2 GCSE English and GCSE English Language qualifications
GCSE English syllabuses in 2012
22. Three new GCSE English qualifications were introduced for first teaching in England in September 2010, namely GCSE English Language, English and English Literature. These three courses replaced two GCSEs in English and English Literature.
23. Students in England can take either GCSE English Language and GCSE English Literature or a single GCSE English (which covers both language and literature). The controversy over last summer's results centred on GCSE English and GCSE English Language (both of which count towards the 5A*-C including English and mathematics school performance measure). Summer 2012 was the first time that these qualifications had been fully awarded. The qualifications will run until new English GCSEs are introduced for first teaching in September 2015 and first examination in summer 2017.
Key factors in the problems experienced last year
24. Ofqual's investigation found that many of the problems experienced with GCSE English[26] in summer 2012 were linked to design flaws in the current English GCSEs. The judicial review concentrated on the probity of the grade awarding process and the way Ofqual and the exam boards sought to deal problems once they arose, rather than examining the design features of the qualifications in depth. However, in his judgement, Lord Justice Elias endorsed Ofqual's view, concluding that "it was indeed the structure of the qualification itself which is the source of such unfairness as has been demonstrated in this case," rather than any unlawful action by Ofqual or the exam boards.[27]
25. Key features highlighted by Ofqual include: the modular structure with a high degree of flexibility, the high proportion of controlled assessment and generous standard marking tolerances, all combined with significant pressures from the school accountability system. Ofqual has suggested that no single factor was responsible; it was the combination of these factors which came together uniquely in English and which proved problematic. Ofqual's investigation found that the combination of features and the context in which the qualification would operate were not considered during the qualifications design phase.[28]
26. Since summer 2012, changes have already been put in place, and others are either pending or proposed, which seek to address some of the problems experienced with GCSE English last year. In this chapter we explore the features of GCSE English qualifications which contributed to the problems experienced in 2012, as well as the interaction of these qualifications with the school accountability system. We consider whether sufficient measures have been put in place, or are proposed, to address the weaknesses identified and to strengthen the current English GCSE qualifications until they are replaced in summer 2017.
Modular/linear structure
27. Current GCSEs were designed from 2007-09 under the previous Government. Most of these GCSEs were introduced for first teaching in September 2009, with first full awards in summer 2011. GCSEs in English, ICT and mathematics were introduced a year later. As part of these changes, all GCSEs became modular. Prior to this, exam boards mostly offered linear GCSEs, with modular GCSEs available in some subjects.[29]
28. Glenys Stacey, Chief Executive of Ofqual, told us that modularity, and the high degree of flexibility it afforded students and teachers, contributed to the problems with GCSE English and led to variability in results and unfairness. Ofqual indicated to us that there were 2550 possible routes through GCSE English/English Language,[30] with Glenys Stacey commenting "that is a level of complexity that no teacher ought to have to navigate through." She added:
we know from our subsequent analysis that some students fared better than others because of the route they took. That, in our view, cannot be fair.[31]
29. In his judgement, Lord Justice Elias concluded that "the problem lies in the modular nature of the examination, coupled with the fact that grade boundaries were assessed and made public at each stage of the process."[32] The latter meant that teachers used this information to make assumptions about where grade boundaries would be set in future. Ofqual announced changes in its second report, which mean that, from 2013, January units for English GCSEs are marked but not graded, and exam boards grade both January and June assessments at the same time in the summer. Changes announced by the Coalition Government in the 2010 White Paper, The Importance of Teaching, mean that GCSEs taught from September 2012 and to be examined in summer 2014 are linear.[33] Ofqual has welcomed this change, saying that it will be easier to ensure that exams are fair.[34]The new GCSEs, planned from September 2015 in some subjects, including English, and to be examined for the first time in summer 2017, are also intended to be linear.[35]
30. Under the previous Government, GCSEs changed from mostly linear to modular, which, combined with other changes, brought turbulence to the system and contributed to the problems experienced with GCSE English in 2012. We recommend that, when considering their reforms of GCSEs and A levels, current Ministers think carefully about the cumulative impact and risks of change.
