Assessment Resource Slides 2 Coursework Controlled Assessment and Allegations of Cheating Paul E Newton 13 March 2015 Coursework mid 2000s A component of 90 per cent of GCSE qualifications ID: 268876
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Teacher Ethics in" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Teacher Ethics in Assessment: Resource Slides # 2Coursework, Controlled Assessment, and Allegations of Cheating
Paul E. Newton
13 March 2015Slide2
Coursework (mid-2000s)A component of 90
per cent of GCSE
qualifications
Activities could include
written
work and extended essays
project
work and investigations
practical
experiments
production
of works of art or other items
production
of individual or group performance work
oral
work
statistical
and numerical
tasks
Some done at home;
some
under
supervision in
school
Marked by teachers to exam board criteria (moderated)Slide3
Coursework (mid-2000s)Slide4Slide5
February 2005(just before May 2005 election)Slide6
14-19 Education and SkillsDfES asked QCA to undertake a review to address three
concerns
:
First
, we want to ensure that the approach
to coursework
in similar subjects is
consistent and
that it tests skills and attributes
that cannot be tested by a terminal examination.Second, the review should address concerns about
fairness. “coursework must be robust – including by comprising examples
of work produced
in lesson
time, for example. ‘Classwork’ in
this sense
should be as important a concept
as coursework
”
Finally
, we want to address
the
cumulative
burden
of coursework.
“the
overall burden on
students is
too high even if coursework
requirements subject
by subject are sensible
when considered
in isolation
.”Slide7
November 2005(just after New Labour re-elected)Slide8
Executive SummaryThe benefits of coursework generally outweigh any drawbacks. Nevertheless, the review has led to proposals
for strengthening present arrangements
.
Teachers
must be confidently and consistently able to confirm that work they mark is
the candidate’s
own
.
Teachers
and parents offer a great variety of help and advice to candidates because
of limited guidance detailing what is permitted.
Teachers
and centres have limited knowledge and understanding of what constitutes
malpractice.
Standardisation
of marks within a centre is required and there is much good and often
very thorough
practice taking place. However,
internal standardisation
is not apparent or
consistent across
all centres
.
The
purpose and format of feedback from moderators to centres needs clarification.
Although
coursework is widely valued there is disquiet in some subject communities about
aspects of
it
.Slide9
FindingsIdentified potential concerns (but quite a lot of them!):
help and advice from teachers
help and advice
from parents
authentication
challenge
(e.g. parents, friends)
plagiarism and internet abuse
collusion (between friends, often not recognised)malpractice (e.g. collusion, plagiarism and over-coaching by
teachers)marking to tolerancegrade creepmarking to grade boundariesSlide10
ForewordIn response to this report QCA has:established
a
task force
to be chaired by Mrs Sue Kirkham, a member of the
QCA
Board and
an experienced
headteacher, to report in February 2006 on the strengthening
of arrangements for authenticating coursework for the summer 2006 examination seriesinvited Professor Jean Underwood of Nottingham Trent University to advise
QCA as regulator on the technical aspects of detecting internet plagiarism, and to help develop a detection strategy across awarding bodies and centres
committed
to produce
guidance for parents and candidates
on the scope for
legitimate family
support
for coursework, on the
nature
of plagiarism and collusion and on
the
consequences
of malpractice
.Slide11Slide12Slide13
November 2005Slide14
March 2006Slide15
May 2006Slide16Slide17Slide18Slide19
Cheating??Formative feedback!!“However, the majority of teachers
do provide support and guidance to students including:
an opportunity
to re-draft and re-submit after initial feedback
(
84
%
)”
From Teachers’ Views on GCSE CourseworkSlide20
2006 guidanceSlide21
2006 reportsSlide22
2007 reportsSlide23Slide24
ATL (2008)Slide25
Ofqual (2009) ... more actionSlide26
Ofqual (2009) ... more actionSlide27
Ofqual (2009) ... more actionSlide28
2009 ... more concernsSlide29
Nisbet (2010) ... more actionSlide30
June 2010Slide31
2010 ... more concerns (Mumsnet)Slide32
2011 ... more concerns (TES Forums)Slide33
2012 ... more concerns (TES Forums)Slide34Slide35
2013 ... more concerns (TES Forums)Slide36
Ofqual (2013) ... more actionSlide37
Ofqual (2013)Views divided over controlled assessmentSlide38
Ofqual (2013)The demise of controlled assessment?Slide39
Ofqual (2013) ... more actionSlide40
The demise of controlled assessmentSlide41
Some relevant readingsAnderman, E.M. and Murdock, T.B. (2007) (Eds.). Psychology of Academic Cheating. Burlington: Elsevier
.
Cizek
, G.J. (1999).
Cheating on Tests: How to do it, Detect it, and Prevent it
. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
.
Cizek,
G.J. (2003). Detecting and Preventing Classroom Cheating: Promoting integrity in
assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Duggan, F. (2006). Plagiarism: prevention, practice and policy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (2), 151-154. Macdonald, R. and Carroll, J. (2006). Plagiarism – a complex issue requiring a holistic institutional approach.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (2), 233-245.Whitley, B.E. and Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic Dishonesty: An
Educator’s Guide
. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Slide42
p.s. it’s not just an issue for EnglandSlide43
p.s. it’s not just a recent phenomenon