Last
update: 27/05/2012
| |
Consultation: GCSE Subject Review 2007
This page gives links and downloads to support ALL members in their
involvement in national consultations.
GCSE Review June - September 14th 2007
Subject criteria consultation links
Controlled assessment Links
The GCSE draft criteria are open for consultation, and points 17, 18 and 19
seem to be related to the issue of controlled assessment:
point 17 - balance external/internal assessment 75%/25%
point 18 - specifications must show how controlled assessment will be
reliable and fair
point 19 - under the heading 'controlled assessment', says use
of dictionaries not permitted in any external assessment [I'm a bit confused
about the placing of this point ...]
Following discussion at the ALL Members' Meeting yesterday,
it may
be helpful to draw attention to the other documents relating to controlled
assessments which are due to be included in the new GCSE specifications (taught
Sep 2009, first tested June 2011).
These are (a) regulatory views and (b) independent recommendations regarding
the nature of controls needed.
HEM June 2007
|
Guidance document pasted below.
GCSE qualification and subject criteria consultation
questionnaire. June 2007.
Guidelines and commentary
These may be of some help to ALL members as
they respond, whether as a group or individually.
CONTENTS
Summary
The
consultation
Reminders
about roles, responsibilities and decision-making processes in education
|
Roles |
|
The
National Curriculum & national assessment with respect to GCSE |
Sequence
of process for decision making relevant to current consultation
-
White
Paper - Feb 2005
-
QCA
response to White Paper
-
QCA
focus on General Qualifications: overview
-
Consultation
on GCSE criteria prior to June 2007 - how ALL was involved
-
Consultation
on Controlled Assessment.
The
Dearing Report
|
Background |
|
Dearing
recommendations relating to GCSE |
Commentary
on Draft GCSE Qualification Criteria.
Commentary
on Draft Revised Subject Criteria.
|
Remit
(reference for question 3) |
|
Aims
& learning outcomes of the GCSE (reference for question 6) |
|
Specification
Content (reference for question 7) |
|
Assessment
objectives (reference for question 8) |
|
Schemes
of assessment and assessment techniques (reference for question 9) |
Walk-through
the consultation questionnaire and cross-reference to comments in relevant
sections above |
Summary
This is a very important and complex consultation with several different
strands.
The detail given in this document is intended to allow ALL members to give an
informed and realistic response to the consultation. GCSE has overarching
criteria applying to all subjects and needs to be seen to maintain standards
over time.
The main areas of change, and those which may need the most detailed
consideration, are as follows:
- A single tier for all examinations
- Short course specifications must examine two skills only
- Scope for open-ended content in writing and speaking
- The balance of external to controlled assessment (75%:25%)
- The nature of the 'controlled assessment'
The review also gives an opportunity for comment on what is necessary to
allow for progression and continuity from the new Secondary National Curriculum.
The consultation
The consultation on GCSE criteria is open for public consultation from 13th
June to 14th September.
The key sources / documents are as follows:
- Link to the 'home' page of the consultation:
http://www.qca.org.uk/609_18640.html
Link to the draft GCSE qualification criteria i.e. the general criteria
covering all subjects (5 page document): http://www.qca.org.uk/18753.html
Link to the existing criteria: http://www.cilt.org.uk/14-19/docs/gcse_criteria_langs.pdf
Link to the modern foreign languages draft criteria, which currently has
everything except the grade descriptors–(18 page document): http://www.qca.org.uk/18751.html
Link to the on-line questionnaire for the consultation: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=CMznDBc0BMWXhm0DYdKWag_3d_3d
Questionnaire in a Word document format (12 page document) : http://www.all-london.org.uk/faq_curriculum.htm#GCSE_draft_criteria
We have not been able to locate a link to the existing common criteria.
Alongside this consultation, the nature of 'controlled assessments' has been
researched.
- The 'home page' for this area is
http://www.qca.org.uk/16657_18754.html
The regulatory views (June 2007) can be downloaded from: http://www.qca.org.uk/18756.html
The recommendations (March 2007) are here: http://www.qca.org.uk/18755.html
Background
Reminders about roles, responsibilities and
decision-making processes in education
Roles
| The Government decides education policy. |
| The Department for Children, Schools and Family (DCSF) is responsible for
implementing this policy. |
| The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) is the state body
responsible for determining and monitoring the National Curriculum and the way
it is assessed nationally. |
| It does this through giving statutory and non-statutory instructions and
guidance. |
| The QCA consults with various representative organisations before making
decisions and regularly includes ALL in the process. |
| Examination boards propose syllabuses which must meet the criteria set by
QCA. |
The National Curriculum & national assessment
with respect to GCSE
GCSE specifications are usually accredited for 5 years. Minor changes were
made in 1999. Those accredited in 2000 were extended for 5 years. New specs will
be available in September 2008 for first teaching in Sep 2009 and first
examination in 2011.
The current National Curriculum has been largely unchanged since 2000. A new
Secondary National Curriculum was launched on 12th July 2007. This
was not available at the time of the initial review meeting.
A download of the Programme of Study to be taught from September 2008 can be
found at http://www.qca.org.uk/libraryAssets/media/MFL_KS3_PoS.pdf The
main change in this programme of study is the removal of any reference to topic
headings [with the exception of speaking level 3 - talk about their interests]
and the increased emphasis on references to creativity. The levels remain
largely the same, avoiding precise quantification / exemplification of words and
contexts (e.g. 'range' 'short /longer' 'passages' 'longer' 'simple / complex'
'familiar' 'unfamiliar' 'some / little repetition' 'at times' ), maintaining an
emphasis on opinions and tenses (emphases which often lead to formulaic tasks /
responses) and leading to a description of 'exceptional performance' which
appears to describe near-native level. All skills make reference to the use of
support or reference sources. Examinations which preclude this support would
appear not to allow for coherent schemes.
