Chemistry CPD Presentation

Programme Welcome and outline for event Overview of Internal Assessment in Chemistry Verification –brief outline Key messages from verification Unit Assessment Support Packs (USAPS) Workshop, assessing exemplar material Additional Questions/Answers

Important handouts

Summary of Unit Assessment National 4 Chemical changes and: Structure Unit Assessment Standard 2.1 Nature’s Chemistry Unit Assessment Standard 2.1 Chemistry in Society Assessment Standard 2.1 Assessment Standards 2.2, 2.3 and achievement is transferable so does not need to be gathered repeatedly in every Unit Assessment Standards 1.1 – achievement is transferable so does not need to be gathered repeatedly in every Unit Added Value Unit Research and Report Outcomes 1.1. – 1.5 National 5 Chemical changes and: Structure Unit Assessment Standard 2.1 Nature’s Chemistry Unit Assessment Standard 2.1 Chemistry in Society Assessment Standard 2.1 Assessment Standards 2.2, 2.3 and achievement is transferable so does not need to be gathered repeatedly in every Unit Outcomes1.1 – achievement is transferable so does not need to be gathered repeatedly in every Unit

External Verification Process Nominees are teachers/lecturers drawn from the pool of those nominated by local authorities/SCIS/colleges. Step 1 – Nominee checks that info on the sample form matches the sample, then selects one level to review the centre’s assessment decisions. Step 2 – Approach to Assessment: Is the centre using a Unit Assessment Support Pack or a prior-verified assessment? If yes – centre is accepted for “Approach”. If no – Nominee checks if the approach is in-line with national standards -the approach is ‘accepted’, ‘accepted*’ or not accepted. Accepted * - used where the centre’s approach has some minor issue(s) and the centre is given advice for future assessments.

External Verification Process Step 3 – Assessment Judgements Nominee reviews the assessment judgements made by the assessor (and internal verifier) at a particular level. When the decisions are in line with national standards the centre is ‘accepted’; When there are minor issues, the centre may receive an ‘accepted*’ decision; When the assessment decisions are not in line with national standards the centre is not accepted. Process repeats for next level in the sample from the centre. All decisions are reviewed by the Principal Verifier/Senior Team Leader. Step 4 – Verification report: Nominee prepares verification report for centre.

Outcome 2 - what evidence? For each of the 3 Units you need to provide evidence for the achievement of Assessment Standard 2.1 Candidates must be provided with the opportunity to make at least one statement for each key area of each Unit of the Course. Some key areas are larger than others and hence may merit there being more opportunities provided to make accurate statements

Advice on the appropriate 2.1 balance between key areas is provided in Unit Assessment Support Package 3.

Achieving Assessment Standard 2.1 At least half of the candidates’ statements to the questions should be correct across the key areas of each Unit.

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 This candidate has scored 4/9 so has not achieved Assessment Standard 2.1.

Reassessment For Assessment Standard 2.1: making accurate statements If a candidate gets less than half of the opportunities correct ( across a whole Unit ) then they would need to be reassessed. Candidates may be reassessed either only in the key areas of a Unit in which they have weakness or across all key areas

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 4/9

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 Two ways to reassess – reassess the whole Unit again using another end of unit test or reassess the weak key areas

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 1/11/32/31/2

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 1/11/32/31/2 5/9 achieved in reassessment

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 1/11/32/31/2 5/9 achieved in reassessment Chemical Changes and Structures Unit, Assessment Standard 2.1 achieved

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 2/3

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 2/3 3/6 achieved in reassessment

Chemical Changes and Structure RatesAtomic Structure and Bonding Formulae and Reaction Quantities Acids and Bases 1/10/32/21/3 2/3 3/6 achieved in reassessment Chemical Changes and Structures Unit, Assessment Standard 2.1 achieved

What else do you have to internally assess? You need to provide evidence for the achievement of Assessment Standard 2.4 Candidates must be provided with the opportunity to demonstrate the following 4 problem solving types: Making predictions/generalisations (PG) Selecting information(SI) Processing information(PI) Analysing information (AI)

 Combine these two assessment standards (2.1 and 2.4) and you could use an end of Unit test that lets you gather evidence of achievement in Knowledge 2.1 and in each of the four areas of Problem Solving in 2.4  SQA has provided a test covering 2.1 and 2.4 in the Unit Assessment Support Pack 1  Described as Activity 3: a set of questions to generate evidence for Assessment Standards 2.1 and 2.4.

2.4 Problem Solving For Assessment Standard 2.4 (Solving problems)candidates must demonstrate success in EACH of the problem solving types across the Course. Each of these skills must be demonstrated and if candidates have more than one opportunity to demonstrate a problem solving skill then they must do so on at least half of those occasions

Do you want to create your own assessment instruments ? Make use of the Prior Verification service provided by SQA Follow the advice on what constitutes a reasonable number of opportunities to make accurate statements for any of the key areas Where is this advice ? - Unit Assessment Support pack 3

Reassessment For Assessment Standard 2.4: solving problems If a specific Problem Solving skill (e.g. Selecting Information) is not achieved, then only that skill would need to be re-assessed. Where evidence is gathered during learning and teaching, it would not be appropriate for candidates to engage in the same activity repeatedly until the Assessment Standard has been met.

