Moderation, Verification & Quality Assurance Policy

Rationale

As part of the whole school approach to Learning Teaching and Assessment in the classroom day to day it is important that we work collegiately to share knowledge and understanding of standards of what high quality learning and teaching looks like and when pupils have attained success in a level, stage or piece of work.

This will assure and improve the quality of pupils’ experiences at all levels it is important that as a school there is a clear and robust policy that supports departments in the consistent delivery of an equitable of experience for all learners.

To do this all aspects of pupil’s work and experience should be reflected on, through what is produced (in school and at home) by our conversations with learners, and in what we observe as we work with young people in our classes, departments and school.

Purpose

The purpose of this Moderation and Verification Policy, along with its associated quality assurance processes are designed to ensure consistency, across all departments at Woodmill High School.

This policy supports the delivery of Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) and the Qualifications Scotland (QS) requirements, ensuring that assessments are valid, reliable, inclusive and to the standard required.

Quality Assurance Processes

Woodmill High School implements a robust quality assurance process to maintain high standards in moderation. Verification and assessment (summative and formative).

Whilst this is not an exhaustive list it includes:

¨ High quality focused learner conversations
¨ Regular reviews of pupil work
¨ Use of both Summative and Formative tools to support pupil learning and define next steps
¨ Regular departmental moderation meetings to ensure an agreed understanding
¨ Cross-departmental moderation activities
¨ Engagement with local authority and national moderation events
¨ Use of Qualification Scotland and Education Scotland guidance and exemplification materials
¨ Ongoing professional learning and development for staff
¨ Estimating Pupil Success/Grades for QS purposes

See Appendix 1 for suggested Dept Process Guide

Review Cycle

The cycle of moderation is ongoing and frequent. In addition to LA processes, and whole school focus points there should be departmental and classroom processes which ensure both staff and pupils are engaged in moderation as part of an ongoing process. Feedback from moderation activities, Qualification Scotland verification, and staff evaluations will inform updates to ensure continued relevance and effectiveness. These processes will feed in to reviews of this policy.

Roles and Responsibilities

All colleagues along with the pupils in Woodmill High School have an important role to play in the moderation cycle:

Learners

Engage actively in assessment processes and reflect on feedback to improve and develop next steps in learning
Engaging in lessons and feedback on lessons to help shape pupil experience

Classroom Teachers

Key role – Plan and deliver high-quality lessons which utilize a range of assessments/AIFL strategies, participate and support moderation activities to ensure they meet the national standard

Sharing good practice at DMs
Working with Peers to reflect through peer observation
Engaging in Pupil voice activities
Reflecting on and using plenary activities to develop pedagogy
Engaging in learner conversations, both individual and group based to develop highly effective practice
Engage in Department moderation Activities throughout the year
Engage in National Understanding Standards webinars (where possible)
Collate and review evidence for each candidate in their class(es) and determines estimated grades in close liaison with their department
Share estimates with their Principal Teacher
Contribute to department discussion with respect to the determination of estimated grades for each candidate
Contribute to quality assuring the accuracy of estimated grades in line with QS guidance

Principal Teachers Curriculum

Key role - Lead departmental moderation and ensure consistency of assessment

Use DM and other departmental processes to develop Learning and Teaching in the department
Review Departmental Tracking information throughout the academic year
Lead Departmental moderation activities throughout the year
Lead the process of collating evidence and determining estimated grades in their Departments
Engage with Local Authority moderation activities
Engage with national moderation/verification events
Engage in National Understanding Standards webinars
Responsibility for quality assuring the accuracy of estimated grades in line with the QS’s guidance
Leads department discussion with respect to the determination of estimated grades for each candidate
Engage with School and Authority Results Support Tools
Inputs estimates and have these checked by one other member of their department (Quality Assured). In a single person department, this should be another colleague within the school

Principal Teachers Pastoral Care and SfL

Key role – Support departmental moderation and ensure contact with home

Review Departmental Tracking information throughout the academic year
Provide an overview of candidates with exceptional circumstances and/or AARs to PTs Curriculum and the QS Coordinator where appropriate

Head Teacher and SLT

Key role - Oversee implementation and review of the policy, support staff development

Review Tracking information throughout the academic year
Overview of the process of collating evidence and determining estimating grades
Engage with School and Authority Results Support Tools
Engages with, quality assures, in close liaison with SMT and Principal Teachers, the accuracy of estimated grades
QS sense-checking alignment with QS processes/expectations
Identifying and accounting for unusual trends/patterns of attainment Heads of centre sign off the outcomes per subject
Ensures all estimates are submitted to QS.