The regulatory documents which provide a framework for the development and
accreditation of a specification are as follows:
1. GCSE Common Criteria which specify (a) the rules (title, content,
structure, level, links) (b) the assessment design (c) rules on aggregation and
awarding. (Broad-brush statements applicable to all subjects; no significant
change was expected for this. We were deliberately asked to look first at the
Subject Criteria, without regard for the Common Criteria.)
2. GCSE Qualification Criteria (additional rules relating to use of ICT,
detailed assessment requirements, tiering, etc).
3. GCSE Subject Criteria - specifying aims, requirements about content (note
tension between comparability and choice), opportunities to develop and generate
tasks, 3 key grade descriptors, balance of internal / external tasks specify
tiering.
NB Grade Criteria are not being examined in this review
Sequence of process for decision making relevant to
current consultation
1. White Paper - Feb 2005
The government published a 14-19 White Paper in Feb 2005 proposing reforms in
education with the following aims:
- place a greater focus on the basics
- offer learners a better curriculum choice
- provide learners with more challenging options and activities
- provide new ways to tackle disengagement.
2. QCA response to White Paper
The QCA planned an 11-19 reform programme in order to take these aims
forward. (See useful summary 11-19reform.pdf) This programme is subdivided into
8 sections
- key stage 3
- general qualifications
- 14–19 curriculum
- Specialised Diplomas
- functional skills
- skills framework
- regulation
- exams, modernisation and systems
3. QCA focus on General Qualifications: overview
This specific focus of this review is the first part under item (2) above,
relating to GCSE.
The QCA states: We are reviewing GCSEs to provide learners with more
opportunities for progression and A levels to reduce the assessment burden and
challenge the most able learners. An extended project will be introduced to
develop individuals’ needs
The overview document of 8 areas gives the following summary with respect to
section (2)
What is QCA doing?
|
The end result |
QCA is redeveloping GCSE English, mathematics and ICT to incorporate
functional skills. A wider choice of GCSEs is being developed that mixes
general and vocational learning. Coursework within GCSEs is being
reviewed. |
A wider choice of GCSEs that present all learners with an opportunity
for progression, and assessment that is consistent |
QCA is redesigning A levels with four rather than six
assessment units to reduce the burden of assessment,
introducing greater stretch for the most able students
and ensuring coursework is used appropriately. |
New GCE AS/A level specifications and an assessment framework that
maintains the A level standard. Top students will also be offered better
opportunities to demonstrate their ability. |
QCA is developing an overarching framework and specifications for
different sorts of projects to support
an individual learner’s needs and interests. These will
be assessed as either a stand-alone qualification or
part of a diploma. |
An opportunity for students to explore a subject or sector
independently, creatively and in greater depth. Learners will be better
prepared for progression to higher education, training or employment. |
4. Consultation on GCSE criteria prior to June 2007 -
how ALL was involved
QCA held a series of 2-day residential consultation meetings with key
stakeholders, including representatives of each exam board (AQA, Edexcel, OCR,
WJEC, CCEA), each subject association, (ALL and ISMLA) and three representative
teachers (ASTs).
As members of the Executive Committee, Vincent Everett and Helen Myers
attended on behalf of ALL.
All subjects were brought together for a presentation on the background, the
draft general GCSE criteria and on the importance of being realistic about the
constraints. However, a key difference for this consultation was that subjects
were invited to be creative in their review and allow for significant change (as
opposed to the last review in 1999 when only minor changes were made). We were
told that proposals for revisions of the subject criteria were to be made BEFORE
proposals for the common criteria (down - up).
The meeting provided the opportunity for all stakeholders to express their
views and to listen to others. In particular, it was helpful for us to consider
the perspective of exam boards who have to design syllabuses in the light of the
GCSE criteria and convince QCA that they can provide valid, reliable exams.
Throughout, as ALL representatives, we were trying to represent the perspective
of the 'ordinary teacher' working in standard circumstances.
There was a great deal of consensus amongst the group.
Most areas were discussed in full, and we agreed on which areas we needed to
discuss in detail. There was little time to address the core grammar or means of
assessment, but we were invited to comment on this in subsequent email
correspondence.
The elections to the Welsh Assembly delayed the public consultation.
The draft criteria are now open to wider consultation.
5 Consultation on Controlled Assessment.
Alongside the Criteria consultation, QCA has been conducting a study into the
means of assessment, in particular considering ways of making assessment more
valid, reliable and less formulaic. They have concentrated on the nature of
coursework.
They have presented models and invited groups to discuss these. These have
now been published for wider consultation. Although there are no specific
questions in this consultation on the nature of controlled assessments, this is
a fundamental aspect of the success of a GCSE specification, and we need to find
out how we can monitor this situation.
The Dearing Review
Background
In October 2006, Lord Dearing was commissioned by the government to conduct
an enquiry into the state of languages, in particular to see how pupils could be
encouraged to continue their studies of languages post 14.
His interim report was published the day after the two-day residential review
in December, and so his specific recommendations were not referenced in the
review. However, QCA had been closely involved in the process, and the likely
key areas were summarised for the group.
The final Dearing report contained many recommendations. Although the aim of
the review was primarily to increase uptake post 14, the area which received an
immediate positive response from government was the recommendation for Primary
Languages.
