The Independent Schools Council is a politically independent, not-for-profit organisation representing 1,270 independent schools educating more than 500,000 children. It exists to promote choice, diversity and excellence in education, developing talent at all levels of ability and from all backgrounds.

Select Search Area: Enter Search Keywords:

13 plus

20 January 2004

Introduction

1. This statement is brief and practical. It identifies issues on which there is a high degree of consensus among the four independent senior school Heads' associations: GSA, HMC,ISA, SHMIS.

2. Our aim in issuing this statement is to affirm publicly what we value, wish to preserve and seek to change in the current system. While it represents our collective views, individual schools are free to use and interpret this statement as they see fit.

Vision and principles

3. We endorse the broad principles set out in Policy Paper 6 (2003) by the Secondary Heads Association (SHA) for a coherent post-14 qualifications structure. This should:

provide the foundation for lifelong learning
be inclusive
be a single, unified framework across a wide range of learning opportunities
provide continuity and progression and build on achievement pre-14
guarantee appropriate degrees of breadth, depth and balance for each learner
build on success and recognise that achievement motivates
be supported by assessment that is fit for purpose.

4. We also accept, and recognise, the value of a nationally agreed ladder of learning and achievement, starting with Entry level and progressing through Foundation and Intermediate levels, to Advanced level. This paper focuses on the last two levels in this framework.

5. As associations representing independent schools, we would articulate our vision as follows:

We aim to facilitate the development of informed, cultured, civilised and skilled young people, preparing them for Higher Education, the workplace and the challenges of adult life. To fulfil this aim, our schools seek to retain and promote the best traditions and values, whilst embracing the changes necessary to meet the future. In our students, we seek to encourage a love of learning, creativity and an appetite for analysis and debate, in a range of environments.

6. We seek to work within, and contribute to, the various national systems of education in which our schools operate. At the same time, we recognise the wide diversity of types of school within the independent sector and, increasingly, the maintained sector and aim to avoid a "one size fits all" approach to the curriculum and examinations. We value above all else the flexibility to meet the particular needs of each individual pupil and coherence in curriculum planning which takes full account of learning pre-13 and post 19. Examinations should serve, not shape, teaching and learning. At present, however, they intrude far too much and impact negatively on the post-13 curriculum. The key priority for reform must be to reduce the overall burden of these examinations.

7. Throughout this statement we have used "13 plus" as a term which matches our circumstances better than "14 plus". But we are anxious to avoid a rigid association between age and stage of learning. We are also mindful of the different ages and stages at which transition takes place throughout the independent and maintained sectors. The specific recommendations which follow aim to minimise the negative impact of transfer, whenever it occurs. In what follows, the term "intermediate level" has frequently been used in preference to "GCSE" because of the age-related connotations of the latter. "Advanced level" encompasses current AS and A levels.

Levels of learning and achievement

8. At intermediate level we endorse the proposals of the Joint Associations Curriculum Group (JACG) that all students should be entitled to a core curriculum comprising:

English
mathematics
science
a modern foreign language
a humanities subject.

9. JACG also believes that a creative arts/technology subject should be represented within a student's overall curriculum, either as a subject in its own right, or within the extra-curricular element of the programme. While we support this recommendation in principle as a desirable aim, we believe that schools should be free to decide how and when pupils should experience the creative arts/technology as part of their overall curriculum.

10. Where there are particular circumstances that militate against the study of the subject areas identified in paragraphs 8 and 9, schools should be free to use their professional judgement (in consultation with the pupil and parents) to provide a curriculum that best meets the individual pupil's needs.

11. At advanced level we firmly believe there should be no prescription with regard to students' main (or specialist) subject areas.

12. In addition to the core curriculum identified in paragraph 8, all students should have opportunities to achieve a minimum level of competence in ICT, usually to intermediate level. Students should be encouraged (although not required) to continue developing their skills in using ICT beyond this level, normally in the context of their main subject areas. We do not support the formal assessment of ICT competence, out of context, as if it were a separate subject in its own right, either at intermediate or advanced levels. However, if there were to be a national requirement for the certification of ICT, schools should be free to choose from a range of nationally approved syllabuses, assessments and certificates at intermediate level.

