Assessment commission report document

Report of the NAHTCommission on Assessment February 2014



COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 3Contents PageForeword by The Lord Sutherland of Houndwood KT 4Executive summary 5Summary of recommendations 6Underpinning principles of assessment 8Assessment in schools – design checklist 9Introduction, remit, membership and outline of process 11The purpose of assessment 12Current position on levels and testing 13National curriculum tests and teacher assessment 14Teacher assessment and moderation 15Role of accountability and inspection 16Teacher training 17The use of information technology (IT) 18Going forward 18Annexes 20Evidence submitted to the Commission 20Case studies: 20 • The Wroxham School, Alison Peacock DBE 21 • Shaftesbury High School, Kerry Sternstein 23 • Cannon Lane Primary School, Reena Keeble DBE History and context of assessment: 24 • History of National Curriculum assessment and reporting 29 • History of GCE and GCSEs Assessment practice: an international snapshot 31

4 NAHTNAHT Commission on assessmentForeword by Lord Stewart Sutherland Assessment helps parents to understand and, as relevant, participate in their children’sChairman’s introduction educational journey. Quite reasonably, parents want to know how their sonThe decision of the NAHT to set up an independent or daughter is progressing, and how they can help.commission on testing and assessment in schools,which I was asked to chair, is a consequence of the Assessment helps head teachers and governorsdecision of the DfE, following a recommendation to plan strategically the use of the resources ofby the expert panel for the review of the National the school.Curriculum, to abandon the use of levels and level If whole or part classes are not making reasonablydescriptors in the assessment of school pupils. Two expected progress, there could be a variety ofconsequences followed: the first was uncertainty causes, and dealing with the uncovered needs mayamongst many teachers about how they were to require redeployment of resources in the school.carry out the task of assessing pupils’ progressacross and between school years; the second was Assessment of individual pupils and schoola growing realisation of the need, as well as the accountability are interdependent.opportunity, to carry out a thorough review of the One critically important role of assessment is torole of assessment in schools. I congratulate the help appropriate types of the accountability ofNAHT on rising to the latter challenge. schools to parents, governors, local authorities and government and tax payers.This report is the first stage in this process. In view ofthe need to offer an approach to tackling the issues Assessment includes externality and objectivity.which teachers will face in September of this year, this This is the main reason for the use of nationalcan only be the first stage of the fuller review, which testing procedures, and also developing the role ofwe hope will now engage the profession and relevant in-school, inter-school and external moderation ofgovernment bodies – the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual. teacher assessment judgements.My opening remarks will be focussed upon variousheadlines, all discussed more fully in the main text. Assessment skills are not sufficiently prioritised in either initial teacher education or continuingThose who cannot assess cannot teach. professional development.Assessment is inevitably part of every teaching There is an unjustified assumption at large thatactivity. “How is she getting on?” “Did he assessment is a natural intuitive skill possessed by all.understand that?” Assessment will benefit from the fast developingAssessment is therefore too important to be the techniques of full pupil profiling which are being enhanced by information technology (IT).sole preserve of national tests and assessments. We saw some good examples of schools exploitingIn good education, assessment is of the progress of this expanding technology for the benefit of all ofthe whole pupil throughout their educational journey. the above.Assessment is the means used by good teachers Finally, as September approaches,to evaluate that progress and diagnose the needs Don’t panic. There will be a mixed economy in most schoolsof the pupil. as they see current pupils through the final yearsTrue assessment is neither wholly formative, nor wholly of the old system and engage with the newsummative; it is embedded in the classroom rather curriculum. Schools are advised to evolve newthan an activity of reflection outside the classroom. structures, rather than try to cope with a barren landscape devoid of the old.Assessment helps pupils engage more fully intheir own development and learning.A pupil responds better to new challenges if theygrasp what is necessary for progress and why.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 5Our recommendations will, we hope, help schools in these matters. My fellow commissioners, mythe short term, as well as invite them to engage in colleagues from NAHT and the observers fromthe wider debate about the various types and roles the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual, each helped test theof assessment in the medium and longer term. evidence which we received and reviewed rigorously, as well as to keep the Chairman on his toes.May I thank all those who submitted writtenevidence and met with the Commission to discussExecutive summary The work of the Commission was, of necessity, urgent because of the timing of the SecretaryThe NAHT established its Commission on of State’s decision to remove levels from theassessment to focus on finding a way to assessment structure of the National Curriculum andsupport schools in determining new assessment the nature of the changes facing schools with regardarrangements in relation to the curriculum and to a revised National Curriculum and assessmentpupils’ learning. The need for this arose following framework. However, it was felt important atthe Secretary of State’s decision to remove levels least to begin the work of developing assessmentand their associated descriptors from the National practice for the longer term. The members of theCurriculum. In carrying out its task, the Commission Commission freely acknowledge that there is furtherwas asked to achieve three distinct elements: work still to do in this area and feel that it would be of benefit for this work to continue.• A set of agreed principles for good assessment• Examples of current best practice in assessment that meet these principles• Buy-in to the principles by those who hold schools to account.The Commission, comprising a panel ofexperienced practitioners, met during the autumnof 2013. The report reflects both the writtenand oral evidence submitted to the panel, andthe subsequent discussions. It contains theCommission’s recommendations, a set of principlesof good assessment, and a design checklist fora practical assessment framework. It focuses onboth the short term implications of the Secretaryof State’s decision to remove National CurriculumLevels and the medium term consideration of thenature of assessment.

6 NAHTSummary of recommendations take part in such moderation. Schools should be prepared to submit their assessment to external1. Schools should review their assessment moderators, who should have the right to practice against the principles and checklist provide a written report to the head teacher and set out in this report. Staff should be involved governors setting out a judgement on the quality in the evaluation of existing practice and the and reliability of assessment in the school, on development of a new, rigorous assessment which the school should act. The Commission is of system and procedures to enable the school to the view that at least some external moderation promote high quality teaching and learning. should be undertaken by moderators with no vested interest in the outcomes of the school’s2. All schools should have clear assessment assessment. This will avoid any conflicts of interest principles and practices to which all staff are and provide objective scrutiny and broader committed and which are implemented. These alignment of standards across schools. principles should be supported by school governors and accessible to parents, other 9. Schools should identify a trained assessment stakeholders and the wider school community. lead, who will work with other local leads and nationally accredited assessment experts on3. Assessment should be part of all school moderation activities. development plans and should be reviewed regularly. This review process should involve 10. Ofsted should articulate clearly how inspectors every school identifying its own learning and will take account of assessment practice in development needs for assessment. Schools making judgements and ensure both guidance should allocate specific time and resources for and training for inspectors is consistent with this. professional development in this area and should monitor how the identified needs are being met. 11. The Ofsted school inspection framework should explore whether schools have effective4. Pupils should be assessed against objective assessment systems in place and consider how and agreed criteria rather than ranked against effectively schools are using pupil assessment each other. information and data to improve learning in the classroom and at key points of transition5. Pupil progress and achievement should be between key stages and schools. communicated in terms of descriptive profiles rather than condensed to numerical summaries 12. The Department for Education should make a (although schools may wish to use numerical clear and unambiguous statement on the teacher data for internal purposes). assessment data that schools will be required to report to parents and submit to the Department6. In respect of the National Curriculum, we for Education. Local authorities and other believe it is valuable – to aid communication, employers should provide similar clarity about comparison and benchmarking – for schools requirements in their area of accountability. to be using consistent criteria for assessment. To this end, we call upon the NAHT to develop 13. The education system is entering a period of and promote a set of model assessment criteria significant change in curriculum and assessment, based on the new National Curriculum. where schools will be creating, testing and revising their policies and procedures. The7. Schools should work in collaboration, for government should make clear how they will example in clusters, to ensure a consistent take this into consideration when reviewing approach to assessment. Furthermore, excellent the way they hold schools accountable as practice in assessment should be identified and new national assessment arrangements are publicised, with the Department for Education introduced during 2014/15. Conclusions about responsible for ensuring that this is undertaken. trends in performance may not be robust.8. External moderation is an essential element in producing teacher assessment that is reliable and comparable over time, and all schools should

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 714. Further work should be undertaken to assessment framework, which instead should improve training for assessment within initial be published by 2016. The development of the teacher training (ITT), the newly qualified full framework should be outlined in the school teacher (NQT) induction year and on-going development plan with appropriate milestones professional development. This will help to that allow the school sufficient time to develop build assessment capacity and support a an effective model. process of continual strengthening of practice within the school system. 21. A system wide review of assessment should be undertaken. This would help to repair the15. The Universities’ Council for the Education disjointed nature of assessment through all of Teachers (UCET) should build provision ages, 2-19. in initial teacher training for delivery of the essential assessment knowledge.16. All those responsible for children’s learning should undertake rigorous training in formative, diagnostic and summative assessment, which covers how assessment can be used to support teaching and learning for all pupils, including those with special educational needs. The government should provide support and resources for accredited training for school assessment leads and schools should make assessment training a priority.17. A number of pilot studies should be undertaken to look at the use of information technology (IT) to support and broaden understanding and application of assessment practice.18. The use by schools of suitably modified National Curriculum levels as an interim measure in 2014 should be supported by the government. However, schools need to be clear that any use of levels in relation to the new curriculum can only be a temporary arrangement to enable them to develop, implement and embed a robust new framework for assessment. Schools need to be conscious that the new curriculum is not in alignment with the old National Curriculum levels.19. To assist schools in developing a robust framework and language for assessment, we call upon the NAHT to take the lead in expanding the principles and design checklist contained in this report into a full model assessment policy and procedures, backed by appropriate professional development.20. Schools should be asked to publish their principles of assessment from September 2014, rather than being required to publish a detailed

8 NAHTUnderpinning principles for assessmentThe principles, in conjunction with the design c. Assessment should draw on a wide range ofchecklist that follows, will assist schools as they evidence to provide a complete picture ofdevelop their own assessment systems. Schools student achievement.will be able to review their own processes toensure that they are underpinned by these d. Assessment should demand no moreprinciples and, where this is the case, determine procedures or records than are practicallywhether the assessment system is fit for purpose. required to allow pupils, their parents and teachers to plan future learning.1. Assessment is at the heart of teaching and learning. a. Assessment provides evidence to guide 5. Assessment is consistent. teaching and learning. a. Judgements are formed according to common principles. b. Assessment provides the opportunity for students to demonstrate and review their b. The results are readily understandable by progress. third parties.2. Assessment is fair. a. Assessment is inclusive of all abilities. c. A school’s results are capable of comparison b. Assessment is free from bias towards factors that are not relevant to what the assessment with other schools, both locally and nationally. intends to address. 6. Assessment outcomes provide meaningful and3. Assessment is honest. understandable information for: a. Assessment outcomes are used in ways that minimise undesirable effects. a. pupils in developing their learning; b. parents in supporting children with their b. Assessment outcomes are conveyed in an open, honest and transparent way to assist learning; pupils with their learning. c. teachers in planning teaching and learning. c. Assessment judgements are moderated by experienced professionals to ensure their Assessment must provide information that accuracy. justifies the time spent;4. Assessment is ambitious. d. school leaders and governors in planning a. Assessment places achievement in context and allocating resources; and against nationally standardised criteria and expected standards. e. government and agents of government. b. Assessment embodies, through objective 7. Assessment feedback should inspire greater criteria, a pathway of progress and effort and a belief that, through hard work and development for every child. practice, more can be achieved. c. Assessment objectives set high expectations for learners.5. Assessment is appropriate. a. The purpose of any assessment process should be clearly stated. b. Conclusions regarding pupil achievement are valid when the assessment method is appropriate (to age, to the task and to the desired feedback information).

