different subjects, with different exam boards, with
totally different stories of what was going on. Is that still
happening, or are you avoiding that now?
(Ms Tattersall) The main point, as Ron said, is that
we are working with QCA to define more closely the standard that
we were talking about earlier in this session; but each of us
does run our own INSET meetings, in the case of AQA, we have something
like 1,000 meetings lined up in the next two or three months to
help teachers to understand better the system. And, of course,
we do have now archive material to draw on; so that is a better
position than we were in last year, when the INSET material was
being provided for the first time. In response though to the first
question, if I may, AQA did not have a grading problem, I really
must make that clear, and I must make clear that, as I said earlier,
we deal with something like 45% of the grades awarded in this
country. And so we did not perceive we had a grading problem,
we certainly did not have any regrading, arising from the Tomlinson
inquiry, and we have many letters from schools, who are saying
that they are very content with the service which AQA provided
for them and their examination results. So, in a sense, while
we are talking about all the problems that have occurred, and
quite rightly so, I think one has also got to remember that there
are people there who have actually performed in the way that they
expected in the exam and been rewarded appropriately for their
performance.
Chairman: Can I just ask you, Kathleen
Tattersall and Ron McLone, to stand down for a moment. Would you
like to sit to one side, you could even have a breather outside;
do whatever you like. We would like five minutes with John Kerr,
and then, alphabetically, Ron McLone and then Kathleen; just five
minutes, so that we can concentrate questions on particular issues
that affect your position.
Mr John Kerr, Chief Executive, Edexcel, was
further examined.
Chairman
176. Mr Kerr, we were interested in seeing your
interview, with The Times report this morning. Is there
anything that, what particularly, at this stage, made you feel
strongly enough to say the sort of thing you said this morning,
in that very interesting article?
(Mr Kerr) Thank you, Chair. I disagreed with your
opening comments, where you said the exam boards should keep quiet,
exam boards should keep below the surface and should not have
a voice. I really do not agree with that. I think that is perhaps
one of the lessons we do have to learn from this activity. We
are not very good at explaining to people what we do. I am looking
at the faces, going round, and there is still a lack of understanding
here, there is clearly a lack of understanding on the press bench,
exactly what we do, and it is not that difficult. And I do think
that certainly both Kathleen and Ron have far greater experience,
and that, together, or individually, we can actually restore that
public confidence by explaining what we do. That was why I agreed
to do the interview with The Times, and I think it is something
I wish to continue to do.
Ms Munn
177. So what do you do?
(Mr Kerr) We are a large awarding body, of which half
of the qualifications are involved with general qualifications,
at A levels; the other half are the B-TEC qualifications, the
vocational qualifications, which receive no publicity at all,
and these are very good, solid qualifications, which we firmly
believe in, these are the qualifications that are in demand internationally,
they are in demand from employers and from fellow education specialists.
178. And, in terms of where you see yourselves
going, presumably, like any organisation, you have some sort of
development plan, or vision statement, or something like that?
(Mr Kerr) Yes, we are still working on our vision
statement; but I think it is really to deliver great qualifications,
qualifications that enthuse the learner, the qualifications that
teachers find it enjoyable to deliver.
Mr Chaytor
179. What are the most important steps to be
taken by your examining board and by the QCA to avoid a repeat
of this year's affair next year?
(Mr Kerr) As my colleagues have already stated, it
is working with Tomlinson, it is working with QCA, to get the
standard communicated better to schools and colleges. It is to
enhance the training that is provided; we have already provided
training to 40,000 teachers this year, we will probably have to
do more. And it is getting our message across, that people can
trust the grades that are set by the exam boards, and these are
very important qualifications.
|