13. Extra-curricular activities should be recognised and systematically recorded, for example, on a student's individual record or transcript of achievements. We do not support formal assessment of such activities (except where they are already a natural part of an award validated by an external body).

14. We believe that extra-curricular activities, together with a student's main areas of study, are the best context for developing what are generally referred to as "the wider key skills" (such as team work or problem solving). While these may be recognised and recorded (as suggested above), we do not believe these should be assessed separately or out of context. We would include "critical thinking" in this category as we do not believe the decontextualised study or assessment of these skills should be compulsory.

Qualifications

15. We believe that there is a continuing role for national qualifications at intermediate level, at or around the age of 16 for all pupils in our schools. GCSE currently meets pupils' needs as both a "progress check" (for those who are continuing to advanced level) and as an "exit point" (for those not intending to progress further in a particular subject at this stage). We wish to see it retained, albeit with the removal of coursework in many subjects (see paragraphs 19-20 below).

16. We see a continuing role for an Advanced Subsidiary (AS) qualification, possibly reduced from three to two units in its assessment.

17. We favour a strengthening of A2 (the second half of A level), decoupled from AS to form two discrete qualifications. A strengthened A2 should include more challenging and stimulating content, assessed in a more holistic way. We wish to see a return to more synoptic examinations, where appropriate, designed to allow the A level to differentiate better between the most able students at grade A. Such reform would, we believe, obviate the need for either Advanced Extension Awards (AEAs) or the recalibration of the current A level. As a short term measure, until such changes can be introduced, there may be some merit in exploring a sub-divided A grade or public reporting of UMS scores alongside overall grades.

Assessment and examinations

18. The over-riding concern of all four associations is to reduce the overall assessment burden at both intermediate and advanced levels, and to review the type of assessment currently required, in particular coursework. The nature of the assessment objectives and specifications in many subjects also needs urgent review. The issue is, therefore, not just quantitative (too much assessment), but also qualitative (assessment which is too atomistic, mechanistic and superficial).

19. Our immediate priority for reform is coursework. Coursework, in its current form, is burdensome, often repetitive and open to abuse.

20. At both intermediate and advanced levels we believe there are strong arguments in favour of dropping coursework assessment, except where it is truly integral to both the learning and assessment of a particular subject, as it is, for example, in art, drama, music, science, technology and PE. Even here, the tasks set should be scrutinised to minimise repetition. Safeguards to prevent plagiarism must be strengthened.

21. At advanced level, the replacement of coursework in individual subjects that do not meet the above conditions by a single, extended piece of assessed work (possibly a piece of independent research) should only be entertained if:

the latter genuinely tests skills, knowledge or abilities not assessable by other means
it offers true scope for independent research and learning
the involvement and support of higher education can be guaranteed
safeguards are put in place to prevent plagiarism
the assessment of the work itself is not unduly onerous.

The practicalities of using vivas (or oral exams) to assess such work should be explored as a matter of priority.

22. At all levels we support the professionalisation of the examining process, in particular the further development and piloting of the SHA proposals for a new system of "Chartered Examiners". However, this should only be contemplated in the context of a real reduction in the overall volume of examinations. It should not be seen as a simple transfer exercise in which the current burden of external examining is merely shifted from the awarding bodies to serving teachers. By way of example, if a properly conceived and implemented system of Chartered Examiners were introduced, this might allow the replacement of external exams at AS level by an internal assessment by teachers of work done during the normal AS course. We accept that for such assessments to be graded and credible there would need to be a system of moderation involving Chartered Examiners.

23. With regard to external exams, we believe a root and branch review is needed of:

the number and nature of the assessment objectives in each subject/specification
the number of examinations for each subject/specification
the type of questions set
the mark schemes.

24. The aim should be to reform the system with a view to achieving:

fewer exams at individual unit/module level
a greater emphasis than at present on end-of-course assessment with more in-depth assessment and more probing, synoptic questions
less mechanistic mark schemes, with greater scope for rewarding truly creative and innovative answers that show evidence of real subject mastery and scholarship.

This latter point is linked to proposals for more challenging and stimulating content, and more holistic assessment, as set out in paragraph 17.

