Submission by the Secondary Heads Association
(SHA) to the Tomlinson inquiry (QCA 22)
INTRODUCTION
1. The Secondary Heads Association (SHA)
welcomes the opportunity to submit its views to the Inquiry on
A-level standards being conducted by Mike Tomlinson.
2. The first stage of the Inquiry was, of
necessity, on a very short time scale. Although the second stage
has until November to reach its conclusions, the issues are complex
and inter-related. We would have wished for more time to gather
evidence and consult SHA members, but we recognise the urgency
of this exercise, which is needed in order to restore not only
the confidence of the public in A-level standards, but also the
confidence of A-level students, teachers and examiners.
3. The terms of reference of this second
stage of the Inquiry are:
To investigate the arrangements at QCA and the
awarding bodies for setting, maintaining and judging A-level standards,
which are challenging, and ensuring their consistency over time;
and to make recommendations by November to the Secretary of State
and the Chief Executive of QCA for action with the aim of securing
the credibility and integrity of these examinations.
4. The SHA evidence is therefore set out
below in three sections:
4.1 Advanced level standards
4.2 Roles and relationships of the DfES,
QCA and the awarding bodies.
4.3 General concerns about assessment
The SHA evidence on 4.3 is supported by the
attached paper (Annex 2) on Examinations and Assessment, recently
published by the Association.
With HMC and GSA, SHA has identified 15 recommendations
that need to be put in place urgently for 2003. These are attached
in a joint GSA/HMC/SHA paper at Annex 1.
ADVANCED LEVEL
STANDARDS
5. We have often heard A-level described
as the gold standard. Nothing could be further from reality: there
has never been a single standard for A-level. It has been well
known for many years that different A-level subjects have different
levels of difficulty. Evidence for this view has consistently
been produced by Professor Carol Fitz-Gibbon through the A-level
Information Systems (ALIS) project, which has analysed A-level
results for the last 20 years. SHA recommends that equivalent
grades in all A-levels should represent the same level of achievement.
6. It was understood that, from the mid-1980s,
A-level grades would no longer be norm-referenced, but would be
criterion-referenced, at least at grades A and E. In fact, as
has become public knowledge in 2002, the grading system is an
uneasy mixture of norm and criterion referencing. SHA recommends
that the A-level grading system should be criterion-referenced.
7. A stronger focus on criterion referencing
would ensure that grades resulted from the professional judgements
of experienced chief examiners and were not subject to statistical
manipulation at the end of the process. SHA recommends that the
chief executives of awarding bodies, acting as Accountable Officers,
should not normally change the grades agreed by chief examiners.
In the exceptional circumstances where this is done, a report
on each case should be sent to QCA within two days.
8. The calculation of AS grades has been
transparent, at least in theory. According to the Dearing Report,
each grade at AS represented the standard reached after one year
of an A-level course that is equivalent to the same A-level grade
reached after two years. SHA recommends that this definition of
AS grades should remain.
9. The calculation of A2 grades has never,
to this day, been clearly articulated. If, as has been suggested,
the level of A2 grades is above that of A-level in order to compensate
for the lower level AS grades to which they are to be added, this
has never been made clear. If that is the case—and SHA strongly
believes that it should not be the case—then the amount
by which A2 is above A-level needs to be publicly stated.
10. SHA believes that it is wrong for A2
grades to be above that of A-level. During the debates on the
implementation of Curriculum 2000, it was never suggested that
it was the purpose of the changes to raise the standard expected
of 18 year olds.
11. If the combining of AS and A2 grades
into a single A-level grade proves impossible without raising
the standard of A-level accreditation, SHA recommends that the
A2 grade should be uncoupled from the AS grade, with AS and A2
grades being reported separately. The AS marks should not be used
in the calculation of the A2 grade.
12. Students study AS courses and normally
complete AS examinations after one year. They proceed to the A2
courses in their chosen subjects and take A2 examinations during
the second year. At least one of the A2 module examinations in
each course would be synoptic, testing students on the work covered
in the whole AS/A2 course. SHA recommends that the A-level grade
should be the A2 grade and should not be computed by combining
marks from AS and A2.
13. Although uncoupled for grading purposes,
SHA recommends that the AS and the A2 courses should continue
to form a single coherent A-level course, normally taken over
two years. There should be no change in AS and A2 specifications.
