Appendix 1
Government's response to the Third Report from
the Children, Schools and Families Committee, Session 2007-08
Introduction
1. The Children, Schools and Families Committee
published the report of its inquiry into Testing and Assessment
on 13 May 2008. This is the Government's response. Paragraph numbers
relate to the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the report.
2. The Government strongly agrees with the Committee's
conclusions on the importance of national testing, to help teachers
to focus on ensuring that every pupil can achieve their full potential.
The Committee highlights the importance of teacher assessment.
The Government published its Assessment for Learning (AfL) Strategy
in May, supported by £150 million over the next three years.
This makes an offer of professional development for every school,
and will help to strengthen teacher assessment and ultimately
ensure that all teachers have the very best understanding of where
their pupils are in their learning, to allow them to tailor their
teaching appropriately. Support for AfL is also at the heart of
the Making Good Progress pilots, alongside piloting a new approach
to testing through single level tests and additional, one-to-one
support for pupils who need it. The Government also welcomes the
Committee's endorsement of the assessment approach to the vocational
and general element of Diplomas.
3. The Committee's report is clear about the
importance of accountability to ensure that all pupils are being
properly supported; and welcomes the creation of Ofqual to ensure
rigorous standards are maintained. The Government is not persuaded
that there are inherent problems in using National Curriculum
testing for the three purposes of measuring pupil attainment,
school and teaching accountability, and national monitoring. Decoupling
these individual uses of the National Curriculum tests could confuse
accountabilities and add to the burden on schools.
4. The Committee raised an important issue about
"teaching to the test". The Government has never encouraged
"teaching to the test", nor do we accept that increases
in national test results are the result of "teaching to the
test". We will consider providing guidance to schools to
reinforce good practice and to re-emphasise our position that
excessive time spent on test preparation would be unacceptable.
As there is little information on parents' and pupils' views of
testing and assessment, we are currently considering how we could
gather better evidence.
5. The Committee's Report also highlights the
importance of ensuing that schools' performance is not judged
narrowly against national test data only. The Government agrees,
and will be consulting on school-level indicators of wellbeing,
as set out in the Children's Plan. We will also look at how the
presentation of the Assessment and Attainment Tables can be improved
to make them more accessible, as suggested by the Committee.
The need for national testing (Recommendation
1)
6. We welcome the Committee's recognition that
national testing has a valuable role and its endorsement of the
principle of accountability at every level of the education system.
National tests provide objective, reliable and consistent information
about the attainment and progress of every child in the core subjects
of English, mathematics and science, enabling valid comparisons
to be made between the performance of pupils and groups of pupils,
schools and local authorities. Parents and pupils are key stakeholders
and the Children's Plan sets out our commitment to establish their
views on our key policies, of which assessment is one.
7. We welcome the Committee's judgment that there
is excellent teaching in our schools. Evidence from inspections
has shown that the quality of teaching has improved alongside
improvements in test and examination results.
The purposes of national testing (Recommendations
2, 4, 21 and 22)
8. The central purpose of National Curriculum
tests is to provide pupils, parents, schools, the Government and
the public with an accurate measure of attainment for every pupil
in the core subjects at the end of Key Stages 2 and 3. The Government
does not believe that there is any necessary or predetermined
limit on the number of uses that can be made of this information;
indeed imposing such a limit would not be sensible, and likely
to impose new burdens on schools. Rather than setting an arbitrary
limit to the uses made of test data, what is required is that
an informed judgment is made in each case about the fitness for
purpose of test results data in the specific context, and about
other possible sources of information.