Dearing recommendations relating to GCSE
In the context of this consultation, it would be helpful to keep the specific
recommendations regarding GCSE in mind. Here are extracts from the report
relating specifically to GCSEs. Summary recommendations are in bold..
Chapter 3: What needs to be done - Recognising Achievement (Pages 11-13, 15)
3.16 Recognising that in practice much of the content and organisation of the
secondary curriculum is determined by the possible outcomes of the assessment
system, we address this matter first. This means reshaping the current GCSE,
supporting a range of alternative options and paying particular attention to the
new Specialised Diploma programme.
Reforming GCSE
3.17 The GCSE is the examination which drives the curriculum at Key Stage 4
and casts its mantle over the final year of Key Stage 3. It is particularly in
these years that the context of the learning needs to be stimulating to pupils
and to engage them in discussion, debates and writing about subjects that are of
concern and interest to teenagers. Although outstanding teachers can overcome
most barriers to learning, as commonly interpreted the present GCSE does not
facilitate this. As we said in our consultation report, it has been suggested to
us that to facilitate teaching in such contexts, a range of options might be
available from which pupils might select a specified number. A strong case has
also been put for an alternative, more flexible GCSE in languages perhaps with
an international or business orientation and involving the development of a more
limited range of skills in several languages. Such an approach may reflect the
interests of a proportion of pupils who would seek such more limited skills in a
range of say three languages as more relevant, useful to them, and more
appealing than continuing with the study of a single language.
3.18 From our discussions with the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA)
we know that they are planning a review of the GCSE and that they are seized of
the importance of an examination that will promote a more lively framework
within which to learn a language. In our opinion a renaissance of language needs
such a review as a matter of urgency.
3.19 We recommend that the review proceeds as a priority in
consultation with the Awarding Bodies, and language teachers. We also invite
consideration of a more flexible "languages in use" GCSE.
3.20 We now return to the widely held view, as recorded in our consultation
report, that the demands of languages in the GCSE are greater than for the great
majority of subjects, and the statistical analysis that appeared to give some
support for that view in terms of the level of demand for the award of a grade.
We recognised that to some extent the conclusions are qualified by recognition
that factors like student interest and motivation affect achievement. In our
further consultation we have found strong confirmation of the view that the
award of grades is more demanding than for most other subjects. This needs to be
resolved one way or the other by a definitive study, followed by publication of
the conclusions, because the present widely held perception in schools, whether
right or wrong, is adversely affecting the continued study of languages through
to the GCSE.
3.21 We do not propose any reduction in the demands of the Curriculum but we
confirm the proposal that the issue should be resolved as soon as possible and
we so recommend.
3.22 We also proposed a new approach to the assessment of speaking and
listening, which rightly account for half the marks in the GCSE, on the grounds
that the present method is too stressful and too short to be a reliable way of
assessing what the candidates can do. It is interesting that when people spoke
about the oral test, that however long ago it may have been, it is often
remembered as a stressful experience. We therefore proposed that these parts of
the examination should be over a period through moderated teacher assessment.
3.23 We recognise that any change has to be made in a way that does not
weaken the validity of the assessment, and concerns have been expressed to us
about that. But that has to be balanced against the risk that a test that is
often highly stressful and over a short period, whilst accurate in its awards
against performance on the day, is not a reliable test of the candidates’
capability. We note that assessment of speaking for awards for the Languages
Ladder (Asset Languages) is through accredited teacher assessment. We have been
advised by one of the examining boards that it is piloting a new approach to
assessment, based partly on an ICT programme over half an hour for listening
skills, and by teacher assessment over a period for speaking. These are matters
for further consideration by the QCA and the examining boards, but we remain of
the opinion that the present forms of assessment are not the best test of the
candidates’ abilities and contribute to the loss of students to languages.
The Short Course GCSE
3.24 The short course GCSE is not proving popular with learners. It is not
distinctively different in approach from the full GCSE. We invite consideration
of a programme that is sharper in focus, aimed at those whose interest is in
basic functionality in a language in a range of meaningfully relevant contexts
to the learner.
New Curriculum Content
3.39 The new languages curriculum for Key Stage 3 that has been presented for
consultation by QCA provides the scope for teachers to teach in contexts that
engage the interest of teenagers. It gives teachers the opportunity to motivate
learning. We would also expect that the changes recommended in this report to
GCSE and the recommendations concerning alternative accreditation, will
facilitate the introduction of more stimulating and relevant content to the
languages syllabus. But that opportunity needs to be realised by concrete
schemes of work and above all by teaching approaches that translate it into
practice.
3.40 The kind of content that will motivate learners – those "meanings
that matter" – are illustrated in the appendix to this report, and it is
not the role of this review to prescribe. Characteristic of them all, however,
is that they are "real" content, whether related to other parts of the
curriculum, to more creative approaches to learning or to the understanding of
language itself.
Commentary on Draft GCSE Qualification Criteria.
The draft criteria do not appear to raise any significant changes other than
with respect to 'where unitised'.
Commentary on Draft Revised Subject Criteria.
It is helpful to refer to the original and the draft proposed criteria when
responding.
| Link to the existing criteria: http://www.cilt.org.uk/14-19/docs/gcse_criteria_langs.pdf |
| Link to the modern foreign languages draft criteria, which currently has
everything except the grade descriptors – (18 page document): http://www.qca.org.uk/18751.html |
Reminder:
GCSEs are governed by two sets of regulatory criteria:
- The GCSE Qualification Criteria set out general rules relating to content,
assessment and reporting for all GCSEs.