14. With A2 uncoupled from AS, SHA recommends
that A2 grades should represent the same achievement as the equivalent
traditional A-level grades.
15. AS is currently worth half an A-level
in UCAS points. In the interests of promoting breadth of study
post-16, SHA recommends that the UCAS points for AS should remain
at half of those for a full A-level of the same grade.
16. SHA believes that it is vital to retain
the modular structure of A-levels, which has brought greater flexibility
and helped to raise achievement. There is, however, little reason
to retain the six-module structure, other than for symmetry of
course architecture. In order to reduce the amount of post-16
assessment, SHA recommends that AS courses should have only two
modules, a proposal put forward by SHA and others several years
ago. This should not, however, necessitate a reduction in coursework,
which SHA sees as a valuable part of many A-level courses.
17. The two examination sittings per year,
in January and June, have given schools and colleges opportunities
for flexibility of organisation and SHA recommends that two examination
sittings per year should be retained. However, SHA believes that
a system of end-of-module assessments would be preferable to examination
period at fixed dates in January and June.
18. SHA believes that it would add to the
reliability of AS grades if greater weight was placed on the professional
judgement of teachers in the manner described in Annex 1 to this
submission. SHA therefore recommends that AS should be largely
teacher assessed.
19. SHA welcomes the discussions concerning
a six-term year and the potential thus created for a post-qualifications
admissions process to university.
20. The six modules of vocational A-levels
are currently all assessed at full Advanced level standard. This
causes considerable problems for many vocational A-level candidates
taking modular examinations in the first year of their course.
SHA therefore recommended previously that the assessment structure
of vocational A-levels be changed to match that of A-levels, with
the first three modules being assessed at a standard half way
to full A-level. SHA recognises that this potentially creates
the same grading problem for the final three modules of vocational
A-levels as has beset A-levels in 2002. SHA therefore recommends
that the standards expected in vocational AS and A2 should match
the standards expected in the general AS and A2 equivalent.
21. The Code of Practice—or, at least,
its interpretation—has been found wanting in 2002. SHA recommends
that the Code of Practice should be amended to reflect the changes
recommended by the Tomlinson report.
ROLES AND
RELATIONSHIPS OF
THE DFES, QCA AND
THE AWARDING
BODIES
22. Although there was no evidence of involvement
by DfES ministers or officials in the statistical manipulation
of A-level grades in 2002, SHA officers have long observed the
close links between the DfES and QCA. DfES officials attend critical
QCA meetings and QCA seemingly feels unable to make recommendations
to ministers that might be received unfavourably. This is not
a healthy system. QCA advice to the DfES should be evidence-based
and independent. SHA therefore recommends that QCA should be reconstituted
as an independent body, governed by a Board drawn from schools,
colleges, universities and business, and reporting to Parliament.
23. The Government nevertheless has a legitimate
interest in curriculum and assessment matters. Legislation on
curriculum and assessment will, of course, remain with the DfES.
SHA recommends that the DfES, advised by the independent QCA,
should establish a framework for the curriculum and assessment,
but should leave the detail to QCA.
24. During the years when separate bodies
were responsible for curriculum and assessment, SHA officers observed
tensions and disjunctions between the two bodies. SHA believes
that assessment should serve the curriculum and that the two should
be planned coherently by a single body. SHA therefore recommends
that QCA should continue to be responsible for both curriculum
and assessment.
25. A confusion of role exists at QCA because
of its responsibility for setting national curriculum tests. SHA
recommends that QCA should no longer set national curriculum tests.
These should be set by another body, regulated by QCA.
26. There should be greater clarity concerning
the role of QCA as the regulator of the awarding bodies. SHA believes
that, with the independent status described above and with its
responsibility for setting national curriculum tests removed,
QCA will be better able to act as an effective regulator of the
processes and decisions of awarding bodies.
27. Under current circumstances, SHA supports
the continuation of three awarding bodies. Recent administrative
problems experienced by awarding bodies have partly stemmed from
their large volume of work, much of it acquired recently with
the great expansion in the number of examinations caused by Curriculum
2000. If, however, the SHA recommendations to reduce the number
of external examinations are accepted, it may be possible for
the work to be done by fewer than three awarding bodies. For the
meantime, however, SHA recommends that there should be no reduction
in the number of awarding bodies.
28. In order to reduce the bureaucracy associated
with the examinations process, SHA recommends that the awarding
bodies should streamline and co-ordinate their procedures.
