Letters

Letters

Capability focus makes assessment smarter

When I was a child there were only two assessments: one when the midwife shouted "Healthy, hungry, and heavy - and probably a boy", and the second when you faced your Maker and He
balanced your past life on a pair of scales. By the time I was 10, I discovered the Eleven-Plus, and the benefits of a scholarship. I also discovered that "School Certs" were just the beginning of a life of examinations, orals, gradings, and in some cases, re-tests.
And all before I could earn a living. As is regularly discussed in the national media, today's children participate in even more examinations. Then they start work and meet a phalanx of non-productive staff whose sole aim is to tick the boxes that say "probably performed to the satisfaction of whoever designed the contents of the box". There is another army of those who tick the box-tickers' efforts as well.
Which leads me to a question: is the assessment community paying enough attention to what employees and learners are capable of doing well over what we think people might be able to do?
In the university world, this is best identified by the Schools of Lifelong Learning and, in my own case more specifically, Middlesex University's "Institute for Work Based Learning". Here
you are able to study and be assessed on what you are doing in the workplace. The degrees awarded are based on how well employers are served by the work-based results produced.
In most of my more critical areas of employment in education, I have been given a job leading to a mutual discovery that I could do it. That includes, incidentally, my appointment as a chief
examiner 30 years ago.
Peter Russell, Professor of education, Driver Education Research Foundation, Safety House Group

Reader review

'Routine good practice' under scrutiny

In the first of our occasional reader reviews, Lionel Warner turns his attention to a controversial book on examinations in England

Education by Numbers:
the tyranny of testing
Author: Warwick Mansell
Publisher: Politico's Publishing
Price: £19.99
Ratings (out of five): usefulness (3),
relevance (5), readability (4)
This book is about "hyper-accountability", the author's term for the "overwhelming emphasis" placed on examination results in England. The impact on education is"damaging", and the detailed evidence presented here, writes the head of Wellington College in the preface, is "shocking". Yet such Capability focus makes assessment smarter concern about the impact of highstakes testing is not new, nor is it
confined to this country.

Much of the evidence has featured in the press, including Mansell's own TES.

Education by Numbers is deliberately emotive: loaded terms such as "teaching to the test" and"spoonfeeding" are frequent, and most theoretical, research-based references are relegated to footnotes.
What for Mansell is "jaw-droppingly suspect practice" is for most of us routine good practice: in-service training courses run by exam boards for teachers, preferable by far to the culture of secrecy that used to prevail over public examinations.

Towards the end, he turns to "hyperaccountability's conceptual problems": too crude a mechanism to improve teaching, myopia in the face of other problems such as teacher shortage, and the politicisation
of education. These points come late in Education by Numbers, and one wonders whether a better book would have emerged if it had been organised around them.
Lionel Warner, The Institute of Education, University of Reading

Read all about it !
Here at Make the Grade we are keen to involve IEA members and to air their opinions. If you would
like to review the latest professional publications, please email your contact details to makethegrade@ redactive.co.uk

Make the Grade welcomes letters. Please include your address, job title and telephone number. We regret that we are unable to print letters from sources we cannot verify.
By email: makethegrade@ redactive.co.uk
By post:
The Editor Make the Grade
Redactive Media Group
17 Britton Street
London EC1M 5TP

 

Head to Head: Awarding bodies

Jerry Jarvis

Why choice passes test

Multiple operators rather than a sole agency ensures the examinations system remains demand-led, says Jerry Jarvis

Awarding bodies are almost unique to the English education system. But the truth is, their function is misunderstood. Often regarded as simply "exam boards" based on their traditional core function of developing qualifications and exams for university entry, the awarding system also includes the many bodies that have evolved to offer specifications and assessment services for professions and industries. What is also perhaps misunderstood is that the role of "awarding body" is only part of the work of an organisation such as Edexcel. It has a wide range of other functions, which include the testing and trialling of new qualification and assessment models; developing innovative products and teaching and learning strategies; producing learning materials and resources; working with and supporting education and training providers; and working with governments and related agencies to develop and implement new qualification and assessment services in an international arena. Depending how they are classified, there are nearly 120 awarding bodies.

The question occasionally arises about whether this is too many, too few and whether perhaps a sole agency might be a better way to run things. The question has an obvious populist appeal. Fewer bodies would mean less costs and simpler systems. Wouldn't it? In terms of the numbers of bodies, for instance, the core business of developing qualifications and testing the outcomes for mainstream learning is conducted largely through just five big unitary awarding bodies. They offer the core services for mainstream education; meanwhile, the various smaller awarding bodies offer niche and specialised services for particular sectors and professions.

