9-1 grading & ML GCSE https://helenmyers.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/gcse-9-1-grading.html ASCL conf - Jan 13

The situation is rightly complex Being fair to all the pupils of all abilities at a time of major transition and change (and by extension to their teachers) taking a wide range of GCSEs in a real world of historical legacy and political realities, not starting from scratch, we need to be sophisticated and thoughtful and avoid simplistic solutions. It's a complex situation but there are a few key principles to help through this transition period to ensure fairness for pupils. ASCL conf - Jan 13

There is information There is a range of information available from Ofqual itself (the body responsible for ensuring the quality of standards in qualifications which have been written by exam boards within the constraints set by DfE) and from ASCL (the Association of School and College Leaders). ASCL conf - Jan 13

There is misleading rhetoric and misunderstanding There is also much rhetoric around which is confusing the situation and so it is important to unpick some of the political rhetoric, false logic etc. etc. For example, 'the content is more demanding'. Yes, the specifications do appear more demanding. They have stripped out any mention of what pupils can be expected to know understand and do at lower levels. However, grades will be awarded according to 'comparable outcomes' (see below), not according to any statement-related criteria ASCL conf - Jan 13

Separate discussions At a time of transition, change and uncertainty this can open a floodgate to discussion (e.g pedagogy, the value of statement-related criteria, etc). This may be very interesting, but it can unnecessarily distract from the task at hand, It’s important to focus on what is happening in order to ensure fairness to pupils during this transition ASCL conf - Jan 13

Context for changes to exams Michael Gove as Secretary of State for Education decided on major changes to GCSE’s and A-levels However, GCSE and AS qualifications were retained, but the content and assessment methods had to be re-specified, and their introduction has been phased. The Dept of Education has specified the content of all the exams, and put certain requirements on the assessment e.g. all at the end (for most subjects), and for ML, use on target language in setting some questions etc etc ASCL conf - Jan 13

Roles Once DfE had specified content and certain assessment requirements, it was then the role of Ofqual as the independent exams regulator to oversee the work of the exam boards in producing specifications and sample exam materials (SAMs) to meet the DfE criteria ASCL conf - Jan 13

The importance of language Example – major TES article What is within our control? We will see later how the numbers getting each grade are already determined..... So need to think very carefully what and how to cover to get the best result for each pupil 17/11/2018

New accountability system A new accountability system has been introduced called Progress 8. Good in principle because it looks at the progress of every pupil not just those on the C/D borderline Some issues in practice because GCSEs and non-GCSEs (“equivalences”) are still mixed in together The EBacc3 bucket in Progress 8 mixes Science, Humanities and ML, so severe grading in ML incentivises schools to go for 2 Science and Hi/Ge rather than ML ASCL conf - Jan 13

New GCSE 9-1 grading firm links between the old scale and the new scale: bottom of grade A = bottom of grade 7 bottom of grade C = bottom of grade 4 bottom of grade G = bottom of grade 1 So the same number of pupils nationally will get 4 or above as get C or above now 17/11/2018

Foundation only content Tiering Tiering: no longer in English, but still in Ma, ML, Sc “Foundation” : “Higher” – was 25:75 nationally, now 50:50 Foundation only content Overlap content Higher only content 17/11/2018 Old grade B 11 11

Actual in Maths, but gives good guide for ML and Science Tiering Higher = 53% Noone knows how papers will perform Sufficient differentiation? Hannah's sweets?! Clustering around grade boundaries? Found’n= 47% Note change in “meaning” of Foundation In 2016, 76% / 24% is just below C/D boundary; in 2017 53% / 47% is just below 5/4 boundary

Media on results day slide moved to later ASCL Technical Notes 17/11/2018 ASCL data conf - 31 Jan 13

Ofqual English Maths 2017 2017 2016 2016 9-7 = A*-A = 16% 9-5 = 50% 9-5 = 53% 9-4 = A*-C = 70% 9-4 = A*-C = 71% 17/11/2018 2016 actual, 2017 estim.