- The GCSE Subject-specific Criteria set out additional detail covering
aims, content, assessment objectives and scheme of assessment. Awarding
bodies must adhere to both sets of criteria when developing the detail of
their specifications.
The purpose of the tables below is to highlight the key differences between
the existing and proposed GCSE subject criteria and cross reference to the
questionnaire.
Column 1 summarises the area
Column 2 summarises current wording.
Column 3 indicates if wording has been broadly retained or changed. Where
additional rows are added in column 2, this indicates new content.
Column 4 gives a commentary on the similarities / differences, raising
questions which ALL members may find helpful to discuss / reflect on as they
prepare their responses.
COMMENTARY ON DRAFT REVISED SUBJECT CRITERIA
Remit (reference for question 3)
Area |
Original (1999) |
Draft for consultation (June 07) |
Commentary / questions |
Description of the remit of the subject specific criteria - how they
set out criteria which satisfy common GCSE criteria, and provide criteria
against which specifications are drawn up (by exam bodies) |
1. Introduction |
|
|
1.1 What the criteria do - what the terms of reference |
no significant change - put into points 1 & 2 |
|
1.2 Title |
point 5 |
|
1.3 Requirement that specifies which significant language content must
follow criteria. |
point 4 |
|
|
point 3 - clarifies the purpose of having subject criteria
| consistency |
| rigour |
| build on NC and prepare for future |
| help others know what has been studied
|
|
This addition incorporates the terms of reference for the review i.e. opportunity
for progression, and assessment that is consistent. (cf QCA statement
of 'outcomes') |
Aims & learning outcomes of the GCSE (reference
for question 6)
Aims & learning outcomes of the GCSE.
This sets out broad aims of specifications. Note that this is not the
same as 'assessment objectives'.
|
Heading: Aims
|
Heading: Aims and Learning outcomes
|
Renamed .. uses terminology more commonly used now.
|
2.1 must give students opportunities to .... |
Point 6. should encourage students to .... |
Is there a reason for using 'should' instead of 'must'?
Note that aims / learning outcomes are not necessarily all assessment
objectives. See later for discussion of this. |
7 numbered aims: |
6 bullet points: |
|
(i) - L&R- range of contexts |
6. bullet point 2 - simplified - develop understanding of the language
in a variety of contexts |
Any significance in using 'variety' rather than 'range?' |
(ii)- S&W - range of vocab/ structures |
6. bullet point 4 -simplified - 'develop the ability to communicate
effectively in the language' - no reference to a range of vocab/
structures |
Removing reference to 'range' is realistic for criteria which seeks to
satisfy the whole grade spectrum.
|
(iii) Grammar & apply it |
6. bullet point 3 - knowledge of the language and language learning
skills |
Uses current terminology in line with MFL framework etc. (not just
'grammar')
Minor point, but is there a rationale for reversing the order of aims
to put 6 bullet point 3 in between 2 and 4 rather than following 4? |
(iv) apply knowledge in variety of relevant contexts which reflect
previous learning and maturity |
|
incorporated elsewhere - bullet points 2 & 6
Do you feel it needed a separate sentence? |
(v) knowledge & understanding of countries and communities |
6. bullet point 5 - awareness and understanding of countries and
communities |
suits current terminology |
(vi) positive attitudes to language learning |
2.1 bullet point 1 - enjoyment and benefit from language learning |
|
(vii) suitable foundation for further study and/or practical use of MFL |
2.2. bullet point 6 - help them to take their place in the multilingual
global society + (as point vii)
|
This wording gives value to language learning for practical situations
in the present (including their own society which is multilingual, not
just 'foreign') and the future. |
|
|
MISSED OUT FROM THE ORIGINAL REVISED VERSION agreed at our meeting:
'provide a coherent, satisfying and worthwhile course of study for all
students' . Would you welcome an aim which recognises the inherent benefit
of language learning , not just in terms of its application to practical
situations and the future? |
Specification Content (reference for question 7)
This section outlines what the specifications must require of students.
This is critical for looking ahead to the nature of the related
assessments. |
Specification content |
Subject content |
|
3.1 Content must be specified |
7 - similar - must allow students to develop the knowledge, skills and
understanding as specified below |
|
This section specifies the skills |
3.2 Require candidates to: |
8 - same |
|
(i) Listen & respond to different types of spoken language |
bullet point 1 - no change |
|
(ii) Speaking - express themselves in speech using range of vocabulary,
syntax and structures |
bullet point 2 - simplified to 'communicate in speech' |
reference not made to specific content - we noted that this detail is
incorporated in the assessment criteria |
(iii) read - variety - including texts from ICT-based sources |
bullet point 3 - simplified |
reference not made to specific content - this detail is incorporated in
the assessment criteria |
(iv) W - range of vocab, syntax, structures |
bullet point 4- simplified to communicate in writing |
reference not made to specific content - this detail is incorporated in
the assessment criteria |
(v) Grammar at foundation |
bullet point 5 - same, without reference to foundation |
single tier removes need for extra detail - tiering to be raised
separately later on |
(vi) authentic sources |
not explicit |
referred to elsewhere - logical not to have it here, as it is not a
skill |
3.3 In addition, for higher ... |
|
single tier - tiering to be raised separately later on. Presumably the
additional requirements will be explicit in the common set of grammar
structures (appendix), but what about the vocabulary / range? |
Content. This sets out the requirements for the context for the skills. |
3.4 Must specify topic areas consistent with NC order |
9. Must set out contexts, topics, purposes - interest candidate,
maturity, appropriate to culture, may relate to other curriculum areas |
This explicitly allows great flexibility - including vocational, CLIL,
locally relevant (although some boards noted that current arrangements
already allow a great deal of flexibility which is rarely taken up by
centres).
