Ofqual has published a research study to review how moderation is delivered in a number of English-speaking jurisdictions across the world at upper secondary, including in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Ireland, Singapore and South Africa. The report reviews a number of different models of moderation and considers what might be learnt in terms of the approach to moderation that is currently taken in England.
- The review found a number of different approaches to moderation which are currently taken across the globe, including consensus moderation, verification, moderation by inspection, and statistical moderation.
- Most jurisdictions included non-examination assessment as a useful method of assessing skills not easily measured via exams.
- England did not appear to 'stand out' from the other jurisdictions studied, and the report concluded that only a few aspects of England's approach would be considered 'unusual' within the international landscape.
- The report raised several points for consideration in terms of what could be learnt from international approaches to moderation and whether these could realistically be applied.
Read the full research report on international approaches to moderation here.
The reports exploring policies, principles and practices related to grading vocational and technical assessments.
Ofqual conclude that grading is not just a technical matter, but an educational one, too. In addition to the potential of grading to engage learners with their course of learning, its potential to disengage both learners and their teachers/trainers needs also to be recognised; for instance, when grading practices are poorly designed, or simply take up too much time.
However, Ofqual consider the UK to be at the beginning of a dialogue towards realising the optimal technical grading models and practices. These issues will be discussed at a conference in December 2018, and they hope that this will mark the beginning of a broader conversation on grading vocational and technical assessments amongst scholars, policy makers, and practitioners in England.
This report extends the analysis we presented in 2016 and other existing research in this area. Ofqual looked at the influence of candidates' background characteristics on their performance in examinations and the variability of centre outcomes in successive years.
Similar to previous work undertaken by Ofqual and others, they found that measures of socioeconomic status have little or no bearing on centre variability. Attainment at both GCSE and KS2 was found to be an important predictor of individual candidates' and individual centres' outcomes in any given year, although attainment at GCSE is a better predictor.
Centres with very high or low ability profiles are more likely to experience a lower level of variability in outcomes than centres with ability profiles that produce large proportions of candidates with C or D grades. Centres with the most variability are those with a change in the ability of successive years of candidates.
Centres with a change in the number of students between years are more likely to experience variability in outcomes. Centres who are stable in one year are likely to be stable the following year. However, centres who experienced positive volatility in one year are likely to experience negative volatility in the next. This is probably because such centres have a high proportion of candidates who are clustered around the grade C/D borderline.
This report is part of a programme of research that Ofqual is conducting to evaluate the impact of qualification reform on the practical skills of A level science students.
The analysis provides an insight into how the practical skills items functioned in relation to other items in the 2017 A level science examinations. The findings suggest that, on average, the practical skills items were more difficult than the other items. However, there was a high degree of variability, with some practical skills items proving to be relatively hard and others relatively easy. The report suggests that the higher difficulty may be in part a result of practical skills items being relatively new to teachers and students. The effect may dissipate in future years, once teachers and students become more familiar with the style of question.
This report presents data on appeals made for the November 2017 GCSE exam series in England.
Ofqual has analysed the year-on-year variation in the percentage of students achieving grades A* or A in 14 3 of the reformed subjects. This includes mathematics where the reformed A level is available after one year of study, alongside the legacy specifications in mathematics.
- In general, the level of variation in individual school and college results at A* and A is similar to previous years.
- Differences between the average (mean) percentage of students achieving grades A* or A in 2017/2018 and in 2016/2017 were generally small, indicating that year-on-year results in the subjects analysed have remained relatively stable
- Even when there are no changes to qualifications, individual schools and colleges will see variation in their year-on-year results: this is normal.
You can access all of Ofqual's research here