1. A2 Agreement Trial ICT November 2014

2. Outline Agenda  10.00 Welcome and introductions  10.05Travel Expenses  10.102014 Outcomes and Issues  10.45Coffee  11.15Principal Moderator’s Report Exemplar Materials  12.30Lunch  1.15Exemplar Materials  3.00Plenary

3. Objectives To inform Centres of the new A2 Assessment Arrangements To provide feedback from the A2 Award 2014 To agree marking standards and assessment criteria for the exemplar materials

4. Travel Expenses  Attendees at CCEA agreement trials are entitled to be reimbursed for their travel expenses  Process has changed slightly because of the introduction of changes linked to auto-enrolment (workplace pensions)  CCEA are required to provide real time information (RTI) to HMRC about all payments made, including travel expenses  The Personal Data Form can be completed by visiting http://www.ccea.org.uk/autoenrolment http://www.ccea.org.uk/autoenrolment  Please ensure that travel expenses form has also been completed correctly – Nat Insurance Number, Postcode, signed, dated etc.  Payments due to you cannot be processed until you have completed the Personal Data Form & fully completed your expenses form

5. The Current A2 Award The current A2 Award  Coursework grade boundaries are high  Examination performance has improved at the upper end of the mark range The new A2 Award  Attempted to provide more balanced outcomes  Did not do what was intended!

6. Background to Awards  An evaluation of the GCE ICT specification is carried out after each award  Concerns arose with the raw to UMS conversion at the upper end of the mark scale in A2 coursework  Summer 2011 the ‘A’ boundary was 76/80 which resulted in 1 raw mark = 5 UMS.  Summer 2013 the ‘A’ boundary increased to 78/80 which resulted in 1 raw mark = 10 UMS.  It remained there in the summer of 2014 even though the weighting of the component had decreased from 50% to 40% (1 raw = 8 UMS).

7. Grade A in Coursework ?  Changes introduced in 2012 (AS) and 2013 (A2) to help alleviate the difficulties with the grade A in A2 coursework  The weightings for each of the two units that make up both the AS and A2 specification were changed from 50%/50% to 60%/40%  By reducing the UMS available in the coursework units from 100 UMS to 80 UMS should have led to a reduction in the grade boundaries.

8. A2 OUTCOMES SINCE 2010 SeriesRaw Mark (Grade A) Summer 201072 Summer 201176 Summer 201277 Summer 201378 Summer 201478  A2 2 ‘A’ grade boundaries over the past 5 years  What has happened?

9. Candidate Performance SeriesRaw MarkOutcome Cumulative Difference 20117825.3%- 20127831.7%+6.4% 20137837.3%+12.0% 20147840.8%+15.5% The A grade raw mark boundary did not change in 2014 The change of weightings should have brought the mark down! Why did it not? The table below shows the annual increase in performance in A22

10. What Next ?  From September 2014 the raw marks available for A2 coursework will increase from 80 to 120  This should:  help teachers differentiate more effectively between Candidates, particularly at the higher end of the mark range  Reduce the Raw to uniform mark conversion in 2015

11. Assessment Criteria SectionMark Analysis30 Design30 Implementation and Testing30 Documentation15 Evaluation15 Total Mark 120 From September 2014:

12. Raw to Uniform Mark 80 Raw MarkUniform MarkGrade 78 64A 7972A*  What happens when the grade A is 78 raw marks

13. Raw to Uniform Mark 120 Raw MarkUniform MarkGrade 110 64A 11572A*  What happens if the grade A is 110* raw marks?  Better distribution of marks *This is for illustration only. Grade boundaries will only be decided at the summer 2015 RMA

14. Proposed GCE ICT Specification Content Assessment Weightings AS 1: Approaches to System Development External written examination 1 hours 30 mins 50% of AS 20% of A level AS 2: Fundamentals of ICT External written examination 1 hours 30 mins 50% of AS 20% of A level A2 1: Information Systems External written examination 2 hours 30 mins 40% of A level A2 2: Application Development Internal assessment 20% of A level  First teaching September 2016  Consultation on Tuesday 18 th November from 12.30PM at Stormont Hotel

15. What is Moderation ?  CCEA request sample from Centre  Moderation team meet to agree standards  Each Moderator will be allocated a number of Centres  Moderator will sub sample each centre  (N/2) + 1 including top and bottom  If sub sample is within tolerance, process finishes  Tolerance is a tool only available to Moderators  If sub sample is not fine, then the whole sample is moderated  Moderator does not change Centre marks, only recommends a change  Moderator’s are supervised during process to ensure consistent application of standards

16. Moderation 2014  Most solutions involved a relational database  Majority of centres applied the assessment criteria successfully  Evidence of Candidates building on their AS work to develop an A2 project

17. Moderation 2014  Teacher comments/annotation are an important aspect of moderation  More detailed comments can greatly assist the Moderation process  “Cutting and Pasting” assessment criteria indicators to justify marks awarded is not helpful to the Moderation Team

18.  Candidates should submit solutions in clearly labelled sections as outlined in the specification  Candidates need to fully detail the design part of their solution such as explaining each stage of Database Normalisation with supporting ER Models  Centres should avoid using a common “Template” approach for their candidates but should provide more individual guidance Moderation 2014

19. Templates Limited scope of problem identification Lack of third party user can result in vague user requirements Design can be limited due to inadequate Analysis Testing can be limited due to vague User Requirements

20. Centre Report  Centres receive a TAC 6 and you can request follow up  Moderation team will attempt to provide feedback for Centres to prepare for 2015  This may involve positive comments as well as areas for development  Need to carefully consider moderator comments:  “ …slightly generous in ….”  “…lenient in the..”  “…slightly severe across all assessment criteria…”

21. CCEA Support 2014/15  Agreement Trials  Centre Visits ( if appropriate)  Coursework Clinic ( Feb 2015 )  Continued development of CCEA Microsite

22. Exemplar Materials 2014 1.Today’s Local Shop 2. Subway 3.Silhouette Beauty Salon

23. Today’s Local Shop

24. Subway

25. Silhouette Beauty

26. Additional Support for new Centres

27. Define the nature of the problem to be solved Fact finding methods to investigate the problem Identify data sources Gather sample documents currently used Identify the current user activities Investigate the tasks carried out by the user Specify limitations of the current system Describe information requirements of a system State the objectives of new system. Analysis

28. Evaluate possible solutions Design and document data capture forms Design of user interface Describe data validation required Design and document data structures Choose appropriate hardware and software Relate the solution to the capabilities of the software and hardware. Design

29. Software solution developed from the design (not documented) No Explicit Software Development section Evidence of testing will imply software has been developed. A test plan produced from the system objectives including:  Valid, invalid and extreme data;  Testing of the user interface  System functionality  Evidence of user testing Implementation and Testing

30. Output from the testing, cross referencing the test plan A description of a strategy for implementing the system into the organisation  Implementation plan  Description of the system changeover  The training required  The problems encountered and the actions taken  Description of how existing data is converted for use in the new system Implementation and Testing

31. Installation Guide Step by step operating instructions Troubleshooting Backup procedures. User Documentation

32. Evaluate results against objectives Identify strengths and limitations of the final system Identify possible extensions to the system Evaluation