Currently many complain that the range of topics / content restrict the
opportunity to develop interesting tasks which develop the essential
language skills.
Does this explicitly reduce need to cover wide range of topics? How
will comparisons be drawn regarding the comparative demands of different
specifications with respect to the range of vocabulary expected,
especially for the receptive skills? This is a significant element for
ensuring validity / reliability across exam boards.
How will this follow on from KS3?
How will such an open-ended requirement satisfy the review's aim to
make it clear to others what the qualification means students can do? How
does it ensure progression to further study? |
|
|
10. for S & W must allow for choice including the possibility of
proposing a context, topic, purpose of their own |
This compulsory requirement ('must') should ensure the option of free
choice of topic which will satisfy many current concerns |
|
For a GCSE short course specification a more restricted range of topics
is required. |
13. GCSE short courses must require candidates to demonstrate their
ability in relation to only 2 of the assessment objectives |
More restricted range of contexts, topics and purposes OR reduced
assessment objectives? Such flexibility would allow for accrediting all
language skills acquired by pupils through learning a language, at the
same time allowing for selecting skills (similar to Asset approach)
Are there any advantages in stipulating that a short course
qualification must test 2 skills only?
Presumably it is to get around the problem of not having content
specified (see above) and therefore specifying reduced content. However,
the content issue MUST be addressed separately. |
|
3.5 must specify grammar and linguistic structures + for foundation
tier only, a minimum core vocabulary. Key words and phrases used in
rubrics |
11. Same ... except 'rubrics where applicable' |
How will minimum core vocabulary be determined? How much will there be?
Is it relevant to have core vocabulary for grades C and above as well? How
can there be fair comparison across specifications regarding the amount /
nature of vocabulary required? (especially in view of listening and
reading assessments if they take place in external conditions) |
|
4 Key Skills
|
Deleted |
Original revised version included these. |
Assessment objectives (reference for question 8)
Assessment objectives. This specifies what must be tested (as opposed
to aims / learning outcomes which set out opportunities which must be
given) and what weighting each objective is given |
5. Assessment Objectives |
Assessment Objectives in column one
Weighting (see below) in column 2. |
Minor point - may be helpful to have numbering system e.g. 12 / 12.1 as
per original 5 / 5.1 throughout
Does it matter where weighting is included? (with AOs or with scheme
below?) |
5.1 LSRW |
12. LSRW - simplified descriptions |
Should language learning skills (one of the aims) be included as an
assessment objective? This could be tested by a task which deliberately
allowed pupils access to common reference materials and tested their
appropriate use of them (e.g. dictionaries / approved word lists) |
Schemes of assessment and assessment techniques
(reference for question 9)
Scheme of assessment. This specifies how the objectives are to be
assessed: |
6. Schemes of assessment and assessment techniques |
Scheme of assessment |
|
How they are weighted |
6.1 equally weighted skills |
Weighting in column 2 in previous section
each skill between 20-30 % |
This allows for Edexcel applied GCSE pilot to match criteria ...
flexibility to increase, for example, writing / speaking. Does this affect
comparability across specs? |
|
6.2 10% to grammar for S & W |
15. same |
Would you wish to challenge this? |
How much controlled assessment there can be |
6.3 terminal exam 70%, staged 50% |
17. 75% to external assessment - 25% controlled |
Critical area which needs to be discussed in depth in the light of
members' concerns, Dearing's recommendations and controlled assessment
regulatory views. Definitions of 'staged' and 'terminal examination'
needed.
Generally speaking, 'controlled' conditions' equate to a less stressful
experience. Dearing has reported the common view of teachers and pupils
that listening and speaking exams are particularly stressful. The examples
given in the controlled assessment documents both relate to writing. There
would seem to be an extremely strong case for allowing as much 'controlled
assessment' opportunity as possible for ML, at least in line with other
'performance' / practical subjects.
For L + S+W the 'control' aspects which are the most stressful are
those related to the 'task taking' (1) time (2) resource. The task setting
and task marking could both be at a high level of control, thereby
ensuring validity / reliability / rigour. |
How they are 'tiered' |
6.4 two tiers of grades |
16. single tier |
The advantage of the single tier = removing 'playing safe', entering
pupils for foundation level and denying them access to higher grades.
The disadvantage of single tier =
(a) pupils sit an exam which has elements which are inappropriate for
them - especially damaging in receptive listening and reading exams for
the least able.
(b) less time to test and give pupils the opportunity to show what they
actually know, understand and can do by making them spend time on tasks
which are too easy or too hard for them ... even greater chance that they
lose out.
Dearing refers to an exam pilot of a 30-minute listening exam where
pupils can control input on a computer. How feasible is this for a typical
year entry of at least 50% of the cohort?