Moderation in BGE

Much of the moderation – both in process and in implementation – links to assessment and the tools we use within the class to ensure that pupils are making measurable progress. Assessment tools are used at multiple levels to ensure breadth and depth of learning. However, these should be used as an impetus/focus of our ongoing feedback to pupils:

¨ Lessons: Formative assessment strategies, questioning, peer and self-assessment, clear success criteria (created with pupils) and revisited in plenary
¨ Departments: Common assessment tasks, marking schemes, and moderation folders, exemplification of levels, department tracking mechanisms
¨ Whole School: Tracking and monitoring systems, data analysis tools, and reporting templates

Moderation in the Senior Phase

As is the case in the BGE, moderation in the Senior Phase links to assessment and the tools we use within the class to ensure that pupils are making measurable progress, which is communicated to the pupils themselves, their parent or carer and to Qualification Scotland. This comprises of the ongoing assessments; such as unit assessments, prelims, assignments etc. and estimates submitted to QS.

Providing Estimates

Different subjects have different assessment requirements, which could be a factor in estimating, depending on the nature of the evidence and the way it is generated.

Throughout the process, it is important to allocate sufficient time to raise questions, to discuss and to reflect. This should include considering issues related to equity for all candidates. (please see graphic on page below)

Documenting moderation discussions

Please see the forms in the Appendix 2 which are there as a guide as to how best to document moderation discussion.

These forms are not mandatory, but the details that are contained in them are – departments should ensure that any departmental forms being used cover the same information.

Justification for decision making

It is imperative that decision making relating to Professional Judgement is documented and the justification for decision-making part of the form includes a detailed explanation of the reasons for professional decisions being made.

These decisions must be based on demonstrated evidence and should already be clearly documented in tracking and monitoring procedures, interventions and subsequent communications to parents.

Internal Verification and Quality Assurance

It is essential that the specified conditions and National assessment standards are consistently applied in all centres. This ensures that reliable assessment decisions are made in centres delivering National Courses, and the standard and credibility of the qualifications are maintained. The classroom teacher performs exactly the same role for QS internal assessed content as an invigilator would be expected to deliver in the QS exam diet.

The subject-specific documentation, e.g. the course specification and the coursework assessment task will provide detailed instructions about the assessment conditions which must be applied to each qualification at each level. These documents must be consulted as this will provide the specific conditions for assessment that must be applied to each subject, at each level.

The purpose of internal verification is to ensure that these principles of QS assessment are met.

Internal verification uses a range of processes to ensure that:

appropriate assessments are used for each qualification
assessments are capable of generating sufficient evidence to allow candidates to demonstrate that they have met the national standard
all teachers are familiar with the national standards
teachers reach accurate and consistent decisions for the same qualification for all candidates in their centre in line with national standards.

The GTCS Standard for Registration highlights that teachers are expected to:

know and understand how to apply the principles of assessment, recording and reporting as an integral part of the teaching process.
have extensive knowledge and a secure understanding of the assessment requirements of the major awarding and accrediting bodies.

They will be supported by Principal teachers who are responsible for implementing departmental verification to ensure the validly of assessments.

They should:

support all teachers
check assessment instruments to ensure validity
arranging standardisation exercises
observing teaching assessment decisions
sampling assessment decisions
ensuring that internal verification decisions are consistent
recording verification activities and outcomes

https://www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/InternalVerificationGuideforCentres.pdf

Principal Teachers are responsible when they submit unit assessment results to QS that they are valid and that the standards of QS assessment have been met.

Evidence that these standards have been applied will be requested by QS external visiting verifiers, if chosen for QS Verification and if requested by the QS coordinator as part of any internal audit.

The Woodmill Internal Verification toolkit should be used by PT’s to ensure compliance to QS standards.

A copy of the Internal Verification Toolkit is also contained in Appendix 3.

Malpractice

Where concerns of possible assessment malpractice arise, they must be dealt with sensitively, robustly and above all fairly. All allegations of malpractice must be investigated consistently, fairly and impartially.

Malpractice can include both maladministration in the assessment and delivery of QS qualifications and deliberate non-compliance with QS requirements. Whether intentional or not, it is necessary to investigate and act upon any suspected instances of malpractice, to protect the integrity of the qualification and to identify any wider lessons to be learned.

