Scottish Government

CONSULTATION ON REVIEW OF ASSESSMENT WITHIN NEW NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Summary of Analysis of Responses

This document is also available in pdf format (36k)

Background to Consultation

1. New National Qualifications (NNQs) were introduced in Scotland in 1999. The initiative brought together qualifications that had traditionally been described as either vocational or academic into one coherent framework. NNQs consist of a range of qualifications (Access, Intermediate 1, Intermediate 2, Higher and Advanced Higher) all of which were to be assessed both internally and externally. Courses are split into Units, normally 3, each of which was assessed internally, most commonly using a National Assessment Bank (NABs) instrument. Unit assessments were graded pass or fail. Unit awards can serve as qualifications in their own right. Students were also subject to external assessment to determine the grade (A-C) of the course award. Course awards were made only when the student passed all internal and external assessments.

2. During the first year of NNQs, considerable concern was expressed about a number of aspects of the initiative, primarily the volume of assessment. In response to these concerns, Scottish Executive Ministers announced in March 2001 a review of the initial implementation of the new National Qualifications. The National Qualifications Steering Group (NQSG), which includes representatives from education authorities, schools, further education and parental organisations, carried out this review using evidence from a wide range of sources. Their task was completed in June 2001. As part of a series of recommendations published in the NQSG report Review of Initial Implementation of New National Qualifications (Scottish Executive, 2001), the group proposed that a consultation exercise on the future of assessment should be conducted. Ministers accepted all the recommendations and established the National Qualifications Task Group to take forward implementation.

3. The consultation took place between September and December 2001 and focused on two options for possible change:

Option A: candidates would achieve a course award by success in the external assessment with unit certification as an option.

Option B: candidates could achieve an ungraded course award by demonstrating they had achieved the full range of learning outcomes through internal assessment, with an optional external examination available for those candidates who wished to achieve a graded award.

4. Respondents were asked which of the following approaches to these options they favoured:

• Option A - but not Option B
• Option B - but not Option A
• Option A and Option B
• Neither Option A nor Option B
• Any other fundamental change

Views of Respondents on Options for Change

5. The consultation received 740 responses. These responses were analysed by Glasgow University using both quantitative and qualitative evaluation techniques. Responses were analysed individually and in constituent groups to show clearly the spread of support for each option and the origin of other recommendations for change that emerged from the consultation. Table 1 in Annex A summarises the number of respondents by each constituent group.

6. Of the 601 respondents who selected one of the approaches listed in paragraph 4 above, the most commonly chosen was neither A nor B (293 respondents). Option A but not B was identified as a preferred option in 215 responses. Support for Option A but not B came largely from schools; there was little support from Further Education, National Groups or Local Authorities. Option B but not A attracted little support; 29 responses identified this as the preferred option. 16 responses of the 29 where Option B but not A was selected came from school departments. One parental group favoured this option. Options A and B together also received little support; 43 responses - 29 of these coming from schools and school departments. Two national groups and one Teachers' Union supported this option. Table 2 in Annex A shows responses to these options for change by each constituent group.

7. 301 respondents proposed their own preferred option for NNQs. Within this group by far the most common recommendation was for the existing system of assessment to continue modified by the subject review process (196 responses). This was the option most commonly selected by Local Authorities, National Groups, Business Organisations and a majority of both School and Further Education respondents who made their own proposals. Table 3 in Annex A shows respondents' own preferred option for change by each constituent group.

8. The overall result of the consultation is therefore that neither Option A nor B is favoured. Where respondents suggested their own recommendations, the most common proposal is for the existing system of assessment to continue modified by the subject review process.

Common Themes Identified as Recommendations

9. A number of common themes as recommendations emerged from the consultation. These were:

• retain the original principles of Higher Still.
• retain and develop an assessment system that is a fundamental, integrated part of the learning and teaching endeavour.
• ensure parity of esteem is maintained/strengthened.
• retain Core Skills.
• ensure all stakeholder needs are met.
• ensure any assessment system promotes and recognises achievement.
• retain a balance of internal and external assessment but reduce the volume of assessment.

10. The main debates and subsequent recommendations arising from the analysis were less about matters of principle than how such principles might be put into practice. One central difference of view between those respondents who selected either Option A or the Status Quo subject to review was concerned with manageability. Those who selected Option A often indicated that making internal assessment optional was the only way to reduce the assessment burden; whereas those who supported the Status Quo subject to review often argued that making internal assessment optional would create as many problems as it would solve. External assessment was often closely associated with credibility by respondents; more commonly internal assessment was associated with motivation and support for learning.

Main Recommendations for future of New National Qualifications

11. The main recommendations for the future of NNQs were:

Maintain commitment to the principles of Higher Still, in particular to:

• core skills.
• parity of esteem.
• a balance of internal and external assessment.
• assessment as part of learning and teaching.

Risk assess and introduce any change gradually:

• the system is unlikely to be able to cope with further significant change and public confidence would be very badly damaged if there were to be further disruption to NNQs.

Strive to improve the quality of the programme:

• standardise assessment across subjects and levels to build confidence in the concept of parity of esteem.
• enhance standards through an appropriate balance of internal and external assessment to monitor progress and to motivate and support learners.
• build capacity in the system by sustaining and enhancing moderation procedures.
• review the length of external examinations to improve validity.

Make the programme more manageable:

• reduce the volume of assessment for learners and teachers.
• ensure that flexibility within the system is manageable and does not lead to further complications.
• seek to minimise data-recording and processing.

Explore the potential of National Assessment Bank (NABs) items to assist the assessment process; such multi-dividending might include:

• using NABs for Appeals Evidence.
• providing headroom in NABs ( to provide challenge and evidence for Appeals).
• recognising success through NABs as the equivalent of a C pass with external examinations available for those candidates wishing to gain an A or B award.

Recognise that NNQs are worthwhile but very demanding:

• the new system will itself have to be subject to a process of continuous improvement.

12. The analysis revealed a clear commitment to improving NNQs. The responses:

• suggested that there is a firm belief in the principles of NNQs as derived from the Higher Still initiative;
• recognised the complexity of the task and the time necessary to develop these principles into practice;
• indicated a willingness across all groups to engage in the debate to create a better qualifications system for Scotland's learners.

13. The main advantages/advisability of continuing the existing system of assessment modified by the subject review process (see paragraph 7) were perceived to be:

• the bedding-in time for the present system.
• the opportunity for information from subject reviews to impact on the system.
• the stability necessary for the profession, the system and the public.
• the need to re-establish credibility in the eyes of both direct stakeholders and the public more generally.

Availability of Full Report Analysing Responses to the Consultation

14. The full analysis of responses to the consultation by Glasgow University is available on the Scottish Executive website ( http://scotland.gov.uk/education/nationalqualifications/).

Hard copies of the report are available from:

Ms Lyndsey Hair
Qualifications, Assessment and Curriculum Division
Scottish Executive Education Department
Area 2-A
Victoria Quay
Edinburgh
EH6 6QQ
Tel: 0131 244 0973
Email: Lyndsey.Hair@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

ANNEX A

Table 1: Number of Respondents by Constituent Group

Table 2: Responses to Options A, B or Combination by Constituent Group

Of the 740 responses received, only 601 selected one of the given options. 139 responses made no such selection.

Table 3: Respondents' Own Preferred Options for Change by Constituent Group