A solution would be a return to the compulsory foundation level for
all, then the option of adding higher level. Although this would entail
more testing, it would give a pupils a better chance of showing what they
know, understand and can do and would remove the temptation to 'play safe'
and restrict their grades. |
Restrictions on entry |
6.5 must be entered for either foundation or higher for each tier |
|
see above |
How much controlled assessment there can be (see above) |
6.6. internal assessment no more than 30% |
|
see above for discussion about controlled conditions - need for
definitions |
How the instructions must be worded |
6.7 instructions in target language |
Deleted |
It was agreed at the meeting that this would allow for testing which is
'fit for purpose', which is the main aim of the assessment, and for more
authentic texts / task types. |
|
6.8 restrictions on use of English |
14. must require pupils to express themselves in the language when
speaking and writing |
We assume this is for the tests whose objective is to test S & W
(not L & R) |
What access to resources they can have |
6.9 use of dictionaries not permitted in external assessment |
19. same - see below |
Does this restriction interfere with the assessment objectives? Note
that language learning skills are specified as an aim, but not an
assessment objective. Would there be a case for including intelligent use
of reference resources as a criterion?
Does this preclude the use of booklets common to all candidates (e.g.
as in the geography Decision Making exercise where reference is issued 6
weeks in advance and candidates have access to it in the exam) |
Controlled assessment |
No detailed instructions on coursework |
Controlled assessment
Point 18 |
Satisfies brief for the review 'assessment that is consistent'.
How easy will it be for QCA to make comparisons between different
levels of control required by different specifications? Can we be involved
in discussions relating to this extremely important and complex area? |
|
|
19. The use of dictionaries will not be permitted in any external
assessment. |
Does this restriction compromise coherence with the emphasis on
language learning / use of resources / process skills highlighted in the
new Secondary National Curriculum? |
|
Grade descriptors |
Not available |
Need to check these, but we were told that this was not the area for
the review. |
Appendix |
Appendix |
|
|
|
* Foundation / Higher lists |
up to grade C / above grade C |
Need to look at these in detail. Note that there is little difference
between demands of above C and AS/A2. Is this a time to raise this? |
* NOTES ON APPENDIX
The rationale for little change is that standards are not changing. However,
following review of the AS and A2 exams, it was noted that there was little
difference between higher GCSE and AS, and some higher level structures were
moved to AS.
We know that exam boards have made independent suggestions to QCA.
Suggestions which have been accepted are detailed below, but there were several
other recommendations which they made and which have not been accepted, in
particular suggesting that various structures should become receptive only.
QCA has helpfully supplied a summary of changes as below. It would be useful
if subject communities could comment on these.
French
Foundation – one change only:
| Adjectives: comparative and superlative: regular - meilleur, added
(currently features only at Higher tier) |
Five items at Higher were originally moved to AS, but exam boards have
recommended reinstating four of these (as indicated)
| relative: lequel, auquel, dont [R]. The draft criteria reinstate dont
[R] |
| demonstrative (celui). The draft criteria reinstate celui as
Receptive [R] |
| le mien. The draft criteria reinstate as Receptive [R] |
| verbs: dependent infinitives (faire réparer) |
| subjunctive mood: present in commonly used expressions [R]. The draft
criteria reinstate this. |
German
Foundation – Adverbs: common adverbial phrases. The following
examples have been added: (ab und zu, dann und wann, letzte Woche, nächstes
Wochenende, so bald wie möglich)
Foundation – Verbs: 'strong' replaced by regular
Foundation – Conjunctions: co-ordinating and subordinating -
examples given : coordinating (most common eg aber, oder, und) and
subordinating (als. obwohl,wenn, weil).
Higher – Verbs: one line reworded as follows: Verbs: imperfect
subjunctive in conditional clauses haben and sein.
Four items at Higher have been moved to AS.
| infinitive constructions lassen with infinitive [R] |
| tenses: perfect modal verbs |
| passive voice: verbs with direct objects |
| subordinating: als ob, seitdem [R]
|
Spanish
Changes at Foundation –
| Adjectives: possessive, long form (mío) |
| Time: use of desde hace with present tense, to be (R) only, plus
some more examples added. |
| Foundation – Verbs: imperfect now receptive (R), with the currently
required active use in weather expressions to be maintained, (and therefore
to be added to the Higher list). |
| Foundation – Verbs: present subjunctive. Removed "for formal
positive and negative commands and for familiar negative commands" |
Walk-through the consultation
questionnaire and cross-reference to comments in relevant sections above
1. Introduction |
Worthwhile reading this carefully to be aware of context and its
constraints. |
2. Questions |
Personal |
3. Changes to the GCSE criteria |
SEE 'REMIT' SECTION
These questions refer to the draft GCSE qualification criteria for all
subjects, not the subject specific. |
3.1. Do you think GCSE criteria are appropriate? |
There has been little change. |
3.2. Unitisation (does this mean modular? - these comments made
assuming this is the case) |
You may wish to note the problems when a subject is generally regarded
as 'linear' or 'spiral' in approach. It can be difficult to build in
allowance for this when testing at an early stage in the course, and this
can raise problems when trying to equate 'unitised' GCSEs with others.
(Modular vs linear)
In ML the reason unitised courses are popular for some may be more to
do with the more candidate -friendly means of testing (e.g. more relaxed
when they know they can re-take, less burden on memory when being tested
on a narrower range of content at a time). If less stressful means of
testing were to be introduced into non-unitised courses (albeit in
'controlled conditions'), this may remove the need for this option (e.g.
on- going controlled conditions assessments which can be taken more
than once) |
3.3. Proposals that unitised assessment have 50% at end of course. |
With existing testing systems, understand the need for this to make
more comparable. However, if more 'controlled' assessments are permitted,
this could remove the need for this terminal control. |
3.4. Balance of assessment |
This question is about the principle of putting subjects into two
categories. Question 9/2 addresses ML specifically. There does not appear
to be a question which invites comment on the definitions and explanations
given about controlled assessment. Clarification of this is key to a
helpful response to these questions. |
|
The balance of assessment types should reflect what is fit for purpose
in the particular subject area. It seems unnecessarily artificial to
constrain subjects into two groups.