Revised Ofqual decisions 1.The first award of all new GCSEs will be based primarily on statistical predictions with examiner judgement playing a secondary role. A modified approach, based on a wider range of information, will be used where needed because of the size and nature of the candidature. 2.The grade standard established in the first award will be carried forward in the second and subsequent years. 3.The same approach will be used for the first awards of grades 1 to 7 in all new GCSEs as has already been confirmed for new GCSEs in English language, English literature and maths. This approach uses key reference points between current (alphabetical) and new (numerical) grades to set grade standards in the new qualifications. 4.The ‘tailored’ approach’ will be used to set standards for grades 8 and 9 in all new GCSEs in the first year they are awarded, including English language, English literature and maths. 5.The standard established in the first award for grades 8 and 9 will be carried forward in the second and subsequent years. https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/setting-the-grade-standards-of-new-gcses-in-england-2017-2018 ASCL conf - Jan 13

Other subjects – A* and grade 9 Outcome of Ofqual consultation ASCL conf - Jan 13

Example of grade boundaries If the U/1 boundary is set at 25 marks and the 4/5 boundary is set at 67 marks, the difference is 42. That divides into two grade widths of 11 marks and two of 10 marks. The ‘wider’ grades would be at the top, as follows: 5/4 – 67 marks 4/3 – 56 marks 3/2 – 45 marks 2/1 – 35 marks 1/U – 25 marks So intermediate boundaries set by dividing the RAW MARKS Does NOT mean equal division of pupil numbers

Unknowns What will the distribution of raw marks look like under ‘new’ exams? Will there be more of a clustering of raw marks? What effect will this have on the numbers getting the “intermediate” grades? Noone knows how papers will perform Sufficient differentiation? Hannah's sweets?! Clustering around grade boundaries?

Actual v estimated national Figures from Ofqual diagram of estimates publ June Actual JCQ Actual v estimated national Note esp grade 3 in English is down from 23% to 19%, and so more with grade 2 and 1 Importantly, the “anchor points have been maintained Noone knows how papers will perform Sufficient differentiation? Hannah's sweets?! Clustering around grade boundaries?

Ebacc subjects But these were mainly lower prior attaining (as one would expect from the EBacc3 by prior attainment graph), with around 10K more D-U from History and Geography (blue boxes) extra D-U Noone knows how papers will perform Sufficient differentiation? Hannah's sweets?! Clustering around grade boundaries?

to give context, the Ofqual ISC survey received 216 responses. Survey on ML grading ASCL hosted survey about GCSE ML grading (open to non- ASCL members as well), circulated via ALL, ISMLA, HMC etc Survey opened 5 pm Tues 7th November By end Monday 13th November (close of survey), there were over 2600 responses !! Massive response shows extent of concern Are you aware of severe grading in GCSE ML exam grades? Yes: 2,540 = 96%, No: 100 = 4% Do you support the ASCL position statement? "ASCL supports Ofqual in tackling severe grading in GCSE MFL so that students learning mainstream GCSE MFL should have a reasonable expectation that they will get similar grades across EBacc subjects, without any systematic variation“ Yes: 2,587 = 98%, No: 52 = 2% to give context, the Ofqual ISC survey received 216 responses. ASCL data conf - 31 Jan 13

Impact on ML in your school for pupils? a) is slightly lower because some schools have maintained a policy of pupils doing a ML irrespective of the grading consequence

Impact on ML in your school for staff? Expect a) to be lower than b) and c) as most schools are “good”, and would take a substantial factor to move up or down, although there may be comments in report

References Link to Joint Letter sent in July https://www.ascl.org.uk/utilities/document-summary.html?id=210C5116-6C6A-4BFC-B3CDD64B513CA1FB   Link to ALL London severe grading page with many documents including the full powerpoint for slides below http://www.all-london.org.uk/site/index.php/severe-grading/ 17/11/2018 ASCL data conf - 31 Jan 13