GENERAL CONCERNS
ABOUT ASSESSMENT
29. SHA believes that young people are subjected
to far too many external examinations. SHA also believes that
greater clarity is needed about the purpose of each examination
and assessment instrument.
30. SHA recommends that the government should
place greater trust in the professionalism of teachers and thus
recommends that internal summative assessment should play a greater
part in the examination system. SHA particularly welcomes the
support given to this proposal by the Chief Executive of QCA at
the QCA Annual Conference in October 2002.
31. SHA recommends that its proposal for
the establishment of a cohort of Chartered Examiners, as set out
in the Annex, should be piloted and, if successful, adopted nationally
as soon as practicable.
32. SHA recommends that decisions on GCSE
and AS grades should rely more on internal assessment by teachers.
A2 papers should remain predominantly external examinations, with
coursework where appropriate.
33. SHA's full recommendations for the future
of assessment and examinations are set out in the attached paper
in Annex 2, Examinations and Assessment: Proposals by the Secondary
Heads Association for a radical reform of examinations and assessment.
October 2002
Annex 1
SUMMARY OF PROPOSALS FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN
2003
A LEVEL STANDARDS
1. Agreed national definitions of the words
"standards" (in relation to public examinations) and
"standards over time" should be communicated as a matter
of urgency by QCA (as the standard-setting body) to awarding bodies,
schools and colleges, and the public at large.
2. Differences between the old, legacy A-levels
and the new A-level structure should be more widely publicised,
with a focus on managing public expectations that pass rates are
likely to rise.
3. Teachers', examiners' and moderators'
confidence in their professional judgements (especially in respect
of coursework) needs bolstering, as a matter of urgency, through
an intensive programme of support from the awarding bodies.
4. The primacy of professional judgement
over statistical data in the awards process needs reasserting.
5. The system of marking and grading should
be made less complex and more transparent.
6. The immediate priority is to define and
communicate the standards of AS and A2 and how, together, they
form the new A-level standard. These should be criterion-referenced:
— for the AS, against the standards
established through the AS pilot and the 2001 summer award;
— for the A2, against expanded grade
descriptions (Grades A, C and E provided in the specifications
for all subjects), with greater use of archive scripts. Use of
the grade C description, although not currently a judgemental
point, would serve as a useful additional check on the accuracy
of the overall grade setting.
7. The standards expected of the vocational
AS and A2 should match those of the general AS and A2 equivalents,
in line with recommendation six above.
ROLES AND
RELATIONSHIPS OF
QCA AND THE
AWARDING BODIES
8. QCA should be fully independent of DfES
and accountable either to Parliament (not a Select Committee)
or the Privy Council.
9. QCA's functions should be restricted
to setting national standards and regulating the system that assesses
achievement against such standards.
10. QCA should be supported in its regulatory
role (at least for the next three years and arguably as a permanent
arrangement) by a distinguished panel of independent scrutineers.
11. The Awarding Bodies should be demonstrably
independent of QCA (and DfES) although the powers of their Accountable
Officers would be circumscribed and their operations open to independent
scrutiny (as suggested above).
12. Awarding Body Accountable Officers should
only be permitted to move grade boundaries recommended by the
Chairman of Examiners/Principal/Chief Examiners by an agreed maximum.
13. Final raw mark grade boundaries should
be routinely published by all awarding bodies for each unit of
assessment, at the time that results are published.
14. All awards meetings should, in future,
include representation from the other board(s) to help ensure
consistency of approach and the application of common standards.
15. All awarding body personnel (including
teachers employed as examiners on a part-time basis) should have
a "let out" clause in their confidentiality agreements
to enable them to contact the independent scrutineers if necessary.
Annex 2
EXAMINATIONS AND ASSESSMENT
Proposals by the Secondary Heads Association
for a radical reform of examinations and assessment September
2002
SUMMARY AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Young people are subjected to far too
many external examinations. (Paragraph 11)
2. Greater clarity is needed about the purpose
of each examination and assessment instrument. (Paragraphs 20-22)
3. The 14-19 Green Paper mentions assessment
and examinations in so far as they contribute to league tables
as drivers of improved performance. Otherwise, it largely ignores
assessment and examinations. Successful reform of the qualifications
structure for this age group depends heavily on reform of the
examinations system. (Paragraph 10)
4. The Government should place greater trust
in the professionalism of teachers. Internal summative assessment
should play a greater part in the examination system. (Paragraph
28)
5. The SHA proposal for the establishment
of a cohort of Chartered Examiners, as set out in the Annex, should
be piloted and, if successful, adopted nationally as soon as practicable.
