Seldom have comparative studies of educational assessment systems been undertaken, let alone in relation to their standard setting procedures. This comparative study examines the effects of governance structures on the power relations in standard setting in the dominant school-leaving or university-entrance examination in various international contexts. We have undertaken a critical analysis of the published research and policy documents and conducted sense-checking with senior assessment practitioners from 22 jurisdictions. The nature of standard setting systems in three broadly representative cases of the Republic of Ireland, the United States of America and India is described in greater detail to showcase the differences between the following three models of governance systems: nationalised, commercial market and quasi-market. The contribution of this article, then, is to provide a nuanced description of the three models of governance systems, to classify the 22 jurisdictions using the three models, and to generate propositions inductively on how power is distributed with respect to examination standard setting under each distinctive system. Thus, the article provides a conceptual basis for extension of this work to other cases in order to advance the literature cumulatively by theory-building.
Building on findings from existing qualitative research into public perceptions of reliability in examination results in England, a questionnaire was developed and administered to samples of teachers, students and employers to study their awareness of and opinions about various aspects of reliability quantitatively. Main findings from the study include: there was substantial variability in the understanding of reliability concepts and attitudes to unreliability in examination results among the respondents; the majority of the respondents appeared to understand the assessment process and the factors that affect students' performances in examinations; to a degree, the respondents also understood the factors that could introduce inconsistency in examination results; the respondents showed various degrees of experience of the examination process and acceptance of measurement error in examination results; the level of tolerance of the respondents for assessment error to some degree was positively correlated to the level of belief about the examinations system, knowledge of aspects of unreliability and approaches to trust. Based on findings from this study and those from other studies, steps that should be taken to communicate with the public about reliability of assessment outcomes have been proposed.
National tests, public examinations, and vocational qualifications in England are used for a variety of purposes, including the certification of individual learners in different subject areas and the accountability of individual professionals and institutions. However, there has been ongoing debate about the reliability and validity of their results. This debate prompted the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual), the regulator of qualifications and examinations in England, to initiate its Reliability of Results Programme in 2008 to investigate the reliability of results from regulated assessments. The purpose of this programme was to gather evidence to develop regulatory policy on assessment reliability in order to improve the national assessment systems in England. This paper provides a brief introduction to the Reliability Programme, discusses its main findings to date and their implications, and explores the impact of the development of regulatory policy on reliability for regulated assessments in England.
In England, pupils aged 16 take the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) examinations for a range of subjects. The current assessment models for GCSE include a two‐tier structure for some subjects and a non‐tier model for the others. The tiered subjects have a higher tier designed for high achieving pupils and a lower tier for low achieving pupils. The higher tier paper is targeted at grades A∗–D (with A∗ the highest grade available), while the lower tier paper at grades C–G (with G the lowest grade). The UK government has proposed a comprehensive reform of GCSEs. It suggested that, with tiered papers, pupils are forced to choose between higher and lower tier papers, which will place a cap on the ambition of those entering for the lower tier. The government therefore suggests avoiding tiering in the reformed GCSEs when possible. This paper discusses the technical and equity issues with the use of tiered examinations in current GCSEs and reviews potential alternative assessment approaches for effective differentiation between pupils for the reformed GCSEs.
For the past 30 years, school-based assessment (SBA) BackgroundThe origins of England's General Certificate of Education (GCE) A level exams can be traced back to 1838 when the University of London set a matriculation exam to use as an objective selection method for entry to university. During the nineteenth century, other universities responded to the demands of schools by providing syllabi and exams for students to take locally. The Higher School Certificate overtook these exams in 1917 and that led to A levels, which were first examined in 1951.Since its introduction in 1951, the A level system has always served two main functions: assessing and certificating achievement against a curriculum defined in a published syllabus and permitting universities to identify students for their courses. Dennis OppossUpon its introduction, the A level was targeted only at the highest achievers. However, it has been studied by an increasing number of students and is now taken by over a third of the national cohort. Whilst there are other pre-university exams available such as the International Baccalaureate, A levels remain the principal tool of university selection for students from England.A levels are usually taken by 16 to 18-year-olds in schools and colleges across the country but they are available to anyone who wishes to gain a qualification in a subject in which they are interested. A levels are intended to be studied over a two-year period. In the summer of 2016, there were 770,000 subject entries taken by approximately 250,000 students in England.A levels are provided by four independent exam boards which compete with each other for entries from schools and colleges. They are available in over 45 subjects. There are no compulsory subjects. A levels can be taken in any combination desired to reflect the interests (or intended progression) of the student. It is accepted that a typical A level student will take three or four A levels at the upper secondary phase. That makes each student's curriculum much narrower than in many countries. On the other hand, the lack of a compulsory element or any rules concerning the combination gives the student the freedom to choose a programme suited to themselves and their planned progression route.In addition, England has had some form of national exam for 16 year olds for almost 100 years. In 1918, there were the first awards of the School Certificate. You needed to pass in mathematics, English and three other subjects to gain the certificate.In 1951, at the same time as the GCE, A level was introduced and the School Certificate was replaced by the GCE O Level examination. This was a subject-based certificate -one certificate per subject.The Certificate of Secondary Education (CSE) was a school-leaving exam awarded from 1965 alongside O levels. O levels were aimed at the highest achievers, mostly those who would progress at age 18 to university. CSE was aimed at those more in the middle of the attainment range. Before the introduction of the CSE, the majority of schoolc...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.