Consultation response - Awarding organisation controls for centre assessments - 6 December 2019

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by Patrick

AQA provides consultation feedback on how awarding organisations should control centre assessments and define related concepts such as Centre Assessment Standards Security, moderation, and effective scrutiny approaches. Key concerns include the vagueness of terms like “periodically,” confusion created by combining moderation with other scrutiny methods, and the feasibility of requiring moderation for all qualification types. AQA also recommends clearer guidance on provisional results, consistent marking responsibilities, and how boards should handle sampling and standardisation.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

Consultation response

Proposed definition: Centre Assessment Standards Security

Proposed definition: Moderation

Qualifications subject to Moderation

Other qualifications to include

Factors for determining the most effective Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny approach

Controls based on set factors

Examples of controls for types of assessment

Proposed Conditions

Consultation response Awarding organisation controls for centre assessments 6 December 2019 1. Do you have any comments on our proposed definition for Centre Assessment Standards Security? The definition uses the term “periodically”. We feel this is unnecessarily vague, and centres would welcome more clarity. For example, “at least annually” this would specify a maximum time period and link into the annual delivery cycle of many qualifications in schools and colleges. The consultation itself and the conditions might be confusing as by concatenating the moderation approach and other approaches to ensuring centres are managing and marking work appropriately, some centres may find it convoluted. Please see sections 5, 8 and 9 for further details 2. Do you have any comments on our proposed definition for Moderation? The definition of moderation does not indicate that, where moderation is specified in the regulations as applying to a qualification, it must be carried out for every centre, in each submission cycle, and should not be a sample of centres. AQA would appreciate some clarification on this. 3. Do you have any comments on the qualifications we propose to specify where centre assessments must always be subject to Moderation? Single-component internally assessed qualifications , such as project qualifications, present challenges with marking and conversion to grades , as seen in the ‘spikey’mark distributions which occur, so specifying they must be moderated could limit opportunities to remedy this issue in future. As such, we would suggest that the list should not include project qualifications as this would limit the ability to innovate how these qualifications are designed and awarded, and stop any potential move away from marking to grading. 4. Are there any other qualifications which we should also specify? It could be argued that the centre-based assessments should be subject to moderation in all qualifications where students compete directly with A-level students for university places. However, it is unlikely moderation would be feasible in some cases, given the nature of the assessments. Nevertheless, we believe that the applied general qualifications, which are used as direct equivalents to A-levels and will be in competition with T-levels, should also be included in order to ensure that they are subject to the same level of scrutiny. This would give greater confidence in the quality of the outcomes for applied generals (assuming they continue in the light of the consultation on the future of Level 3 technical and vocational qualifications) . 5. Do you have any comments on the factors we have set out that an awarding organisation might consider when determining the most effective Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny approach? With respect to those qualifications which the conditions stipulate must be moderated, many of the aspects are not relevant so it is confusing to have moderation and other forms of Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny included together. For example, reference to some activities taking place in person and to observations of assessments being taken and marked. It should be made clear whether these aspects relate to moderation or not in the consultation document. We believe that where results are issued by a centre prior to the Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny, it should be made clear that such results are provisional. This would minimise the concern likely to be caused to students and parents , should the marks or grades change in the light of the Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny. This should be stipulated in the conditions to ensure consistent practice across qualifications. We believe it is problematic to expect the Centre Assessment Standards Scrutiny to collect data on who has assessed which work in a centre. It would be challenging to devise sampling regimes to cover this to ensure consistency of marking by different assessors and is disproportionate

FAQs

Why does AQA find the proposed definition for Centre Assessment Standards Security too vague?

AQA notes the definition relies on “periodically,” which it considers unnecessarily vague. Centres would welcome specificity such as “at least annually” to align with the annual delivery cycle.

What clarification does AQA request regarding moderation under the regulations?

AQA asks for clarification on whether moderation must apply to every centre in each submission cycle and whether it can be a sample of centres when moderation is specified for a qualification.

Does AQA support requiring moderation for project or single-component internally assessed qualifications?

No. AQA argues such qualifications face marking and grade conversion challenges and that requiring moderation could limit opportunities to remedy issues and constrain future innovation in how qualifications are designed and awarded.

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by Patrick