Waddell (1978)

Notes on the text

Part I

Preliminary pages Contents, Membership
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Educational matters
Chapter 3 Structure of the examining system
Chapter 4 Cost
Chapter 5 Conclusions
Appendices

Part II

Preliminary pages Contents, Membership

Report of the Education Study Group (ESG)

Glossary, Introduction
Chapter 1 Feasibility of common exam system
Chapter 2 English
Chapter 3 Mathematics
Chapter 4 Science
Chapter 5 History
Chapter 6 Geography
Chapter 7 Modern languages
Chapter 8 Classics
Chapter 9 Commerce
Chapter 10 Social science
Chapter 11 Religious studies
Chapter 12 Craft design and technology
Chapter 13 Technical drawing
Chapter 14 Home economics
Chapter 15 Needlecraft and dress
Chapter 16 Art
Chapter 17 Music
Chapter 18 Further work
Appendix A List of witnesses
Appendix B Questions
Appendix C Statistics
Appendix D Joint examinations

Report of the Cost Study Group (CSG)

Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Costs in 1976
Chapter 3 Costing a common system
Chapter 4 Changeover costs
Annexes

Report of the Steering Committee established to consider proposals for replacing the General Certificate of Education Ordinary Level and Certificate of Secondary Education examinations by a common system of examining

Chairman: Sir James Waddell CB

Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Education and Science and the Secretary of State for Wales by Command of Her Majesty July 1978

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1978
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Part I: Cmnd 7281-I
Part II: Cmnd 7281-II

Part II - ESG Report

Chapter 18 Further work
[pages 73 - 76]

253. Some further work must be carried out in the period leading up to the introduction of a common system because, in our view, that system cannot work without it. This chapter tries to identify this essential work. In addition it draws attention to the possibility of making some improvements in present practice which are not essential to the introduction of the common system but for which the proposed changes afford a good opportunity. For the most part, further work, whether essential or desirable, can be based on the existing practice of the schools supported by curriculum projects already in progress; the subject chapters indicate the cases in which it will be dependent on the carrying out of new curriculum development work.

254. The major task, which must be completed during the preparatory period, is to devise, for each subject, aims, objectives, syllabuses and forms of assessment to suit the ability range of candidates likely to be presented for that subject. Within this range (which will differ between subjects) every effort must be made to enable both the ablest and the weakest candidates to show what they can do. Much has already been accomplished by the examining boards, in the fields of GCE, CSE and the joint examinations, by various curriculum projects and by work in the schools. But development is still needed: i. in major subjects for which examinations have not yet been developed by some consortia; ii. in those subjects, combined forms of subjects or aspects of subjects which were not treated by any of the consortia in the joint examinations; and iii. in subjects represented in the joint examinations but in need of reappraisal.

255. It may not be possible to deal with all this further work at once and priorities should be established, with three considerations in mind. Firstly, the importance of a subject by virtue of the number of candidates taking it; secondly, its importance as a qualification to users; and thirdly, the technical difficulty of the transition from a dual to a common system (which will be greater for subjects attracting a wide range of ability). On these counts English, mathematics, sciences, history and geography must be given high priority. Subjects where the ability range is not as wide (eg modern languages; craft subjects) will deserve a somewhat lower priority. This is not because these subjects are intrinsically less important and does not imply that work may not be very desirable to extend them across a wider range of ability; it is simply that the task of preparing for the introduction of a common system necessitates fewer changes of existing practice. The same principles should be applied in determining the urgency to be attached to other subjects. Amongst them subjects which attract considerable numbers of candidates, and subjects which are particularly adapted to the needs of a more restricted ability range (whether from the higher or lower end of the scale), must not be neglected. Examinations for some of the latter might be designed for limited grade ranges.

256. The considerable effort which will be required in reviewing aims and objectives and the related syllabuses will be applied to better advantage if two general principles are kept in mind. The first is that schools should have an appropriate choice of syllabus available to them, and the second is that the range and scope of available syllabuses should be as clear and intelligible as possible, to users as well as to schools. In major subjects some variety of syllabuses should be available (apart from the opportunity for a school to offer its own syllabus, as at present in Mode III), but some rationalisation may result where a large number of existing syllabuses have a great deal in common. Some subject chapters have drawn attention to a lack of clarity about essential content (social science; craft, design and technology). The system will be better understood, and more intelligently used, to the extent either that syllabus titles themselves give a sufficiently clear indication of the content or that information on this subject is readily accessible to those who may need it.

257. Considerations of a more strictly educational character should also be borne in mind. Some subject chapters have suggested the need for a better balance between factual recall and the application and understanding of concepts in the examinations with which they deal (commerce, mathematics and science) and the last two drew attention to the need to prune over-full syllabuses, especially for students who do not intend to pursue the subject beyond the age of 16. The relation of aims, objectives, syllabus and content to specific levels of ability should be made explicit.

258. Just as the aims, objectives, and syllabus must be related to the range of ability of the candidates so must the examination provide discrimination to match. The major question we have had to consider is how far this can be achieved by a common examination, with the element of differentiation this permits, and to what extent it will be necessary to have recourse to some other form of common system involving the use of differentiated papers.

