Consultation on Review of Assessment within New National Qualifications

We are basing our response on two sources of information

1. Directors' views developed through discussion at their schools and with their pupil-children and from their attendance at the national seminars on the consultation.
2. The views expressed by parents throughout Scotland in surveys undertaken by SPTC in 2000 and 2001 on Higher Still. Particularly relevant to this consultation are their observations that:-

1. internal assessment is valued because it helps pupils pace their work and keep focused
2. there is too much assessment - (this criticism was strongest from the parents of youngsters who took five subjects)
3. the third unit assessment is pointless as it comes just before the final exam and is detrimental because it gets in the way of students studying for the final exam.

It is clear that most parents see unit assessments as staging posts on the way to the final exam, which for them is the real focus. They do not appreciate the value of unit assessments in terms of assessing competency, building up a profile of achievement and resulting in certification.

Option A.

We do not support option A.

1. We recognise that under Option A, courses will still be delivered in units, that it will still be possible for schools to do internal assessments at the end of each unit and that it is highly likely that they will. However, we feel that it is the "required" aspect of the current system that gives the unit assessments their value in keeping youngsters focused and helps them pace the course.
2. We also see considerable value in youngsters getting official recognition/certification for the units if they fail the external exam. This could not happen if the units were not a formal, certificated part of the system.

Caveat:- if option A is adopted then, whilst it might be desirable for youngsters to choose whichever course happens to suit them, the practical problems for schools and teachers in managing a multitude of systems simultaneously would be overwhelming. Option A therefore cannot be optional. There would need to be clear national guidelines about how and when it was to be used.

Option B

We think Option B should be adopted

1. Many schools are currently using Access 3 rather than the Standard Grade Foundation level because they find the system of unit assessment without a final exam better suits students at this level. Indeed, many schools find the system so motivating that pupils who were originally aiming for an Access 3 course award are encouraged by achieving the units to go on and take the Intermediate 1 exam. Option B offers all students who are put off by the prospect of an external exam a way of achieving a course award at every level.
2. Option B gives students who do not want to take the external exam, for whatever reason, recognition for the year of study. For example, if a student wanted to study a subject out of interest but did not want the added stress of a final exam, Option B would give a very rewarding way of undertaking such a course of study and getting recognition for that study.
3. Option B can exist alongside the present system, as there is no added complication at school level.
4. It gives students who get the unit passes but fail the external exam a good fall back award.
5. Course completion can be done at any time during the year as it would not be dependent on the diet of external exams.

Proposed other fundamental change

The graded course requirement should be cut from 3 unit passes plus the external exam, to 2 unit passes plus the external exam.

Whilst we reject Option A in recognition of parents comments on the value of unit assessments as evidence in our Higher Still surveys, we do not think that the status quo is an option. There is a need to address parents' concerns about the excessive amount of assessment and particularly the burden of the third unit assessment immediately prior to the external exam. We therefore propose that the graded course requirement is changed from its current position of three unit assessment passes plus the external exam to two out of three unit assessment passes plus the external exam.

Our reasons for proposing this

1. It would build flexibility into the system for schools and pupils.
2. It would reduce some of the assessment pressure, as it would cut the need for resits if a student just missed passing a unit, or were absent for any reason. This would be particularly valuable where a student failed/missed the third unit.
3. Schools could use it to by-pass the third unit for some groups of students and simply allow them extra study time for the final exam.
4. Moreover, if a student had taken two units and failed the final exam, it would still be relatively easy for that student to take the missing third unit assessment in order to get an ungraded course award under option B.

Caveat:

We are aware that in most subjects the units cover different competencies /material and that where a pupil gained a course award with two unit assessment passes rather than three, they might not have proof that they have covered all aspects of the course. However, the external exam does sample across the whole course and so it would not be possible for a student to do nothing in one unit and still get a course award. We therefore think that dropping the course requirement by one unit pass is acceptable in terms of the programme design. However, if one unit were seen as absolutely crucial to the integrity of the subject, and is not assessed in the final exam, it would be possible, under this proposal, to make that one unit assessment mandatory and require the pupil also to pass one of the other two units. For example in the new proposals for English, the unit on personal study is not assessed in the final exam. It would therefore be acceptable to make this a required unit.