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 9Assessment in schools • Each pupil is assessed as either ‘developing’,Design checklist ‘meeting’ or ‘exceeding’ each relevant criterion contained in our expectations for that year. (note D)These statements provide an evaluation checklistfor schools seeking to develop or acquire an • Where a pupil is assessed as exceeding theassessment system. They could also form theseed of a revised assessment policy; there is relevant criteria in a subject for that year theycertainly value in schools using broadly consistent will also be assessed against the criteria inapproaches to assessment. that subject for the next year. For those pupils meeting and exceeding the expected standards,Our approach to assessment we provide more challenging work.• Assessment is integral to high quality teaching • Assessment judgements are recorded and and learning. It helps us to ensure that our backed by a body of evidence created using teaching is appropriate and that learners are observations, records of work and testing. making expected progress. • Assessment judgements are moderated by• All staff are regularly trained in our approach colleagues in school and by colleagues in other to assessment. schools to make sure our assessments are fair, reliable and valid. (note E)• We have a senior leader who is responsible Our use of assessment for assessment. • Teachers use the outcomes of our assessmentsOur method of assessment to summarise and analyse attainment and• Assessment serves many purposes, but the progress for their pupils and classes. main purpose of assessment in our school is to • Teachers use this data to plan the learning help teachers, parents and pupils plan their next steps in learning. for every pupil to ensure they meet or exceed expectations. Teachers and leaders analyse the• We also use the outcomes of assessment to data across the school to ensure that pupils identified as vulnerable or at particular risk in check and support our teaching standards and this school are making appropriate progress help us improve. and that all pupils are suitably stretched.• Through working with other schools and using • The information from assessment is external tests and assessments, we will compare communicated to parents and pupils on a our performance with that of other schools. termly basis through a structured conversation. Parents and pupils receive rich, qualitative• We assess pupils against assessment criteria, profiles of what has been achieved and indications of what they need to do next. which are short, discrete, qualitative and concrete descriptions of what a pupil is • We celebrate all achievements across a broad expected to know and be able to do. and balanced curriculum, including sport, art• Assessment criteria are derived from the school and performance, behaviour, and social and emotional development. curriculum, which is composed of the National Curriculum and our own local design. (note A)• Assessment criteria for periodic assessment are arranged into a hierarchy, setting out what children are normally expected to have mastered by the end of each year. (note B)• The achievement of each pupil is assessed against all the relevant criteria at appropriate times of the school year. (note C)

10 NAHTNotes and commentary on the design checklist to the results in KS2 tests. Such data may emerge over time, although there are question marksThese notes expand on the statements above with over how reliable predictions may be if schoolsfurther implications or options. are using incompatible approaches and applying differing standards of performance and thereforeThe types of assessment discussed here are primarily cannot pool data to form large samples.for learning. The information generated is to be usedby several different people to plan future approaches D: There is a need to record a pupil’s attainmentto learning. Assessment should not be a bureaucraticexercise for its own sake. The processes should be against each applicable assessment criterion.streamlined to ensure that only those are used that The criteria themselves can be combined toprovide information that is useful to teachers, pupils, provide the qualitative statement of a pupil’sparents and school leaders. achievements, although teachers and schools may need a quantitative summary. Few schoolsA: There is a task of work to translate the National appear to favour a pure ‘binary’ approach of Curriculum (and any school curricula) into yes/no. The most popular choice seems to be a discrete, tangible descriptive statements of three phase judgement of working towards (or attainment – the assessment criteria. As there emerging, developing), meeting (or mastered, is little room for meaningful variety, we suggest confident, secure, expected) and exceeded. this job be shared between schools. In fact, Where a student has exceeded a criterion, it NAHT is commissioning a model document. may make sense to assess them also against the criteria for the next year.B: The most natural choice of hierarchy for criteria is by school year (certainly the curriculum is These recorded judgements can be translated usually organised into years and terms for planned delivery). However, children’s progress into numbers, which can then be analysed and may not fit neatly into school years, so we used for prioritising. Traffic lighting is a popular have chosen the language of a hierarchy of method for monitoring. The most obvious expectations to avoid misunderstandings. method to generate a ‘colour’ or status is to Children may be working above or below their count the proportion of the relevant year’s criteria school year and we must ensure we value the that have been met at that point in time. At this progress of children with special needs as much stage, it is not possible to say what proportions as any other group. The use of P scales here is would be cause for concern or celebration at a important to ensure appropriate challenge and particular time of the year – although presumably progression for pupils with SEN. you would expect to have mastered all applicable criteria to be green at the end of the year.C: We assume that schools will conduct formal assessments more than once a year (and informal The method of ‘fitting’ a student to a criterion assessment will take place continually). A formal must be consistent to draw comparisons assessment at the end of each term, against the between groups. If the criteria are discrete, year’s criteria, is a natural pattern, although some concrete and precise, this will remove some schools will want to do this more frequently. It ambiguity. If a school is using a three phase will take time before schools develop a sense of judgment, one would expect the middle how many criteria from each year’s expectations ‘meeting’ to be based on mastery. are normally met in the autumn, spring and summer terms, and this will also vary by subject. E: The exact form of moderation will vary from Consequently it will also be hard to use this school to school and from subject to subject. The framework by itself for prioritising intervention in majority of moderation (in schools large enough the first few years of use. to support it) will be internal but all schools should undertake a proportion of external moderation For some years to come, it will be hard to make each year, working with partner schools and local predictions from outcomes of these assessments agencies. It is also good practice to invite external agencies with no connection to the local group of schools to verify practice from time to time.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 11Introduction but also a more practically-based design checklist to assist schools in the short term as they reviewIn the summer of 2013 the government announced their assessment framework.the end of the official use of National Curriculumlevels for assessment, following a recommendation The Commission met during the autumn of 2013,from the expert group on National Curriculum with a panel of experienced practitioners, includingReview. This caused concern across the profession official observers from Ofsted, Ofqual and theand gave rise to such questions as how inspectors Department for Education (DfE). A formal invitationwould react to multiple different assessment was issued to stakeholders to submit evidencesystems in place in schools, how progress would for consideration and the Commission receivedbe demonstrated and judged, and how attainment both written and oral evidence. The report of thewould be measured. ‘Levels’ had become the Commission contains a series of recommendationsaccepted language both of pupil attainment and covering the elements listed above.progress and the prospect of the removal of thislanguage caused widespread consternation. We hope that these recommendations and principles will support consistency in assessmentThe government has a stated policy of freedom without constraining freedom. Above all, theyand autonomy for school leaders. NAHT should give schools confidence that, if they investbelieves strongly that freedom need not mean in developing approaches to assessment thatfragmentation and, if the government wants to accord with these recommendations, principlestransfer ownership of assessment to the profession, and checklists, inspectors and officials will give duethen the profession should take that ownership and credence to those systems.design a proper replacement. The removal of levelsprovides an opportunity for the government, its Membershipagencies and, most importantly, the profession itselfto enhance the professionalism of teachers in the Membership of the Commission ranged across thedevelopment and use of assessment. In furtherance education profession. The panel was chaired byof this aim, NAHT decided, therefore, to establish former HMCI of schools Lord Stewart Sutherlandan independent commission on ‘assessment and its members were:without levels’ to consider what lay behind goodassessment and to look for examples of good Leora Cruddaspractice already in place or developing in schools. Director of Policy, ASCLRemit of the Commission Tony Draper Head Teacher, Water Hall SchoolThe Commission was asked to achieve threedistinct elements, with their associated outcomes: John Dunford John Dunford ConsultingA set of agreed principles for good assessment; Hilary EmeryExamples of current best practice in assessment CEO, National Children’s Bureauthat meet these principles; and, Sam FreedmanBuy-in to the principles by those who hold Director of Research, TeachFirstschools to account. Russell HobbyThe remit did not extend to KS2 tests, floor General Secretary, NAHTstandards and other related issues of formalaccountability. Rather, the focus was on assessment Bernadette Hunterfor learning within school. During its considerations, NAHT National President 2013-14the Commission decided it would be helpful tooutline not only high level principles of assessment Kathryn James Director of Education, NAHT Steve Kirkpatrick Deputy Head, Willow Tree Primary

