GOOD PRACTICE IN ASSESSMENT AND MODERATION

THE EXEMPLAR PROJECT

Liz Bowen-Clewley

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

Phase 1 Scoping

Phase 2 Identification

Phase 3 Investigation

Phase 4 Publication

SELECTION CRITERIA

Selection Criteria Judgement

Adherence to Best Practice Principles and Criteria

The submission meets the provided best practice principles and criteria

Breadth of Use The submission has been used enough times and with a sufficiently wide range of people to be able to validate its effectiveness

Relevance The submission provides significant learning for others

Replicability The submission can be easily adapted for use by others

Systemic good practice The submission is reflective of on-going good practice within the submitting organisation

Verification by stakeholders The submission has been verified by end users and other relevant stakeholders as being effective and useful

CONCLUSIONS

• Emphasis on performance criteria

ACTIVITY STANDARDS FOR WHICH ACTIVITY IS PRODUCING EVIDENCE

Make a farm gate and fit on site         sketch drawing and have it checked by the boss         interpret drawing         select steel          cut to lengths            weld          assemble          fit on site

  2430 Draw and interpret engineering sketches under supervision 

2430 (As above) 4798 Identify and select engineering materials for specified applications 2418 Lay out and mark off irregular fabrication shapes under supervision 2425 Mechanically cut sheet, plate, tube pipe and structural sections 2682 weld steel up to 10mm thick with the manual metal arc welding process in the downhand position 2424 Assemble and mechanically join sheet, plate, tube, pipe and structural sections 2424 (As above)

THE FARM GATE MODEL

CONCLUSIONS cont.

•Judgement statements

• The notion of competence in relation to unit standards

Elements of Competence Elements of Competence

the ability to repeatedly perform individual tasks/activities to a specified standardthe ability to manage a number of different tasks/activities in the job/work role to a specified standardthe ability to respond to irregularities and breakdowns in routine (contingency management)the ability to deal with the responsibilities and expectationsof the work environment, including working with othersthe ability to continue to learn in rapidly changing workenvironments

Hierarchy of Workplace Competence

Learning Stage In Training Learns and practises new skills

Capable Performs specific activities within a simulated or provider based environment

Competent Performs a range of activities to a specified standard consistently and meets other competence requirements in a performance environment

Expert Develops new methodologies and routinely advises / trains / supervises others

Cognitive Skill Insufficient experience to identify patterns or occurrences

Understands patterns and what situations are likely to occur

Identify patterns of recurring events and applies correctly in most situations

Identifies when existing knowledge is inadequate for the current situation/s and develops new patterns and tests hypotheses

Sample Credential

None Initial qualification Professional membership

• The requirements of level

• Impact of moderation

• Importance of context

• Trialling assessment and moderation processes before use

CONCLUSIONS cont.

MODERATION

All the research evidence that we have on assessors’ behaviour emphasises the very active role their own concepts and interpretations play … They operate in terms of an internalised, holistic set of concepts about what an assessment ought to show, and about how, and how far, they can take account of the context of performance

Competency Based Assessment, Alison Wolf 1995

MODERATION cont.

Viewpoint 1 – England and Wales

The moderator is solely an auditor/verifier of assessor judgements.

Whilst some minimal review of assessment tasks is incumbent within this role, the key function is to review comparability of standards interpretation and assessor judgements in accordance with this interpretation. Because it is a post-assessment role, this viewpoint has principal impact on later assessment decisions.

MODERATION cont.

Viewpoint 2 – Scotland, Queensland and early NZQA

The moderator has both pre-assessment and post-assessment roles. Assessment tasks and schedules are reviewed before use to ensure they are of appropriate standard, while post assessment verifies that judgements of student work are correct.

This role may be seen as raising assessment quality through assisting assessors with advice and training. It has a balance of preassessment task review and post-assessment verification.

MODERATION cont.

Internal External

(should include) (may include)

Assessor meetings Assessor meetings

Critical friend/peer review Postal moderation

Assessor self review Visits

Wolf (1995)and Black (1994), noted the effectiveness of networks and the designation of a group of “leader” or “master” teachers in a provider environment.. These processes, they argue, will not only improve assessment, but have spin-off into quality of instruction and learning.

MODERATION cont.