Balance of internal and external assessment
31. In GCSE English and GCSE English Language controlled assessment, which is internally assessed, accounts for 60 per cent of the overall marks. Internally assessed units are marked by teachers and teachers' marking is checked or moderated by the exam board, to ensure that the marking is consistent and in line with required standards.
32. Current GCSEs have 0 per cent, 25 per cent or 60 per cent of marks awarded by controlled assessment. For example, GCSE Mathematics has no controlled assessment, while science GCSEs have 25 per cent. GCSE English Literature has 25 per cent controlled assessment. The only other English Baccalaureate subject which has 60 per cent controlled assessment is modern languages.[36]
33. Having 60 per cent controlled assessment means that a high proportion of assessment for GCSE English is marked and administered by teachers. Ofqual noted in its November 2012 report that English and English Language are not the only subjects with 60 per cent controlled assessment, "but they are the most high-stakes GCSEs with 60 per cent controlled assessment".[37] Having such a high proportion of controlled assessment in a high stakes qualification puts teachers in a sensitive position: they are given a high degree of control over the assessment in a qualification for which there is strong pressure to deliver good results, both for their pupils and for their schools.
34. Exam board representatives told us that they raised concerns during the qualifications design phase that the proportion of controlled assessment was too high in GCSE English, but these concerns were not acted upon. For example, Ziggy Liaquat, Managing Director of Edexcel, told us that "when we were designing the qualification we asked for there to be 40 per cent controlled assessment in English".[38] Andrew Hall of AQA was regretful that "we were not anything like forceful enough, I think, in making our point heard".[39]
35. Ofqual told us that the decision about the proportion of controlled assessment in GCSEs (0, 25 or 60 per cent) was taken by the executive of its predecessor body the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), a non-departmental public body reporting to Ministers, in 2007. According to Ofqual, "beyond that time, all subjects seemed able to do was to decide which of those three weightings they went for".[40]
36. Ofqual's November 2012 report notes that discussions about qualifications design "were focussed on the curriculum, underpinned by a belief in a common, unitised approach across all qualifications at similar levels".[41] It appears that curriculum considerations and the desire for qualifications to be the same overrode the concerns of assessment specialists. There was also insufficient focus on the context in which GCSE English qualifications would operate in schools. Ofqual found "little evidence of awareness of the tensions this would create, given their [the qualifications'] central role as a performance measure for schools" during the qualifications design phase.[42]
37. Ofqual has recently published proposals for changes to the way speaking and listening is assessed in the current English GCSEs (see speaking and listening below). The proposals involve a change in the balance of internal and external assessment for the current English and English Language GCSEs, so that controlled assessment would account for only 40 per cent of the overall marks and the weighting for the externally assessed written exam would increase to 60 per cent. Ofqual states in its consultation document that "written exams are more resilient to pressures on schools from accountability measures and therefore we are proposing to adopt the highest weighting for the written papers".[43] Ofqual is proposing that these changes would be introduced from summer 2014, so for pupils who are currently in year 10 of their GCSE course. The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has said that "the changes proposed by Ofqual are understandable and we will consider them carefully." It has, however, voiced concern about the timescale, saying that "as a matter of principle, changes to assessment should never be introduced after students have started a course".[44]
38. We welcome Ofqual's proposals to increase the weighting of external assessment in the current GCSE English and GCSE English Language qualifications from summer 2014, as we agree that this will help to make the qualifications more robust and more resistant to pressure from the school accountability system. We note the concerns expressed by school leaders about the timescales, but believe that benefits of the proposed action outweigh the downsides, particularly given the assurances from Ofqual that it will take steps to minimise any advantage or disadvantage to students caused by the change.
39. It seems likely that in future the balance between internal and external assessment in GCSEs may be rather different than it is at present for some subjects. The Secretary of State has indicated that internal assessment in revised GCSEs "should be kept to a minimum and used only where is a compelling case to do so".[45]
40. It is clearly better to decide on a subject-by-subject basis what an appropriate proportion of internal assessment should be, rather than imposing central requirements or models to which all subjects must conform. We welcome Ofqual's indication that in future these decisions will also take into account the context in which the qualifications will operate. This is particularly important for GCSE English, given the current proposals for GCSEs in English and mathematics to remain part of a headline threshold accountability measure as part of the new secondary school accountability measures. We look forward to examining Ofqual's proposals for internal assessment in revised GCSE qualifications in due course.