12 NAHTDame Alison Peacock • Is a universal system of assessment necessaryHead Teacher, Wroxham Primary to measure pupil progress and attainment?Tim Sherriff • What aspects of learning should be assessedHead Teacher, Westfield School and how?Kerry Sternstein • What forms of assessment are appropriate forDeputy Head, Shaftesbury School use at the following ages? 0-4yrs (early years)Prof Gordon Stobart 5-7yrs (KS1)Institute of Education 7-11yrs (KS2) 11-14yrs (KS3)Observers from Ofqual, Ofsted and DfE 14-16yrs (KS4)Supported by Mick Walker and Alex Rowley • What should be the outcomes of an effective assessment system?Outline of the process • What quality assurance mechanisms are neededIn carrying out its work, the Commission sought to ensure robustness and reliability of assessment?evidence for consideration from as wide a rangeof stakeholders as possible. With this in mind, • What role should assessment play in formala public call for evidence was extended and inspection?individual invitations were addressed to specificstakeholders. Those willing to present evidence • What other areas of assessment should be(both oral and written) were asked to address the considered by the Commission?following questions: The Commission met to consider the written• What are the purposes of assessment? evidence received and also took oral evidence from a wide range of sources. We would like• Who benefits from assessment? to extend our gratitude to the individuals and• What are the elements of good assessment organisations who so freely gave their time and expertise in submitting their views. Details of the practice? evidence received are given in the annex.The Commission’s view on the purpose of assessmentBefore looking in detail at the evidence submitted, Assessment has many forms, including differentthe Commission spent time reflecting on the nature types of testing and individual teacher assessmentof assessment and its purposes. In an educational through observations of pupils in class. It is easycontext, the term ‘assessment’ is used to denote to conflate assessment with testing, but testing isa range of measurement functions for formative, merely one method of assessment. The Commission’sdiagnostic and summative uses. The data derived task was to look into a system that, from Septemberfrom such assessments are used to: 2014, will be based on a new National Curriculum for all maintained schools that would no longer be• inform pupils, parents and others about the underpinned by nationally determined performance levels. Therefore, the Commission’s focus was on performance of individual pupils and to inform finding a way to support schools in determining teaching and learning; new assessment arrangements in relation to the curriculum and pupils’ learning.• hold schools accountable for the attainment Teachers assess pupils’ progress on an ongoing and progress of their pupils; basis in the classroom, determining what is being learned, what pupils know, understand and can• enable benchmarking between schools as well as monitoring performance both locally and nationally; and• award qualifications such as GCSE and GCE A level.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 13do and what they need to do next to progress. scales for pupils with special educational needs hasArguably, this formative and/or diagnostic been developed and continues to be important toassessment is the basis of nearly all teaching and, ensure appropriate challenge for children with SEN.)without it, what happens in the classroom runs therisk of being directionless and ineffective. The original level descriptors have evolved in line with various revisions of the National Curriculum in termsThe use of level descriptions came into being in of their definition and the uses to which they havethe early 1990s, shortly after the introduction of been put. As time has progressed, the descriptorsthe National Curriculum, and was designed to have been assimilated into the common language.enable consistency and uniformity in describing The important narrative behind the headline numberwhat an individual pupil had attained and thereby was often lost through over-simplification. Thus, thethe progress being made. This has developed into assumption was made that we mean exactly the samea common language, very often shortened to a thing when we refer to a pupil achieving a certain level:numerical value, used by schools and others as a level 4, for example. Of course, this is not necessarilyshorthand to summarise progress and attainment. A the case. Using level descriptor shorthand also fails tonumerical summary can be useful to schools for the address whether the pupil is consistently achievingpurpose of analysis and tracking over large numbers that level, achieving it most of the time or on occasionof pupils but it misses the richness of a more or, indeed, only in some aspects. It also fails to show arounded description of achievement. (The use of P pupil’s particular strengths and weaknesses.Current position on levels and testingThe decision of the Secretary of State to remove expectation that pupils would make two levels ofthe official use of levels and level descriptors, progress over a key stage. Thus the expected twoalthough arising from the report of the National levels of progress at certain key stages were lookedCurriculum review expert panel, was unexpected at in terms of six sub-levels. This development ofand caused concern within the profession. Although sub-levels was, in the main, profession-led and initiallythe government stated that levels were not clearly not widely used by official sources. However, moreunderstood by parents and other stakeholders, recently, when defining the term, ‘secondary ready’this was disputed by teachers and other education in the DfE primary accountability consultation, theprofessionals. Many said that this current generation government alluded to this being equivalent to levelof parents had grown up with such a system of 4b. Given that the expected level of attainment forcommunicating attainment and progress and, as the majority of pupils at the end of key stage 2 hadsuch, had an adequate grasp of what was meant. It been level 4, and this notion of 4b was raised afterbecame clear to the Commission that there needed the announcement that levels were to be removed,to be two points of focus for its work: the short term this only added to the general confusion and concern.implications of the Secretary of State’s decision –what schools should do in September 2014 – and The majority of those giving evidence to thethe medium term consideration of the nature of Commission highlighted that level descriptorsassessment more generally. and National Curriculum levels, whatever their other faults, had given the profession a commonAs well as measuring pupil progress and defining tool to communicate with each other and withattainment in National Curriculum terms, levels had stakeholders. Others commented that whateveralso been developed further by the profession to replaces levels needs also to retain a commonaddress the issue of progress within schools as an language or, if a number of different assessmentelement of the accountability system. The original systems emerge, there would still need to be anNational Curriculum levels 1, 2, 3, etc. were further element of compatibility or common understanding.refined to 2c, 2b, 2a and so on, with the continued

14 NAHTNational curriculum tests and teacher assessmentTesting is often seen as reliable, definitive and ignored. An effective assessment system built aroundobjective. However, the Commission found this the curriculum will inform classroom practice andfar too simplistic a view. There is clearly a value in help improve teaching and learning. Whilst we noteusing tests, both internal and external, and most that the revised curriculum has not been dictatedschools use them internally on a regular basis. to by an assessment framework, curriculum andHowever, assessment is not an exact science. Tests assessment should be developed in tandem. Theare in effect a snapshot of what a pupil can do Commission heard compelling arguments abouton that day at that particular time in a specific the adverse effects of levels caused by the labellingsample of the curriculum and may or may not be of pupils and the oversimplification of numericalan accurate measure of a pupil’s attainment over a measures. This underpinned the government’swider period; tests are effective for assessments of decision to remove levels. Ironically the revisedcertain types of knowledge and less effective for curriculum is presented in a model of year-by-yearothers. In a more reliable system, tests should be progress with planned descriptors of performanceused to inform and be part of the teacher’s wider at the end of each key stage. Taken alongside theassessment of pupils’ progress and attainment. lack of timely guidance and exemplification, this only exacerbates the demands on individual schools forThe Commission’s view that too great a reliance September 2014. The Commission therefore believesis being put by government on external tests, that, so far as schools are following the Nationalparticularly for school accountability purposes, was Curriculum, it is valuable – to aid communicationwidely supported by the evidence submitted to the and comparison – for schools to be using consistentreview. This over-reliance has led to distortion in criteria for assessment. The Commission alsocurriculum emphasis and accusations of ‘teaching recommends that the profession acts to create ato the test’. If too much weight is attached to set of model assessment criteria, based on the newany form of assessment it is likely to lead to such National Curriculum, that demonstrate pupil progress.perverse incentives – not only teaching to the test,for example, but also inflated teacher assessment 1. Schools should review their assessmentbecause of performance management issues, ordeflated assessment to enhance the measurement practice against the principles and checklist setof later progress. Although assessment is frequentlyused as the basis of accountability, the very out in this report. All staff should be involvednature of accountability influences the results ofassessment, which in turn constrains what forms of in the evaluation of existing practice and theassessment may be used. The Commission heardhow too restrictive an assessment system can lead development of a new, rigorous assessmentto the narrowing of the curriculum. Teachers needthe opportunity to develop trust and confidence system and procedures to enable the school toin their own and colleagues’ ability to assesspupils accurately. We need a more coherent, promote high quality teaching and learning.rounded approach to assessment overall and anaccountability system that does not raise the stakes 2. All schools should have clear assessmentand distort outcomes unnecessarily in any one area.This highlights the challenges of using assessment principles and practices to which all staff arefor multiple purposes, because what may suitaccountability may damage assessment for learning committed and which are implemented. Theseand the accuracy of judgements. principles should be supported by schoolThe Commission’s view is clear: the link betweencurriculum, assessment and pedagogy must not be governors and accessible to parents, other stakeholders and the wider school community. 3. Assessment should be part of all school development plans and should be reviewed regularly. This review process should involve every school identifying its own learning and development needs for assessment. Schools should allocate specific time and resources for professional development in this area and should monitor how the identified needs are being met.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 154. Pupils should be assessed against objective 6. In respect of the National Curriculum, we criteria rather than ranked against each other. believe it is valuable – to aid communication and comparison – for schools to be using5. Pupil progress and achievements should be consistent criteria for assessment. To this communicated in terms of descriptive profiles end, we call upon the NAHT to develop and rather than condensed to numerical summaries promote a set of model assessment criteria (although schools may wish to use numerical based on the new National Curriculum. data for internal purposes).Teacher assessment and moderationThe Commission heard from the majority of those Trust, of course, must be earned as well as given.submitting evidence that there was a lack of trust in Schools must take professional accountabilityteacher assessment at the present time. All saw the and pride in the integrity and accuracy of theirneed to address this urgently; teacher assessment assessments. The level of trust can be extendedwas seen as a vital component of a balanced and further by a system in which moderators havereliable assessment system. The unanimous view the ability and professional standing to contestwas that the necessary improvement in teacher assessment judgements made at school levelassessment would not be achieved by increasing where necessary.external testing; that, in fact, this risks furtherdeskilling of teachers in broader assessment methods. A recurring theme in the evidence presented toRather, much of the evidence was aligned in the view the Commission was the need for ‘externality’that a general move to external testing over the years in terms of assessment. It was clear that, forhad eroded both public and professional confidence any assessment system to be trusted, there hadin the outcomes of internal assessment. to be a reliable form of external checking. For teacher assessment, this would take the formConcerns were raised about initial teacher training of external moderation. Examples were given toand how it dealt with assessment, about the lack of the Commission of in-school and cross-schoolcontinuing professional development for teachers moderation which went a long way to deliveringin the area of assessment, about developing high on this aim. However, if the moderation processquality professional dialogue and, significantly, is to be robust, it is important to have a degreeabout the need for effective moderation. of judgement and accountability which was not always present in the examples given.To enable development of teacher expertise, theCommission is of the view that there needs to be It is important to distinguish between professionala more widespread climate of trust. Professional dialogue, standardisation and moderation. Eachdevelopment of teacher skills will need time. are relevant and important elements of a robustAlthough there is a general belief that classroom system, with professional dialogue playing a hugeassessment practice has improved in assessment part in teacher development. Moderation shouldfor learning, for example, this needs to be balanced bring with it some ‘teeth’, some judgement andwith the lack of trust exhibited by the profession a requirement to take note. The moderator mustitself – junior schools often report that infant schools’ have the right, indeed, the responsibility to sayassessments of their pupils are over-inflated, that the assessment level is too low, too high orsecondary schools argue that they need to test pupils correct, with an expectation that this judgementon arrival because primary assessments, including will be acted upon.national tests, cannot be relied upon. In part, this lackof trust is due to a lack of consistency and in part to There is a worrying lack of trust in individualthe perverse incentives resulting from a high stakes teacher-based assessment, which emanates fromaccountability model. within the profession itself. For example, the

16 NAHTCommission heard how secondary schools were and improve the quality of assessment which, mostlikely to test pupils as they came into year 7 rather importantly, would improve teaching and learning.than trust the KS2 assessments. This was generallyseen as a problem caused by the nature of the 7. Schools should work in collaboration, foraccountability system rather than any underlying example in clusters, to ensure a consistentlack of ability within the profession. However, approach to assessment. Furthermore,there was a clear acknowledgement of the need to excellent practice in assessment should bedevelop further teachers’ skills in this area. identified and publicised, with the Department for Education responsible for ensuring thatIt was generally appreciated in the evidence given this is undertaken.to the Commission that nationally standardisedtests have an important part to play in supporting 8. External moderation is an essential element inand validating teacher judgements but public trust producing teacher assessment that is reliablecan be increased by developing the use of effective and comparable over time, and all schoolsmoderation practices. This can be increased further should take part in such moderation. Schoolsby improving assessment training in initial teacher should be prepared to submit their assessmenttraining and continuing to develop CPD, including to external moderators, who should have theencouraging professional dialogue within and across right to provide a written report to the headschools. As previously stated, further national tests and governors setting out a judgement onwere seen generally as unnecessary. Indeed, it was the quality and reliability of assessment in theargued by a significant number of those submitting school, on which the school should act. Theevidence that the current test regime should be Commission is of the view that at least someevaluated against its intended purposes. Some external moderation should be undertakenmembers of the Commission were of the view that it by moderators with no vested interest in thewould be more appropriate to use national sampling outcomes of the school’s assessment. Thisto review the performance of all schools at a national will avoid conflicts of interest and providelevel, with improved, moderated teacher assessment objective scrutiny and broader alignment ofbeing used to hold schools accountable on an standards across schools.individual basis. Other members of the Commissionforesaw a continued role for universal testing. Any 9. Schools should identify a trained assessmentsuch system must provide a national picture of lead, who will work with other local leads andperformance standards, provide local accountability nationally accredited assessment experts on moderation activities.Role of accountability and inspectionThe Commission considered evidence that and limited the curriculum unduly. Because thecommented on the potential for tests and the national measurement of progress and attainmentcurrent accountability system to distort and is tied closely to accountability, this raises thecorrupt the curriculum and the diagnosis of stakes in terms of the elements which will bepupil ability and progress. By their very nature, tested. This in turn can result in other elements oftests sample a relatively small proportion of ability being seen as less important, leading to anthe curriculum. Indeed, the tests for National overall misdiagnosis of the pupil’s actual ability.Curriculum English, for example, completely omit This can mislead pupils and their parents. Theresuch essential elements of the subject as speaking is a concern that only that which can be tested isand listening. Therefore, when tests play such a valued and this is having a negative and restrictivecentral role in the accountability system, it is hardly impact on what is taught.surprising that this has, in some ways, narrowed

