Launched last month, QCA’s Annual Review for 2006 reports on progress made over the last year in four main areas: the regulation of qualifications and standards; the exam and assessment infrastructure; the developing of a new qualification framework; and the changing nature of the curriculum itself. Some of the detail is a bit heavy but it’s a useful summary of how the qualification and exam system is working let alone a corrective to what’s often reported in headlines.
Confidence in the qualification and assessment system balanced by proportionate scrutiny is the key to the first of these areas and can be seen in three particular aspects. Firstly, continuing development towards a more ‘refined’ regulatory approach based on the 5 principles of good regulation produced by the Government’s Better Regulation Task Force – proportionate, accountable, consistent, transparent and targeted. Unfortunately these don’t lend themselves to an easy acronym like SMART but can be seen in two major projects for 2007; ‘one focused on the process of setting exam questions and the other looking at the training of examiners.’
Secondly, and under commission from Government, a review of pricing structures in some qualifications for which findings will be released in due course. Thirdly, further work on establishing the integrity of coursework and evidenced by the revised proposals announced by the Education Secretary last autumn. Elsewhere, QCA is publishing regulatory principles to support e assessment and has launched a new National Database of Accredited Qualifications (NDAQ.) But the fact that last summer over 99.9% of exam results were issued to centres on time and over 98.6% of exam papers were issued error free suggests that while improvements can always be made, confidence in the exam system is justified.
This takes us neatly into the second area on which the Review reported, that of the exam and assessment infrastructure. A key feature of the modernisation programme over the last few years has been the development of support for Exams Officers (EOs.) In the past EOs were often teachers or admin staff who performed the role between mouthfuls of lunch in a back office. This role has now become highly professionalized, transformed through the use of technology and backed up by targeted support and training. There is even now a professional association for Exams Officers with over 4,000 members and based in Reading. Not only is there such an association for EOs but since May 2006, one for examiners/assessors as well in the shape of the Institute of Educational Assessors. In both cases the two driving forces involved are the increasing professionalism of the roles and the increasing use of new technology. Each provides living proof of how the exam system is transforming.
The third and fourth areas on which the Review reported take us into the areas of qualifications and the curriculum.
The major piece of work currently under way on the qualification side is the development of what’s intended to be a more responsive and flexible qualification framework. This long term project has been through a number of evolutionary stages from its conception in the Skills Strategy White Paper of a few years ago. The Leitch Report and 14 – 19 developments have since added obvious momentum to what is now a 4 nation project encompassing a number of different strands and residing under the title of the Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF.) Testing and trialling of components is currently in Phase 2 with the vision being to create “a unified, integrated system of qualifications which will encourage lifelong learning and support Lord Leitch’s vision of a flexible, responsive and demand led system of skills acquisition.”
On terra firma this means setting up a databank of units of learning each with a credit value and which learners can tap into and build up over a period of time. The hope is that this will streamline the mass of adult qualifications listed and allow learners greater choice and freedom to select units (“navigate pathways”) that they can bank and build up.
There are some difficult challenges in here including the gradual incorporation of the mass of employer led provision currently not included in such a national Framework and incorporating some 17,500 qualifications offered by 500 professional and awarding bodies. In his launch speech, Ken Boston spoke enthusiastically of a Framework that “would recognise all quality training, regardless of who delivers it, how it is delivered, who funds it or who awards it.”
It was a powerful image and one which ultimately puts the learner much more at the centre of the whole system but a key factor in all of this is having the technology in the first place. For those less acquainted, this is a world presently populated by a range of mysteriously labelled initiatives, ULN, LAR, MIAP and so on. Each has a vital role to play in turning the wheels. The ULN is the Unique Learner Number which learners are given when they first log in; as they successfully complete a unit, that achievement is logged against the ULN on to an individual LAR, Learner Achievement Record. The LAR is linked to the NDAQ, National Database of Accredited Qualifications while the information transfer on learning and achievement for individuals is managed through MIAP, Managing Information Across Partners.
Now that’s all clear, it’s time finally to look at the fourth area reported on in the Review, namely the changing nature of the curriculum as it seeks to respond to new needs, new demands and new learners.
In pursuit of this, QCA has over the past year been leading a major review of the curriculum under three headings; what are we trying to achieve? How should we best organise learning? How do we know if we are succeeding? This has come under the Futures or as it is now known, Futures in Action project. Currently some 60 curriculum development groups, some school based, some linked in with national agencies such as Oftsed and the NCSL are working on what’s termed “disciplined innovation in the curriculum.” Some clear themes have emerged largely around involving learners more, creating curriculum space to be able to innovate and the use or otherwise of technology.
In his Introduction, Ken Boston described 2006 as “a good year;” perhaps not vintage yet but certainly beginning to taste better.
Edexcel Policy Watches are intended to help colleagues keep up to date with national developments. Information is correct at the time of writing and is offered in good faith. No liability is accepted for decisions made on the basis of information given.
T:\Policy and Curriculum\Steve\Policy Watches\QCA Annual Review for 2006.doc