259. Most of the joint examinations were designed on the basis of a common examination, a strategy which, if successful, would offer to the full the organisational and social advantages of a common system. Several of them attempted to deal with a wide ability range by setting questions capable of response at different levels, or questions or sections of papers directed at different identified levels of ability. In some major subjects it appeared to be possible to discriminate adequately over the subject ability range by such means. It is possible that further development work, taking account of experience in GCE and CSE, as well as in the joint examinations, may reveal wider scope for discriminating adequately within a common examination than at present seems likely.

260. On the basis of present evidence, however, some subjects are likely to require the use of differentiated papers. Since few of the joint examinations explored this approach more extensive development work is needed to identify the most promising applications in particular subjects, and to resolve attendant difficulties such as comparability between options, and the balance between, for example, poor performance on hard papers and good performance on easy ones. The range of work now to be tackled therefore includes the identification of syllabus material that can be examined in common, and the definition of objectives and syllabus content for specific levels of ability; the basis for choice and options in the examination and the comparability of such options for the purpose of grading; analysis of the use of various techniques such as essay questions, structured questions, objective questions, and tariff questions, and their relationship to the performance of pupils of different levels of ability. The research already undertaken by the boards and that described, for example, in Schools Council Examinations Bulletins will be helpful in this context.

261. Part of the need for development work along the lines indicated above arises from the suggestion in certain subject chapters that although the joint examinations were broadly acceptable in meeting the needs of the middle of the intended ability range, they made insufficient demands on the abler candidates or presented excessive difficulties for the less able. The methods to be adopted to overcome these problems have implications for the curriculum. An obvious approach would involve overlapping syllabuses, to be examined or otherwise assessed by 3 papers (or other components) of varying difficulty, of which all candidates would take one, and either of the others. The development of such syllabuses would need to bear in mind the needs of different groups of students, for example of the majority whose school education would end at the age of 16, those intending to pursue the study of the subjects to a more advanced level, and able pupils who would not be doing so.

262. The use of forms of assessment other than written papers is intended primarily to explore capabilities of the candidates which may not otherwise be revealed. There is nothing new in introducing a range of components such as oral, practical, field and course work to make possible the assessment of a wider variety of skills than written examinations can test. Although the written examination is likely to remain a principal feature for most subjects, the assessment by other techniques of the ability to deal critically with extended pieces of work, to apply what has been learned, or to discuss a subject will be valuable in their own right. The development of these techniques will need to be considered with care subject by subject in order to achieve the right balance - a balance that overall will have to take account of available resources as well as educational advantage. To expand examination practice to include, for example, oral examining (still in its early stages except in modern languages), practical examinations, course work and project assessment creates logistical problems which can basically be solved on a large scale only by increased use of moderated school-based assessment. This has implications in a development period for the inservice training of teachers in assessment and moderating techniques. There is already much experience to hand which will support a development programme, especially if it is brought together.

263. Progress will be more rapid, and the chances of success greater, if boards coordinate their development work and pool their ideas and initiatives. Whilst a degree of competitiveness and independence in approach is to be welcomed, it should be the aim to secure some agreement as to the scope and limits of assessment techniques and as to the conditions and types of task to be set in the interest of comparability. It would be helpful if such coordination were to include consideration of such detailed matters as the marking and weighting of papers. The need for coordination at this level is perhaps exemplified in English, where the differences in the approach of boards to such matters as spelling and grammar are wide.

264. The historical fact that the GCE and CSE examining boards have experience and expertise in catering for different, although overlapping, bands of ability, underlines the necessity for cooperative approaches to the work outlined above. Only through such cooperation is it possible to ensure that the considerable experience already gained in the joint examinations is used as a basis for the further development work required, and is made more widely available. But much remains to be done, and the magnitude and diversity of this work argue the need for coordination in order that the tasks may be distributed, as well as experience shared, and the work already done in association, for example, in the studies of comparability (especially cross-moderation exercises) and reliability, fully exploited.

265. There are other matters which merit consideration, though not necessarily before a common system is implemented. It will be worth bearing in mind ways of increasing the value of examinations to users. One obvious point, already referred to, is the desirability of clear and precise syllabus titles. There may be value too in making more clear to teachers how examiners reward different aspects of performance; this would be particularly valuable in subjects where no precise syllabus is available, as in English language. For some of those who require to take note of examination results for the purpose of employment (particularly in a technical capacity) it would be of help if eventually grade descriptions could be composed which gave an indication of what the candidate should have done to be awarded a particular grade, at least in the major subjects. At present syllabuses are made available to those employers who require them. In any case more discussion of these issues with employers appears necessary. There are examples of grade descriptions in both O Level and CSE examinations; however, we acknowledge that they are difficult to devise, and that maintaining comparability between grades would be difficult. Eventually also it may prove useful to those who require evidence of particular knowledge, skills, or other qualities, for a profile assessment to be made and recorded on certificates, although we understand that there may be substantial difficulties inherent in this approach.

266. We have concluded earlier in our report that a common system of examining is feasible. In coming to this view we became aware that a considerable amount of preparatory work would need to be done. That there was widespread readiness to undertake such work, that much experience of the issues had already been gained, and that changes in the curriculum were already prompting changes in examining practice were all factors which have led us to believe that the programme we have suggested is both necessary and practicable. If the experience and expertise already gained are pooled, our confidence that the fullest advantages of the common system could be secured would be still further increased.