Moderation procedures
41. A qualification with a high proportion of controlled assessment relies on having robust moderation procedures in place to help maintain standards. As Brian Lightman of the ASCL commented, in such circumstances "you have to have proper safeguards in place."[46] Procedures for moderating internally assessed work are laid down in the regulatory Code of Practice.[47] Moderation involves exam board moderators checking and marking a sample of work from each school. A standard marking tolerance is set by the exam boards and applied to all A levels and GCSEs. The tolerance is the number of marks by which the teacher's marks may vary from the moderator's marks before they are adjusted by the exam board. The standard tolerance used for all GCSE and A level subjects with coursework/controlled assessment is +/-6 per cent of the maximum mark for the unit. It is set by the exam boards.
Moderator feedback
42. Ofqual's investigation found that "moderators' feedback to schools was not always sharp enough" and that "in some cases moderators were not as direct with schools as they should have been when they saw signs of over-marking (within tolerance)."[48] Capgemini research commissioned by Ofqual found that if a school or college did not have their marks adjusted by the exam board, "the majority of centres took this to mean that the marking had been accurate".[49] On the other hand, headteachers have stated that their moderator's report commented favourably on the accuracy and quality of their marking, and that they found this difficult to square with disappointing results.[50]
43. Exam board representatives assured us that that they have taken steps to improve their moderator feedback to schools. Gareth Pierce of WJEC told us that:
one clear distinction we need to make is between saying that their work is perfectly acceptable administratively [...] and the different comment of saying they were absolutely spot-on on the standards.[51]
Ofqual is currently checking whether exam boards' systems and processes can provide enhanced information to schools that have marked generously or severely but within tolerance. We welcome this. Ofqual will then discuss with school leader representatives "how desirable this additional information would be to schools, bearing in mind the additional costs that exam boards would incur to provide it".[52]
44. We welcome the steps taken by exam boards to improve their moderator feedback to schools and to make clearer the distinction between administration and standards/marking issues. We recommend that it is made clear to schools and colleges in moderator feedback if they have been marking generously or severely but within tolerance, and that Ofqual monitors this aspect of exam board communication with schools and colleges more closely in future, to ensure that teacher assessments are fair and accurate.
Teacher marking and tolerances
45. Relatively low numbers of schools had their marks adjusted through moderation for English GCSEs in 2012. For example, for AQA (which has 62 per cent of the market share for GCSE English/English Language), adjustments were made to the marks of 127 centres (5.8 per cent) in English and 86 centres (3.5 per cent) in English Language on unit 3 (reading and writing controlled assessment).[53] Ofqual's investigation found evidence, however, of schools marking generously but within the marking tolerance.
46. Ofqual's findings are based on analysis by AQA, the largest provider, which compared the marks given by teachers and moderators in a sample of its centres. AQA keyed in the teacher and moderator marks for "approximately every fifth centre." [54] Figures supplied to us by AQA indicate that the sample covered about 20 per cent of AQA's candidates for English and English Language. Ofqual states that "the results from this sample show clear evidence of over-marking in both English and English Language".[55] The regulator's report contains charts showing that most schools in this sample tended to mark slightly more generously than the moderator.[56]
47. Exam boards retain only paper copies of moderation records of schools whose marks are found to be within tolerance. This means that it is labour-intensive for exam boards to enter data electronically, which would enable them to run wider analyses of trends in teacher and moderator marking. Ofqual has recently asked the exam boards how they will review evidence of marking trends within tolerance, ahead of the summer 2013 grade awarding.[57] We welcome this. We recommend that Ofqual and the exam boards consider whether changes to moderation systems and processes are needed to ensure that it is easier to analyse and track patterns in schools' marking of internally assessed work.
