1. UAL Awarding Body External Moderator Training Sarah Atkinson Head of Academic Standards

2.  Introductions  Aims of the Meeting  Attendees

3. The Process  The EM Role  The EM Handbook  UALab Approach  Setting the schedule  Communicating with Centres

4. Dear name of Course leader / Centre contact I am writing to confirm arrangements for the forthcoming name of course moderation visit, and I am attaching a proposed schedule for the day. To ensure that the assessment process is sound and that the standard meets the UAL Awarding Body assessment criteria for level of course, I will be moderating a sample of completed and formatively assessed assignments for the name of course – Unit number. The sample size for the qualification will be 10% of the cohort (or a minimum of 6) and the actual candidates decided in discussion with you on the day of moderation, to ensure that a representative range is included. I will also need to see evidence of the tracking, monitoring, assessment and internal verification of the non- graded units, please can you also make available schemes of work, assignment briefs and assessment tracking for units unit numbers, it is not necessary to present student work for these preceding units. Please have ready a completed final results sheet with student ULNs. I will need to sign this off and send to the Awarding Body shortly after the visit. The moderation team will be myself and if applicable cc'd. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any queries I look forward to seeing you on confirm date of visit Best Wishes Your name and contact details

5. Selecting the Sample  The sample for UAL Awarding Body qualifications is usually set at 10% of the cohort.  This ensures that a sufficient number of sets of assessment evidence, covering all disciplines and/or pathways and a range of internal assessors are externally moderated and checked.  Where a cohort or specialist pathway is below 50 Students a minimum sample of six is acceptable.  The External Moderator will always select the sample  Samples should contain: Grades in all categories, Pass, Merit and Distinction where a qualification is graded. Sufficient examples of the Referral Category, to establish the Pass/Referral boundary and guidance for students to redeem the grade A range of disciplines reflecting the range of qualification experience. Assessment evidence assessed by a range of internal assessors.

6. Documentation  To support the Sample Centres should provide External Moderators with: An outline of the structure of the course internal assessment, standardisation and verification and process Schemes of work and Assignment/Project briefs. Examples of assessment and verification records sufficient to enable the External Moderator to confirm that the methodology is working and adheres to UALab guidelines for good practice EMs are required to confirm that the assessment and IV processes for the assessment of the non-graded units support decisions that are fair reliable and valid

7. Moderator Assessment Record Sheets

8. Reporting  Grade Confirmation  Marks/Results Sheets  Completing the Report  Coversheet  EM handbook Part 1: Candidate Sample Part 2: Candidate Authentication Part 3: Profile of Assessment Evidence Part 4: Assessment Methodology Part 5: General Commentary Part 6: Recommendations Part 7: Actions

9. Part 1: Candidate Sample Part 2 : Candidate Authentication Candidate sample must be 10% of the cohort. Candidate sample may be extended by 5% to clarify the accuracy of centre grading decisions. Candidates in the sample should be identified only by their Unique Learner Number (ULN) which can be retrieved from the Course Leader. Indicate either YES or NO to confirm that Candidate Authentication Forms were made available at the point of the external moderation visit. If the response is NO this must be an action for the following year.

10. Part 3: Profile of Assessment Evidence  Number of candidates in the cohort  Number of candidates in the sample  List the pathways and select a representative sample as a percentage of each area (10%-15%)  Number and percentage of D/M/P/R/W  Any special consideration or reasonable adjustment should be supported by the correct UAL paperwork.  Any areas of concern in regards to malpractice and maladministration in the assessment and internal verification process. EMs should use this section to report on the candidate evidence in relation to the assessment criteria

11. Part 4: Assessment Methodology  Assessment paperwork is fit for purpose.  Internally assessed units are rigorous and assessment decisions are fair, valid and free from bias.  Assessment internal verification and standardisation processes are suitably robust.  Assessment and internal verification documentation clearly evidences the decision making process in borderline candidates.  Referred students are given clear feedback and time frame for resubmission.  Grading decisions across all pathways are consistent  The External Moderator is able to confirm that assessment decisions made by the centre are consistent with national standards  If they are unsound the External Moderator should provide a commentary on those aspects which require re-design or strengthening.  Any aspects described should be noted as actions EMs should use this section to confirm that the assessment methodology conforms to good practice

12. Part 5: General Commentary  Teaching and Learning Materials  Student understanding of criteria and expectations as evidenced in self assessment  Opportunities for tutorial group critiques and peer review  Employer engagement  Quality of project proposals or overarching briefs – stretch and challenge  Range and depth of topics  Breadth and depth of research in informing project development  Level of investigation and experimentation  Quality of Centre documentation  Student progression  Overall quality of work by pathway Provides an opportunity for a brief summary identifying areas of good practice as appropriate

13. The EM should select the appropriate definition to comment on each of the identified grading themes for the level and qualification being assessed  Use sub headings  Note differences between pathways  Note good practice and areas for improvement  Identify by ULN but not name candidates  Refer to EM handbook Context Research Problem Solving Planning and Production Practical Skills Evaluation and Reflection Presentation

14. Part 6: Recommendations Part 7: Actions Recommendations are for guidance only and can be carried out at the discretion of the Centre Recommendations should refer directly to commentary made in the report The EM should report on any recommendations carried out from the preceding EM or Advisory report and what if any impact this has had on quality improvement Actions are essential measures for improving standards for assessment and must be carried out by the date agreed between the EM and the Centre The EM must follow up on any actions required in the preceding EM or Advisory report

15. Questions?

16. The Extras  Training and Events  Standardisation  Website  Visual Standards Platform  Senior Moderators

17. Training – Events – Standardisation – Conferences 2016  FAD  Fashion Business and Retail  Art and Design  Media  Performing Arts  Music EM Annual Training Event: Jan External Assessor Training: Feb/Mar Conferences: Jan/Feb/Mar Standardisation Events: Apr/May/Jun Exhibition: July

18. Visual Standards Platform http://workflow.arts.ac.uk/group/awarding-body-grade-standards/level2-diploma-in-art-design Website http://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/awarding-body/

19. Regions and Senior Moderators  FAD  Fashion Business and Retail  Art and Design  Media  Performing Arts  Music North East North West Midlands South East South West

20. Chief Examiners  FAD  Fashion Business and Retail  Art and Design  Media  Performing Arts  Music Sue Cook: sue.cook@arts.ac.uksue.cook@arts.ac.uk Sarah Atkinson: s.j.atkinson@arts.ac.uks.j.atkinson@arts.ac.uk Martin Vella: m.vella@arts.ac.ukm.vella@arts.ac.uk Andy Sankey: a.sankey@arts.ac.uka.sankey@arts.ac.uk Marc Mollica: m.mollica@arts.ac.ukm.mollica@arts.ac.uk

21. In Practice  Breakout Groups  Scenarios – Exercise  Reviewing Reports – Exercise  Handling Difficult Situations  Giving Feedback  Observations

22. Reviewing Reports - Exercise On your own read through the example reports and make notes in relation to:  Good reporting  Poor reporting You have 20 minutes to complete this task  Discuss your findings with the others in your group  Agree headline issues and appoint spokesperson You have 10 minutes to complete this task  Feedback to delegates

23. Final Questions and Next Steps