(Paragraph 34 and Annex)
6. As a supplement to other forms of assessment,
national item banks of well developed assessment tools could be
made available for current and future testing arrangements, such
as national curriculum tests, GCSE and AS. (Paragraph 31)
7. Decisions on GCSE and AS grades should
rely more on internal assessment by teachers. A2 papers should
remain predominantly external examinations, with coursework where
appropriate. (Paragraph 36)
8. At ages seven and 14, teacher assessments,
supported by online test scores, should be reported to parents,
but not used to compile performance tables. (Paragraph 32)
9. The feasibility of having a cadre of
professional salaried examiners and moderators who are not serving
teachers should be investigated.(Paragraph 30)
10. A fundamental review of assessment should
seek to promote a move from assessment of learning to assessment
for learning, which focuses more strongly on the needs of the
learner than the needs of the system. (Paragraph 23)
11. The random sampling tests carried out
by the Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) for national monitoring
of standards and national levels of attainment should be reintroduced.
(Paragraphs 7, 37)
12. To ensure consistency, more emphasis
should be placed on training in a range of assessment methods
for teachers, both in initial training and in-service training
courses. (Paragraph 26)
13. National performance tables in their
present form, even when recording value added in addition to raw
scores, have no part to play in a progressive assessment structure.
They should be abolished. (Paragraphs 6, 9)
THE ASSESSMENT
PROBLEM
1. Assessment in Britain requires a radical
review. The introduction of modular AS examinations in 2000-01
highlighted the problem of adding new external examinations to
an already over-examined system. There is widespread agreement
that young people in England and Wales are subjected to far too
many external examinations and that the extent of these examinations
has a damaging effect on the quality of education in schools and
colleges. In the words of Professor Harry Torrance,
To use an engineering metaphor, it seems that
we are beginning to "test the system to destruction".
Well, that's all very well when we want to know how much force
the materials in a bridge can withstand, but it hardly seems appropriate
to the future building blocks of our society—our children.
(Torrance, 2002)
2. There is less consensus on how the system
of external examinations should be reformed. This paper sets out
a programme of reform that is both practical and radical. The
proposed measures could be introduced over a five-year period,
with some reforms being introduced more quickly.
3. This paper does not argue against assessment.
Far from it. High quality assessment is an important part of good
teaching. As we argue below, however, the purposes of assessment
have become confused. This has happened largely because external
examinations have assumed too much importance in the system. Examinations
have become the master of education, not the servant.
4. Recent research has shown that examinations
are a less precise science than the public is led to believe and
that too much confidence has been placed in the detailed results
by those who use them to make judgements, both on the performance
of individual pupils and on the performance of the school system
as a whole. (Black and Wiliam, 2002)
5. There are historical lessons about over-reliance
on high stakes testing, as well as evidence from the modern era.
Teachers have always set goals for their pupils, based on the
demands of the examination syllabus. The higher the stakes in
the examination, the stronger is the concentration on the limited
goals of the test. Under the Revised Code in the nineteenth century,
Matthew Arnold HMI described the school examinations as "a
game of mechanical contrivance in which the teachers will and
must learn how to beat us" (Report, 1864-65) and Joshua Fitch
HMI commented that the Revised Code was:
tending to formalize the work of elementary schools,
and to render it in some degree lifeless, inelastic and mechanical.
Too many teachers narrow their sense of duty to the six Standards,
or what they sometimes call the paying subjects. (Report, 1864-65)
6. The current school performance tables,
which summarize age-related achievement at 11, 14, 16 and 18,
impose perverse incentives on schools. At GCSE, resources are
often concentrated on pupils at the C/D borderline, sometimes
to the detriment of those who could perhaps raise a grade B to
an A, or an E to a D. The performance tables dictate that many
pupils have to be entered for examinations when they are not ready
for them. We need to move away from age-relatedness of examinations.
7. As Torrance notes, national curriculum
test scores improve each year because teachers ensure that pupils
practise for the tests. The same is surely true of GCSE and Advanced
level. International evidence, notably from the US, also indicates
that high stakes testing raises test scores without necessarily
improving knowledge and understanding. (Torrance, 2002) The random
sampling tests carried out by the Assessment of Performance Unit
(APU) were a more effective way of monitoring national standards.