48. According to Ofqual, the standard marking tolerance was well established and teachers were aware of it. Ofqual observed that the marking tolerance "meant that schools could be over- or under-marking by up to 6 marks in some units and still have their marks accepted".[58] We are surprised that, given all the assessment expertise residing in exam boards and now in Ofqual, no-one questioned whether a standard tolerance of 6 per cent was appropriate for a high stakes qualification with such a high proportion of controlled assessment. One senior exam board official acknowledged that this was "a fair challenge" when we put this question to him.[59] Andrew Hall of AQA suggested that it was because "we did not understand sufficiently[...] the impact of accountability measures."[60] We return to the accountability system later in this chapter.
49. Moving forward, Ofqual recommended in its second report that the tolerance for GCSE English needed to be tightened. The exam boards collectively agreed to reduce the tolerance for GCSE English (to +/-3 per cent of the maximum mark for the unit), with effect from November 2012. We welcome this change. Ofqual is commissioning research to provide an evidence-based method for determining appropriate moderation tolerances for summer 2014 and beyond.[61]
50. We recommend that Ofqual and the exam boards consider on a subject by subject basis what an appropriate tolerance might be for new GCSEs and A levels when deciding upon the proportion of internal assessment for each qualification, and that these decisions be informed by the research commissioned by Ofqual.
51. Exam boards have expressed varying views on whether over-marking by teachers contributed to the problems experienced in 2012. In its report for Ofqual, AQA detailed what it described as "compelling evidence" indicating "the high degree of strategic behaviour demonstrated when allocating marks for internally assessed units".[62] By contrast, the other exam boards told us that they had not found evidence of widespread teacher over-marking.[63] Ziggy Liaquat of Edexcel stressed, however, that Ofqual's view was based on the entire cohort, whereas Edexcel's data accounted for only 10 per cent of the cohort.[64]
52. School leaders rejected Ofqual's findings on teacher over-marking and called into question its evidence base. Kenny Frederick, Principal of George Green's School in Tower Hamlets (who gave oral evidence to us in September 2012), wrote an open letter to Glenys Stacey, challenging Ofqual to publish its evidence of inflated marking.[65]
53. Ofqual's position is that widespread over-marking created inflated marks in the system, which led to exam boards having to make some significant changes to grade boundaries on controlled assessment units between January and June 2012. We note that this is an action which will have been felt collectively by all students, regardless of whether their centre had marked their work accurately or not. Glenys Stacey acknowledged this in November 2012 when she admitted that pupils whose controlled assessment was marked accurately by their teachers may have been penalised and awarded lower grades than they deserved because of over-marking in other schools. Ofqual, however, had no means of identifying these students or recompensing them in any way.[66] This, as Ms Stacey acknowledged at the time, is a sobering reflection and a cautionary tale for all concerned. It also relates to the point made in the judicial review judgement that whichever way Ofqual chose to resolve the problems it faced, there was going to be an element of unfairness.[67]
54. We note the point made by AQA that moderation does not, and cannot, rigorously "police" teacher marking. It was not designed to do so.[68] In a subject such as English, absolute marking precision is difficult: there will always be room for debate and a degree of subjectivity. Furthermore, as Mark Dawe of OCR told us, "there also comes a point where the narrower it [the tolerance] gets, the more you might as well just mark the papers yourselves."[69]
55. Moderation, as AQA has stated, relies on the professionalism of the teacher community.[70] Ofqual's position on over-marking is an uncomfortable one for teachers, as it calls into question the integrity of some of the profession. We accept Ofqual's findings about over-marking. However, we can see that its position is not helped by its reliance on a sample from one exam board, by contrasting views among exam board chief executives and by moderator feedback to schools and colleges which has not always been sufficiently clear about marking and standards. Furthermore, we recognise that Ofqual's action to address over-marking in some schools has led to the unavoidable but highly unsatisfactory situation that students in other schools, whose work was marked accurately by their teachers, may have been penalised. Exam boards and Ofqual must make every effort to ensure that this situation is not repeated in summer 2013.