25. There is one other possibility which, we believe, should be actively explored. This is how to translate into practice the principle that "a higher level qualification should subsume a lower level one". Such a practice is not uncommon in independent schools in Scotland, where students can skip Standard Grade examinations and go straight to Highers in subjects other than English and mathematics or ones where they are weak and need a safety net. If this practice were extended to England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with students bypassing external examinations in those non-core subjects they intend to study at advanced level, the external assessment burden would be reduced. Coupled with the suggestion in paragraph 22 concerning internal assessment of AS, a real reduction in the overall examination load from 13-19 could be achieved. While there are difficult issues which need addressing, particularly in cases where students transfer between institutions or change their mind about future advanced level studies, these proposals merit further detailed consideration. It will be important, in considering these issues, that the pastoral needs of pupils are not sacrificed in the pursuit of higher level qualifications and accelerated learning. Our principal concern remains a reduction in the overall burden of assessment on young people and their schools alike.

26. Whatever changes are introduced we wish to retain the flexibility in the present system for individual schools to:

take all examinations at the end of the course (in "linear" fashion)
restrict January sittings to the upper sixth
discourage or limit re-sits at school level (particularly in the lower sixth).

Grouped Awards/Diplomas

27.This aspect has been left until last since it is both less immediate than many of the other issues covered here and, to many members, less of a priority. Moreover, there is deep scepticism amongst members about several aspects of the Tomlinson proposals for a series of grouped awards or Diplomas.

28.While the Tomlinson progress report (July 2003) recognises the tension between what it calls "the climbing frame approach" (linked but free-standing courses and qualifications) and a "baccalaureate-style approach" (in which individual qualifications cease to exist), we believe firmly that individual subject identities (not necessarily in the form of separate qualifications, but certainly as identifiably coherent groups of units and modules) have a continuing place in any new grouped award. Even in the International Baccalaureate, where the Diploma is considered to be all-important, individual subject components have some currency in their own right. We believe the same should apply to any new grouped award.

29.The second concern about any Diploma, particularly at advanced level, is whether it would preserve the sort of flexibility for individual pupils and schools valued by members. Any Diploma must, inevitably, involve some prescription. As is clear from paragraph 11, most members would resist any subject prescription at advanced level. Those schools which value subject breadth already have an option available in the form of the International Baccalaureate. The issue is, therefore, whether members are prepared to entertain other forms of prescription such as a mandatory extended research project. As is implied in paragraph 21, views are mixed on this issue and there are important caveats even amongst those who are sympathetic to such a requirement for the award on an Advanced Diploma.

30. The third, and most important, issue is the reaction of higher education. Unless all universities, including selector universities, make the achievement of an Advanced Diploma a pre-requisite for entry to higher education (as a modern day form of matriculation), it is inconceivable that a Diploma framework will command support and respect. Credibility with schools, colleges and young people themselves is linked to the currency of any Diploma at advanced level. If the advanced level Diploma is not taken seriously, Diplomas at lower level (Intermediate, Foundation and Entry) will likewise be devalued.

Conclusion

31. One issue which has not been addressed in this paper is that of vocational education. This is not to minimise its importance. Indeed, improvements to vocational education and training (and related occupational training and qualifications, such as Modern Apprenticeships) are, arguably, more important in terms of the national good than any of the proposals in this paper. As independent school associations we have limited, but important, experience of offering vocational qualifications in our schools. We strongly support initiatives which aim to improve the relevance and appeal of such qualifications. Just as we would wish to see a greater role for universities in shaping the school curriculum from 13 plus, so would we argue for a greater say by employers in the design and assessment of vocational qualifications.

32. The experience we have of offering such qualifications suggests that attempts to achieve illusory "equivalence" by making vocational qualifications more academic have done nothing to boost their status. On the contrary, these have only served to undermine the very distinctiveness and relevance that made such qualifications attractive and motivating in the first place.

33. It is hoped that the reform of vocational qualifications will encourage more schools in the independent sector to include them as part of their 13+ curriculum. Much will depend, however, on the nature of that reform and the involvement of employers in the process. In order to play our part in this reform process, the four independent school associations who are party to this document are setting up a cross-association Vocational Education Working Group to take forward our thinking and develop concrete proposals for wider debate. It is hoped that this will be the subject of a future cross-association policy statement.