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 17Whilst there was undoubted concern about detail being published when there had been timethe current accountability system and its effect to develop and embed robust assessment andon assessment, the Commission was clear that reporting systems.there was a willingness from the professionto be held accountable. In fact, there was 10. Ofsted should articulate clearly how inspectorsconsiderable support for a more effective form will take account of assessment practice inof accountability, one that went beyond the making judgements and ensure both guidancesimplistic and potentially damaging snapshot and, and training for inspectors is consistent with this.instead, looked to get a more rounded pictureand, in so doing, recognised teachers as valued 11. The Ofsted school inspection frameworkprofessionals. The Commission believes that it is should explore whether schools have effectivenot unreasonable to hold schools accountable for assessment systems in place and consider howthe quality of their assessment practice as well as effectively schools are using pupil assessmenttheir assessment results, with head teachers also information and data to improve learning inappraising teachers on their use of assessment. the classroom and at key points of transition between key stages and schools.There was strong concern expressed about therequirement for schools to publish their detailed 12. The Department for Education should make acurriculum and assessment framework in September clear and unambiguous statement on the teacher2014. A significant number of those submitting assessment data that schools will be required toevidence stressed the importance of Ofsted making report to parents and submit to the Departmentabsolutely clear to schools what they expect of for Education. Local authorities and otherschools’ assessment processes. There also needs to employers should provide similar clarity aboutbe absolute clarity from the DfE about expectations requirements in their area of accountability.of teacher assessment and moderation and whatdata schools will be required to submit. When these 13. The education system is entering a periodelements are in place, schools would then need of significant change in curriculum andtime to develop their own assessment and reporting assessment, where schools will be creating,systems. It would therefore be helpful if, rather than testing and revising their policies andasking schools to publish a detailed assessment procedures. The government should makeframework for September 2014, they were asked to clear how they will take this into considerationpublish their principles of assessment, with further when reviewing the way they hold schools accountable during 2014/15. Conclusions about trends in performance may not be robust.Teacher training and practice and an ongoing programme of CPD. Some also commented that it could be usefulEvidence heard by the Commission was consistent for the teaching standards to reflect furtherin the view that, in terms of assessment, teacher assessment knowledge, skills and understanding.training was not of a sufficiently high or rigorousstandard. This applied across the board, from initial Although the awareness of newly qualified teachersteacher training through to on-going professional in relation to accountability measures appears todevelopment. With any change to the system, there have increased, the same cannot be said for theirneeds to be sufficient support and development awareness of assessment practice. In part, this is duefor teachers to allow them to adjust and adapt to some deficiencies in initial teacher training, asto the change. All teachers are not automatically well as the inability or unwillingness of schools to beequipped to assess, even though there is an flexible in their approaches when working with traineeapparent assumption that this is the case. They teachers. The latter was highlighted as one way inneed practical training in assessment methodology

18 NAHTwhich early development of experience and expertise continual strengthening of practice within thein newly qualified teachers was being stifled. school system.For more experienced teachers, a comprehensive 15. The Universities Council for the Educationprogramme of CPD is required to improve the of Teachers (UCET) should build provisionoverall quality, thereby providing greater validity and in initial teacher training for delivery of theincreased public confidence. A national standard essential assessment knowledge.in assessment practice for teachers would be auseful addition. The Commission also favoured the 16. All those responsible for children’s learningapproach of having a lead assessor to work with should undertake rigorous training in formative,each school or possibly a group of schools, helping diagnostic and summative assessment, whichto embed good practice across the profession. covers how assessment can be used to support teaching and learning for all pupils, including14. Further work should be undertaken to improve those with special educational needs. The training for assessment within ITT, the NQT government should provide support and induction year and on-going professional resources for accredited training for school development. This will help to build assessment leads and schools should make assessment capacity and support a process of assessment training a priority.The use of information technology (IT)The Commission heard evidence about the Additional uses of technology include using thedesirability of improving the use of technology in internet to facilitate professional dialogue andassessment and the communication of assessment extending professional communities beyond theoutcomes. For example, GL Assessment and IAPS traditional and sometimes limited local networks.both highlighted the benefits of adaptive, online The panel heard from Streetly School how it istesting in producing more granulated outcomes developing links with its feeder schools throughthan traditional testing. The development of anonymous sharing of pupils’ work as part of ae-profiles brings with it the potential for parental moderation process.access at any time and also ease of parental inputand support. A particular strength of IT is that it 17. A number of pilot studies should becan be used to track progress as well as collect undertaken to look at the use of IT to supportand report data and other assessment information. and broaden understanding and application of assessment practice.Going forward Short termThe Commission set itself two broad aims: Given the immediacy of the issues, with schoolsthe first was to consider how schools could facing the removal of levels and level descriptorsbe helped in the short term and to make such from September 2014, the Commission’srecommendations as would be possible for schools recommendations are of necessity interim into implement within the timescale of September character. However, it was recognised that in no2014. The second aim was to consider in more way should these disagree with the principlesdetail what would be necessary in assessment outlined in the report, as these should form theterms going forward.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 19basis of future developments. It is also important 20. Schools should be asked to publish theirthat the short term recommendations are principles of assessment from Septemberpracticable and accessible to the profession. 2014, rather than being required to publish a detailed assessment framework, whichIt is likely that, in September, schools will need instead should be published by 2016. Theto base their practice on the skills and methods development of the full framework should becurrently in place to satisfy the need for good outlined in the school development plan withdiagnosis of learning needs and appropriate appropriate milestones that allow the schoolteaching response. However, it is important to sufficient time to develop an effective model.recognise that, even if schools decide to continuewith some form of levels, the new National Medium termCurriculum does not align to the existing levels andlevel descriptors and this alignment is a piece of Much of the evidence given to the Commissionwork that needs to be undertaken now. highlighted the interest and concern that exists amongst the education profession in improvingThe Commission is concerned that, currently, the assessment process as a whole. There is clearlythere is a requirement for schools to publish their a need and, importantly, a desire to engage indetailed curriculum and assessment frameworks a much broader examination of the nature ofby September 2014. This seems unduly hasty and assessment and the varying forms and outcomesdoes not give schools sufficient time to develop which it can have.fully their assessment systems. Rather than expecta fully fledged, deeply embedded assessment To build on this willingness to engage, thesystem in all schools, it would be more sensible to Commission believes strongly that furtherask schools to publish their assessment principles study should be made of the whole system ofin September 2014. It would then be possible to assessment. Rather than the disjointed picturebuild in a plan to develop a detailed assessment currently in place, there is a need for a logical,framework, with the full system being in place and mutually, compatible assessment process thatpublished by no later than September 2016. covers the whole of a child’s education through whatever educational setting he/she attends.18. The use of suitably modified National Curriculum levels as an interim measure in 21. A system wide review of assessment should 2014 should be supported by the government. be undertaken. This would help to repair the However, schools should be clear that any disjointed nature of assessment through all use of National Curriculum levels in relation ages, 2-19. to the new curriculum can only be considered a temporary arrangement to enable schools to develop, implement and embed a robust framework for assessment. In doing so, schools need to be conscious that the new curriculum is not in alignment with the old National Curriculum levels.19. To assist schools in developing a robust framework for assessment, we call upon the NAHT to take the lead in expanding the principles and design checklist contained in this report into a full model assessment policy and procedures, backed by appropriate professional development.

20 NAHTAnnexesEvidence submitted to the CommissionAchievement for All Independent Association of Shaftesbury High School Preparatory SchoolsAssessment Reform Group Professor John White, Institute of Southampton Localand British Educational Education AuthorityResearch Association and Teaching AllianceAssociation of School and Liz Twist, National Foundation The Streetly SchoolCollege Leaders for Educational ResearchAssociation of Teachers Mayflower Primary School Tim Oates, Cambridgeand Lecturers AssessmentCorporation Road National Children’s Bureau and Universities’ Council forPrimary School Council for Disabled Children the Education of TeachersDr Des Hewitt, Oxford University Press VoiceUniversity of DerbyGeographical Association Pearson The Wroxham SchoolGL Assessment Professor Peter Tymms, Durham UniversityGoddard Park CommunityPrimary School Ridgewell Primary SchoolCase studiesAlison Peacock DBE, Headteacher, Life without levels leaves space for the highest quality curriculum, opportunities to tailor learningThe Wroxham School to the needs of the individual and an environment of excitement and ambition. Children at WroxhamAt The Wroxham School, a primary school with do not rank their performance against their peersnursery in Hertfordshire, we have not talked to but work happily with a wide range of learningchildren and parents about ‘levels’ for the last ten partners in each class. They are encouraged toyears. Within that time the school has achieved challenge themselves and to make good choicesthree consecutive Ofsted ‘outstanding’ judgements about the complexity and difficulty of a range ofand attainment has remained high. The secret of tasks. They are not given targets or grades butour success has been to create a ‘listening’ culture there is a strong focus on formative feedback. Therewhere children and adults know that they are are no ability based groups and children are offeredtrusted and valued. Dialogue about how to support choice about joining additional sessions if they feeleach child and their family has remained the central they could benefit. For example, challenging mathsdiscourse. Within an environment where everyone lessons are offered by a member of staff severalbelieves in the importance of learning, tests and times a week for the older children. If they feel thatgrades take care of themselves. they can thrive in a fast-paced lesson children have

