6 Forthcoming A level reform
Involvement of universities in
A levels
120. The Government has announced that universities
should have a "leading role" in the design of A levels.
The Secretary of State envisages that "universities should
be able to determine subject content, and that they should endorse
specifications, including details of how the subject should be
assessed".[191]
These changes will take effect for courses starting in September
2014.
121. Historically universities were involved in the
development and content of A levels and the "ancestors of
the current awarding bodies were linked to universities".[192]
These days, as examiner Andrew Hunt noted, "the links to
universities are now very much reduced".[193]
Rather telling was the observation by Edexcel examiner Graham
George that "as far as I know, none of the current Principal
Examiners in Physics works in a university, compared with a significant
majority 25 years ago".[194]
122. Cambridge Assessment has suggested that "the
State's greater role in defining the content of syllabuses and
the way in which they are examined has led to a kind of divorce
between the users and producers of qualifications".[195]
Researchers acknowledge that "occasional consultation [with
HE] exists through exam boards and Ofqual—it is not working".[196]Ana
Gutierrez of Bournemouth University told us that "it is a
pity that [...] we do not have any opportunity to be part of the
design of qualifications".[197]
Recent studies by Ofqual and Cambridge Assessment both suggested
that universities should have greater input into the design and
content of A levels.[198]
123. The fact that a high proportion of those studying
A levels go on to higher education lends further weight to the
argument that universities should have a greater influence over
what young people study at A level. Research suggests that 84%
of young people achieving 2 or more A levels go on to higher education
before the age of 20.[199]
The proportion of high achieving A level students (obtaining grade
profiles of AAB or above) who go on to higher education is even
higher, at over 90%.[200]
124. There is plenty of evidence to support the Government
in seeking to increase the involvement of universities in the
design and content of A levels. However, as Glenys Stacey pointed
out to us, "the practicalities of that are all in the detail"
and "there is a danger in listening to a small cadre of voices
in higher education; we need to look at it in the round".[201]
Ofqual has also emphasized that the full commitment of and support
from universities is essential for the new arrangements to work.
Indeed the success of the proposals depends upon the capacity
and willingness of universities to play a major role. Universities
UK has said "this involvement would have clear implications
for universities in terms of resources and admissions".[202]
We were struck by the finding of Ofqual's research that:
many HEI interviewees said that they would not have
the time to set aside for such activities on top of their academic
roles. On several occasions these interviewees suggested that
Learned Bodies were best placed to provide the higher education
sector view because they knew more about A levels than individual
academics.[203]
125. Witnesses from higher education expressed concerns
to us about securing consensus from universities, given the diversity
of views across the sector. Professor Graham Hutchings, Chair
of SCORE and Pro-Vice Chancellor at Cardiff University told us
"there are at least four groupings. They all have their separate
secretariats. Do they speak with one view? No, they do not. Whom
you would go to is very difficult".[204]
Professor Sir John Holman of the University of York and Senior
Fellow for Education at the Wellcome Trust warned that "any
kind of system where you try to have a collection of university
heads of departments sitting down together and working out A levels
would not work, but if you take a body like the Institute of Physics,
for example, it has strong links to universities and employers
and very good education expertise".[205]
126. It was also pointed out to us that performance
measures operating in higher education do not incentivise involvement
with A levels. Professor Jo-Anne Baird et al cautioned that "systems
of accountability in higher education are now a disincentive to
academics being involved with examining at secondary level, as
this would not contribute to the indicators upon which individuals
and institutions are measured in HE".[206]
127. Press coverage would suggest that some in higher
education have concerns about the Government's proposals, the
speed of their introduction and the prospect of two-tier A levels,
as well as a lack of consultation so far. There is a perception
that the proposals are overly focused on Russell Group universities.[207]
We can see that it is important to take into account views across
the university sector, as universities' requirements of A levels
may vary. We think that there is a strong case for increasing
the involvement of learned bodies in the design of A levels, as
suggested by Ofqual's research, and that this may offer a solution
to the limited resource available within higher education. These
learned bodies have strong links to universities and employers,
as well as very good education expertise. We note, however, that
syllabus development requires a blend of subject and assessment
expertise, with the latter residing mostly in exam boards. It
is therefore essential that exam boards retain ultimate control
of question paper and examination design, working with universities
and learned bodies on matters of content, and subject to rigorous
accreditation by Ofqual.
128. We recommend
that the Government and Ofqual seek to increase the involvement
of learned bodies as well as universities in the content of A
levels, while allowing exam boards to retain control of question
papers and examination design to ensure best assessment practice.
The Government and Ofqual must also ensure that the whole
of the university sector is consulted on the proposed A level
reforms, as well as schools, colleges, learned bodies and employers.
National subject committees
129. Part of the role envisaged by the Government
for higher education in A level reform could well be undertaken
by the national subject committees we recommended in chapter five.
National subject committees may also help address the issue of
limited capacity in higher education to devote to A level changes,
as raised in Ofqual's recent report. Ofqual's research suggested
that:
the optimal outcome might be for Ofqual (and other
regulators) to convene and coordinate the involvement of a representative
group of HEIs and other stakeholders in offering substantive input
at the criteria stage, and then involve these same people at the
review and accreditation stage when it receives specifications
from Awarding Organisations. Then the Awarding Organisations would
be free to involve other HEIs and stakeholders, not involved in
these representative groups, in their own specification designs.[208]
130. This fits very well with the role we envisage
for national subject committees, convened by Ofqual, in terms
of their role in syllabus development and accreditation. We
recommend that Ofqual involve national subject committees in the
development of criteria for and accreditation of new A levels.
191 Letter from Michael Gove to Glenys Stacey, 30 March
2012 Back
192
Ev 113 Back
193
Ev w3 Back
194
Ev w196, paragraph 3.7 Back
195
A better approach to Higher Education/Exam Board interaction for
post-16 qualifications, A policy paper, Cambridge Assessment,
June 2011 Back
196
Ibid. Back
197
Q120 Back
198
Fit for Purpose? The view of the higher education sector, teachers
and employers on the suitability of A levels, Ofqual, 2012 and
http://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ca/News_Room/Latest_News/News?id=139383 Back
199
Phil Vickers and Bahram Bekhradnia, Vocational A levels and
university entry Is there Parity of Esteem?, Higher Education
Policy Institute, Back
200
Teaching funding and student number controls, Consultation on
changes to be implemented in 2012-13, Higher Education Funding
Council for England, 2011 Back
201
Q310 Back
202
Universities UK response to proposals to give universities a larger
role in the development of A levels, 3 April 2012 Back
203
Fit for Purpose? The view of the higher education sector, teachers
and employers on the suitability of A levels, Ofqual, 2012, p12 Back
204
Q433 Back
205
Q433 Back
206
Ev 181, paragraph 7.5 Back
207
Interview with Pam Tatlow of Million+ on BBC News, 3 April 2012,
"Exam regulator's research backs case for A level reform",
The Independent, 4 April 2012, "All A levels are equal
- but some will be more equal", The Times Educational
Supplement, 6 April 2012 Back
208
Fit for purpose? The view of the higher education sector, teachers
and employers on the suitability of A levels, Ofqual, 2012, p12 Back
| 
