2. Understanding Standards: Nominee Training Event
N4 N5 Physics

3. Aims of the Day
To support the understanding of national standards and the communication of these to colleagues by giving nominees the opportunity to:
review candidate evidence
discuss evidence and associated assessment standards
ask questions and seek clarification about national standards.

4. Activities for the Day Workshop 1 – N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
- Making Judgements.
Workshop 2 – N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
- Writing an External Verification Report.
Workshop 3 – N5 Experimental Report (Outcome1)
Workshop 4 – N5 Accurate Statements/Solving Problems Making Judgements.

5. Introduction Planned events and visiting rounds 2016/2017.
Issues arising from verification events 2015/2016.
N4 Assignment - assessment standards.
Writing an External Verification report.
N5 Experimental Report - assessment standards.
N5 Accurate statements/solving problems – common marking issues.

6. N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
AH Investigating Physics unit AS1.1
Agreeing ‘How much physics?’ .
Assessment Standards
1.1
Choosing a relevant issue in physics
1.2
Researching the issue
1.3
Presenting appropriate information/data
1.4
Explaining the impact in terms of the physics involved
1.5
Communicating the findings of the investigation

7. N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Assessment standard 1.1
Issue investigated should be stated clearly.
Relevance to environment/society should be stated clearly.
Assessment standard 1.2
Information/data should be gathered from at least two relevant sources.
Reference to two relevant sources of information/data should be recorded in such a way that they could be retrieved.
Assessment standard 1.3
The information/data from at least one source must be presented in a different and appropriate format.
Headings, labels and units should be correct.
The presented information/data should be processed accurately.

8. N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Assessment standard 1.4
The candidate must explain the underlying physics as it relates to the issue.
The candidate must explain at least one impact on environment/society using some knowledge of the underlying physics.
Assessment standard 1.5
The candidate must communicate findings in a way that is clear, concise, relevant and appropriately structured, by:
summing up /drawing a conclusion of the findings of the investigation.
communicating the findings clearly and concisely.
using an appropriate structure.

9. N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Workshop 1
N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Making Judgements

10. TASK
Read through the new ‘Judging Evidence Table’ for assessment standards of the Physics Assignment (National 4) Added Value Unit.
Read the Workshop 1 candidate 1 evidence.
Use the Judging Evidence Table to decide if the candidate has achieved the Added Value Unit.
Record the rationale for your judgements on your verification worksheet.
Discuss your decision with your group.
Repeat for each of the other Workshop 1 candidates.

11. Writing an External Verification report
Our aim is to help you to write a report which:
reflects the validity of the centre’s approach to assessment and reliability of the centre’s assessment judgements;
gives due emphasis to the positive aspects of the evidence submitted;
comments on the effectiveness of the centre’s internal verification procedures;
gives the centre clear advice for future presentations;
gives the centre crystal clear actions that must be followed if there is a Not Accept verification decision.

12. External Verification Report Form
Centre details and Verification details
Unit verified and Outcome
Approach to Assessment
Assessment Judgements
Effectiveness of Internal Quality Assurance & Verification
Good Practice

13. External Verification Report Form - Guidance
Get the details right date convention
unit code and title
verification outcome decisions
Approach to Assessment
ACCEPTED
‘The centre is using the most up-to-date Unit Assessment Support Pack (UASP).’ in the Verification Comment box.
ACCEPTED*
‘The centre is not using the most up-to-date UASP.’ in the Verification Comment box.
‘In future presentation, the centre should ensure that the most up-to-date UASP is used.’ in the Development Recommendations box.
NOT ACCEPTED ?

14. External Verification Report Form - Guidance
Assessment Judgements
ACCEPTED
make a comment in the ‘Verification Comment’ box only.
ACCEPTED*
make comments in the ‘Verification Comment’
AND in the ‘Development Recommendations’ boxes.
NOT ACCEPTED
make comments in the ‘Verification Comment’ AND in the ‘Required Action’ boxes.

