Comparison of A Levels with International Qualifications

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 May 2012 16:42 Thursday, 10 May 2012 16:14

We have published the key findings from our international comparability study of A levels and equivalent qualifications.

Read more: Comparison of A Levels with International Qualifications

Summer Exams 2012

Last Updated on Monday, 21 May 2012 09:23 Wednesday, 02 May 2012 16:31

This page aims to gather together information that we think you will find useful during the summer 2012 exam season. We will up-date this page whenever we have new information.

Read more: Summer Exams 2012

A level reforms

Last Updated on Wednesday, 02 May 2012 16:29 Wednesday, 02 May 2012 16:23

We have published the recent correspondence between Rt Hon Michael Gove MP, the Secretary of State for Education, and Glenys Stacey, Chief Regulator. The exchange of letters makes clear the Secretary of State’s concerns over the current A level qualifications and outlines his views on the areas of reform that he believes are needed for A levels to serve their purpose as:

• a secure platform to prepare students for further study in the same or related subjects, and
• one of the selection tools used by Higher Education (HE) to identify the most suitable and best students for their courses.

Exploration of these issues was the focus of research that we commissioned (and on behalf of the regulators in Wales and Northern Ireland) into A level qualifications, entitled ‘Fit for Purpose?’. This gathered the views of representatives from a wide range of stakeholder groups including HE, employers who use A level results as a recruitment tool, learned bodies, teachers and awarding organisations. We have also published the research report, including the Executive Summary.

Our research has identified that

• overall all stakeholder groups viewed A levels positively
• A levels prepared most students for most undergraduate degrees
• employers select students with A levels because they have met the right level of academic achievement

These findings were consistent across England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Our research also identified areas where changes could be made to A levels that could improve the course of study and development of skills for students. These included

• greater clarity over the core knowledge required in some subjects
• improved skills in researching, problem solving, analysis and critical thinking
• a reduction in modularisation
• a reduction in the number of resits
• better discrimination between the most able candidates applying for oversubscribed undergraduate degree courses.

Our research also identified concerns over the general level of literacy and numeracy of students entering higher education. However, HE and teachers both recognised that this was not an issue restricted to A levels or one that could be solved by them alone.

There was consensus across the stakeholder groups that it was right for HE to be more involved in the design of A levels. HE representatives supported the suggestion but expressed concerns about their capacity for involvement on top of their academic roles.

We will be giving further consideration to the issues identified through our research and what design rules we require for A levels to support the qualification meeting its agreed purposes.

Given these findings, the Secretary of State’s concerns, and the closure of the QCDA (the body which would previously have led on the development of new A levels), we will need to put in place new arrangements for the development of reformed A levels. We plan to consult later in the summer on the arrangements for the development of the new A levels, including their structure. We will be developing proposals for consultation which reflect the evidence, the views of universities and others and the need to secure standards, as well as meet our commitment to reduce our regulatory requirements.

The consultation will be online and we will be holding regional focus groups. We will look for input from schools, colleges and employers as well as from HE. We will provide a further update on progress with the development of the consultation shortly.

Exam errors - actions taken and principles (Summer 2012)

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 May 2012 12:05 Wednesday, 02 May 2012 09:30

During the summer 2011 exam season, exam paper errors in a small number of GCSE, GCE AS and A2 papers made it difficult or impossible for candidates to answer some questions.

The qualifications regulators in England, Wales and Northern Ireland carried out an inquiry and found that, overall, the exam boards took action to minimise any advantage or disadvantage to candidates. We found that in most cases the question paper development process met our current regulatory requirements. However, some risk factors were identified, including:

• an insufficient focus on quality early in the development process leading to late changes to question papers
• a lack of clarity about the roles, responsibilities and accountability of those involved in the development and sign off processes.

To address these risks, written undertakings setting out improvements were agreed and published with five awarding organisations. A sixth is in draft and expected by 21st May 2012.

Some of the improvements will take time to implement. Meanwhile all of the GCSE and A level exam boards have put in place further quality control measures, including increased checking of exam papers being taken this summer. A result of these extra measures should mean the risk of errors is reduced and will continue to reduce in the future. But we recognise the risk cannot be eliminated.

When an error comes to light we expect the exam board concerned to take responsibility for the problem, apologise to those affected and explain how the paper will be marked to minimise any advantage or disadvantage to the candidates affected by the error.

Although all errors are indicative of a lack of effective quality control processes, some clearly cause more problems to candidates than others. Errors can be categorised according to the impact they have on candidates' ability to answer the question as it was intended to be answered:

1. Errors which make the question impossible to answer either because of the way the question is constructed or set out, or as a result of a printing problem which would mean parts of the paper are unavailable to the candidate.
2. Errors which may cause unintentional difficulties for students in answering the question.

There may also be some minor issues such as grammatical mistakes and typos which, while disappointing to us, do not affect candidates' ability to answer the question.

Where an error occurs we recognise that it may have an impact beyond the actual question concerned. For example a candidate may be distracted in answering other questions or spend a disproportionate length of time on a problem question.

In working out the actual impact of an error, exam boards take into account a variety of information including the relative number of marks affected, information provided by centres, and the candidate's responses for the question concerned and subsequent questions.

Exam boards can also refer back to previous papers for the same candidate, if there are any, and compare that with performance on the affected paper. Where an error occurs we expect exam boards to make the best use of the information available to them before issuing results. If any errors happen this summer we will look carefully at the way the exam boards implement any measures to correct the issue.

Principles for handling an error

In working out how to handle an error we expect each exam board to apply the following principles:

1. Information should be as transparent and helpful as possible without undermining the integrity of the qualification.
2. Information should be available at all times:
   • Teachers, candidates and parents should have access to information about what to do if they find an error: who to contact and what will happen to those affected by an error
   • Exam board staff should know how to deal with errors and who to contact if an error is found.
3. When an error is identified, exam boards should:
   • tell all schools and colleges taking the affected paper that an error has been identified as soon as it is confirmed
   • tell Ofqual
   • tell other people affected or interested in the error using appropriate channels and speed. The speed of announcement and method used should be based on how urgent the message is (for example, social media may be used).
   • make available generic information about the way the exam board can make sure the exam results are valid despite an error.
4. If error occurs in a paper an exam board can take a range of actions depending on the nature of the error. It can:
   • omit the question concerned for all candidates (so the paper is marked out of a lower total mark) or give all candidates full marks for that question
   • give marks for answers that are correct in the light of the error
   • use statistics to judge whether the error has affected the demand of the paper for all candidates, which might affect the grade boundaries for that paper
   • adjust individual candidates' marks where there is evidence that their performance has been affected significantly by an error (compared to performance on their other papers in the subject or when their performance on questions after the error is significantly worse).
5. When an exam board has assessed the impact of an error on the candidates sitting that exam it should:
   • tell Ofqual and the schools and colleges concerned that a valid assessment of candidate performance can be made or, if this is not the case, why not and what the centre should do to support the candidates
   • tell Ofqual, schools and colleges, and other interested parties the nature of the measures that it will be taking to make sure the results are a valid indication of candidate performance.
6. In reaching decisions we expect that:
   • the exam board's response to the error should reflect the severity (category) and impact of the error
   • any unfair advantage or disadvantage to candidates should be minimised and, wherever possible, all candidates affected should be treated in the same way.

Regulatory action

Our response to an error will reflect the severity of the error, the number of errors, the causes of errors and the number of candidates affected by the error. It would also take into account any regulatory action previously taken or commitments made, for example in an undertaking. We have powers to impose sanctions on the exam boards in the event of errors or other failings against our regulatory rules. We will use these sanctions as and when we consider it is appropriate.