They act within the same regulatory system and to similar accreditation criteria, but in effect have a range of different outlets to meet the different requirements of the qualification and examination system. The market model, endorsed by the most recent major review, allows choice both about the product and the service that accompanies it. If customers don't like a particular service, they can try an alternative. Such exercise of choice is important as the government seeks to empower the user and encourage a shift towards a demand-led system. It's also important in keeping costs down. Operating a "cash-in" exam system or a competency-based external verification system is hugely expensive but the development costs are borne upfront in the main by the awarding body as part of its reinvestment of "returns" - surplus or profit. Equally a market model ensures that the customer gets the best deal on

 

"The market model delivers the best deal on cost. A sole supplier could set its own tariff; multiple suppliers can't and stay competitive"

 

cost. A sole supplier could set its own tariff; competing suppliers cannot if they wish to remain competitive. In terms of simpler systems, two points are worth noting. One is that bodies are increasingly collaborating on shared data interfaces and processing systems; the 14-19 and Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) developments are making this a reality, ensuring the customer can log in at any point and the assembly of data such as collecting achievements from different sources would happen behind the scenes.

Second, they are working closely with the bureaucracy-busting initiatives to ensure processes and systems are as simple and accessible as possible. Such systems are regularly tested and evaluated to ensure they conform not just with regulatory requirements but customer expectations as well.

 

About the author
Jerry Jarvis is managing director of Edexcel

Martyn Ware

One way forward

A single national awarding body is the best way to operate a well-defined route to qualifications, says Martyn Ware

Scotland's distinctive education system has grown up over more than 300 years to reflect the particular social, economic and cultural influences on the nation's development. Since 1997, the existence of the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) as the single awarding body has been a key feature of the system. Under the Education (Scotland) Act 1996, SQA is responsible for all qualifications other than university degrees and some professional qualifications. SQA's diverse portfolio includes almost all of Scotland's school qualifications, a wide range of post-16 qualifications, including Higher National Certificates and Diplomas, Scottish Vocational Qualifications and a range of other qualifications for specific needs.

Although SQA is the national awarding body, all registered SQA centres are free to choose qualifications offered by other awarding bodies. In practice SQA qualifications form the staple in almost all schools and the majority of colleges. However, SQA recognises that centres' decisions will be based on their judgment of which awarding body is best able to meet their needs and those of their learners. In addition to its awarding role, SQA's responsibility for accrediting SVQs has been extended to all qualifications based on national occupational standards and other qualifications prescribed by industry regulators. One of the key aims for any system of qualifications is to establish a framework that is coherent for users and offers clear routes for progression. Having SQA as the single national awarding body has been a significant factor in helping to work towards this aim in Scotland.

The Higher Still reforms of the late 1990s brought together, as national qualifications (NQs), vocational and academic courses around a common architecture of 40-hour units, each containing criterion-referenced learning outcomes. NQs now exist at seven levels, the best-known of these being Higher grade, allowing learners to enter and exit at points that meet their needs, aspirations and abilities SQA was established alongside the Higher Still reforms to act as the single awarding body for this new unified framework.

The establishment of the 12-level Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) in 2001 was a further significant step in facilitating progression. All new qualifications developed by SQA are clearly positioned on the SCQF, helping users to understand how they relate to each other. SQA is also engaged in a wide range of further work to help maximise progression routes for learners.

For example, wherever possible, SQA qualifications are aligned to National Occupational Standards to ensure

"The market model delivers the best deal on cost. A sole supplier could set its own tariff; multiple suppliers can't and stay competitive"

that they meet employers' needs. In addition, through the Digital Media and ICT Vendor Alliance programme, SQA has made links with vendor qualifications from a range of leading IT companies to build global workplace standards into qualifications. This opens access to these highvalue qualifications to all learners while providing the core skills and progression pathways guaranteed in SQA qualifications. The current arrangements, combining a clear national lead awarding body with freedom of choice for centres and an enabling framework against which learning from other sources can be recognised, offers an effective approach to supporting Scotland's learners.

 

About the author
Martyn Ware is business manager for computer-assisted assessment at SQA. He leads its work in e-assessment and the use of technology to support teachers who