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 21the option of joining the group. The emphasis is for children to impress their families with theiron self knowledge and self regulation that offers knowledge and understanding. As a teaching school,constant opportunity for improvement. Wroxham welcomes many visitors. Our children are very proud, informed guides and are keen to explainFamilies are very well informed about their children’s about our system of choices in lessons. If you areachievements and progress as this is evidenced interested in hearing the children talk about this wayin the manner in which each child can talk about of working without levels please visit www.wroxham.his learning and next steps for improvement. net to see films and blogs about day to day learning.The quality of work produced provides excellentopportunities for children and families to witness As a head teacher, it is my belief that ourevidence of progression and increasing skill. experience of rejecting numbers as a proxy forThis learning is not confined to written work ability has enabled us to focus on the reallyand calculation, but is also evidenced through important work of finding a way through for everyareas such as sports achievement, musicality and single child to learn. We have kept data trackingscientific problem solving. End-of-year reports are sheets as a management resource purely as awritten by the children from year one to year six means of ensuring that no child slips through theand form an electronic dialogue with the teaching net (and to provide a record for Ofsted when theyteam. Photographs illustrating the breadth of the inspect). The crucial difference at Wroxham is thatcurriculum are uploaded to these documents by the the learning comes first and assessment is usedchildren. The youngest children are supported in to inform the process but not to provide a labelthe composition of their report comments by older or measure. The outcomes at our school speak forchildren working with them in pairs. themselves and we are optimistic that others may be interested to join us on this journey now thatLearning Review Days and Family Consultations within England we have a unique opportunity toprovide families with an opportunity twice a year assess beyond levels. Let’s take the opportunityto review progress in a detailed manner. In years we have been given to change the emphasis in5 and 6 these meetings are held in my office. As schools to one of ‘I can’t do it …yet’ rather than ‘Iheadteacher, I attend every meeting for every year can’t do it because I’m only level three’.5 and year 6 child. The meetings are led by the childwho prepares a powerpoint presentation for their Kerry Sternstein, Deputy Headteacher,family and teachers providing feedback about theircurrent challenges and successes. Conversation The Shaftesbury Schoolthen ensues with the child at the centre, uponhow the adults can support next steps in learning. Shaftesbury High School is a special needs highThis is a highly rigorous process, as it means that school in Harrow catering for young people agesall participants are committed to supporting the 11-18 with complex learning, social, emotional andhighest possible ambition for that child’s success. behavioural needs. Young people whose abilities range from SLD to mainstream (GCSE). We areIn the summer term we organise a whole school open a specialist school for pastoral care, a nationallearning event where families arrive to take part in a support school and have been consistentlywide range of activities in classrooms throughout the outstanding in the last two Ofsted inspections.school and in the grounds. We provide a simple A5passport for children so that they can collect stamps We believe that assessment and learning are partin each room where they take part in learning with of the same continuous process, underpinned intheir family during the evening. Feedback from these an atmosphere of mentoring and support. Thesessions is very positive. process is designed so assessment and learning inform each other throughout the year on a daily,Families are invited into school on a regular basis. weekly and termly basis.This enables shared understanding of the waysin which we teach and provides opportunities Pupils’ achievement and progress is monitored by continuous setting and reviewing of targets –

22 NAHTtargets not determined to level or judge, but parent-carers. Many of our parent-carers haveto guide and reinforce. Pupils set their own significant needs of their own, and we want all thetargets for learning and development with their information that we share to be part of a proactive,form tutors at the start of every term. These mutually nurturing dialogue. Staff have workedare reviewed formally in the same way towards long and hard to defuse the anxieties around datathe end of the term and informally at the end and assessment, to ensure they are part of a trulyof each week with the teaching assistant. The inclusive package.meetings with the form tutor are held in privateand 1:1, something pupils and staff alike find a In the upper school and the 6th form, the pupilsvery positive experience. Pupils and staff together have visual annual reviews. The pupil is at thedecide whether they have met the target (green), centre of this, directing what is being recorded,are still working on the targets (amber) or have under a number of headings such as: home,not met it (red), perhaps suggesting changes are school, college, my friends, important people, nextrequired. If a target has been met or is no longer steps. Drawings or symbols are used to illustrateappropriate, it can be changed at any time. the students’ comments and they sign it to assure ownership. These annual reviews have beenAll targets at Shaftesbury can be modified, greeted with great positivity both from studentsextended or revisited. The targets are SMARTER, and parent/carers who feel they can understandpositive and meaningful. They may be academic what is being said and what is being discussed andor behavioural or a mix, either way they can be that the young person is really part of it.applied across the curriculum. Academic targetsare based on descriptors and ‘I can’ statements, The 6th form students also collect evidence ofnot on NC levels, although they are relevant to work and experiences throughout their two yearthem. Staff also set subject targets (ILOs) with course. This is often shared during annual reviewsand for pupils. These are continuously reviewed but is also stored on pen-drives and presentedthroughout the year and used in every subject area. when they leave. This provides an excellent, detailedSome are taken from attainment level statements, and accurate record of attainment in a visual andsome may refer to a specific skill needed for creative format for them to take to college or theaccreditation. All are designed to recognise areas next stages of their education and development.of progress, address areas of concern and offer There are also plans to produce hardback formatthe next steps on each student’s learning path. versions for each student, and a ‘greatest hits’These are also discussed during the three parent/ legacy version which all can contribute to with theteacher consultation evenings held across the year aim of inspiring their successors.and at annual reviews. This process is rigorousand consistent to ensure all stakeholders share in All reports are written in advance of annualdecisions about pupils next steps. reviews. The reports aim to acknowledge pupils’ strengths, development and progress, discussAnnual review meetings are a compulsory their ILOs and comment on attainment. Theserequirement for all statemented pupils. This is are shared with pupils who complete their ownwhy pupils are at the centre of our annual reviews. self assessment. The reports are designed to beThey bring examples of work from their record accessible, therefore they are short, precise andof achievement, on paper and in a digital format. concise. They will also inform each pupil’s transfer,They also choose their favourite photographs and transition and accreditation.talk about the occasions when these were taken.They complete self assessments, choosing from a Accreditation comes through functional skills,range of options, smiley faces, written text, multiple entry level, AQA units of attainment, Asdanchoice questions and verbal feedback. These feed awards, Duke of Edinburgh awards, B.tech andinto an annual review front cover summary sheet, GCSE. Pupils are entered for this accreditationdesigned to be accessible for the student and their and encouraged and supported to achieve at a level appropriate to them. There are no predicted

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 23exam grades or league tables to present, but our parents what their child could or could not do,we still closely monitor each pupil’s progress up let alone their next steps in learning. I think this isand across the learning ladder. This is further very much our ‘can do’ approach. We relished thesupport by an enrichment grid map, which allows challenges but knew there would be barriers tous to monitor their individual and collective have to overcome; mainly a mind shift for the staffopportunities in sport, the arts, community access of moving away from levels.and residential visits. Our starting point for assessment was theWe have further data tracking records to monitor National Curriculum. Using the first draft of theand support progress, but there are no level new curriculum in 2012, we broke down thediscussions with pupils. The records provide expectations for pupils in English and maths intoevidence for Ofsted and ensure learning pathways statements. Teachers planned to these statementsare open, rigorously monitored and accessible. Staff and recorded achievement against each statementare still diligent with their data assessments: they once it had been achieved. Teachers said thisrefer not just to levels, but also the ‘small steps’ made their planning much easier and they knewdescriptors gained within and above the levels exactly what each child had to do to achieve thefor each subject and student; end of key stage statements. Therefore a very strong link betweenpredictions are also made and regularly reviewed. planning and assessment was established.But the data is never used as a label or measure. Teachers found planning much easier and less time consuming and it also enabled us to strengthen ourAs a special school we believe that achievements personalised approach to learning for our pupils.come through community cohesion, life skills, The teachers simply recorded a tick against eachprogression paths, student voice and collaborative statement once it had been achieved. The beautyworking. We are very proud of our pupils’ of this system was that it showed progression fromachievement, and so are they; they have a ‘can Reception. For example, there were 13 statementsdo’ attitude, recognising that achievement can in English for Reception. Year 1 statements beganbe both individual and collective. It is built on a with point 14; so if a Reception child had achieveddetermination to learn despite often indescribable 16 statements in writing it was easy to see he/shebarriers. It is sustained by us all. was working to Year 1 expectations. The results were recorded on a simple spreadsheet and RAGReena Keeble DBE (red, amber, green) rated. As a staff we developedCannon Lane Primary School our own expectations of where we expected children to be at particular time of the year.Cannon Lane Primary is a large school in Harrow, This was subjective and based on our own highLondon. It serves a diverse community, with two expectations (which some said were too high).thirds of students coming from minority ethnicbackgrounds. It was rated as ‘outstanding’ at its Making the basic judgements of attainment waslast Ofsted inspection and its head teacher is therefore easy because the statements we drew upDr Reena Keeble DBE. The school has recently were SMART; everyone had a shared understandingamalgamated from separate junior and infant of them and what the evidence would look like.schools into an all through primary. In addition, staff moderated and sampled work to ensure statements were being assessed in aAt Cannon Lane, we had regarded levels as fairly consistent way. Data in the first year was recordedmeaningless for some time. It had been obvious on a spreadsheet, but we now use a softwareto us that a 2A in one school was not the same in package which we have helped to build withanother school, so we welcomed the opportunity Classroom Monitor.to develop something that reflected ourpersonalised learning approach. More importantly We can also use this approach to track specificwe wanted to find a way of reporting that made groups of pupils. We do use numerical data insense to our parents. Reporting a level did not tell working at expected/exceeding/below levels.

24 NAHTHowever we have encountered two problems. addition to this parents are given a termly reportFirstly, expectations for Years 3 and 4 and Years on what their child has achieved and how they are5 and 6 are grouped together in the national developing in English and maths. These reportscurriculum, making it difficult to show progression are generated by our software system. (We arefrom Year 3 to Year 4 or from Year 5 to Year 6. currently developing a tool for parents to be able toSecondly, our system was designed to show access their child’s report using a secure passwordprogress at the end of Year 4 and Year 6 in terms rather than getting a hard copy.) We also send allof the percentage that exceeded or were below or the children’s books home before the structuredworking at the expectations for that particular year. conversation so that parents have triangulatedThis is not robust enough and we need something evidence of their child’s progress – the books, themuch finer. We are currently working towards a meeting and the written report. Parents no longersolution and should have this sorted by the end of get a long school report at the end of the year andFebruary/early March. we have done away with parents’ evenings because all structured conversations take place during theA key role for assessment is to keep parents school day. Interestingly our parents prefer this andinformed. We are an ‘achievement for all’ school say that, as long as they have enough notice, theyand use their system of structured conversations do not mind taking time off work.for all our parents each term. This means everyparent gets to spend 20-25 minutes with their Thinking ahead to implementation of the newchild’s teacher (with the child being present if the approach to assessment, I think schools willparent chooses) to discuss progress and next steps. probably use an assessment tool from possibleEnglish and maths are discussed every term, as is case studies and make it their own. The challengethe child’s social and emotional development and will come in ensuring the assessment proceduresdispositions and attitudes. Targets for the school are robust enough. Implementing the tool isand home to work on are agreed and a summary almost the easy part of assessment; it is the schoolof the meeting is given to each parent. In the procedures that need to be thought of. So, inspring term, teachers also discuss progress in half conclusion, schools need to think not just aboutof the foundation subjects and the remainder of the specific tool they are using, but also theirthe subjects are discussed in the summer term. In assessment processes, skills, systems and culture.History and context of assessmentA brief history of national curriculum assessment Task Group on Assessment and Testing (TGAT)and reporting report as it made a significant contribution to the structure of the ERA and introduced the notion ofThe current system of National Curriculum tests and teacher assessment, National Curriculumassessment was effectively the outcome of a debate levels and key stages, formative and summativeset in motion in 1976 by the then prime minister assessment approaches and the use of tests toJames Callaghan in a speech at Ruskin College evaluate performance.which created the notion of an entitlement to aNational Curriculum and accountability for schools. Kenneth Baker, the Secretary of State at the time, selected elements of the report favouringHowever, it was not until the Education Reform externally set tests and tasks in preference to theAct (ERA, 1988) that a National Curriculum and an more formative function of assessment.associated assessment regime were introduced inEngland for the first time. Even in a brief history, The National Curriculum Council (NCC) and theit is worth mentioning the National Curriculum Schools Examination and Assessment Council