15. External Verification Report Form - Guidance
Effectiveness of Internal Quality Assurance & Verification
Is there evidence of cross marking?
If sampling is used, is it adequate? Is it targeted?
In the case of disagreement between the assessor and the internal verifier, is the final assessment judgement clear?
Is the internal verification process effective?

16. External Verification Report Form - Guidance
Good practice
You have to say something!

17. So what do you say? Approach to assessment
“The centre is using the most up-to-date Unit Assessment Support Pack (UASP).”
“In future presentations, the centre should ensure that the most up-to- date UASP is used.”
“The centre should reassess all candidates in the sample using a valid approach, possibly the most up-to-date UASP or assessment packs which have been approved through prior verification.
The centre IS required to resubmit further evidence to SQA for verification.
In addition, the centre should reassess all candidates not included in the verification sample.
The centre is NOT required to submit this further evidence to SQA for verification.”

18. So what do you say? Assessment judgements – verification comments
“ The majority of the assessment judgements made are in line with national standards. There were, however, a number of issues noted.
Candidates 1 and 2
The candidates’ evidence does not include the table of raw data which was processed and presented as a line graph. It was therefore not possible to check the accuracy of the candidates’ presentation.
Candidates 1 and 2 were judged not to have met assessment standard 1.3”

19. So what do you say? Assessment judgements – verification comments
Candidates 3 and 4
The candidates’ explanations of the impact of seatbelts were felt to demonstrate only a limited knowledge of physics at this level.
This issue did not affect the judgements made for assessment standard 1.4 for these candidates.
The centre should review the evidence for candidates not included in the sample, and give the appropriate candidates the opportunity of redrafting their explanations so that they demonstrate a knowledge of physics at National 4 level.”

20. So what do you say?
Assessment judgements – Development recommendations
If the verification decision is ACCEPTED*
“The centre should give candidates 1 and 2 the opportunity of redrafting their evidence to include the raw data which would enable an assessor to check the accuracy of processing.
In addition, the centre should review the evidence of candidates not included in the verification sample to ensure that raw data is included, giving affected candidates the opportunity of redrafting their evidence appropriately.
The centre is NOT required to resubmit further evidence to SQA for verification.”

21. So what do you say?
Assessment judgements – Development recommendations
If the verification decision is NOT ACCEPTED, leave this box blank.

22. So what do you say? Assessment judgements – Required action
If the verification decision is NOT ACCEPTED,
“The centre should give candidates 1 and 2 the opportunity of redrafting their evidence to include the raw data which would enable an assessor to check the accuracy of processing.
The centre IS required to resubmit further evidence to SQA for verification.
In addition, the centre should review the evidence of candidates not included in the verification sample to ensure that raw data is included, giving affected candidates the opportunity of redrafting their evidence appropriately.
The centre is NOT required to submit this further evidence to SQA for verification.”

23. So what do you say?
Effectiveness of Internal Quality Assurance & Verification
“The centre has robust and effective internal verification procedures to ensure the uniform application of standards across the centre.”
“In future presentations, the centre should ensure that at least a sample of the assessor’s judgements are confirmed by a suitably qualified colleague.”
“There is evidence of the assessor’s judgements being checked by an internal verifier. In the case of disagreement, however, the centre’s final assessment judgement is unclear.”

24. So what do you say? Good practice
“The evidence submitted by the centre was laid out in a clear and logical manner.”
“For each candidate, the location of evidence supporting assessment decisions is clear.”
“The checklists used by the centre clarify the progress of candidates through the assessment standards.”
“Each candidate had a copy of ‘Appendix 1: Instructions for Candidates’ to support them as they progressed through their assignment.”

25. EV Report Form - Final advice
Imagine you’re going to receive the report. What would you want it to say?
Check for:
Spelling slips;
Punctuation slips;
Extra character and line spaces.
Unnecessary Capitalisation:
Please Don’t Do It.
If there are many issues, avoid losing clarity by including each and every detail. Mention only the main points.