9. The Committee identifies three broad uses
of test result data: measuring pupil attainment; school and teacher
accountability; and national monitoring. It is the Government's
clear view that test result data is fit to support each of these
three important uses:
- National tests provide objective,
comparable information about every child. This data complements
teachers' own assessments about how each child is progressing
based on evidence gathered day-to-day. In the round, assessment
data supports schools and teachers to help children to progress
and to achieve their best. This is the most important use of national
test information: the other two uses exist to support this vital
work;
- National test results also provide reliable,
comparable information on schools' performance and, together with
evidence from Ofsted and schools' self-evaluation, form the basis
of school accountability to parents and to the taxpayer. National
testing results are the basis for calculating progression measures,
value added and Contextual Value Added (CVA) scores. In this respect,
they are also a key tool for headteachers and Governing Bodies
to use in comparing the performance of their school against others;
- The third use is one in which test data has a
unique function; it provides information on national standards
and measures attainment against national Public Service Agreement
(PSA) targets.
In his evidence to the Committee, Ken Boston confirmed
that the tests are fit for purpose.
10. The Government agrees with the Committee
that test results do not, and cannot, provide a complete picture
of a pupil's or a school's performance. Testing focuses on the
core subjects of English, mathematics and science, as those subjects
underpin the rest of the curriculum and so hold the key to children's
future success in study and in the world of work beyond. That
is why these subjects are also the main focus of the target-setting
process. High standards in the core subjects must be a key objective
for every school. But the Government is clear that other areas
of the curriculum, and other sources of information on a pupil's
progress and development, are also very important.
Targets, and the consequences of high-stakes uses
of testing (Recommendations 3, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 17 and 20)
11. The Government welcomes the Committee's endorsement
of the importance of effective assistance for children who struggle
to meet expected standards, but it does not accept that the current
system of targets puts the system out of balance. The accountability
system for schools, including the setting of targets as well as
the tests themselves, the Achievement and Attainment Tables and
Ofsted inspections, has contributed to the highest standards ever
achieved at primary and secondary levels. The Government agrees
that the pursuit of higher standards is not about numerical targets.
Targets, and their use in the accountability system, are just
a means by which we move towards the objective of equipping pupils
with the skills and knowledge they need.
12. The Committee raises "teaching to the
test" as a key concern. The Government does not accept that
increases in national test results are the result of "teaching
to the test". The term is used to cover a broad range of
possible practice in different schools, from recapitulating on
skills that children need to internalise and hone, after initial
learning, to repeated practise of test questions and learning
test technique. A better understanding of school practice would
be helpful, and we are therefore considering how best we can gather
further evidence in this area with a view to providing guidance
to schools to reinforce good practice and to reemphasise
our position that excessive time spent on test preparation would
be unacceptable.
13. The Committee also noted that some of its
witnesses believed that testing was stressful for children, but
it did not reach any specific conclusion. As the Minister of State
for Schools and Learners said in his evidence session with the
Committee, the Government is keen to understand more about parental
and pupil views of testing and assessment, and we are currently
considering how best to collect better evidence than is currently
available.
14. As noted above, the Government believes it
is right that national testing should focus on core subjects.
Nonetheless, schools are statutorily required to provide a balanced
and broadly based curriculum which:
- promotes the spiritual, moral,
cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school
and society; and
- prepares pupils at the school for the opportunities,
responsibilities and experiences of later life.
15. There is no reason for testing to result
in an unbalanced, narrow curriculum or uninspiring teaching. The
breadth of the curriculum and the quality of teaching are both
entirely within the control of the school and the teacher. There
is no evidence that good test results need be obtained at the
expense of the broader curriculum or of engaging teaching. Successful
schools combine both high attainment and a rich, varied curriculum
and each contributes to the other. Literacy and numeracy can be
taught in and through other subjects; teaching the core subjects
in the context of a broad and rich curriculum is what we want
for every child. If children are taught the curriculum well, then
they will do well in the tests.
16. Evidence from Ofsted also demonstrates this.
The majority of Ofsted inspection reports about schools judged
to be outstanding describe schools which have a broad and balanced
curriculum and good or outstanding achievement and attainment.
Ofsted's report on The curriculum in successful primary schools
(October 2002) identified schools
"which achieve what many others claim is not
possible. They have high standards in English, mathematics and
science, while also giving a strong emphasis to the humanities,
physical education and the arts."