8. The 2002 Annual Report of HMCI, Mike
Tomlinson, observed that
in some primary schools the arts, creative and
practical subjects are receiving less attention than previously.
This risks an unacceptable narrowing of the curriculum. (Ofsted,
2002)
If educational standards are defined more broadly
than literacy, numeracy and science, HMCI's observation suggests
that standards are being reduced, rather than improved, by the
present testing regime. (Torrance, 2002)
9. The national performance tables in their
present form, even when recording value added in addition to raw
scores, have no part to play in the progressive assessment structure
outlined in this paper. Many alternative ways of making schools
accountable for their performance exist.
10. The Government's proposals for a post-14
qualifications structure will be threatened if the current weight
of examinations for 17 and 18 year-olds is replicated in reforms
for students aged 15 and 16. Unless we change the examinations
system, we cannot build the progressive structure of curriculum
and qualifications that the government has proposed. The 14-19
Green Paper mentions assessment and examinations in so far as
they contribute to league tables as drivers of improved performance.
Otherwise, it largely ignores assessment and examinations. Successful
reform of the qualifications structure for this age group depends
heavily on reform of the examinations system and the Green Paper
does nothing to move us away from our national obsession with
levels and grades at every age.
THE NEED
TO REDUCE
THE NUMBER
OF EXAMINATIONS
11. Young people are subjected to far too
many external examinations. The total number of examination papers
sat by young people in schools and colleges in 2002 in national
curriculum tests at 7, 11 and 14, GCSE examinations, AS and A2
examinations and key skills tests is over 30 million. No other
country has so many examinations, taking place so frequently in
the life of a young person. Fewer examinations would not mean
worse. Indeed, SHA believes that fewer examinations could lead
to an improved education system.
12. Under the pressure of the present system,
schools and colleges spend too much valuable curriculum time in
directly preparing for, and conducting, external examinations.
13. The examination system is very costly,
taking too high a proportion of available funding in schools and
colleges. A typical secondary school of 1,000 pupils, including
a sixth form, is spending around £100,000 per year on external
examinations. A typical sixth form college is spending around
£180,000.
14. The three awarding bodies are buckling
under the pressure of the system. Unacceptable administrative
errors have increased greatly in the last two years. The underlying
cause of this increase has been the rapid expansion of the number
of examinations during this period.
15. The complexity of the examination system
has led to an increased number of errors in marking and results.
Appeals are not dealt with efficiently.
16. It is becoming impossible to find sufficient
markers, moderators and examiners.
17. The problem of over-reliance on external
examinations is illustrated by the fact that bright children take
over 100 examinations during their school career.
18. The national obsession with tests and
grading is illustrated by the daft proposal that national tests
for seven year olds will include starred grades "to differentiate
the very highest performers from the merely excellent".
19. The chief inspector of independent schools—a
very experienced ex-HMI—reports that examination overload
"threatens to turn education from an intellectual and spiritual
adventure into a treadmill". (Tony Hubbard)
A CONFUSION OF
PURPOSE
20. There is considerable confusion about
the purposes of external examinations and assessment. In particular,
the purpose of examining the student has become confused with
school accountability and the performance management of teachers.
The same assessments are used for the following purposes, as cited
in the TGAT Report (DES, 1988):
They are also used for:
— Component of the qualifications structure.
— Teachers' performance-related pay.
— School performance tables.
— Meeting national targets.
Of the last group of five purposes, three are
evaluative, demonstrating how the government has skewed the assessment
system from its prime purposes of diagnostic and formative towards
the evaluative.
21. No single assessment tool can be applied
effectively in so many ways. There needs to be much greater clarity
about the purpose of each assessment.
22. The recent furore over Advanced level
grades has highlighted the confusion at Advanced level and GCSE
between norm-referenced assessment and criterion-referenced assessment.
This has been apparent to many chief examiners since the late
1980s.
ASSESSMENT FOR
LEARNING
23. A fundamental review of assessment should
seek to promote a move from assessment of learning to assessment
for learning, which focuses more strongly on the needs of the
learner than the needs of the system. It seeks to promote pupils'
learning, rather than act as a measure of accountability. (This
section is based on Black et al, 2002)
24. Assessment for learning is formative
assessment, producing evidence for teachers and pupils that leads
to modifications in both teaching and learning. Black and Wiliam
(1998) demonstrate clearly how formative assessment raises standards.