26. N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Workshop 2
N4 Assignment (Added Value Unit)
Writing an External Verification Report

27. TASK
Read the centre’s assessment decisions for Candidates 1-4 for the Physics Assignment (Added Value Unit).
By comparing the centre’s assessment judgements with your worksheets from Workshop 1, come to a judgement for the verification of the centre.
Record your decisions, with reasons, and any actions for the centre in the External Verification Report form.
Discuss your decision, and share your report with colleagues.

28. N5 Experimental Report (Outcome1)
Apply skills of scientific inquiry and draw on knowledge and understanding of the key areas of this unit to carry out an experiment/practical investigation.

29. N5 Experimental Report (Outcome 1)
AH Investigating Physics unit AS1.1
Agreeing ‘How much physics?’ .
Assessment Standards
1.1
Planning an experiment/practical investigation
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

30. N5 Experimental Report (Outcome 1)
Assessment standard 1.1
The plan should include:-
a clear statement of the aim;
a dependent and independent variable;
the key variables to be kept constant;
the measurements to be made;
the equipment to be used;
a clear description of how the experiment should be carried out, including safety considerations where appropriate.
Assessment standard 1.2
The candidate should be seen to follow procedures safely.
Assessment standard 1.3
Measurements should be recorded correctly.

31. N5 Experimental Report (Outcome 1)
Assessment standard 1.4
Candidates should present processed results in an appropriate format, normally an extended table or line graph.
Assessment standard 1.5
Candidates should refer to the aim of the experiment. Inconclusive results are acceptable.
Assessment standard 1.6
The evaluation should be supported by justification, and provide at least one possible improvement for the experiment.
ICIWC

32. N5 Experimental Report (Outcome 1)
Workshop 3
N5 Experimental Report (Outcome 1)
Making Judgements

33. TASK 3
Read through the ‘Judging Evidence Table’ for assessment standards of the National 5 Experimental Report.
Read Workshop 3 candidate 1’s evidence.
Use the Judging Evidence Table to decide if the candidate has achieved assessment standards
Record your decisions and rationales in your verification worksheet.
Discuss your decisions with colleagues.
Repeat for the other Workshop 3 candidate.

34. N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Assessment standard 2.1
Making accurate statements.
At least half of the statements made by the candidate should be correct.
Assessment standard 2.2
Solving problems:-
making predictions;
selecting information;
processing information;
analysing information.
If candidates have more than one opportunity to demonstrate a problem solving skill, they must do so on at least half of those occasions.

35. uncertainties could be reduced, or speculation on any
N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
No working
Full credit should be given for a correct final answer unless the candidate has demonstrated wrong physics or an arithmetic slip(s).
Incorrect/missing unit
The final answer to a numerical item should have a correct unit (unless the quantity is dimensionless).
Vulgar fractions
The final answer to a numerical item should be given as a decimal fraction to the appropriate number of significant figures.
uncertainties could be reduced, or speculation on any

36. uncertainties could be reduced, or speculation on any
N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Significant Figures
It is acceptable to give a final answer to a maximum of one less or two more significant figures compared to the least precise data given in the question.
Exponent error (Squaring error)
When using a relationship containing a quantity raised to a power which shows the substituted value NOT raised to the power is incorrect.
Physical constants
The substitution of a value for a physical constant should be consistent with the value given in the data sheet or question.
uncertainties could be reduced, or speculation on any

37. N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Exponent notation
A final answer given in scientific notation should be written correctly.
Use of non-standard symbols
It is acceptable at N3-N5 levels, to use a relationship written in non-standard symbols, where the substitution shows that the relationship is correct.
Explanation by diagram
It is acceptable for a diagram or sketch, appropriately labelled, to convey the answer required by the question.

38. N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Incorrect Spelling
Incorrect spelling can be accepted if the word is easily identified and used correctly.
If the meaning of an incorrectly spelt word is unclear, credit is not given.

39. N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Workshop 4
N5 Accurate statements/Solving problems
Making Judgements

40. TASK
Using the Unit Assessment Support Pack questions and marking guidance, mark Workshop 4 candidate 1 evidence.
Form a judgement as to whether assessment standards 2.1 and 2.2 have been met.
Discuss your decisions with your group.
Repeat for each of the other Workshop 4 candidate evidence.

41. Plenary