Speaking and listening
56. Particular issues emerged with the assessment in GCSE English and GCSE English Language of speaking and listening, which is worth 20 per cent of the overall marks. Controlled assessment in English consists currently of one third speaking and listening and two thirds written controlled assessment. The evidence for speaking and listening is not collected and moderated in the same way as written assessments. Moderators visit schools to observe a sample of students doing their speaking and listening tasks. According to Ofqual, about a third of schools are visited each year, with schools visited on a three-year cycle. Further visits are undertaken to schools where marking is a cause for concern.[71] The judicial review judgement noted Edexcel's view that the speaking and listening element "had been very lightly moderated, and had led to mark inflation at least across all the AOs [exam boards] as a whole".[72]
57. Ofqual has told us that it is "not satisfied that we can assure and protect standards in speaking and listening as the qualification is currently designed."[73] It has recently launched a consultation on proposals which would mean that speaking and listening no longer contributes to a student's overall mark and grade in GCSE English. Speaking and listening would be assessed in the same way as at present, but achievement would be reported separately and be shown as an endorsement on GCSE certificates. The overall grade would be calculated using only marks from the written papers and reading/writing controlled assessment. Crucially, the change will involve an increased weighting for the exam papers, moving from 40 to 60 per cent (see balance of internal and external assessment above). Ofqual is proposing that the changes will take effect from summer 2014. These are the last planned changes as part of Ofqual's action to strengthen the current GCSE English qualifications.
58. Ofqual has warned that the change, which is favoured by several exam boards, would have an impact on results. Its consultation document states that:
overall results in these qualifications will fall if these changes are implemented without any further action on our part, because students generally do better in speaking and listening than in the rest of the qualification. The proportion of candidates attaining grades A*-C would drop noticeably.[74]
Ofqual is therefore proposing to use its comparable outcomes approach to minimise any advantage or disadvantage to students caused by the change.
59. Some have questioned whether it is fair for young people not be credited for performance in what was conceived as an integral part of the course.[75] School leader representatives have emphasised the importance of speaking and listening skills. Russell Hobby of the National Union of Head Teachers (NAHT) commented that "it is all very well to say they should still be taught even if they are not in the exam, but, in the current high stakes system, if they are not tested for the league tables, they won't count."[76] The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has expressed similar concerns, but acknowledged that "the changes proposed by Ofqual are understandable".[77]
60. The problems experienced with GCSE English in 2012 highlighted serious weaknesses in the moderation of speaking and listening and the consequences for grade awarding. While we agree that speaking and listening are important skills, the current assessment arrangements are not robust enough to ensure that assessment is a reliable, fair and accurate reflection of students' performance. This risks devaluing the assessment of those skills and also generates further problems in securing standards across the qualification as a whole. On balance, we welcome the action proposed by Ofqual to address the weaknesses in the assessment of speaking and listening.
Pressures from the school accountability system
61. Ofqual concluded that the pressures of the accountability system contributed to the problems experienced with GCSE English in 2012. Its view was that the structural weaknesses of English GCSEs, as highly flexible, modular qualifications, with a high proportion of controlled assessment, meant that the qualifications were susceptible to pressures, as "teachers strove for the best possible outcomes for their students and school".[78] Ofqual stated in its November 2012 report that:
while no school that we interviewed considered that it was doing anything untoward in teaching and administering these GCSEs, many expressed concerns that other nearby schools were overstepping the boundaries of acceptable practice. It is clearly hard for teachers to maintain their own integrity when they believe that there is widespread loss of integrity elsewhere. No teacher should be forced to choose between their principles on the one hand and their students, school and career on the other.[79]
62. We reiterate the point we made in our 2012 report on the administration of exams for 15-19 year olds that one should not underestimate the extent to which the accountability system incentivises schools to act in certain ways with regard to exams. Having a significant proportion of internal assessment in a high stakes qualification gave teachers a high degree of control over outcomes against which they and their schools were being judged. It is entirely understandable, and should come as no surprise, that teachers sought to achieve the best outcomes for their pupils and schools. As Andrew Hall of AQA said to us:
I do not think someone sets out to do something fundamentally bad, but we put them in a position where we are asking them to make really quite complex judgements with 60 per cent of the marks in a high stakes exam [...] I think they are being put in a position where their judgements are influenced by the pressures of the accountability system, and that is natural human behaviour. If you set up a system of measurement, do not be surprised that people use it.[80]
63. We note that an interesting contrast can be found in GCSE Mathematics. This is a similarly high stakes qualification and subject to similar pressures, but with no controlled assessment. It did not experience the same difficulties as GCSE English in summer 2012.
