2. 0 End of Year Arrangements 2015-16 Training Presentation for Access Practitioners

3. 1 Aims and Objectives This presentation will address: 1) The reasons for changes to the organization of ‘End of Year’ arrangements 2) The new procedures for the conduct of Final Moderation Visits, the Preliminary Awards Board Meeting, the Virtual Awards Board phase and the Final Awards Boards 3) Common concerns and an examination of the Pros and Cons of the new system

4. 2 The QAA position The QAA (quite reasonably) is concerned with how AVAs manage Final Awards Boards should the final moderation visit uncover problems… The QAA have stated that AVAs must allow time for centres to actively address any issues arising from final moderation prior to the conducting of a Final Awards Board… The QAA in its guidance use the term ‘sufficient’ in terms of the time left between the ‘Final Moderation Visit’ and the ‘Final Awards Board’. This presents LASER (and other AVAs) with a considerable challenge… How can a separate final moderation visit, around two weeks prior to the Final Awards Board be effectively resourced?

5. 3 Unpacking the QAA position… It is worth considering what the rationale is behind the new QAA guidance… An example of the QAA’s concerns underpinning this process could be that a final moderation visit uncovers significant grading discrepancies (either under or over grading)… If the Final Awards Board follows the moderation visit immediately how might these be properly / thoroughly addressed to allow the students to complete and progress? If a significant problem is uncovered, it is likely a further moderation visit and Final Awards Board would be required… Last year four centres, for a variety of reasons, had student achievement postponed due to being unable to comply with the requirements of the Final Awards Board (in terms of moderated work)

6. 4 The Challenge… How can a separate final moderation visit, around two weeks prior to the Final Awards Board be effectively resourced? ANSWER: EM undertakes final moderation and meets with centre staff at a Preliminary Awards Board meeting. The EM then remotely agrees the Recommendation of Credit forms and completes the EM Report prior to the Final Awards Board… This proceeds but without the physical attendance of the EM…

7. 5 Final Awards Process PartsSummary A single visit consisting of: Part One: The Final Moderation Visit (FMV) + A visit by the EM approx. 2 weeks before the Final Awards Board consisting of:  EM sampling marked student work and portfolios Followed by Part Two: Preliminary-Awards Board (PAB) Meeting  EM discusses issues arising from moderation, agrees next steps/actions prior to FAB  Draft (or final if ready) RACs approved Part Three: Virtual Awards Board Phase The period after the FMV/PAB and before the FAB  Centre implements agreed actions from FMV  Centre uploads RAC to Quartz-Web  EM verifies RAC A single visit consisting of: Part Four: Final Awards Board Meeting A single visit by a LASER Officer approx. 2 weeks after FMV  Final RACs accepted by FAB  If necessary amendments to RACs agreed subject to approval by the EM.  LASER rep discusses issues with centre as part of annual reporting process

8. 6 The small print… The EM’s Final Moderation Visit will take place separately to the Final Awards Board… This is the main sampling visit and the EM will sample student achievement in relation to a pre- agreed sample of students’ work… This would take the form of a request to see X,Y,Z students’ folders (in their current state… i.e. not complete) The EM would be sampling both general assessment design / practice and the application of grading to the completed work… The EM would also be looking for confirmation of Internal Moderation processes… At the Preliminary Awards Board Meeting the EM will consider and make recommendations in terms of the granting of extensions, Student Representations, Referrals, Appeals, Academic Malpractice and / or Aegrotat awards They would also meet with appropriate centre staff (and students) to discuss the organization and management of the Access Diploma Titles at the Centre as well as providing initial feedback

9. 7 So what’s next… The Virtual Awards Board If the EM is happy with the work sampled then the centre will continue to complete all outstanding work and upload the RAC to Quartz when it is completed If the EM wishes to sample further work remotely (in terms of work yet to be marked at the Final Moderation Visit) then s/he will set this up with the centre and it will be included as a condition for the centre in the draft EM Report and fed back to LASER… When the Centre uploads the completed RAC to Quartz the EM is notified. The EM can then electronically verify the RAC. Please note that this cannot occur if there is sampling work outstanding though… If the centre has not complied with any of the conditions set then the EM will inform LASER and set appropriate conditions in relation to the completed EMA1 Report recommending that the Final Awards Board be delayed… In extreme cases a further EM visit may be sanctioned… We anticipate this to be highly unlikely for most centres!!! Upon satisfactory completion of the above the EM will then verify the RACs via Quartz and this together with the completed EM Report will be carried over to the Final Awards Board Meeting…

10. 8 The Final Awards Board The Final Awards Board will now include: The Access Co-ordinator A senior member of College Staff An AVA representative Course teams would be free to attend but this would be optional… Student representatives could attend (although it may be more useful for them to attend the Final Moderation Visit to see their EM).

11. 9 The Role of the Board To award credit to students based on the agreement of the relevant EMs (via completed RACs)… To agree any Extensions and / or Aegrotat Awards once again based on EM recommendations (via EMA 1 and relevant supporting documentation)… To feedback EM judgements to the Access Co-ordinator and senior management (via discussion of EMA 1)… To gather headline information about the administration and management of the Diploma Titles run by the centre

12. 10 Positives of New Model Meaningful gap between Final Moderation Visit and Final Awards Boards will minimize risk of delay in certification if Moderation uncovers any assessment / quality issues… Use of Final Awards Board to gather Centre Data will reduce the burden placed on centres in relation to the Annual Centre Report. Targeted Feedback from EM Reports can be fed back to Senior Management at the point of the Final Awards Board

13. 11 Challenges for New Model The ‘de-coupling’ of the Final Moderation Visit and the Final Awards Board mean that the Final Awards Boards will not be attended in person by the Diploma EM… However, remote participation will allow for EM input into the process, moreover, this will be written down and focussed in nature (allowing for feedback to be based on reflection and consideration post final moderation visit)… If a dialogue is required this can be taken up remotely… The ‘de-coupling’ of the two visits will increase burdens of Centre Staff... They will need to have student folders ready sooner and will need to attend two meetings There is no requirement for all work to be completed and marked prior to the Final Moderation Visit. This is a sampling visit and only requires the work of identified students to date to be requested… If further evidence is required it will be requested remotely by the relevant EM… Centre teaching Staff will need to be available for the Final Moderation Visit / Preliminary Awards Board but are not required to attend the Final Awards Board… This remains an option should they wish to though. Senior college staff will only need to attend the Final Awards Board. The only person required to attend both AVA visits will be the Access Co-ordinator

14. 12 What the changes do not mean… That all work must be finished by the point of the Final Moderation Visit… That EMs will not play a role in the Final Awards Board… These are two valid concerns but they are not the case… The Final Moderation Visit does not require all work to be complete as the system allows for further ‘remote sampling’ if necessary… Although EM participation in the FAB is now remote, the feedback from EMs still plays a pivotal role in ‘framing’ the feedback provided to centres… Should further dialogue or face to face contact be required this can be sanctioned by the AVA…

15. 13 Conclusion The AVA appreciates that change can always have an unsettling impact… The use of more ‘virtual’ models of participation inevitably reduces ‘face to face contact’ However, the changes are based upon a rational critique of the existent system… There are considerable benefits for centres in relation to the proposed changes…

16. 14 Further Information ‘Revised End of Year Arrangements: 2015-16’: detailed guidance available from ????? ‘End of Year Process Chart’ available from: ????? Agenda pro-forma documents will be available for the Preliminary Awards Board Meeting and the Final Awards Board Meeting as soon as possible… Watch this space!!!