17. The Government supports schools in the provision
of a broad and rich curriculum in a number of ways. For example:
- the new secondary curriculum
offers schools exciting opportunities to increase engagement and
motivation by providing a wider range of relevant learning experiences
for young people. Schools are expected to offer additional curriculum
opportunities outside the classroom, designed to enhance teaching,
learning and engagement with the subject areas;
- in the Children's Plan we announced our intention
that, no matter where they live, or what their background, all
children and young people should be able to get involved in top
quality cultural opportunities in and out of school;
- £332 million will be invested in music education
during 2007-11 and, by 2011, all primary children will have had
an opportunity to learn a musical instrument; and
- the PE & Sport Strategy is aiming to offer five
hours of PE and sport a week, during and after the school
day, to all 5-16 year olds, supported by £783 million over
the next three years.
18. In order to encourage a more equitable focus
on improving outcomes for pupils performing below national expectations
(and stretching those who are most able), as indicated in the
Education White Paper, Higher Standards, Better Schools For
All (October 2005), we now have a pupil progress measure.
The interaction between this new progression target and the attainment
targets measuring the percentage of pupils who have passed a particular
threshold is important. For some pupils, often because they have
started a Key Stage behind their peers, reaching nationally expected
levels is particularly challenging. By introducing a progression
target alongside the traditional end of Key Stage attainment targets,
we are helping schools to focus on outcomes for all pupils, regardless
of their prior attainment, while continuing to recognise the importance
of children reaching the expected levels, where they can do so.
This, alongside personalised teaching and learning approaches,
will help to ensure that we have the right incentives in the system
to increase attainment and narrow gaps at the same time.
Use of data by Ofsted (Recommendation 11)
19. We think it is right that standards in national
tests and examinations should continue to be prominently reported
in inspections, because educational attainment and success in
examinations is fundamental to the future life chances of young
learners. For the same reasons, it is right that national test
data should help inspectors to form their judgements on standards
and progress, without being crudely used to pre-decide inspection
outcomes. As well as absolute attainment, inspectors look to CVA
data in order to take account of schools' specific circumstances
and intakes. Inspection grades can reflect excellent progress
by pupils who enter a school significantly below national expectations;
or inadequate progress by pupils from more privileged backgrounds
with high attainment on entry. CVA data, alongside absolute attainment
data, is therefore relevant in reaching inspection judgements,
as is the direct evidence seen during the inspection itself, on
assessment systems, the quality of teaching, lesson observations,
discussions with learners and the views expressed by parents.
20. RAISEonline, and other data packages, provide
inspectors with robust data about the standards achieved by pupils,
and the progress they are able to make during each Key Stage.
Data of a similar quality is not current available in other areas
of schools' work, to reflect the full range of the Every Child
Matters agenda. The Department is working with Ofsted to address
these gaps in time for the next inspections cycle, starting in
2009.
The burden of assessment (Recommendation 16)
21. Some preparation is necessary to enable pupils
to display what they know and what they can do in the context
of a time-limited test. Teaching the curriculum well and teaching
pupils how to display what they know is good practice, but the
Government does not support excessive time spent on test preparation,
and will ensure that this issue is explored in gathering evidence
about "teaching to the test", and in any future guidance.
22. Single level tests, currently being trialled
in the Making Good Progress pilot, could reduce the need for other
tests to monitor progress within the Key Stage or for diagnostic
purposes. Our investment in developing teachers' assessment skills
and the provision of AfL and Assessing Pupils' Progress (APP)
materials will enable teachers to track progress and plan the
next stage of learning through their own ongoing assessments.
They would enter pupils for a single level test when they judged
them to be ready, rather than wait until the end of the Key Stage.
Sample testing (Recommendations 5 and 23)
23. The Committee has proposed that we consider
a move to multiple test instruments, each serving fewer purposes,
as an alternative to National Curriculum tests. As set out elsewhere
in this Response, we do not accept the argument that the current
National Curriculum tests serve too many purposes. The development
and implementation of additional tests implies extra costs and
increased workload for teachers and others, and we are not persuaded
of the benefits it would bring. It also seems likely that we would
have a number of sets of incompatible performance data, which
would result in confusion for schools and parents, and would be
a less transparent way of holding the education system to account.