The teacher delivering the assessment is responsible that all QS regulations relating to that assessment are followed to ensure equity and fairness for all candidates. It is essential that the specified conditions are consistently applied in all centres. This ensures that reliable assessment decisions are made in centres delivering National Courses, and the standard and credibility of the qualifications are maintained. The teacher performs exactly the role as an invigilator would be expected to deliver in the QS exam diet.

Candidate Malpractice

Where a concern arises about a possible breach of QS regulations in relation to QS coursework or unit assessment by a pupil or pupils, the member of staff must report immediately to the Principal Teacher.

The Principal teacher should collate this information and as soon as possible pass this to the QS Coordinator. The QS coordinator will conduct an investigation in line with QS guidelines ‘Malpractice: Information for Centres’ and specifically QS Standards for Devolved Investigations’.

https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/files_ccc/MalpracticeInformationForCentres.pdf

The following are examples of candidate malpractice, but you should be vigilant to other instances of suspected malpractice that may undermine the integrity of qualifications.

Examples could include:

Collusion with others when an assessment must be completed by individual candidates.
Copying from another candidate (including using ICT to do so) and/or working collaboratively with other candidates on an individual task.
Frivolous content — producing content that is unrelated to the assessment.
Misconduct — inappropriate behaviour in an assessment room that causes disruption to others. This includes talking, shouting and/or aggressive behaviour or language, and having a prohibited electronic device that emits any kind of sound in the assessment room.
Offensive content — content in assessment materials that includes vulgarity and swearing that is outwith the context of the assessment, or any material that is discriminatory in nature (including discrimination in relation to the protected characteristics identified in the Equality Act 2010). This should not be read as inhibiting candidates’ rights to freedom of expression.
Personation — assuming the identity of another candidate or a candidate having someone assume their identity during an assessment.
Plagiarism — failure to acknowledge sources properly and/or the submission of another person’s work as if it were the candidate’s own.
Prohibited items — physical possession of prohibited materials (including mobile phones, electronic devices and handwritten notes etc) during a controlled assessment.
Breaching the security of assessment materials in a way which threatens the integrity of any exam or assessment.
Pupils will have the right to appeal any decision made by Woodmill High School that they disagree with to the QS. Parents will be informed that candidate appeals against the outcome of a centre investigation must:
only be considered by QS after the centre’s internal appeals process has been exhausted
be submitted, in writing, to an QS director within 15 working days of being notified of the decision
be sent to the Corporate Office at QS’s Glasgow office (The Optima Building, 58 Robertson Street, Glasgow G2 8DQ) and should be clearly marked as an appeal
include a written account of why the candidate thinks that the centre’s decision is wrong, and • address the reasons for the original decision given by the centre
Any evidence submitted to support this claim must be relevant to the case being made.

Further details about the appeals procedure can be found in:

https://www.sqa.org.uk/files_ccc/Appeals_Process.pdf

Centre Malpractice

Centre malpractice means any type of malpractice by a centre, or someone acting on its behalf which threatens the integrity of an examination or assessment.

The following are examples of centre malpractice,

Managers or others exerting undue pressure on staff to pass candidates who have not met the requirements for an award.
Excessive direction from teachers to candidates on how to meet national standards.
Failure to assess internally assessed unit or course assessment work fairly, consistently and in line with national standards.
Failure to apply specified QS assessment conditions in assessments, such as limits on resources or time available to candidates to complete their assessments.
Misuse of assessments, including repeated re-assessment contrary to requirements, or inappropriate adjustments to assessment decisions.
Insecure storage of assessment instruments, materials and marking instructions.
Failure to comply with requirements for accurate and safe retention of candidate evidence, assessment and internal verification records.
Failure to comply with QS’s procedures for managing and transferring accurate candidate data.
Deliberate falsification of records in order to claim certificates.
For all QS qualifications, failure by a centre to notify, investigate and report to QS allegations of suspected centre malpractice.
Failure to take action as required by QS or to co-operate with an QS investigation in relation to concerns of malpractice.
For qualifications subject to regulation by QS Accreditation or Ofqual, failure by a centre to notify, investigate and report to QS allegations of suspected candidate malpractice.
Deliberately withholding information about circumstances which may compromise the integrity of any QS qualification and/or credibility of QS.

Any member of staff who has concerns, or becomes aware of any incidents of malpractice, must report this immediately to the QS coordinator.

