Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180-199)
MONDAY 28 OCTOBER 2002
KATHLEEN TATTERSALL,
JOHN KERR
AND RON
MCLONE
180. But you are adamant there is nothing in
your existing systems that is at fault?
(Mr Kerr) I am not adamant at all on that. The exam
system is still essentially Victorian, it is a large number of
pieces of paper; in our own exam board, it is 10 million marks,
five million pieces of paper, scripts, in a large warehouse, there
is little technology that has been applied there. Certainly, the
question for me is investment, who is going to pay for that investment
and bring technology in; otherwise, we are going to continue with
errors and mistakes, which clearly we will strive to minimise,
and it is important that we do so, but there are limited reserves
within the exam boards, as charitable organisations.
Jonathan Shaw
181. If you had the opportunity to pinpoint
what you do, if you had the opportunity to pinpoint one particular
event, over the course of the summer, that would have been done
differently, what would that be?
(Mr Kerr) From Edexcel's point of view, I was very,
very pleased with the results this summer, given the publicity
surrounding the board earlier in the year.
Chairman
182. You were pleased to be out of the public
eye?
(Mr Kerr) I was very pleased to be out of the public
eye. I was very pleased to see that we delivered the results on
time and that we delivered them accurately. So, actually, this
whole grading issue came as a bit of a surprise to us. In terms
of what I would want to change, piloting of the A2s would have
helped enormously.
Paul Holmes
183. You talked about the half of your business
that goes without any comments, any problem, all the vocational
courses; is that because the vocational courses are essentially
criterion referenced, and they are not bedevilled all the time
by the harp back to the old days of norm reference in A level,
and the idea that if there are any improvements in grade passes
it must be because things are getting easier?
(Mr Kerr) I think some of the aspects from the B-TEC
qualifications are that they are essentially assessed by the teachers,
the scripts never leave the college, we have an internal verification
system, we have an external verification system, teachers and
lecturers have a great deal of confidence in applying these qualifications,
and they feel confident and they pass on that confidence to the
children.
Chairman
184. When, in my introductory remarks, I suggested
that most people do not really want to know much about examining
boards, I said that in the sense that they want a quiet confidence
but they do not want really to hear exam results questioned, as
they always are, round about August, which comes at a particularly
slow news time. Is part of what you were saying, in terms of your
method of explaining, or your mission to explain, if you had a
mission to explain, how would it be better done, because in view
of the very good article by Len Masterman, regarding, I think
he said, "How the papers saw it: press coverage of the A-level
controversy (up to the publication of the Tomlinson inquiry),"
and if there are ridiculous articles in the Daily Mail,
and Simon Jenkins in The Times, and then Melanie Phillips,
again in the Daily Mail, those are articles that are really
not based on any reality, you could have explained, how would
you have come back and explained yourself?
(Mr Kerr) We get the press we deserve; it is our job
to try to educate the press, it is our job to make clear what
we do, how we do it, and that is bearing fruit.
185. And you could see it all going away from
you, in the summer, that run of articles, because it was all moving
away from you, was it not? Who should have stepped in and said,
"Actually, these are the facts; this is what's happening
here," who should have done that, you, the QCA, who?
(Mr Kerr) Referring again, an independent regulator,
a regulator who was respected by the public, could stand up and
say, "Don't worry; these are the issues, we can resolve it."
But I think also a Government spokesman standing up and saying
that they had confidence in the exam system, confidence in the
exam results, would have gone a long way to allay press speculation.
186. So the Government did not give you enough
support; the Government should be out there, batting for that?
(Mr Kerr) I would prefer to see the Government taking
forward the lead in promoting the qualifications, and promoting
confidence in the qualifications.
Chairman: Mr Kerr, thanks very much.
And can I now have Dr McLone back in the seat.
Dr Ron McLone, Chief Executive, OCR, was
further examined.
187. Dr McLone, the reason I really wanted to
get you on your own was because you are a consensus builder, and
I felt that I wanted really to find out more in depth what you
individually thought about what had been going on in the last
couple of months, and also your view of how you could better do
your job. How do you think you can better do your job as an examining
board?