How does this make 'assessment more rational and transparent for the
learner'?
If it does achieve the aim of transparency and rationality, how does
this balance with the need for an assessment which is fit for purpose and
allows the learner to show fairly what s/he knows, understands and can do.
Which is more important? |
5. GCSE subject-specific criteria |
Heading for the next set of questions.
See grid above comparing current with draft for each of these sections. |
6. Aims and learning outcomes
Appropriate?
|
SEE 'AIMS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES' SECTION
Suggestion: include aim which recognises the inherent benefit of
learning a language per se, without necessarily a practical or future
application e.g. 'provide a coherent, satisfying and worthwhile course of
study for all students' |
7.Specification Content
|
SEE SPECIFICATION CONTENT SECTION
Interesting note regarding additional / optional content. How is this
decided? How are the specs fairly compared regarding volume of content? |
7.1. Up to date? |
Content very similar to current, but worded in a more 'up-to-date’
way using current terminology (e.g. language awareness and language
learning skills)
Content seems to avoid any reference to specific topics - and is
therefore in line with new Secondary National Curriculum. However, this
raises issues of coherence and progression in a subject which has to have
content. See below - section 11.
|
7.2. Appropriate progression to A level? |
Skills appropriate for further study to AS and A in its current format.
Is it too demanding, since there is little difference between
requirements for AS and GCSE. [Note comments on appendix- some aspects
removed then reinstated]
Concern that any decisions about KS3 should allow for relevant
progression. How can we ensure this? |
7.3. Content covers areas of study that should be required of all
students? |
Difficult to answer without seeing sample of 'core vocabulary' and
knowing how judgements will be reached about suitability of the proposals
from exam boards.
When / how can this be discussed?
Appendix detailing grammatical content sets out more specific
information which raises concerns, since structures have reappeared which
A level review suggested should be removed or made 'receptive only'.
Re: short course - see section 12/2 below
For tiering comment - see section 12/3 below |
8. Assessment objectives. |
SEE SECTION 'ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES' |
8.1 Do they indicate clearly what has to be assessed? |
Four skills clear.
Is there a case for introducing assessment objectives which cover other
'aims and learning outcomes' e.g. language learning skills. [Could lead to
demonstrating appropriate use of reference materials] / cultural knowledge
[note that this has been removed from some AS/A level exams as it was seen
to penalise good linguists who may have not referred to target language
examples]
Not for short course. Pupils naturally develop in all 4 skill areas,
and would be disadvantaged not to have the option of receiving credit for
more than 2 skill areas.
Should short course be more flexible and allow for reduced content but
all skills? |
8.2 Any overlap between assessment objectives? |
The review team acknowledged the argument that assessment objectives
could be tested jointly and that in 'real life', situations require more
than one skill at a time sometimes (e.g in a conversation as opposed to a
monologue).
However, very important to be aware that for a fair and reliable test,
discrete skill testing is better for the candidate to demonstrate what
they know, understand and can do. To test speaking and listening together
(e.g. marking response and production in a conversation), while useful in
a teaching situation, could doubly penalise a candidate in a time-limited
testing situation, and would not lead to a valid reliable test fit for
purpose (e.g. if they did not understand a question they would lose marks
for comprehension and production, even if they actually know how to form
the answer) |
8.3 Assessment objectives collectively cover all that is essential for
assessment of this subject at GCSE? |
Acknowledge that some of the aims are not explicitly tested, but
recognise that this would be difficult to do at the same time as adhering
to a subject criteria (e.g. cultural knowledge / understanding /
enjoyment) |
8.4. Relative weightings of Assessment objectives appropriate? |
Flexibility may lead to lack of comparability across exam boards?
Would lower weighting for highly stressful assessment objectives (e.g.
speaking) reduce the risk of unfairly penalising a pupil who suffers from
nerves? |
9. Scheme of assessment and tiering |
SEE 'SCHEME OF ASSESSMENT AND ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES' SECTION |
9.1. Proposed arrangement appropriate? |
See notes. Need to give full and considered response to this. Real
concerns - will students be able to have the same opportunity to show what
they know in a single tier listening / reading test? |
9.2. Balance controlled / external assessment |
See notes above. Very strong case for allowing ML to have exam
conditions which are less stressful, especially in the light of Dearing
recommendations. If the GCSE 'brand' is to compete with other level 2
qualifications which are less 'stressful', it needs to allow for more
flexible testing. |
10. Maximising accessibility and equality |
|
10.1. Take into account all learners? |
Pupils with sensory deprivation are particularly excluded from ML (e.g.
if selective mute/ severely hearing impaired).
Is there any way of taking this into account? Can the qualification
have the same currency if certain skills are waived / significant
allowances made? |
10.2. Promote cultural understanding, diversity, and gender equality
appropriately? |
|
10.3. Restrictions for disabled? If so: |
|
10.4. Requirement restricting access |
|
10.5. Disability group likely to be affected |
|
10.6. Essential |
Are 10.6/7/8 really separate items? |
10.7. Desirable |
|
10.8. Not needed |
|
10.9. Reasonable adjustments during controlled assessment |
|
11. Curriculum opportunities within the GCSE subject criteria |
The review took place before the KS3 / secondary review was published
and before the Dearing report was published. |
11.1. Criteria make clear the ways in which subject complements and
reflects the revisions to the overall objectives for KS4 curriculum? |
Flexibility in content reflects current move to make meanings relevant.