Assessment for learning is used widely in the Government's
key stage three strategy.
25. Key features of assessment for learning
include:
— more effective questioning techniques
by the teacher;
— increasing the waiting time for answers
from pupils in class;
— feedback from teacher to pupil by
comments, instead of marks or grades;
— feedback that causes pupils to think;
— more self-assessment by pupils;
— peer-assessment as a complement to
self-assessment;
— the formative use of summative tests.
26. To ensure consistency, more emphasis
should be placed on training in a range of assessment methods
for teachers, both in initial training and in-service training
courses. This is an imperative when major changes, such as assessment
for learning, are introduced.
27. So much of the current debate about
assessment is divorced from the student's learning process. The
work of Black and Wiliam is refreshing in bringing the focus of
the debate back to the central issue of learning.
NEW METHODS
OF ASSESSMENT
28. In recent years, teachers have become
more rigorous and skilful at assessment. The Government should
place greater trust in the professionalism of teachers. Internal
summative assessment should play a greater part in the examination
system.
29. One way to increase the proportion of
internal assessment is to have a massive programme of moderation,
but this would be unduly bureaucratic and would take moderators
(who would mostly be serving teachers) out of their own schools
for too much of the summer term.
30. Another way to solve the present examinations
crisis is to have a cadre of professional salaried examiners and
moderators who are not serving teachers. The seasonal nature of
examinations may make this an inefficient way of proceeding. Nevertheless,
this is worth investigating, as part-time salaried examiner posts
may be attractive to teachers at the end of their career in the
classroom.
31. The use of online assessment is likely
to increase, as online techniques become increasingly sophisticated
and cost-effective. As a supplement to other forms of assessment,
national item banks of well developed assessment tools could be
made available for current and future testing arrangements, such
as national curriculum tests, GCSE and AS. These item banks could
be used to complement teachers' judgements of levels and grades
achieved. Online assessment is good at testing knowledge and,
to a lesser extent, understanding, but it is not so good at testing
analytical ability and other higher order skills. It should be
noted, therefore, that the results produced by online assessment
do not always correlate exactly with the results of other forms
of assessment. Nevertheless, online assessment has an important
part to play, although the practicalities of organising online
testing in schools should be considered carefully.
32. At ages seven and 14, teacher assessments,
supported by online test scores, should be reported to parents,
but not used to compile performance tables.
CHARTERED EXAMINERS
33. A problem with relying more on internal
assessment by teachers is that there is a lack of trust in the
professional ability of teachers to carry out such assessment
rigorously. A change in the balance between external and internal
assessment must take place in a way that maintains public confidence
in the qualifications system.
34. SHA's scheme for the establishment of
a cohort of Chartered Examiners would produce no loss of rigour
in examining and would thus hold public confidence. The SHA proposals
are set out in the Annex. These should be piloted and, if successful,
adopted nationally as soon as practicable.
35. The proposal to create Chartered Examiners
will raise the status of teachers and of internal assessment in
schools and colleges. It will improve the quality of school-based
assessment and thus contribute to the raising of achievement in
schools and colleges. It will provide a new step on the continuum
of professional development for teachers. It will provide important
professional development opportunities for aspiring classroom
teachers. It will make just-in-time testing more viable and reduce
the length of the examination period each summer. Above all, it
would make the examinations system more manageable.
36. With Chartered Examiners in place, the
GCSE and AS examinations could rely more on internal assessment
by teachers. Assessment instruments could be externally set and
internally marked by (or under the supervision of) Chartered Examiners.
Instruments could also be internally set. Grades could be recommended
internally from a combination of internal and external assessment
instruments. A2 papers should remain predominantly external examinations,
with coursework where appropriate.
NATIONAL MONITORING
37. National curriculum testing should not
be used to monitor progress towards the achievement of national
targets. The pressure of high stakes testing creates a false picture.
The random sampling tests carried out by the Assessment of Performance
Unit (APU) should be reintroduced. Monitoring of progress should
be by national sampling, not by national saturation, as we have
at present.
October 2002
REFERENCES
Black, P, and Wiliam, D, Inside the black
box: Raising standards through classroom assessment, King's
College, London, 1998
Black, P, and Wiliam, D, Standards in Public
Examinations, King's College, London, 2002.