(Dr McLone) I think that it is absolutely essential
that we have a clear remit in which to operate, given by a regulator.
I also believe that what we have in the system that we have got
is something, as John has said, which is not transparent, and
that we need to move on the examination system we have got in
this country to make it more transparent, but also to bring it
into the 21st century. That will make it a better job.
Mr Turner
188. I am still worried about your chart, Dr
McLone, because Val asked you, essentially, were you arguing with
the 50/50 split or not, and you said, no, you were not, and then
proceeded, in my view, to do so, by saying it is still 40/60.
And, putting it at its simplest, what we are saying is, an A level
is worth £1, an AS level, according to the Secretary of State,
is worth 50 pence, but, according to you, it is worth 40 pence?
(Dr McLone) I do apologise, if I have not explained
it properly. What I am saying is that we would have preferred
it to be 40 pence, because that would have been a recognition
that it was not half an A level. But we worked on it being 50/50,
in terms of having to get a balance between the two, yet it is
something which is not worth 50 pence but you are having to call
it 50 pence; that being so, you have got to have something which
really should be 60 pence, and you are going to call that 50 pence.
All of that means that you have got this complexity of where you
are at; and I am sorry if the arithmetic does not add up, but
I think it does.
Chairman
189. I think we are getting to the heart of
this problem.
(Dr McLone) We have to apply 50/50, and, in my view,
and I think in lots of other people's, the 50/50 meant the A2
was harder than A level, otherwise it did not stack up.
Mr Turner
190. Ms Tattersall, I think, used an expression
relating to the maturation of the candidates, maybe she did not
but somebody did; no, I wrote it down, actually, on the basis
of what she said. This is making assumptions about the maturation
of the candidates over the two-year period, is it not, and I still
do not see how you can say, on the one hand, that your chart shows
40 pence because the student in the lower sixth is only broadly
capable of achieving a lower standard, and therefore you have
got to top it up with a greater achievement in the upper sixth?
(Dr McLone) Indeed; and that, I think, is part of
the flaw in the system, which we referred to earlier. And, also,
if I go back to my analogy with the university world, which I
was in, if we had said it was 50/50 we would have been asking
too much of the final year students, that is absolutely true,
but the 40/60 made that balance work. The fact that you say 50/50
means that you are really asking an awful lot, because you are
asking something that is not A level; it is this comparison with
what we were doing before which is the problem, because many students
in the modular course took these three units in the first year
sixth before, yes, and they were A level standard, by definition.
Now we have them taking it, and we say, "No, it's not A level
standard." That has been the problem; it is a flawed process,
and it has been flawed, I think, because we have not had the right
definition, and the definition should come from the regulator.
191. But when answering David Chaytor, you were
asked about communication with the QCA, effectively, over the
last two years; as I read it, it was before the last two years
began that the failure of communication, or, at least, of agreement,
took place?
(Dr McLone) The roots of the problem certainly happened
then. What needed to be done, in my view, was, over that time,
to have recognised that the roots of the problem were going to
be difficult. Now we spent a lot of time, of course, in 2001,
focusing on AS properly, because we have not run A2; and, properly,
I think we got AS right, it was welcome. What we did not do, and
what I think everybody feels we should have done, is have some
exemplar material, so that everybody understood what A2 was, we
did not have it, and if I go back and think about it, collectively,
or individually, I think, driven by QCA, we should have had exemplar
material.
Valerie Davey
192. You say there was not pressure from QCA;
was there pressure from the universities, in any way, in any way
over this new process?
(Dr McLone) I would not like to say. There was certainly
no pressure on the individual awarding, absolutely not; but, in
terms of that 50/50 decision, I suspect it was a contributory
factor, yes.
193. So universities, which we have not really
mentioned very much, are the other factor in determining how they
value the outcome of your exams?
(Dr McLone) I think there was a concern within the
universities, and, as I said, I come from the sector, I can understand
it, there was a concern about what on earth AS was supposed to
be; and if it was not valued at 50, I think the understanding
of the universities was that it would not have been something
that they could value. That must have been, in the end, a political
decision, of one sort or another, and I am using `p' with a small
`p', not a large `P'. But, nonetheless, that must have had an
effect on the final decision about whether it is 40/60 or 50/50;
they tend to be decisions that are not made on the assessment
structure but on other dimensions.