64. Ofqual's investigation found that "insufficient attention was given to the totality of the changes and incentives on schools" during the qualifications design phase of the current English GCSEs. This has clear implications for qualifications design in the future. Glenys Stacey, Chief Executive of Ofqual, told us that one of the key lessons from the 2012 GCSE English results is that "decisions about the design of the qualification and the detailed design of assessment need to be made in the real world, with a recognition of not simply what is regarded as best assessment practice, but how that might play out in the real world of schools".[81]
65. The Government is currently consulting on its proposed changes to secondary school accountability measures. The proposals include a headline threshold measure showing the percentage of pupils achieving a pass in English and mathematics. This measure will be part of the floor standard which all schools must aim to reach. Revised English GCSEs will therefore continue to be high stakes qualifications, not only for individual students, but also for their schools and teachers.
66. We welcome Ofqual's indication that it will take into account the context in which qualifications operate when regulating and planning qualifications reform. This is especially important for GCSE English, given that it looks likely to remain part of a headline threshold measure, as outlined in the Government's proposals for secondary school accountability. We recommend that Ofqual indicates publicly and clearly when and how accountability measures are a factor in its decision about how a qualification is designed.
26 GCSE English is used to refer to GCSE English and GCSE English Language, unless specified. Back
27 Judgement, paragraph 157 Back
28 Ofqual second report, paragraph 2.3 Back
29 In a linear qualification, candidates take all examinations at the end of the course. In a modular structure, the course is split into modules or units and candidates can take units at different intervals throughout the course, with opportunities for re-sits to improve their performance. Back
30 Ofqual's response to Committee's question 7 Back
31 Q344 Back
32 Judgement, paragraph 152 Back
33 2010 White Paper, The Importance of Teaching, paragraph 4.49 Back
34 Q340 Back
35 Letter from Michael Gove to Glenys Stacey, 6 February 2013 Back
36 http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.ofqual.gov.uk/2421.aspx, accessed on 25 April 2013 Back
37 Ofqual second report, paragraph 4.21 Back
38 Q180 (Ziggy Liaquat) Back
39 Q169 (Andrew Hall) Back
40 Q367 Back
41 Ofqual second report, paragraph 7.9 Back
42 Ibid., paragraph 1.48 Back
43 Consultation on the Removal of Speaking and Listening Assessment from GCSE English and GCSE English Language, Ofqual, 25 April 2013, p8 Back
44 Comment on proposed changes to GCSE English, ASCL, 25 April 2013 Back
45 Letter from Michael Gove to Glenys Stacey, 6 February 2013 Back
46 Q74 Back
47 GCSE, GCE, Principal Learning and Project Code of Practice, May 2011, Ofqual, CCEA and DfES, section 5. Back
48 Ofqual second report, paragraphs 1.50 and 7.43 Back
49 Report of findings from Centre Interviews, Ofqual second report, appendix 1, p90 Back
50 Q76 (Kenny Frederick and Mike Griffiths) Back
51 Q276 (Gareth Pierce) Back
52 Ev 69 Back
53 AQA annex to Ofqual's second report, p30 Back
54 Ofqual second report, paragraph 6.52 and footnote 59 Back
55 Ibid.,paragraph 6.52 Back
56 Ofqual second report, p58-60 Back
57 Ev 69 Back
58 Ofqual second report, paragraph 6.54 Back
59 Q205 (Ziggy Liaquat) Back
60 Ibid. (Andrew Hall) Back
61 Letter from Glenys Stacey to Pat Glass, 15 April 2013 Back
62 AQA annex to Ofqual's second report, p33 Back
63 Q264, Q266-7,Q190, Q197 and Q217 (Ziggy Liaquat) Back
64 Q190 and Q197 (Ziggy Liaquat) Back
65 Open letter from Kenny Frederick to Glenys Stacey, 7 November 2012 Back
66 Students who were not over marked have suffered, admits Ofqual, Times Educational Supplement, 9 November 2012 Back
