Somehow, my goddaughter has reached the ripe old age of 16 and has just finished sitting her GCSEs.
Somehow, my goddaughter has reached the ripe old age of 16 and has just finished sitting her GCSEs.
The day she finished, she had her school prom and was pleased to let her hair down and breathe a sigh of relief that the exams were over. She worked so hard during the courses and throughout the revision and exam period.
I really believe she has done her very best and should be proud of herself no matter what grades she achieves.
What makes me sad is knowing that when the results are released for both GCSEs and A-levels, we can brace ourselves for another round of shouty headlines complaining that pass rates are too high and that exams are easier since ‘our day’.
Seemingly ‘our day’ appears to apply to anyone who took the exams more than 5 years ago.
I’m sure there are some students, who have not tried as hard as they could, but I really believe the majority will have studied, revised and tried their best to get top grades.
I am consistently surprised that each year, the press and public want to diminish student’s achievements by complaining pass rates are too high.
I’ve never quite understood why we seem to have such an issue with a qualification that has a high pass rate.
As a nation there seems to be an acceptance of the urban legend that a qualification which yields a high pass rate must be of poor quality and therefore not worth the merit.
Working for an examination institute, I’d just like to throw out there the alternative theory and explain the process for setting a pass mark to try and dispel this myth!
When an examination or assessment is created there are several stages to work through:
Stage One
To understand what a candidate who presents an employer with the ‘end certificate’ represents. This person specification explains what the certificate holder has achieved; that could be anything from ‘knowledge to a certain level’ to ‘demonstrable application of a subject’ through an assessment method.
Stage Two
Design a syllabus to ensure the course delivered will cover all of the material a person needs to achieve a pass in the assessment – the fundamental assumption being that if you haven’t been taught the subject area, it would be unfair to test against it!
Stage Three
Now the syllabus is designed, you can consider which form of assessment is appropriate and design this;
- there could be multiple assessment methods used (such as the combination of coursework and examination) or one assessment method.
- all decisions will depend on the level of knowledge, skills and understanding that you expect someone to be able to demonstrate.
- The assessment design will be created based on this and the syllabus areas which have been taught to assume that someone has complete the work expected of them and were able to understand the concepts to demonstrate this at the required level.
Stage Four
The pass mark is then set for the assessment, we rarely expect people to be able to demonstrate 100% perfection, so there are several methods used to understand what the threshold should be to be able to show the standards expected have been met.
Stage Five
The assessment is written against these design standards. Normally this will then go through several stages of review and refinement before being released for use.
There are several potential weaknesses in a system for someone looking to pass and achieve a qualification:
- An examination institute could design materials poorly , meaning the assessment is inappropriate
- Poor teaching delivery to the student may not adequately cover the syllabus
- The student may display poor studying discipline in adhering to the guidance given when following the course
However, lets assume all elements in the assessment process are correct – the examination institute knows their job and designs an appropriate assessment, the teaching covers the syllabus and adequately prepares candidates and the student themselves are able to understand and demonstrate the required level of knowledge – common sense says that the student will pass.
So if the system supports good assessment design and good teaching…why is it wrong to have a high pass rate?
Rather than seeing this as a devaluation of learning and assessment, shouldn’t we see it as a success of the quality of assessment, teaching and effort exerted by students?
To reduce the pass rate would be to artificially fail people who have met the standard required to appease some strange notion that a qualification only holds value if enough people fail it!
So please be kind to our stressed out 16 and 18 year olds nervously waiting for their results – if they pass all their qualifications, then it’s much more likely they’ve tried hard against the background of well-defined learning outcomes and teaching standards than a fluke!