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 25(SEAC)1, both established under the 1998 Act, A further contributing factor to the teachers’commissioned existing research and publishing dissatisfaction with assessment arrangementsorganisations associated with universities to was the government’s decision to introducedevelop and trial a number of new assessment performance tables. The first secondary school2approaches. These were developed and phased in performance tables were published by theover a number of years, starting with Key Stage department for education (DfE)3 in 1992 covering1 then Key Stage 2 and finally Key Stage 3. With GCSE data and average point scores for 17-yearregards to Key Stage 4, GCSE syllabuses were olds entered for at least one GCE A/AS examination.developed to reflect the statutory requirements of The first primary school4 performance tables werethe National Curriculum. published in 1996, showing the percentage of pupils eligible for Key Stage 2 assessment achieving levelThe initial tests and tasks were regarded by some 4 in tests and teacher assessment in each of theas innovative and involved an element of practical three core subject, plus contextual data on pupilwork. All were marked by teachers. Some were numbers and pupils with SEN. In 1997, publicationbetter received than others, but ultimately all were of the primary tables was delegated to Localmet with a great deal of suspicion on the part of Education Authorities (LEAs) and by 1999, teacherschools, particularly because of the workload. assessment data had been dropped from the tables.However, opposition to the tests had grown to However, teacher assessment data continued tosuch an extent that by the time Key Stage 3 went be collected by the DfE but were not publishedlive in 1993 it led to a national boycott of the tests. until 2010 when new teacher assessment indicators showing the percentage of pupils on Level 4+ inThe initial level descriptions covered ten levels English, maths and science were included.and were more complex than those used in 2013.Levels were presented under attainment targets These changes in data collection and publicationeach being assessed and weighted separately. illustrate the way the content of performance dataAs an example, the first National Curriculum has differed year-on-year.for science had 17 attainment targets with 14 inmathematics. These attainment targets were split Most of the changes have reflected policyinto statements of attainment and each statement decisions, but there have been other reasons forof attainment was weighted separately. In addition changing requirements. For example results wereto the weightings, some statements of attainment impacted by the outbreak of foot and mouthwere necessary to achieve a level, others were not. disease in 2001 and in 2002 post-16 data wereThe final level awarded to a pupil was therefore delayed because of the Tomlinson enquiry in toreliant on a complex procedure often resulting in a GCSE A level results. In 2004, publication of Keylevel that some teachers felt was not an adequate Stage 3 English data was delayed until March 2005reflection of pupil performance. because of a ‘data collection disaster’. Problems re-occurred in 2005 when Key Stage 3 tables were1 The NCC and SEAC were abolished in 1993 and replaced by the again published late in March (2006) because of School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (SCAA). In 1997, ‘continued difficulties arising from late English SCAA and the National Council for Vocational Qualifications marking and reviews’. Indeed, this was repeated in (NCVQ) were abolished and replaced by the Qualifications and 2006 when tables were published in March 2007. Curriculum Authority (QCA). In 2004, the QCA transferred all In 2008 Key Stage 2 test data were delayed until national curriculum assessment responsibilities to the National April 2009 because of the Educational Testing Assessment Agency (NAA). In 2008, the NAA was closed follow- ing test delivery failures and all national curriculum assessment 2 All maintained mainstream and special schools were included. responsibilities were brought back into QCA. In 2007 Ofqual was Independent schools were included on a voluntary basis. formed taking on the regulation of examinations and qualifica- tions previously the responsibility of QCA. QCA was reconfigured 3 The current Department for Education has held differing titles and became the Qualifications Curriculum and Development over the period of this history. For ease, the term DfE has been Agency (QCDA). QCA was formally dissolved in 2010 when used throughout. QCDA and Ofqual gained statutory status. In 2011, QCDA was officially closed and all national curriculum assessment functions 4 Primary tables covered all maintained mainstream schools with were transferred to the Standards and Testing Agency, a part of KS2 pupils on roll (no special or independent schools). the Department for Education.

26 NAHTService’s (ETS) failure in administration of the isolation and without reference to other subjects.marking and as Key Stage 3 tests were to be This resulted in duplication, over-subscriptionwithdrawn from 2009, the 2008 results were not and complexity. This prompted ad-hoc reviews ofpublished. In 2010, results for around 26 per cent subjects to reduce content; for example in 1993,schools that boycotted the tests were missing from the NCC had recommended revisions to Englishthe tables, the same year as science tests ceased reducing the attainment targets from five to threeto be used with all pupils and instead were used and for design and technology from four to two.in a representative sample of schools to monitornational standards. In April 1993 John Patten, the then Secretary of State for Education, initiated a review of theOther changes have had less obvious reasons. In National Curriculum and assessment framework.2002 Key Stage 3 results were published for all The grounds for the review were that theschools including independent schools. In 2003, curriculum and assessment arrangements wereKey Stage 3 results for independent schools were not effectively integrated, that the curriculumdiscontinued and the tables were once again had become over-extended and the assessmentpublished by the DfE. And in 2004 the tables were arrangements unduly complex. The NCC andrenamed as achievement and attainment tables. SEAC were replaced by SCAA in October of that year under the chairmanship of Sir Ron DearingIn 2011, the numbers of pupils gaining 5+ GCSE who was charged to lead the review of a systemA* to C grades including English and maths were he described as unjustifiably complex. Extensivepublished for secondary schools and contextual consultations took place resulting in a reduction invalue added (CVA) was abolished with value curriculum content, fewer attainment targets andadded (VA) being re-introduced for Key Stage 1 statements of attainment. Sir Ron recommendedand 2 mathematics and English. that in future, National Curriculum orders should be revised together rather than sequentially. ChangesMore recent changes to the performance tables were also made to the tests and administrationhave resulted from the independent review of Key of the assessments. Tests were only maintainedStage 2 testing, assessment and accountability in English, mathematics and science with teacher(Lord Bew, 2011): these are noted below. Full details assessments, at least in theory, given equalof the achievement and attainment data and weighting. The ten level scale was reduced to eight.annual data specifications can now be found underthe performance tables section on the DfE website. In the same year, it was announced that Key Stage 3 tests would be externally marked. In theA number of significant events and reports following year, external marking was introducedhave also shaped the way National Curriculum across key stages two and three and nationalassessments have changed and developed. Even data collection was introduced. In 1996 the DfEfrom the earliest days of the National Curriculum, published the first primary performance tables aschanges to the programmes of study and noted above.assessment requirements have been made. Fromthe word go, the statutory orders that laid out the The following few years saw further consultationsubject content of the National Curriculum proved and year on year minor changes: the boycotting ofcontentious with all subjects attracting criticism tests faded away.from the teaching profession. With the exceptionof physical education, subjects were presented in In 1997 the newly elected Labour governmenta consistent manner organised through key stages, introduced the national literacy strategy and theattainment targets, statements of attainment and national numeracy strategy the following year.programmes of study. The initial view was that To the Strategies the tests were a data source tothe National Curriculum should occupy no more measure their progress on which they establishedthan 70-80 per cent of school time. However, the a system of pupil, teacher, school, local authorityorders had been put together by subject experts in and national targets. To the government, the

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 27targets were seen as a device to drive up and teacher assessment would be run in 2004. Inmeasure standards. David Blunkett, the then 2005, Key Stage 1 moved to teacher assessmentSecretary of State for Education staked his as the prime indicator of achievement. Further, theposition on the impact of National Strategies by national target of 85 per cent of 11-year old pupilspromising to resign if the target of 80 per cent of achieving at least level 4 was relaxed to be met ‘aspupils achieving a level 4 or higher in English by soon as possible’. Interestingly in Wales, Key Stage2002 was not met. Given that in 1997 the number 1 tests were abolished in 2001.achieving this level was 63 percent, this broughteven more pressure on what was already a high In 2004, the NAA introduced component markingstakes environment. for Key Stage 3 English where reading and writing were assessed by different markers as a means of1998 saw the first of three major national failures in reducing the burden on markers and improvingthe marking and publication of results system. marking quality. The reading and writing test scripts were then re-united for borderlining, a qualityThis failure attracted allegations in the Daily check for scripts adjacent to performance levelTelegraph that the Secretary of State had boundaries. However, the new system slowed downmanipulated the level boundaries to achieve higher the marking process and resulted in delays to theperformance against his targets. delivery of results to schools. Mike Beasley, a QCA board member, undertook a review of the deliveryThis led to the Rose Report Weighing the Baby in failure which repeated some of the findings of the1999. David Blunkett and QCA were exonerated 1998 failures. However, whilst the report found notogether with a recommended moratorium on reason to doubt the test, quality of marking orchanges to the tests and a review of the purposes the final results, it criticised the delivery systemof assessment. In common with later failures, as being badly flawed characterised by poorconcerns were raised about inadequate project leadership and inadequate project management.management, not acting on concerns expressed Changes were made to the management systemsby staff, untrained staff and poor communication for 2005, but concerns over marking quality hadbetween QCA and the department for education. heightened. To allay fears, the NAA establishedOf interest, the major delivery failures have usually marking centres, but this in turn delayed Key Stagefollowed the appointment of new contractors and/ 3 results again in 2005 and 2006.or changes to the system to meet ever increasingdata requirements. Despite this, the DfE was Faced with continuing problems with its targets,reluctant to introduce on-screen marking which the government launched the Making Goodwas seen by QCA as a means to improve marking Progress consultation in 2006. The consultationquality and shorten processing time. explored a system whereby schools could focus more systematically on assessing the progressIn 2003, the National Assessment Agency was of pupils supported by a system of more flexiblyformed as a means of separating the delivery and timed statutory tests. In 2007 the NAA wasregulatory functions of QCA. Further changes to commissioned to develop and pilot single levelthe tests and mark schemes following the Rose tests: one-level, summative, reportable measuresReport and the subsequent review of assessment of pupil performance that could be administeredwere also implemented. when teachers considered pupils were ready to take the test. In the same year the Chief ExecutiveEvidence was beginning to emerge that the of QCA, Ken Boston criticised practice testing ingovernment had not achieved its targets for schools, saying “The key to driving up performanceprimary schools as set by the strategies. In 2003 at key stages 2 and 3 is better teaching based onthe Secretary of State, Charles Clarke, announced diagnostic assessment and personalised learning,that in response to concerns raised by the not more practice drill in taking tests.” However, theprofession about excessive pressure caused by top single level test system was never implemented.down targets, the primary targets would go anda pilot of tests and tasks at Key Stage 1 informing