Although the aims and learning outcomes of the new criteria seem to be
coherent with the new secondary curriculum for languages (launched July
2007), it is difficult to judge whether the content / assessment criteria
expected offer coherent progression, and the scheme of assessment (if 75%
external assessment removes access to support and access to reference
sources) does not seem to offer coherence.
The main change in the programme of study is the removal of any
reference to topic headings [with the exception of speaking level 3 - talk
about their interests] and the increased emphasis on references to
creativity. The levels remain largely the same, avoiding precise
quantification / exemplification of words and contexts (e.g. 'range'
'short /longer' passages', 'simple / complex' 'familiar' 'unfamiliar'
'some / little repetition' 'at times' ) and maintaining an emphasis on
opinions and tenses.
How will judgements be made about comparability of specifications with
respect to range / content? How will assessment criteria reflect the
emphasis on process / concepts? Will the continued emphasis on opinions,
tenses and complex grammar stem or perpetuate the temptation to provide
formulaic tasks and responses which 'tick the boxes'?
Note that the description of 'exceptional performance' still appears to
describe near-native level. Is this consistent with demands of other
subject area descriptors? (i.e. near mastery of the subject area).
All skills make reference at some point to the use of support or
reference sources. Examinations which preclude this support (and which in
the current draft would count for 75% of an assessment) would appear not
to allow for accreditation of these relevant and useful processes.
|
11.2. More coherent? |
see above. Lack of content and scheme of assessment which restricts
access to reference sources likely to reduce coherence. Schools tend to
prepare students from KS3 with the requirements of KS4 in mind. |
11.3. Aims: successful learners / confident individuals / responsible
citizens |
Learners will feel successful and confident if given realistic tasks
matching their abilities. Performing in languages is acknowledged to be
stressful (see Dearing report)
The aim of a positive learning experience is essential. A positive
experience of language learning can make pupils feel more positive as
international citizens. A negative experience can reinforce prejudice.
The scheme of assessment is a critical element for providing a positive
experience. Elements of the draft criteria which may compromise this
experience are: Single tiered exams, lack of access to reference resources
/ support, restricted skills in the short course, unknown content for the
reading and listening exams. |
11.4. Use subject to develop contexts beyond school? |
The chance to respond to questions set in English lends itself to more
relevant, authentic tasks which may be met in a context beyond school.
(Current assessment tasks are often very artificial and unlikely). |
11.5. Support development of personal, learning and thinking skills? |
This is implicit in language learning. It is important that the
assessment schemes reward these skills appropriately by giving realistic
tasks matching pupils’ abilities (see above) |
11.6. Sufficient flexibility to develop specs that reflect subject and
curriculum initiatives and developments? |
Flexibility of topics will allow for cross-curricular and vocational
themes within the GCSE. Flexibility of entry to different tiers, different
skills or combining different languages would be the 'ultimate' response
to current curriculum initiatives and developments and may reduce the need
for centres to be running several types of qualifications and increase the
chance of having an assessment system which satisfies one of the key
desired outcomes of this review: 'A wider choice of GCSEs that present
all learners with an opportunity for progression, and assessment that is
consistent' |
12. Subject specific |
|
- ML:2-5
12.2. Short course - 2 objectives? |
see SPECIFICATION CONTENT NOTES:
More restricted range of contexts, topics and purposes OR reduced
assessment objectives? Such flexibility would allow for accrediting all
language skills acquired by pupils through learning a language, at the
same time allowing for selecting skills (similar to Asset approach)
Is short course content appropriate for all? Least able can normally
manage a low level in all 4 skills. Requiring testing in just 2 skills
only will not give them the opportunity to demonstrate what they know,
understand and can do. Dearing (para 3.29) does not recommend this
approach. He recommends sharper in focus, aimed at those whose interest
is in basic functionality in a language in a range of meaningfully
relevant contexts to the learner.
Are there any advantages in stipulating that a short course
qualification must test 2 skills only?
Presumably it is to get around the problem of not having content
specified (see above) and therefore specifying reduced content. However,
the content issue must be addressed separately. |
12.3. Question papers not tiered? |
See SCHEME OF ASSESSMENT NOTES:
The advantage of the single tier = removing 'playing safe' and denying
pupils access to higher grades.
The disadvantage of single tier =
(a) pupils sit an exam which has elements which are inappropriate for
them - especially damaging in listening and reading exams for the least
able.
(b) less time to test and give pupils the opportunity to show what they
actually know understand and can do by making them spend time on tasks
which are too easy or too hard for them ... even greater chance that they
lose out.
A solution would be a return to the compulsory foundation level for
all, then the option of adding higher level. Although this would entail
more testing, it would give al pupils a better chance of showing what they
know, understand and can do and would remove the temptation to 'play safe'
and restrict their grades. |
12.4. All specs must include controlled assessment? |
Would welcome detailed consultation on nature of controlled assessment.
Is it essential to have controlled assessment as compulsory?
The nature of external assessment could allow for less stressful
circumstances if tasks were known in advance and access to a common
reference source allowed. [These are lower control elements which are
appropriate for most writing and speaking tasks]. Such an arrangement may
reduce the need for as much 'controlled assessment' and lead to an even
more reliable assessment régime. |
12.5. Permit use of dictionaries in controlled assessment? |
Need for more discussion about the nature of controlled assessment.
Can we envisage a realistic and relevant task which would credit
appropriate use of reference materials in language learning? (i.e. this
could be an assessment objective). |
Helen Myers
|