POSSIBLE CHANGES TO A LEVELS

Ofqual A Level Consultation Proposes Minimal design rules for A Level No subject-specific requirements Awarding bodies develop A Levels with universities

Ofqual Questions Should AS continue to exist? If AS continues, should it be 50% of A Level? If AS continues, should it be part of A Level?

Ofqual Proposals A levels should not be modular There should be no January examinations There should be a minimum of 60% external assessment An A level must have the support of at least 20 UK universities (including at least 12 leading universities) A new ‘A level review board’ to report on standards annually

Ofqual Timeline Ofqual consultation ends 11 Sept 2012 (online plus meetings) Proposals: For courses starting Sept 2013, no Jan exams New A Levels in priority subjects for teaching from Sept 2014 (selected from chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics, English literature, geography, history, French, German and Spanish) Other A Levels change between 2015 and 2018

House of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in England, July 2012 ‘We recommend the development of national syllabuses, accredited by Ofqual. National syllabuses would be developed by exam boards in conjunction with learned bodies and employer organisations and, at A level, higher education. They would be regarded as a national resource that could be examined by any of the English exam boards. They would remove the incentive for exam boards to compete on content and the associated downward pressure on standards, but would retain the benefits of competition on quality and the incentive for exam boards to innovate.’

House of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in EnglandHouse of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in England (cont’d) We believe that national subject committees, convened by Ofqual, would offer a way to increase the involvement of subject communities as well as universities and employers in GCSEs and A levels. National subject committees should draw their membership from learned bodies, subject associations, higher education and employers. Their remit should include syllabus development and accreditation, starting with the forthcoming revised A levels, as well as on-going monitoring of question papers and mark schemes.

‘Overall, we conclude that the costs, heightened risk and disruption likely to be generated by moving to a single board outweigh the potential benefits. Furthermore, evidence suggests that some key issues identified with the current system, such as comparability of standards over time and across subjects and the role of examiners in training and textbooks, would remain. New problems, such as a lack of incentive to innovate, the risk of higher fees and a reduced quality of service to schools, may be generated. There may also be the potential for increased political interference, as well as the issue of whether to limit schools’ choice of exams to those offered by the single board.’ House of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in EnglandHouse of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in England (cont’d)

‘We recommend that the Government and Ofqual seek to increase the involvement of learned bodies as well as universities in the content of A levels, while allowing exam boards to retain control of question papers and examination design to ensure best assessment practice. The Government and Ofqual must also ensure that the whole of the university sector is consulted on the proposed A level reforms, as well as schools, colleges, learned bodies and employers.’ House of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in EnglandHouse of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in England (cont’d)

‘In order to strengthen the links between textbooks and the curriculum, as well as assessment, we recommend that in future A level textbooks be endorsed by the universities involved in developing a particular syllabus rather than by the exam board. At GCSE much will depend on the outcomes of the National Curriculum review and the ensuing reforms to GCSE, but a possible way forward might involve learned bodies endorsing textbooks instead of exam boards.’ House of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in EnglandHouse of Commons Education Committee report: The administration of examinations for 15–19 year olds in England (cont’d)