28 NAHTAround the same period, the QCA was developing essential purposes of assessment and how theythe Assessing Pupils’ Progress (APP) initiative could be best met. The Group reported in 2009with its focus on supporting teacher assessment. with a range of recommendations including crossAPP materials were available to schools along with key stage moderation, strengthening the qualityoptional tests provided by QC(D)A which were of teacher assessment and national sample testsdesigned to help teachers identify pupils’ strengths at Key Stage 3 to monitor standards over time.and weaknesses and guidance materials such as However, other than the development of samplethe Understanding Progress series. These materials tests, the recommendations were overtaken by theprovided a greater focus on assessment as a tool arrival of a new coalition government in 2010.to support teaching and learning. However, testscontinued to dominate the agenda. It was not long before Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Education, announced the Review intoIn 2008, the test system saw its most dramatic Key Stage 2 testing, assessment and accountabilitydelivery failure. The contract for the delivery and chaired by Lord Paul Bew. The review reportedmarking of tests had been awarded to ETS a USA in July 2011 with a range of recommendations.based assessment company a year earlier giving The report supported external school-levelthem one year to prepare their systems. In the light accountability and a focus on progression butof ETS’ failure to deliver test results to schedule, recommended greater emphasis on teacherthe Qualifications and Examinations Regulator assessment within statutory assessment. With(Ofqual) and Ed Balls, the then Secretary of regards to the latter, the review recommendedState for Education, remitted Lord Sutherland that English reading tests should continue to beof Houndwood to lead an independent inquiry. externally marked but that writing compositionBy the time the inquiry reported in late 2008, Ed should be subject only to summative teacherBalls had announced the end of Key Stage 3 tests assessment with spelling, punctuation grammar andfor 2009 and single level tests. Lord Sutherland’s vocabulary assessed through an externally markedreport recommended that test delivery should be test. Cluster moderation by schools was encouragedmodernised, with any new processes piloted and as was the wider use of Key Stage 2 pupil-level datathat customer service to schools should be vastly by secondary schools , but this was not grantedimproved. In particular, the report was highly the weight of a recommendation. Mathematics ascritical of the due diligence process during the an externally marked test and the continued use ofprocurement exercise and the ambiguous role of national sampling of science were recommended.the NAA within QCA’s corporate structure. The The report was accepted by the governmentreport also called for more clarity of Ofqual’s and affectively underpins the current Nationalrole and a strengthening of its resources and Curriculum assessment system for Key Stage 2.skills to monitor QCA more thoroughly. Therecommendations of the inquiry were accepted The Secretary of State also announced the closureby the Secretary of State and Ofqual and fully of QCDA and a review of the National Curriculumimplemented by QCA. The NAA was discontinued by an expert panel. The National Curriculumand the management of the tests was located fully Review Expert Panel reported in 2011 and as awithin QCA. The Chief Executive of QCA resigned. part of their deliberations they expressed a viewFrom 2009, the test delivery and marking process that programmes of study and attainment targetshas seen considerable change with year-on-year have often lacked precision even after successiveimprovements to the service. reviews of the content of the National Curriculum. This led the Panel to conclude that attainmentNevertheless, concerns over the more fundamental targets and level descriptions should not beaspects of testing continued. In 2008, as part retained in the revised National Curriculum. In Juneof the announcement to discontinue testing at 2013, the Secretary of State announced that levelsKey Stage 3, the Secretary of State established had become too abstract, detracted from realthe expert group on assessment with a remit feedback to pupils and parents and that schoolscovering Key Stages 1, 2 and 3 and a focus on the have found difficulty in applying them consistently.

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 29So from 2014, levels would be removed from more demanding tests, a baseline test at the end ofNational Curriculum assessments. New tests based Key Stage 1 or at the start of reception, test resultson the new National Curriculum will be taken by reported using a scaled score, comparison of pupilspupils for the first time in the summer of 2016. against the national cohort by decile and threshold attainment measures at a much higher level.The announcement was accompanied by the launchof a consultation on Primary assessment and The outcome of the consultation is expected inaccountability under the new National Curriculum. February 2014.The consultation proposed amongst other things:A brief history of GCE and GCSE pupils leaving school with no nationally recognised qualification. As for GCE A levels, they were evenThe General Certificate of Secondary Education more exclusive aimed at a proportion of those taking(GCSE) was introduced for first teaching in 1986 the ordinary level. As such it became known as theand first examination in 1988. The GCSE was a gold standard and has since its inception acted assingle system of examinations designed to replace the key entry qualification for universities.the dual system of the General Certificate ofEducation (GCE) Ordinary level and the Certificate It was not until the 1960s that the CSE came intoof Secondary Education (CSE). The GCSE was being. The Schools Council was established in 1964available through six examination boards in to replace the Secondary Schools ExaminationsEngland, Northern Ireland and Wales. Council with a remit to oversee the developing examination system. The CSE was introduced inThe GCE was established in 1951 and was available 1965 and was available in three formats: Mode 1at ordinary, advanced and scholarship levels. Before where syllabuses and examinations were set and1951, the national school examination system offered marked by an examination board; Mode 2 wherethe School and Higher School Certificate under the schools set their own syllabus but examinationscontrol of the Board of Education. Both certificates were set and marked by a board; and Mode 3recognised attainment in defined groups of subjects where schools set the syllabus and examinationwith the School Certificate aimed at 16-year olds and marked their own examinations subject toand Higher Certificate for 18-year olds. Entries for approval and moderation by a board. The CSE wasthe examinations were small compared with current delivered by fourteen regional examination bodiesday standards. As early as 1943 the Norwood and were targeted at the 40 per cent of pupilsreport had proposed a new system of single subject below the 20 per cent GCE ordinary level target.awards with an emphasis on teacher rather than These fourteen bodies were in addition to the eightexam board assessment particularly at the School GCE boards.Certificate level. This proposal was not accepted butfollowing the 1944 Education Act which raised the The GCE ordinary level was graded A to E with gradeschool leaving age to 15 and established a system of A being the highest. The CSE was graded on a fivegrammar, technical and secondary modern schools, point scale, 1 to 5, with grade 1 being the highestthe GCE was introduced with its single subject offer. and regarded as equivalent to a grade A to C at theHowever, the GCE was exclusively aimed at the top GCE ordinary level. Unlike most GCEs, the CSE had20 per cent of the population and as such became a an emphasis on the assessment of work undertakenpredominantly grammar school qualification. Indeed during the course of study, rather than through a one-technical and secondary modern schools were off final examination. However, with the school leavingdiscouraged from large scale GCE entries which age being raised to 16, more children were entered forresulted in the creation of a proliferation of localisedleaving certificates resulting in the majority of

30 NAHTthe two examinations and questions of comparability an increase, but this was not accepted bygrew as did the confusion about the two grading Gillian Shepherd, the then Secretary of State forsystems by employers and the general public. As Education. Along with comparability of standardsearly as 1971, the Schools Council were looking at the over time, the place of coursework has attractedpossibility of combining the two qualifications which considerable debate throughout the lifespan ofresulted in a joint 16+ pilot courses up to 1974 which the GCSE. In 2006, the QCA raised concern overwere jointly developed by GCE and CSE boards. Most the fairness of coursework citing problems suchof these were discontinued at that point except for as parental support, cheating and plagiarism –those offered by the Northern Examining Association particularly referring to the internet as source. Towhich ran up to 1987. counter this, ministers announced in 2009 that controlled assessments would replace the moreFollowing a number of feasibility studies, open approach of coursework.debates and changes in government, the GCSEwas approved in 1984. Subject specific and Following a consultation between June andgeneral criteria were developed which the new September 2013, Ofqual announced in Novembersyllabuses were required to meet and in 1986, the that further modifications to the GCSE wouldfirst teaching began with the first examinations be introduced impacting qualifications for firstbeing held in the summer of 1988. The criteria teaching from September 2015. The key featuresrepresented agreed standards rather than a reliance include a new 1-9 grading scale (with 9 being top);on norm referencing, or pre-set quotas, which limitations on the use of tiered papers; an end towas a feature of qualifications up to that point. modular examinations – all GCSEs will be examinedOf equal significance, the 1988 Education Reform at the end of the course; examinations will be theAct introduced the Secondary Examinations and ‘default’ method of assessment unless there areAssessment Council which was granted statutory issues of validity; and all examinations will be held inpowers over assessment arrangements. This was the summer with the exception of English languageeffectively the start of a more centrally controlled and mathematics, where there will also be exams inand ultimately regulated examination system. November for students who were at least 16 on the preceding 31 August.Unlike the GCE ordinary level and the CSE, theGCSE was not specified for a particular ability At the time of writing, further announcements aregroup with the intention that around 90% of the expected from Ofqual covering decisions on non-school population should achieve the standard of exam assessment on a subject-by-subject basis‘average’ which at the time was grade F. Because of and whether November examinations should bethe wide ability range expected to take the GCSE, made available for 16-year-olds on the precedingexamination papers were designed in a new way. A 31 August in a wider range of subjects.key aim of the GCSE was that of allowing candidatesto demonstrate what they know, understand and It was also confirmed that from 2015, Englishcan do. In order to achieve this aim, differentiated, language will be un-tiered and fully assessed by anor ‘tiered’ questions papers were used. external examination. As now, speaking assessment will be reported separately. English literature will alsoAssessed coursework was a feature of the GCSE be un-tiered and assessed by an external examination.with the initial syllabuses having at least 20 per For mathematics, overlapping tiered papers will becent with some subjects going well above the used and assessed by an external examination.minimum. English syllabuses for example containedbetween 50 to 100 per cent coursework. However,this came under attack with the then prime ministerJohn Major calling for 20 per cent as the upper limitin 1992. As a result coursework was settled between20 and 40 per cent. This was challenged by SirRon Dearing in the mid-1990s who recommended

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 31Assessment practice: an international snapshotOne of the recurring themes in the evidence However, as all other types of assessment in Sweden,presented to the Commission has been that of the national tests are corrected and graded bytrust in teachers’ assessments. There are two main the students’ own teachers, and the weight of testreasons underpinning the concerns expressed: results in students’ grades is determined locally.1. the unintended consequences of a high stakes This raises concerns about inequities in grading. assessment system, for example the pressures In fact, teachers’ marking of the performance- exerted by the publication of performance based national tests has shown to be uneven. tables which have created a perverse incentive Possible explanations are that grading criteria are to inflate assessments; and not adequately detailed and that teachers vary in their capacity to score student achievement on2. concern over the level of assessment expertise performance-based tests. There is a lack of external in the teaching profession. reference points and moderation to ensure that student assessment in Sweden is reliable and fair.As a result, teacher assessment has been downplayedin the accountability system in England. The following Source: OECD REVIEWS OF EVALUATION ANDsections provide a snapshot of assessment practice in ASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION: SWEDENother countries. © OECD 2011The sections on Sweden, Australia, Norway, and The Australian approach combines the developmentNew Zealand are taken from the OECD Review of goals, monitoring and reporting at the national levelon Evaluation and Assessment Frameworks for with local evaluation and assessment practices shapedImproving School Outcomes. by jurisdiction-level school improvement frameworks.The Swedish approach combines national The current strategy for student assessment consistsstandard-setting and central test development of a combination of National Assessment Programwith a high degree of trust in school professionals Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) and teacher-basedto carry out evaluation and assessment. assessments against the full range of curriculum goals. The latter implies a considerable investment on teacherMany evaluation and assessment activities capacity to assess against the standards, includingincluding student assessment, teacher appraisal specific training for teachers, the development ofand school quality reporting are managed grading criteria and the strengthening of moderationinternally at the school level. This approach processes within and across schools. Also, the currentfosters and encourages school leader and teacher prominence of NAPLAN within the student assessmentprofessionalism in evaluation and assessment. framework requires particular care about not reducing the importance of teacher-based assessment.While a lot of quality assurance work happens locallyand informally, these practices are frequently not Teachers benefit from a high degree of trustdocumented and there is little evidence as to whether and extensive autonomy, but they have fewgood practice is spread and shared across the system. opportunities for professional feedback.There is a strong focus on classroom-based Source: OECD REVIEWS OF EVALUATION ANDassessments through which teachers collect a variety ASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION: AUSTRALIAof evidence on student progress and provide regular © OECD 2011feedback to students. National tests at key stages ofeducation are intended to capture a wide range of Norway has a well-established tradition ofcurriculum goals through performance-based tasks decentralisation and school autonomy, with aincluding oral assessment and team projects. The strong sense of individual schools being ‘owned’tests are summative in Year 9 and upper secondary by their local communities and accountable toschool and intend to provide a more standardised them rather than the national authorities.and external measure of student achievement.

