Review of Internally-Assessed Marking Policy for GCE coursework, GCE and GCSE non-examination assessments, and project qualifications
Ashbourne is committed to ensuring that whenever its staff mark candidates’ work, this is done fairly, consistently and in accordance with the awarding body’s specification and subject-specific associated documents.
While the College supports the students’ right to request a review of Ashbourne’s internal marking prior to the marks being submitted to the awarding body, it should be noted that Ashbourne teachers spend a lot of time to ensure that there is consistency in the marking of candidates’ work and it is extremely unusual for awarding bodies to alter the marks given by our teachers.
Candidates’ work will be marked by staff who have appropriate knowledge, understanding and skill, and who have been trained in this activity. Ashbourne is committed to ensuring that work produced by candidates is authenticated in line with the requirements of the awarding body. Where a number of subject teachers are involved in marking candidates’ work, internal moderation and standardisation will ensure consistency of marking.
- Unless otherwise agreed with the Director of Studies (Lee Kirby), teachers will ensure that the Examinations Officer (Nancy Bui) is given the centre’s marks for non-art subjects by Thursday 25th April 2019, 6pm. For art subjects the deadline is Friday 24th May 2019, 2pm.
- Ashbourne will ensure that candidates are informed of their centre assessed marks so that they may request a review of the centre’s marking before marks are submitted to the awarding body. Unless otherwise informed, for non-art subjects this will take place before Friday 26th April 2019, 6pm. For art subjects, it will take place before Friday 24th May 2019, 6pm. The Director of Studies will work with the Examinations Officer (Nancy Bui) to ensure that these marks are sent.
- Ashbourne will ensure that the candidates who request a review of Ashbourne’s internal marking are informed that their mark can increase or decrease. These candidates will also be made aware that the subsequent moderation process carried out by the awarding bodies may result in a mark change, even after an internal review. The internal review process is in place to ensure consistency of marking within Ashbourne, whereas moderation by the awarding body ensures that Ashbourne’s marking is in line with national standards. The mark submitted to the awarding body is subject to change and therefore should be considered provisional.
- Ashbourne will inform candidates that they may request copies of materials to assist them in considering whether to request a review of the centre’s marking of the assessment. Materials will include the mark scheme and copies of the marked assessment material. Generally, candidates who request reviews will believe that the marks they have been awarded do not give them sufficient credit for meeting the criteria in the assessment materials. The purpose of giving candidates the assessment criteria is to enable them to evaluate whether the criteria have been correctly applied.
- The cost of the review of internally assessed marks is £100 per subject component.
- The requirement for Ashbourne to inform candidates of their centre marks also applies to the Spoken Language Endorsement for GCSE English Language and the Practical Skills Endorsement for A level Sciences. For this, Heads of Faculty will ensure that they have evidence to support the marks given, which might include written records and in the Spoken Language Endorsement recordings, if available.
- Ashbourne will, having received a request for materials, promptly make them available to the candidate, either originals viewed under supervised conditions or copies. Candidates are not allowed access to original assessment material, unless supervised.
- Ashbourne will provide candidates with sufficient time, in order to allow them to review copies of materials and reach a decision.
- Unless otherwise informed, for non-art subjects, candidates must submit their request for a review of centre marking before Wednesday 1st May 2019, 6pm. For art subjects, candidates must submit a request before Monday 27th May, 6pm. Requests must be made by sending an email to the Director of Studies (Lee Kirby – email@example.com) and the Examinations Officer (Nancy Bui – firstname.lastname@example.org). Requests will not be accepted after these deadlines.
- When requesting a review of marking, candidates will need to clearly explain on what grounds they wish to request a review of an internally assessed mark. If the mark is reviewed, the reviewer will focus their attention on the direct concerns that have been raised by the candidate. Therefore, candidates must ensure that they include as much detail on the concern they raised. It should be noted that this review will focus on the quality of the work submitted versus the marks awarded. This is not an opportunity to make a complaint against the quality of teaching. If candidates wish to log a complaint in this regard, then they should contact the Director of Studies separately.
- Ashbourne will allow sufficient time for the review to be carried out, to make any necessary changes to marks and to inform the candidate of the outcome, all before the awarding body’s deadline.
- Ashbourne will ensure that the review of marking is conducted by an assessor who has appropriate competence, has had no previous involvement in the assessment of that candidate for the component in question and has no personal interest in the outcome of the review. Ashbourne will ensure that the reviewer has declared any conflict of interest prior to undertaking the review.
- On occasion, the assessor may well be somebody outside Ashbourne. Outsourcing the review of an internally assessed mark will not breach the confidentiality of assessment materials and candidate data. Confidential assessment materials will not be discussed with, or sent to, any person not directly connected to the conduct of the task (s) or their assessment. If the review is conducted by someone outside the Ashbourne community it should be noted that confidentiality is not breached because the reviewer is linked to the assessment process. With regard to candidate data, any external parties must comply with Ashbourne’s Data Protection Policy.