24. We recognise that sample testing is one way
of measuring performance and progress at national level. However,
a system of sample testing could achieve only that single purpose
and a whole cohort system of assessment would continue to be needed
to provide information about the performance of every pupil and
every school. We believe that high quality annual tests that reflect
the evolution of the curriculum provide a more accurate measurement
of performance. In developing tests, the NAA uses a standard test
against which to equate the standards of each annual test. We
do not see merit in imposing the additional burden of participating
in sample tests on some schools.
25. There is evidence to suggest that, internationally,
there is a trend to move away from the use of sample testing to
national testing of the full cohort. Recent examples include:
- Australia, where national assessments
have been introduced for the first time in May 2008 in literacy
and numeracy for years 3, 5, 7 and 9;
- Japan, where new national standardised tests
in Japanese and mathematics were introduced for all 12- and 15-year
olds in April 2007 and will take place annually; and
- Germany, where national tests to assess children
in lower secondary against recently introduced national standards
in a range of subjects are being introduced from 2009.
The recent OECD review of Scotland's school system,
where testing is currently carried out on a sample basis, recommended
that the Scottish Survey of Achievement be extended to all children
throughout Scotland as a basis for negotiating resource and outcome
agreements with local authorities and to enable improvements to
be measured at an individual and sub-group level.[2]
Teacher assessment and Assessment for Learning
(Recommendations 3 and 26)
26. We welcome the Committee's recommendation
which supports action we are already taking to improve AfL practice,
to promote personalised teaching and learning, and reflects the
way in which single level tests and AfL have been designed to
work together in the Making Good Progress pilot. Rigorous assessment
and tracking of pupil performance in order to inform classroom
practice is the most common feature of schools where pupils make
good progress and attainment gaps are closed. AfL is therefore
a key element of personalised learning. While some schools are
already using AfL very effectively, the evidence of inspections
is that, for one school in four, ongoing assessment is a key area
for improvement.
27. In the Children's Plan, we set out our aim
"to make the use of tracking and AfL tools and techniques
truly universal across all schools - extending them beyond the
core subjects of English and mathematics." We are investing
£150 million over the next three years in the continuing
professional development of school staff in AfL. The AfL Strategy,
which has been jointly developed by the DCSF, the National Strategies
and the QCA, together with the Chartered Institute of Educational
Assessors, is designed to support schools in using assessment
information to improve and plan provision, as well as improving
the quality of the assessment process itself. Among the Strategy's
aims is that every teacher is equipped to make well-founded judgements
about pupils' attainment, understands the concepts and principles
of progression, and knows how to use their assessment judgements
to forward plan, particularly for pupils who are not fulfilling
their potential. With the Chartered Institute of Educational Assessors,
we are working towards having a trained assessment specialist
in every school.
28. To improve the quality and consistency of
teacher assessment, the QCA and the National Strategies have been
developing Assessing Pupils' Progress (APP). APP is a structured
approach to teacher assessment, providing clear criteria against
which judgements can be made about levels and sub-levels, helping
teachers to track pupils' progress throughout a Key Stage and
to plan for the next steps of learning. APP materials for English
(reading and writing) and mathematics are available for Key Stages
2 and 3 and should be universally used in schools. English (reading
and writing) and mathematics materials for Key Stage 1 will be
available in January 2009. Over the next two years, APP materials
will be developed for English (speaking and listening), ICT and
science, and work will begin on materials for other foundation
subjects.
29. We agree with the Committee that teacher
assessment has an important place in assessment, alongside test
results. The approach being trialled in the Making Good Progress
pilot gives teacher assessment a pivotal role. Pupil entries for
the new single level tests are being trialled in the pilot dependent
on teacher judgements about when pupils are ready. As with test
results, the uses made of teacher assessment data should be determined
on the basis of fitness for purpose in a specific context. For
example, since 2005, moderated teacher assessment, informed by
national tasks and tests, has replaced test results as the principal
performance measure for Key Stage 1. It is important to be aware,
however, that a moderated teacher assessment process also brings
certain demands, including on teacher workload, if it is to provide
robust, reliable and comparable data.
