Reforming functional skills qualifications in English and maths - Consultation questions - AQA responses

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by Patrick

Responses to an Ofqual consultation on reforming Functional Skills qualifications in English and maths. The submission addresses agreement or disagreement with proposals on minimum assessment time requirements, restrictions on the number of assessments, centre versus awarding-organisation responsibility for setting and marking assessments at Entry and at Levels 1–2, and whether availability of assessments should be unrestricted. It also supports a pass/fail grading model and emphasizes validity, reliability, comparability between providers, moderation, and confidentiality.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages9

Reading Time23 min

AccessFree to download

Consultation questions

Q1 - Overall assessment times

Q2 - Number of assessments within qualifications

Q3 - Entry levels: setting and marking by centres

Q4 - Levels 1–2: awarding organisation setting and marking

Q5 - Levels 1–2 English speaking/listening: centres set and mark

Q6 - Restrictions on availability of assessments

Q7 - Pass/fail grading model

Q8 - Awarding decisions and preset passes

Reforming functional skills qualifications in English and maths Introduction | Would you like us to treat your response as confidential?If you answer 'yes', we will not include your details in any list of people or organisations that responded to the consultation. | | --- | | No | | Telephone | | --- | | 01483 556330 | | Email | | --- | | [jkennelly@aqa.org.uk](jkennelly@aqa.org.uk) | Consultation questions | Q1 . To what extent do you agree or disagree that we should introduce requirements setting minimum, but no maximum overall assessment times for reformed functional skills qualifications? | | --- | | Disagree
Please give reasons for your answer
We disagree with this position. In order to ensure public confidence in the qualifications, there will need to be a degree of comparability between the offers of different providers. In our view, this is best achieved with tight frameworks for the awarding organisations to work within, ensuring, for example, that the sampling of the content domain is broadly comparable from all providers. | | Q2 . To what extent do you agree or disagree that we should not set requirements around the number of assessments within individual functional skills qualifications? | | --- | | Agree
Please give reasons for your answer
If minimum and maximum assessment times are set, we agree that there is no need to stringently define the number of assessments needed within individual Functional Skills Qualifications. Awarding organisations are well placed to evaluate the appropriate number of assessments (and associated marks) needed to create valid assessments that satisfactorily differentiate between students of all abilities. The freedom to develop assessments that fit with the qualification structure will make the marketplace richer. If no maximum assessment time is set, we would re-iterate our concern around comparability of offers, and the risk of how the content domain is sampled, which could make comparisons more challenging. | | Q3 . To what extent do you agree or disagree that at the Entry levels we should allow, but not require, centres to set and mark the assessments? | | --- | | Agree
Please give reasons for your answer
AQA does not intend to develop Entry level qualifications in Functional Skills. However, our previous experience of offering these qualifications, and our knowledge of challenges faced by the teachers delivering these qualifications, means that we agree with the proposal to allow (but not require) centres to set and mark assessments that are suitable for their learners, providing the rules as set out in paragraph 2.15 of the consultation document are implemented. We also agree that the absence of a requirement for centres to set and mark assessments allows for flexibility in specific situations such as malpractice. | | Q4 . To what extent do you agree or disagree that at Levels 1 and 2 we should require all mathematics assessments, and the reading and writing assessments in English, to be set and marked by the awarding organisation? | | --- | | Strongly Agree
Please give reasons for your answer
We strongly agree that all Level 1 and 2 assessments, except Speaking, listening and communicating, should be set and marked by the awarding organisation in order to maintain an appropriately robust level of validity and reliability for these qualifications. It is imperative for qualifications that contribute to accountability measures to have public confidence. The arguments made in support of a move away from NEA in GCSEs and A-levels should be considered here. | | Q5 . To what extent do you agree or disagree that at Levels 1 and 2 for the speaking, listening and communicating assessments in English we should allow, but not require, centres to set and mark the assessments? | | --- | | Strongly Agree
Please give reasons for your answer
We strongly agree that centres should be allowed to set and mark the Level 1 and 2 assessments for Speak

FAQs

What does the response say about introducing minimum but no maximum overall assessment times?

The response disagrees, arguing that comparability between providers requires tight frameworks for awarding organisations and broadly comparable sampling of the content domain.

How does the response view assessment setting and marking responsibilities at Entry level?

It agrees with allowing (but not requiring) centres to set and mark assessments suitable for their learners, provided the consultation rules are implemented, and highlights flexibility for situations such as malpractice.

What grading model does the response support for reformed Functional Skills qualifications?

It supports continuing with a pass/fail grading model, emphasizing the ethos of demonstrating competency.

Oct 20, 2026

Uploaded by Patrick