194. So where does the university influence
come into this debate; is there any debate from your Council,
or the QCA, or is it all done then by the Government?
(Dr McLone) I would say it was done directly, myself,
it would not have been through our Council; directly to QCA or
to Government, I would think.
195. To QCA or Government?
(Dr McLone) Or. I would not know.
196. Are we saying that this is another body
that does not understand the system that you are operating?
(Dr McLone) We need a lot more transparency for everybody.
I think the business about whether the AS will count as one point,
or not, was something which certainly did not get thought through
alongside what that would mean if you had put it in terms of assessment
structure; and, of course, there is an argument which says the
two should be divorced anyway.
Chairman
197. But, Dr McLone, the worry the Committee
would have, from your evidence today, particularly after your
remarks just now, would be that here is a flawed system, you have
said it is a flawed system; on the one hand, some of your colleagues
have said, "But we've got great confidence in the new team
in QCA," but you are saying, "It's a flawed system,
we have not said it right, the super-tanker is on its way, kids
are doing this AS level, they are on their way, they are on the
new A level system, they are on their way, very soon we'll be
in June again." But you are saying you are happy with this
system. On the one hand, you are saying, "It's a deeply flawed
system, we're all on the way to the next disaster, the next iceberg;"
what are you saying?
(Dr McLone) I do understand the question, and I think
there is a tension; there is a tension between picking up plants,
as I said, and inspecting the roots, because you want to embed
something that is already going. There are flaws which I believe
will be put right through Ken Boston's procedures over the next
few months; those are the flaws, and that is the way it must be
put right.
198. Right; so the QCA can get it right. We
are not suggesting that you pick it up by the roots and replace
it by the International Baccalaureate immediately, but what we
are saying is, you have identified the flaw but you have not actually
said, at which I am surprised, how you will put it right, by next
year?
(Dr McLone) By next year, I think we will put it right,
by talking to Ken Boston's task group and Ken Boston's Programme
Board and the arrangements he is getting right, and Tomlinson's
inquiry, I think we will be looking to get things out that can
match next year and get it on the road. I think there are longer-term
issues that we will have to address, like six/four units, because,
eventually, there is really too much assessment going on, and
it is overburdening our teachers and students.
Chairman: Dr McLone, we will have you
back to talk about that at greater length; thank you. Kathleen
Tattershall, can I ask you for the final spot.
Kathleen Tattersall, Director-General, AQA,
was further examined.
199. Can we just, seamlessly, sort of move from
that question to Dr McLone to you, in the sense that, right at
the end there, he said, "far too many examinations."
As I say, the Committee has been to New Zealand, where they are
really at the opposite end, hardly any examination and testing,
a large number of educators there saying, "We ought to have
more appropriate and accurate evaluation of how students are doing;
we don't have it." And they are looking at our system, they
do not want our system because they think we have gone to an extreme,
but they would like something. Are we at the extreme, should we
be fighting back and getting less examination, I know it is difficult,
you are in the exam business, are we overexamining our students
in this country?
(Ms Tattersall) I think we are externally overexamining
our students, and that, I think, is where the problem lies; and
certainly there has been a trend to external examining, over the
last 14, 15 years, which actually has swept away some very good
coursework-based examinations. So I distinguish between assessing
of students and externally examining our students, and I think
the balance has tipped too far to external assessment, and, as
I said earlier, that brings with it some problems, such as recruiting
examiners to fulfil our requirements. So I would prefer to see
the pendulum swing somewhat back, to enable teacher assessment
to take place, but, in order for that to happen we would have
to recognise that there would have to be a lot of training of
teachers, for a start, in assessment methods, there would have
to be very robust systems of moderation, and there would have
to be, I think, a turnaround of public perception of the value
of teacher assessment, because that was where it went wrong 14
or 15 years ago, when people really started questioning whether
that was valuable.
|