30. At Key Stage 4, given the applied nature
of the Diploma, it is important that the assessment method
reflects the type of learning. We are confident that we have got
the balance right between the level of controlled internal assessment
and external testing. Units that involve controlled internal assessment
will typically be those that focus on practical or applied learning
(the application of knowledge and skills through tasks, problems
and situations that relate to work in that sector) whilst those
with a more theoretical focus will be externally assessed.
31. It is for Awarding Bodies to determine the
assessment methods that best suit the knowledge, skills and understanding
required for each unit. The NAA has developed arrangements to
support the management of internal assessment of the Principal
Learning and Project elements of the Diploma to ensure rigour
and high standards. It is currently running a series of training
events for senior managers in consortia who are involved in internal
assessment to support delivery of the Diploma from this September.
Making Good Progress (Recommendations 24, 25 and
27-30)
32. We welcome the Committee's acknowledgement
that single level tests may be useful, and their endorsement of
a more personalised approach to assessment. The Making Good Progress
pilot, of which single level tests are one strand, brings a number
of elements together designed to do just this. At its heart is
strengthening teachers' assessment skills and using AfL and tracking
children's progress to move them on in their learning, alongside
the new tests, one-to-one tuition in English and mathematics for
pupils who need it, new progression targets and incentives for
schools that are successful in supporting pupils who enter Key
Stages behind expected standards.
33. The Making Good Progress pilot is taking
place over two years in over 450 schools in ten local authorities.
It is being rigorously monitored, and is subject to an independent
evaluation. As part of that monitoring and evaluation process
we will be looking carefully at the issues the Committee has raised
in relation to single level tests, such as the impact on the wider
curriculum, and whether they encourage teaching to the test. The
validity of single level tests is subject to NAA's own evaluation
as they develop the tests, and the assessment model will be subject
to Ofqual scrutiny and approval. We agree with the Committee about
the importance of using the pilot to understand how single level
tests work in schools before deciding whether to implement them
on a national basis. The Children's Plan makes clear that we will
only make a decision to do this on the basis of positive evidence
from the pilot, and endorsement of the approach from the regulator.
34. It may be helpful to clarify how single level
tests are intended to work in relation to AfL. Entry for single
level tests will be triggered by teachers when they judge a child
is working securely at the next level. If teachers are making
accurate judgements about the level at which pupils are working,
the test will confirm their judgement. Testing in this way becomes
responsive and designed to occur when the child is ready, rather
than at a fixed point in their education. The emphasis on AfL
within the pilot and through our wider AfL strategy for all schools
should also ensure that teachers have a better and sharper understanding
about how each pupil is progressing against National Curriculum
criteria, where they need to go next in their learning, and what
support they need to progress. Single level tests have been designed
to work together with our approach to AfL, and in developing both,
we and NAA are, as the Committee suggests, looking at the purposes
which each should serve.
35. We do not agree that either single level
tests or the current National Curriculum tests disadvantage pupils
who may be struggling with the core subjects, or are in any way
incompatible with a personalised approach to learning. Within
the Making Good Progress pilot we are also trialling the use of
one to one tuition in English and mathematics for precisely those
children who need and will benefit from this additional support
in order to progress. Whilst it is too early at this stage in
the pilot to make judgements about the impact of tuition on rates
of progress, the anecdotal evidence from pupils and parents about
the impact on children's motivation and confidence is very strong.
36. Progress targets, which measure the percentage
of pupils moving two National Curriculum levels through a Key
Stage, are not linked specifically to single level tests, as they
are part of the national target-setting regime for 2009-10. The
focus on progression within the Making Good Progress pilot does,
however, enable us to look in more detail at how these targets
operate at school level, and their effectiveness as a means of
encouraging schools to focus on securing good progress for all
pupils, whatever their starting point.