32 NAHTThe Norwegian authorities have set up a national systematic moderation processes to ensure thatquality assessment system (NKVS) for the OTJs are reliable and nationally consistent; (3)education sector in 2004. NKVS provides access Better articulation between the National Standards,to a range of data and tools intended to help the National Curriculum and existing assessmentschools, school owners and education authorities tools; (4) Clearer statements regarding the kindevaluate their performance and inform strategies of information that standards-based reportingfor improvement. The system initially included can and cannot provide and the uses of reportingmandatory national student assessments, user information that are considered appropriate; andsurveys and a web-based school portal, and (5) Further work to ensure that the Standards’ focuswas later complemented by additional tools and on literacy and numeracy does not marginaliseguidance to support evaluation at the local level. other learning areas where measurement of performance and progress is more challenging.The successful implementation of an evaluation andassessment framework crucially depends on whether In the context of self-management, individualprofessionals in counties, municipalities and schools schools can be relatively isolated and have limitedhave the understanding and competencies to collect, opportunities for collegial networking and peeranalyse and interpret evaluative information with a learning. There are a range of policy options toview to improve practices. Embedding an evaluation strengthen the connectedness of schools andculture in schools and municipalities across Norway is help spread and share effective evaluation anda large culture shift that requires further investment assessment practice. These include (1) Providingin professional learning opportunities, targeted to the cluster funding for groups of schools to poolneeds of different stakeholder groups. evaluative information and engage in collaborative analysis and interpretation of data; (2) SupportingSource: OECD REVIEWS OF EVALUATION AND the collaboration of schools with an externalASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION: NORWAY facilitator or ‘critical friend’ such as a professional© OECD 2011 development provider; (3) Relying as much as possible on practitioners in the role of peer evaluatorsNew Zealand has developed its own distinctive or participating in ERO review teams; and (4) Buildingmodel of evaluation and assessment characterised further on recent developments to strengthen theby a high level of trust in schools and school Regional Offices of the Ministry of Education andprofessionals. There are no full-cohort national enhancing regionally based school support structures.tests and teachers are given prime responsibility toassess their students’ learning. While there has been strong focus on building evaluation and assessment competencies at the schoolNational Standards were introduced in primary level, further investment in professional developmenteducation in 2010 to provide clear expectations is necessary to ensure that practices are consistentlyfor student learning in mathematics, reading and effective across New Zealand. Teachers need towriting and help teachers make and report overall develop not only the capacity to use, interpret andteacher judgements (OTJs) based on a range of follow up on results obtained from nationally providedassessment evidence. In a context where there is a assessment tools, but also to develop their own validgeneral consensus against national testing in primary and reliable assessment tools, adapt assessment toeducation, the introduction of Standards is seen as an diverse learner profiles and communicate and reportalternative way to make information about student assessment results effectively.learning more consistent and comparable. However,further developments are necessary to embed the Alongside general training in assessment literacy,Standards within the primary school system. teachers and school leaders also need to further develop skills to collect school-wide assessmentThese include (1) Ongoing investment in teacher data; disaggregate data for relevant sub-groups;professional development to build teachers’ and interpret and translate assessment informationcapacity to assess students in relation to the into improvement strategies. Central agenciesNational Standards; (2) Stronger support for

COMMISSION ON ASSESSMENT 33could consider developing a unique set of teacher There are no national tests for pupils in basiccompetencies in assessment to set clear targets education in Finland. Instead, teachers arefor initial teacher education and continuing responsible for the assessment in their respectiveprofessional learning. Given the key role of school subjects on the basis of the objectives writtenleaders in New Zealand’s devolved education into the curriculum. Also the grades in the basicsystem, there is also a need to firmly embed a education certificate, the final certificate given atfocus on effective evaluation and assessment in the end of year 9, are given by the teachers.the competency description, training, performanceappraisal and support materials for school leaders. On the basis of this assessment pupils will be selected for further studies. Therefore, the nationalSource: OECD REVIEWS OF EVALUATION AND core curriculum contains assessment guidelines inASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION: NEW ZEALAND © all common subjects. One task of basic educationOECD 2012 is to develop the pupils’ capabilities for self- assessment. The purpose of this is to support theIn Finland school inspections were abolished in growth of self-knowledge and study skills andthe early 1990s. The ideology is to steer through to help the pupils to learn to be aware of theirinformation, support and funding. The activities of progress and learning process.education providers are guided by objectives laiddown in legislation as well because the national The first national examination is at the end ofcore curricula and qualification requirements. The general upper secondary education. Generalsystem relies on the proficiency of teachers and upper secondary education ends with a nationalother personnel. matriculation examination, which comprises four compulsory tests: mother tongue and, accordingThere is strong focus on both self-evaluation of to each candidate’s choice, three of the following:schools and education providers and national the second national language, a foreign language,evaluations of learning outcomes. National mathematics or one subject in general studies, suchevaluations of learning outcomes are done regularly, as humanities and natural sciences. Students mayso that there is a test every year either in mother also include optional tests.tongue and literature or mathematics. Other subjectsare evaluated according to the evaluation plan of Having completed the matriculation examinationthe Ministry of Education and Culture. Not only and the entire upper secondary school syllabus,academic subjects are evaluated but also subjects students are awarded a separate certificate thatsuch as arts and crafts and cross-curricular themes. shows details of the examinations passed and the levels and grades achieved.From the schools’ perspective, the evaluationsare not regular as they are sample-based. The Teachers in basic and general upper secondaryeducation providers receive their own results to be education are required to hold a Master’s degree.used for development purposes. At most levels of education the teachers are required to participate in in-service training everyThe main aim of the national evaluations of learning year as part of their agreement on salaries.outcomes is to follow at national level how well theobjectives have been reached as set in the core Finnish teachers consider in-service training as acurricula and qualification requirements. Consequently, privilege and therefore participate actively.the results are not used for ranking the schools. The State also provides in-service trainingThe main type of pupil assessment is the continuous programmes, primarily in areas important forassessment during the course of studies and final implementing education policy and reforms. Theassessment. Continuous assessment is to guide and education providers can also apply for funding tohelp pupils in their learning process. Each student improve the professional competence of their teachingreceives a report at least once every school year. personnel. Teachers are recognised as keys to quality

34 NAHTin education. Therefore continuous attention is paid to monitor the curriculum. Under the system, Koreanboth their pre-service and continuing education. language, mathematics, science and social studies are assessed every two years (two subjects eachSource: Finnish education in a nutshell. 2012. Ministry year), while English communications skills and theof Education and Culture, Finnish National Board of use of information technology skills are assessedEducation, Centre for International Mobility (CIMO) once every three years. Small samples of students (between 0.5 per cent and one per cent of theThe examples from Singapore, Korea and Japan whole student population in specific years/grades)that follow are drawn from the International are involved in the tests.7Review of Curriculum and Assessment Frameworks(INCA) country archives which were set up by the Entry into higher education in Korea is based onQualifications and Curriculum Authority and are students’ high school records, extra-mural activitiesnow contained in the national archive. They may not and scores in national tests (College Scholasticreflect the latest practice in each country. Achievement Tests – CSATs) as well as assessment arrangements by individual universities. These takeIn Singapore, the assessment and qualification place on one day a year (special arrangementsarrangements are fairly similar to those in England. are made to reduce distraction to candidates byAt the end of primary education there is the national staggering rush hour traffic and grounding flights)8.Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) whoseprimary purpose is to stream students by ability onto Japan, like Sweden, has no formal system ofdifferent courses in lower secondary (it also informs assessment for pre-school education9. In primaryassessment of school performance). Continuous and lower secondary there have been national tests,formative assessment in primary and lower secondary which are survey-like in style, happening last in 2007education is used by teachers to assess progress in and involving many but not all schools. This was toextracurricular as well as academic studies. There are measure the national standard of education afteralso mid and end of year examinations, which provide structural reforms. Other assessment is teacher-drivenmore summative information. A review in April 2009 which includes teacher devised formative assessmentis leading to less emphasis on these in lower primary, which may be criterion or norm referenced; involvingin favour of ‘bite-sized’ assessment to improve a comparison of the performance of individuals withstudent confidence and engagement5. that of their peers and reported to parents in terms of grades. There are no standard procedures laid downAll students wishing to go on to one of Singapore’s nationally as to how such grades should be derived ortwo universities must also achieve the Scholastic described10. Students are also encouraged to assessAchievement Test (SAT1) covering verbal reasoning and their own and their peers’ work11. Completion ofmathematics. The Centre for Testing and Assessment upper-secondary education is certified by individualPte. Ltd (CTA) has been set up by the universities principals with no external moderation; althoughto administer the tests. The Ministry of Education is there is a separate national university admissionresponsible for the administration of all national tests6. examination and universities may also administer their own admissions assessment12.There are various types of assessment systemsin Korea. These include the nationwide system of 7 INCA Korea country archive sections 6.4.2 and 6.4.4scholastic achievement tests (SATs) (the national (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1403.html)assessment of educational achievement), andcontinuous classroom assessment by teachers. A 8 Ibidrevised system of periodic national assessments ofstudent achievement (the national assessment of 9 INCA Japan country archive. Section 6.1educational achievement) began to be implemented (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1477.html)in September 2000, the principal aim of which is to 10 INCA Japan country archive. Section 6.35 INCA Singapore country archive. Section 6.2 (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1481.html) (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1082.html) and Section 6.3 (Available at; http://www.inca.org.uk/1083.html ) 11 INCA Japan country archive. Section 6.2 (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1478.html) and Section 6.36 Ibid (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1481.html) 12 INCA Japan country archive. Section 6.4 (Available at: http://www.inca.org.uk/1483.html)



1 Heath Square Design and print: www.graphicimpressions.co.ukBoltro RoadHaywards HeathWest SussexRH16 1BLt: 0300 30 30 333w: www.naht.org.uk© February 2014