- Ashbourne will instruct the reviewer to ensure that the candidate’s mark is consistent with the standard set by the centre.
- The reviewer will be informed that the review should be of the mark that has been awarded, confirming whether or not the candidate’s mark is in line with the standard set for the other candidates at the centre. Therefore, the reviewer will review the following:
- the candidate’s work (where the evidence of this involves practical work, for example Drama or Music, then the recording of the work should be given to the reviewer);
- the mark sheet completed by the teacher which usually shows the breakdown of marks per Assessment Objective (AO) or section of the mark scheme;
- information regarding any internal standardisation to ascertain whether consistent standards were applied by the original marker to the candidate’s work; and
- any comments/annotation made by the teacher during the marking process.
- Heads of Faculty will ensure that they retain internal standardisation materials for the review procedure. It is important to note that the reviewer must consider the review within the context of the internal standardisation materials provided in order to ensure a consistent approach to other candidates within the centre. Where there are no internal standardisation carried out (because there was only one teacher involved in marking the component), work of other candidates in the cohort must be considered to ensure that judgments can be made on the consistency of standards.
- Ashbourne will generally organise for the review to take place on the College premises in order to maintain the integrity of the work and to ensure secure storage. If the review must take place remotely, then the original materials will be held at Ashbourne, with the reviewer being provided with copies of the candidate’s work.
- During the review process, Ashbourne will ensure that the reviewer, the teachers, and the Heads of Faculty are all clear that it is not possible for anyone to alter the work after Ashbourne has provided the original mark to the candidate.
- The reviewer must provide a reason for upholding or changing the mark awarded by Ashbourne. This should be sent by email to the Director of studies (Lee Kirby – email@example.com) and Examinations Officer (Nancy Bui – firstname.lastname@example.org). Should the review raise wider concerns, for example about the centre’s general application of the assessment criteria, the reviewer should also put this in writing to the Director of Studies. The Director of Studies will then review these issues with the teachers, Heads of Faculty and the awarding body as required.
- Should the reviewer disagree with the internally assessed mark given by Ashbourne’s teachers, Ashbourne is not obliged to accept the new mark. The reviewer will be instructed to ensure that the candidate’s mark is consistent with Ashbourne’s marking standard. The reviewer will be expected to correct any marking error. The three types of marking error are:
- an administrative error;
- a failure to apply the marking criteria to the evidence generated by the candidate where that failure did not involve the exercise of academic judgement; or
- an unreasonable exercise of academic judgement.
- If the reviewer decides there has been a marking error, they must indicate where the marking error has occurred and how the mark is not in line with the standard of other candidates at the centre. It is for the centre to determine whether any difference in marking is within any tolerance that the centre would allow during its internal standardisation process. If there is a disagreement in the mark to be submitted to the awarding body, the Director of Studies will consult with the Principal, who will have the final say.
- Ashbourne will inform the candidate in writing of the outcome of the review of Ashbourne’s internal marking. The Director of Studies will work with the Examinations Officer to ensure that this is carried out.
- In cases, after a review of centre marking, where a candidate’s mark changes by five marks or more, Ashbourne will look to review the other marks to ensure standardisation. If, as a result of this process, Ashbourne deems it necessary to adjust the marks of the students, then these students will be informed of their new mark. However, as the centre marks have already been reviewed, students cannot request for a review of centre marks at this stage. These students would have to wait until the results are released to review their moderated mark.
- Awarding bodies do not automatically request the work that has been reviewed. These awarding bodies will use its standard sampling system to identify candidates’ work to be submitted for moderation, which may include candidates whose marks were reviewed.
- Ashbourne is responsible for following the regulations and processes set by an awarding body, including internal assessment. Any legal challenge made against Ashbourne regarding a mark it has awarded as part of a qualification should be referred to the relevant awarding body. However, if the challenge is made before moderation has taken place, the complainant would need to wait until the moderation process has been completed. As part of any such challenge, the awarding body would need to satisfy itself that Ashbourne had followed the correct processes. Awarding bodies are responsible for the grades and awards that they make.
- The outcome of the review of Ashbourne’s internal marking will be made known to the Principal and the relevant teachers/Heads of Faculty. In addition, a written record of the review will be kept by the Examinations Officer and made available to the awarding body upon request.
If you have any concerns with regard to this policy, please speak to the Director of Studies.
|Authorised by||The Principal|
|Effective date of the policy||June 2018|
|Circulation||Teaching staff / all staff / parents / Students on request|
|Review date||September 2019|