Measuring standards across the curriculum (Recommendation
18)
37. There are strong reasons for the National
Curriculum tests to focus on the core subjects and these are set
out elsewhere in this Response. At the end of Key Stage 2, the
tests are also backed by statutory teacher assessment in those
subjects. In secondary schools, teacher assessments for core and
foundation subjects at the end of Key Stage 3 and results from
GCSE and other examinations provide measures of performance across
the curriculum. For all schools, inspection reports provide an
evaluation of standards across the full National Curriculum.
38. It is a fact that 72% of children who achieve
at or above the expected level 4 at the end of Key Stage 2 progress
to achieve five or more good GCSEs, compared to 15% of those who
did not achieve level 4. This is compelling evidence that the
skills gained in achieving the expected level in the core subjects
are not illusory; nor come at the expense of development in other
curriculum areas.
Grade inflation (Recommendation 19)
39. We acknowledge that the technical issues
relating to grade inflation are complex, but it is not right to
say that Government has not engaged with them. The decision to
create Ofqual as an independent regulator of examinations and
tests for England shows our determination to ensure that the best
possible systems are in place to assure standards, and that those
systems operate transparently—the regulator will report
directly to Parliament—and thereby improve public confidence.
The QCA has an established programme of work that Ofqual will
continue. This comprises regular reviews of standards in A level
and GCSE subjects, the results of which are published. Furthermore,
Ofqual announced on 16 May that it had decided to set in hand
a study of the reliability of results of external assessments
—national tests and examinations—and teacher assessments.
This will inform the development of Ofqual's thinking on how it
can develop its regulatory approach and ensure the delivery of
a high quality assessment system. Ofqual intends to structure
a public debate around those issues in parallel with the technical
work, engaging a wide range of stakeholders. The Government welcomes
Ofqual's decision to conduct this study.
Contextualised Value Added (Recommendation 9)
40. Contextual Value Added (CVA) scores are constructed
to act as a means of measuring the relative successes of schools,
taking account of the various starting positions of their pupils,
and the challenges they face. The factors that go up to calculating
schools' CVA scores are derived each year from a statistical
analysis of the academic progress of different groups of pupils,
and are used to demonstrate which schools performed better or
less well than other schools that year, taking account of the
characteristics of their pupils. As such, CVA is a "backward
looking" measure, comparing past performance; it should not
be used to set future targets, and the Government fully endorses
the Committee's view that CVA must not be used to justify or excuse
lower performance by some pupil groups. Narrowing attainment gaps
is a key priority for the Government, and is underpinned by the
new PSA targets. The Achievement and Attainment tables include
a substantial discussion of the uses of CVA, and make clear that
CVA should not be used to set lower expectations for any pupil
or group of pupils.[3]
Presentation of data (Recommendations 5, 8, 10
and 12)
41. The Committee expresses concerns about how
accessible the information published in the Assessment and Attainment
tables is, in particular in respect of CVA scores. We have already
taken many steps to ensure that users of the National Curriculum
test results can interpret the data in an informed manner. We
have added text to the front page of the published statistics
to make it clear what the tests measure. We have also included
confidence intervals around school CVA scores published in the
Achievement and Attainment Tables. We will continue to ensure
that information required to make informed judgements about the
published statistics is made available.
42. We are constantly looking for better ways
of depicting school performance in the Achievement and Attainment
Tables, and they have evolved over the years, reflecting the dialogue
we have with our stakeholders. The content and format of the tables
is reviewed each year, as are other sources of public information
on the performance of schools. We accept that the presentation
of CVA could be improved and are considering changes that might
be introduced. However, there is a difficult balance to be struck
between providing data that is readily understandable by the general
public and ensuring that data is presented in a way which is statistically
robust.
43. In the Children's Plan, we set out our desire
to ensure that schools are measured and rewarded for their contribution
to children's overall wellbeing—that is, their contribution
to the five Every Child Matters outcomes (which encompass achievement).
We are developing school-level indicators of wellbeing on which
we plan to consult. We are considering carefully how information
on these indicators and existing measures can best be presented
to parents.