Workshop activity on 2.1 /2.4 Using exemplars - are these instruments of assessment acceptable for use to generate evidence for Assessment Standard 2.1? Do these instruments of assessment acceptably generate evidence for 2.4 ?

To be internally assessed Outcome Apply skills of scientific inquiry and draw on knowledge and understanding of the key areas of this Unit, to carry out an experiment by: 1.1 Planning an experiment 1.2 Following procedures safely 1.3 Making and recording observations/measurements correctly 1.4 Presenting results in an appropriate format 1.5 Drawing valid conclusions 1.6 Evaluating experimental procedures

Unit Assessment Support Pack 1 Assessment Activity 1 — a scientific report of an experiment Suggested experiments - see Outcome 1 summary table - includes a summary of suggestions made in the SQA documentation Centres can select other experiments to cover Outcome 1, provided that they relate to a key area of this Unit and are of an appropriate standard.

Workshop Activity Outcome 1 Using exemplars - are these instruments of assessment valid for use to generate evidence for National 5 Outcome 1 and are the assessment judgements in line with national staqndards? Use the Outcome 1 Summary table to help

KEY MESSAGES from Verification Good practice – annotate candidate work where each assessment standard has been achieved Candidates should use SI units and standard abbreviations ( ‘cm 3’ not ‘ml’ and ‘s’ not ‘sec’ ) At National 5, for 1.6 the evaluation must be supported by a justification At National 5 an experiment must be repeated and average calculated

KEY MESSAGES from Verification The different Assessment standards for Outcome 1 can be achieved over different practicals For National 3 there is a proforma to use for Outcome1

Back to Outcome Making accurate statements 2.2 Describing an application 2.3 Describing a chemical issue in terms of the effect on the environment/society 2.4 Solving problems

Draw on knowledge and understanding of the key areas of this Unit and apply scientific skills by: 2.2 Describing an application 2.3 Describing a chemical issue in terms of the effect on the environment/society produce a short report, of 50–100 words or equivalent, which covers both Assessment Standards 2.2 and 2.3. There is no penalty for going outwith this word count.

2.2 and 2.3 can be assessed together but don’t have to be. The important part is that they should contain chemistry, not just what the application is and whether it’s good/bad for society. It should be a short report (it is intended to be basic competence) but a candidate shouldn’t be penalised for doing more than is required.

2.2. and 2.3 summary table Also contains a summary of all the suggestions of topics to research that relate to key areas which are contained in SQA documentation for National 3, 4 and 5 Chemistry Suggesting topics to your candidates - topics must allow candidates to write about the chemistry.

Workshop activity on 2.2 /2.3 Using exemplars - what should the internal assessment judgements be on the following pupils’ work - use the summary tables to help make the decision.

KEY MESSAGES from Verification Best to gather evidence for these two assessment standards together in one activity The short report should contain sufficient chemistry at the appropriate level Good practice – annotate the report to show where within it the assessment standard is being met Acid rain only being accepted this session – while it can be used to achieve 2.3 it is not an application so is not suitable for 2.2

KEY MESSAGES from Verification If a report on acid rain is being produced then the chemistry of how acid rain is formed must be included Appropriate chemistry could include chemical terms, chemical equations, chemical structures Many reports at Nat 5 were providing too much detail - it should be a short report (it is intended to be basic competence)

National 4 Added Value Unit Apply skills and knowledge to investigate a topical issue in Chemistry and its impact on the environment/society. 1.1Choosing, with justification, a relevant issue in chemistry 1.2Researching the issue 1.3Presenting appropriate information/data 1.4Explaining the impact, in terms of the chemistry involved 1.5Communicating the findings of the investigation

National 4 Added Value Unit To support centres with the introduction of the new Added Value Unit at National 4, the use of SQA- developed Added Value Unit Assessments — most of which offer a degree of flexibility and choice which is clearly described within the published assessment support for the Unit — will be mandatory in 2013– 14 and 2014–15.

Workshop Activity Added Value Unit Using exemplar - what is the assessment judgement on this Candidate’s National 4 Added Value Unit ? Use Added Value National 4 summary table

National 4 Added Value Unit Reassessment if a candidate has not met the requirements of the whole assessment, it will only be necessary for the candidate to be re-assessed on specific stages. This would apply to the following stages of this assignment: Stage 1 — research stage Stage 2 — communication stage It is the centre’s responsibility to decide the nature of the re-assessment that is most appropriate for each candidate on each occasion. There is no requirement to choose a different topic for re-assessment.