Black, P, Harrison, C, Lee, C, Marshall, B,
Wiliam, D, Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning
in the classroom, King's College, London, 2002.
DES, Task Group on Assessment and Testing,
DES and the Welsh Office, 1988.
Hubbard, T, Annual Report of the Independent
Schools Inspectorate 2000-01, Independent Schools Council,
2002.
Ofsted, Annual Report of Her Majesty's Chief
Inspector of Schools in England 2000-01, HMSO, 2002.
Report of the Committee of Council on Education,
1864-65.
Torrance, H, Can testing really raise educational
standards?, Inaugural lecture, University of Sussex, June
2002.
Annex
PROPOSAL TO CREATE CHARTERED EXAMINER STATUS
1. A new Chartered Examiner status is introduced
for experienced teachers.
2. If greater reliance is to be placed on
internal assessment by teachers as a component of externally awarded
qualifications, this must be achieved with no loss of rigour.
3. The internal assessment is therefore
carried out by teachers who uphold, and are seen to uphold, the
standards set by the government, QCA and awarding bodies.
ACCREDITATION OF
CHARTERED EXAMINERS
4. Chartered Examiner status is available
to qualified teachers with at least four years' experience of
teaching the subject in which they are to be accredited.
5. Teachers applying for accreditation as
Chartered Examiners take part in three to five days of training
and testing, administered by the awarding bodies. Much of this
involves the marking of candidates' work and the estimation of
grades. Only teachers achieving a high standard of consistency
in this work are accredited as Chartered Examiners.
6. The status of Chartered Examiner is granted
by the awarding bodies and is publicly recognised with a post-nominal
C.Ex.
7. The status is awarded at Advanced level
for those conducting assessments at A level and AVCE; at Intermediate
level for those conducting assessments at GCSE and vocational
GCSE; at Foundation level for those conducting key stage three
assessments.
8. It is for consideration whether teachers
awarded the status at Advanced level need to be separately accredited
at Intermediate and Foundation levels.
9. The proposal could be extended to teachers
of children at key stages one and two.
10. The status of Chartered Examiner will
be awarded to teachers in maintained and independent schools and
colleges.
11. Precedents exist for the proposals in
this paper, both in the D32 to D35 qualifications for teachers
who assess vocational courses, and in the accreditation awarded
to modern languages teachers to carry out A level and GCSE speaking
tests. In each case, teachers apply for the accreditation and
undergo training and testing for one or more days. The awarding
bodies administer the process and award the accreditation.
OPERATION OF
A SYSTEM
OF CHARTERED
EXAMINERS
12. It is envisaged that each large subject
department of a secondary school or college will have several
Chartered Examiners. These teachers will be responsible for carrying
out or overseeing rigorous internal assessment that would form
a substantial proportion of externally awarded qualifications.
13. The work to be assessed by the Chartered
Examiners will be of two types:
i. externally set tests or assignments, and
ii. internally set assignments on specified
parts of the syllabus.
14. If a department does not have a Chartered
Examiner in a particular subject, the school or college may use
a Chartered Examiner from another institution or may send the
work to the awarding body for external marking.
15. It is the responsibility of the Chartered
Examiner to mark and grade work at the standard of the external
qualification to which it contributes.
16. A senior Chartered Examiner will be
appointed in each school to oversee the whole assessment process.
17. A small amount of moderation of the
work of Chartered Examiners could take place each year. Moderation
systems tend to be very bureaucratic and time consuming. The extent
and procedures of the moderation must avoid this excessive bureaucracy.
18. The proposed increase in internal examining
is subject to the criticism that it will increase the workload
of teachers. This should not be the case. If year 12 is taken
as an example, the experience of 2000-01 suggests that the weight
of external examinations has caused additional stress and workload.
Yet year 12 students have always been given internal examinations
by their teachers without these problems. Unless the new system
is introduced with excessive bureaucracy, a more rigorous form
of internal assessment will add little to the workload of a typical
teacher of year 12 students.
19. C.Ex. status will be renewable every
three years.
20. C.Ex. status (as was the case with a
good honours degree) will be appropriately rewarded with a salary
supplement.
21. The cost of the proposals has not been
calculated, but any additional cost will be offset by the reduction
in external examinations, which are expensive consumers of resources.
| 