The QS coordinator will conduct an investigation in line with QS guidelines

‘Malpractice: Information for Centres’ and specifically QS Standards for Devolved Investigations’

External Verification

Overview

All units are internally assessed, and some course assessment components are also internally assessed — you can find a list of these in the Course Assessment Components spreadsheet, which is available in the NQ Information section on QS Connect.

To maintain confidence in all QS qualifications, robust quality assurance of these internal assessment decisions is essential to ensure that national standards are being maintained, wherever and however the qualifications are being delivered.

External verification is the process by which QS works in partnership with all centres to do this. It focuses on:

sharing knowledge about national standards
providing support and guidance to centres on the delivery of QS qualifications
ensuring that appropriate approaches to assessment that are in line with QS
specifications are being used — that they are rigorous and fair so that candidates can
show if they have achieved the required standard
ensuring the reliability of assessment decisions —
- o that they are accurately and consistently applied across all candidates and levels External verification is undertaken by subject experts who are contracted to undertake activities on behalf of QS. They may be teachers, lecturers or representatives from professional bodies, industry and commerce.

Details about their roles and responsibilities can be found on our website at

www.sqa.org.uk/appointeeroledescriptions.

You can also find details of current opportunities and vacancies for QS verifiers at https://appointeeopportunities.sqa.org.uk/vacancies.html.

There are three main types of verification for National Qualifications:

prior verification
event verification
visiting verification

Prior verification

Prior verification is a service offered to centres who devise their own assessments, or who significantly change QS’s assessments to suit their particular needs. The service gives centres additional confidence that their proposed assessment is fit for purpose and meets national standards.

Please see www.sqa.org.uk/nqpriorverification for further details and instructions on how to submit prior verification requests.

Visiting verification

Verifiers will visit the centre and look at verification evidence from a sample of candidates. This is to confirm that an appropriate approach to assessment has been used, and that consistent assessment decisions are being made in line with national standards. Visits will always be arranged in advance. This will primarily be done via the Principal Teacher and the visiting verifier.

Generating the evidence sample

When our centre has been selected for verification, it will be necessary for verification evidence from a sample of candidates to be made available for uplift, or for review during a verification visit to the centre. QS will provide details when they issue the selections. Please note that evidence for verification must be for candidates being certificated in the current session. Complete evidence is required for course verification selections. For all other units, complete evidence should be provided where it is available. Although it is anticipated that complete evidence will be available, interim evidence can be used, assuming that it meets the criteria detailed in the submission guidance, which you can find at https://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/74668.6220.htm

Arranging visits

If you have been selected for visiting verification, the QS visiting verifier will contact the school to arrange a date and time for the visit and agree a visit plan. This should be agreed between the Principal Teacher of the subject being visited and the visiting verifier. If the evidence to be reviewed includes live candidate performances, the schedule for this should not be finalised with the candidates until the visit date has been agreed with the verifier.

The visit plan will specify:

the levels to be covered by the sample (and, for unit verification, which units are to be covered)
the records, documents and personnel that should be available during the visit

Once the plan has been agreed, it will be emailed to the Principal Teacher. Although a start time for the visit will be agreed, it may be difficult to specify times during the visit for meetings with individual centre staff, as this will depend on what the verifier finds in the evidence on the day. QS therefore advise not to devise a programme for the visit. Centre staff should keep arrangements for the visit as fluid as possible until all of the evidence has been reviewed. Time should be planned for the end of the visit to include a feedback meeting that should be attended by:

The Head of Department/Principal Teacher
The QS Co-ordinator
Any member of staff featured in the visiting verification

Outcome Report

Once the review of evidence has been completed, an Outcome Report detailing the outcome, feedback on the verification of evidence, and any required actions, will be published and made available on QS Connect. A copy of the report should be passed to the Principal Teacher.

Return of materials

All materials uplifted from the centre for verification will be dispatched back as soon as possible after the Outcome Report has been published.

Follow-up action

If the verification outcome is ‘Not Accepted’, the reasons for this will be detailed in the Outcome Report.

The report will detail specific instruction on the required actions that must be undertaken to allow certification to proceed. Specific instructions and the forms/stationery required to undertake these actions will be issued when the verification materials are returned to the centre. Required actions should be completed as soon as possible and in time to allow them to be reviewed by the published key dates. The Principal Teacher is ultimately responsible for ensuring that these steps take place. This will ensure that any accepted/revised results can be processed for August certification. If required actions are not completed by the key date, the candidates may not be certificated. It is the school’s responsibility to ensure that candidates are informed that they will not receive the award of this qualification in August.