[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-621018-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-621018-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","confirmation-method-procedure-and-awarding-committees","Confirmation Method - Procedure and Awarding Committees","","The Confirmation Method is a rationale-driven approach for awarding exam grades across multiple versions of a test, using the Statistically Recommended Boundary (SRB) to maintain consistent standards over time. It explains how awarders scrutinise a limited set of scripts on the SRB, record judgements on certainty, uncertainty, and non-acceptance, and use an index of uncertainty to decide whether to move boundaries. Evidence from trials shows reduced awarding time and uncertainty, while enabling scale-up initiatives under AQA modernization.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/confirmation-method-procedure-and-awarding-committees/621018/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/confirmation-method-procedure-and-awarding-committees/621018.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Angel","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-20",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main rationale behind the Confirmation Method?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It is based on the idea that differences in candidate performance across exam versions are largely explained by the relative difficulty of the papers, so the relative difficulty cannot be estimated purely by script scrutiny. Script scrutiny is used to confirm whether the statistical difficulty estimate underlying the SRB is sensible.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How do awarders judge scripts in the Confirmation Method?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Awarders look at scripts on the SRB and classify the work as certainly worth the grade (coded 2), borderline worth the grade (coded 1), or certainly not worth the grade (coded 0). Their judgements are recorded on a tick chart to support an index calculation.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"When does the process move away from the SRB?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The index of uncertainty (median rating) determines whether a move is warranted: it requires more than half the committee to vote in the same direction. Practically, the index must be 2 or 0 to justify looking at the mark above or below the SRB, respectively.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},621018,1792502330,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,95,100,105,109,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":110,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":123,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},687207412472,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","The rationale for the Confirmation Method is that the relative difficulty of two examination papers is what primarily accounts for the average difference in performance between two populations of candidates taking two versions of an exam when differences in their population characteristics have been accounted for. Therefore, the relative difficulty of the two papers (defined as it is here) cannot be estimated quantitatively through script scrutiny.  \nAwarding using the Confirmation Method involves asking awarders to decide whether scriptson the Statistically Recommended Boundary (SRB) are of a suitable standard to be consistent with the same grade in previous series. Awarders are asked to look at only one script on the SRB and compare it to archive scripts to ensure comparability. Awarders need to decide if the script they look at on the SRB is certainly worth the grade, borderline worth the grade or certainly not worth the grade. It is argued that without the statistical information provided, awarders would be unable to decide accurately a scriptís quality in terms of examination difficulty between two successive years, which is precisely what must be done to maintain standards. This is also because there is evidence showing that awarders cannot discriminate between scripts within a small range of marks sufficiently well to be able to identify the boundary precisely (Baird and Dhillon, 2005) . The Confirmation Method streamlines the awarding process which, it is argued, will facilitate large scale capitalisation of other modernisation initiatives within AQA, such as electronic marking (CMI+) . At present, it would be impossible to implement CMI+ across all components as script scrutiny would require  \nfacilities that AQA cannot accommodate such as considerable IT and space, to allow onscreen scrutiny, or the mass printing of scanned scripts. These problems would be reduced through the use of the Confirmation Method, since the method requires awarders to scrutinise fewer scripts, Modernisation will also be critical for the viability of the Governmentís proposed move towards a system of Post-Qualifications Applications (PQA) to higher education by 2012.  \nStringer (2007) trialled the Confirmation Method in eight subjects, on one unit from each. It was found that the Confirmation Method greatly reduced awarding time; in total it was estimated that if the Confirmation Method was to be used in all subjects the number of awarding days would be cut from 316 to 204, a saving of 35 per cent. The width of zone of uncertainty also reduced by an average of 1.22 scripts per grade in each unit. The distance of the recommended boundary from the statistically recommended boundary was not found to alter significantly between the traditional method of awarding and using the Confirmation Method in awarding. Generally, awarders tend to go with the mark of the SRB or a mark adjacent to this. This did not alter using the Confirmation Method.  \nQCA granted permission to deviate from the Code of Practice where the trial procedures required, for example the requirement to establish upper and lower limiting marks. QCA also waived the need for an awarding meeting to be reconvened if a grade boundary is subsequently moved to a mark on which scripts had not been scrutinised during the awarding meeting, providing that the mark would have been within the normal five-mark range scrutinised under normal procedures.  \nTHE PROCEDURE  \nThe following section details the Confirmation Method instructions given to awarding committees this series.  \nIntroduction  \nThe Confirmation Method is not simply the standard AQA awarding procedure with the difference that awarders consider one mark at a time. The rationale for the Confirmation Method is that the relative difficulty of two examination papers is what accounts for the average difference in performance between two populations of candidates taking two versions of an exam when differences in their population charact","cbCaif2MXCCe2Hfd","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaif2MXCCe2Hfd","pdf",629675,"English","# Introduction\n# Procedure\n## Script scrutiny and coding\n## Index of uncertainty and SRB confirmation\n## Trial outcomes and operational impact\n# THE PROCEDURE","[{\"question\":\"What is the main rationale behind the Confirmation Method?\",\"answer\":\"It is based on the idea that differences in candidate performance across exam versions are largely explained by the relative difficulty of the papers, so the relative difficulty cannot be estimated purely by script scrutiny. Script scrutiny is used to confirm whether the statistical difficulty estimate underlying the SRB is sensible.\"},{\"question\":\"How do awarders judge scripts in the Confirmation Method?\",\"answer\":\"Awarders look at scripts on the SRB and classify the work as certainly worth the grade (coded 2), borderline worth the grade (coded 1), or certainly not worth the grade (coded 0). Their judgements are recorded on a tick chart to support an index calculation.\"},{\"question\":\"When does the process move away from the SRB?\",\"answer\":\"The index of uncertainty (median rating) determines whether a move is warranted: it requires more than half the committee to vote in the same direction. Practically, the index must be 2 or 0 to justify looking at the mark above or below the SRB, respectively.\"}]","Confirmation Method - Procedure and Awarding Committees | PDF",1792464864,25]