Diplomas (Recommendations 31-34)
44. The Government welcomes the Committee's support
for Diploma assessment methods which reflect both the applied
and theoretical learning elements of the Diploma. We are confident
that the Diploma is a high quality and credible qualification
but it is right that it is properly evaluated. The 14-19 Education
and Skills Implementation Plan set out our commitment to evaluate
the Diploma over the first three years of each qualification to
ensure that both the design of the Diploma and how it is working
are effective.
45. 14-19 Partnerships will be made up of autonomous
institutions working together. The fact that a school has a clear
identity and sense of purpose does not prevent collaboration.
Our Pathfinder work has shown that it is sometimes the most autonomous
institutions that make the strongest Partnerships because each
institution is clear about what it wants to achieve and what it
can contribute.
46. We believe that the Achievement and Attainment
Tables and other measures do not hinder collaboration, but promote
higher attainment. Collaboration actively supports the
higher achievement of individual institutions through sending
students from the home school to a partner school where that partner
school specialises in and does particularly well in certain subjects.
Where students attend more than one institution, it is right that
their performance will be recorded at the home institution where
they are registered. The home institution is (and must continue
to be) responsible for ensuring its students receive high-quality
education wherever it takes place. Holding individual institutions
accountable for their students wherever they learn will encourage
them to make effective collaboration arrangements and help drive
up quality of provision. Successful partnership working should
see an improvement in the chances for all pupils and better results
for all participating institutions.
47. The Government is committed to ensuring that
the Diploma is of the highest quality in terms of both content
and delivery and it is therefore essential that we have an active
feedback loop to enable us to learn lessons from early delivery
and make any necessary refinements which improve young people's
experiences of the Diploma and help to establish them as valued
and valuable qualifications. We are not clear from this recommendation
what role the committee believes Ofqual should have, but we are
convinced that the role intended for it—accrediting and
monitoring the qualifications to ensure delivery and maintenance
of standards—is the right one.
48. We set out clear plans for Diplomas and other
14-19 qualifications at the end of March 2008 in "Promoting
achievement, valuing success: a strategy for 14-19 qualifications".
It set out that there will be four national qualification options:
GCSEs and A levels; Diplomas; Apprenticeships; and the Foundation
Learning Tier to support students at lower levels. These will
offer a range of choices from the general and theoretical to the
job-specific. A consultation on aspects of that document has recently
closed and we are currently considering the responses. We will
review in 2013 how in practice Diplomas, GCSEs, A levels and other
general qualifications are combining to meet the needs of young
people, employers and universities. This gives time for Diplomas
and changes to existing qualifications to bed in, as called for
by the Committee. We do not believe it is right to prejudge before
young people and parents have had a chance to decide what they
think of the new Diplomas.
Regulation and development: the new arrangements
(Recommendations 35 and 36)
49. We welcome the Committee's comments about
the creation of the Qualifications and Curriculum Development
Agency and the independent Office of the Qualifications and Examinations
Regulator (Ofqual). These reforms will make still stronger the
arrangements for safeguarding the standards of qualifications
and assessments, and maintain confidence in the system. As mentioned
above, Ofqual has already announced a new in-depth programme of
work which will look at the reliability of assessment.
50. As set out above, we do not accept that sample
testing is necessary or desirable. In any case, Ofqual's role
is not to monitor education standards as a whole; it is to regulate
the qualifications and assessments which are one of the means
by which those standards are measured. The work that QCA has done
on regulation, engaging with awarding bodies and academics, gives
Ofqual a strong and internationally-renowned set of regulatory
tools, which can mean that its regulation will be as effective
as it can be. Thanks to that regulatory scrutiny, we have every
confidence that standards are being maintained and that tests
are a true measure of learners' attainment.
2 Recommendation 3, Quality and Equity of Schooling
in Scotland, OECD, December 2007. Back
3
Guide to CVA, at http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/performancetables/schools_07/2007GuidetoCVA.pdf
Back
| 
