Assessment and Procedure Policy

To ensure that:

Assessment of OTHM programmes are to the national standard

There is equal and fair access to assessment for all learners

Learners are given realistic targets and informed of their progress

Achievement is accurately recorded and tracked

Assessment leads to accurate and valid certification claims

Equal access to assessment for all students.

Aim:

To ensure that assessment methodology is valid, reliable and does not disadvantage or advantage any group of learners or individuals.

To ensure that the assessment procedure is open, fair and free from bias and to national standards.

To ensure that there is accurate and detailed recording of assessment decisions.

iIn order to do this,lccm wil:

Ensure that learners are provided with assignments that are fit for purpose, to enable them to produce appropriate evidence for assessment.
● Assessment covers all Assessors, all units and all learners
● Assess learner’s evidence using only the published assessment and grading criteria.
● Ensure that assessment decisions are impartial, valid and reliable
● Not limit or ‘cap’ learner achievement if work is submitted late
● Develop assessment procedures that will minimise the opportunity for malpractice
● Maintain accurate and detailed records of assessment decisions
● Maintain a robust and rigorous internal verification procedure for assessed work
● Annually provide assessed samples for EV as required by Edexcel
● Monitor EE reports and undertake any remedial action required
● Share good assessment practice between all BTEC programme Assessors
● Ensure that OTHM assessment methodology and the role of the assessor are understood by all staff

Assessments and Guideline’s:

The assignments of OTHM programmes are criterion-referenced and learners’ evidence is assessed against published learning outcomes and assessment criteria set out by OTHM. To get pass/credit/distinction for each unit, learners must meet the assessment criteria set out in the unit specifications provided by the awarding organization. Assessment is a cumulative and an ongoing process throughout a unit. The Assessor gives guidelines on the length of time available to students for the preparation, completion and assessment of the unit. For assessment audit purposes, and for general clarity, an Assignment Brief must be clear about what is being assessed, by whom and when. Key administrative information that should be evident in an Assignment Brief is the: • programme title
• unit title
• Assessor details
• hand-out date
• hand-in date (and interim review dates, where applicable). The timing of the assessment activity will depend on the duration of the course, the coverage of assessment criteria and the level of learners. Nevertheless, assessor must make judgements on whether th

Scenario or Vocational Context

A scenario or vocational context is normally used to provide a vocational focus. For example, a scenario might typically give background information, a job role and a purpose for assessment activities. It may also be contextualised to the local area or work environment the learner may be placed in. Generally, there should be a relationship between the format of the evidence and the given scenario or vocational context. Using forms of evidence such as a poster, a leaflet or a presentation does not mean that an appropriate vocational context and audience have been provided; that is normally supplied through purpose and audience. Consideration should also be given to whether the scenario or vocational context is appropriate for the level of the learner. For example, level 2 learners would be able to relate to a supervisory, rather than managerial, role. Example questions • Does the Assignment Brief have a scenario (or context) that provides an appropriate basis for a vocational assignment at this level?
• Does the Assignment Brief encourage learners to make effective use of the centre, or other local, resources? Structure Assignment Briefs should reference clearly the criteria that they are covering. Simple quoting of criteria is not good practice, but is not actually invalid. Using the verb and key words from a criterion is good practice. Examples of bad practice are:
• including references to criteria but not the criteria themselves
• listing the criteria at the beginning of the Assignment Brief but not linking them to individual tasks
• altering the criteria. An effective assignment structure will group similar themed criteria together and, where appropriate, show progression through pass, merit and distinction. Similarly, assessment activities and tasks within an Assignment Brief should relate to each other. Coverage In delivering a programme all the stipulated unit content must be covered, but for assessment learners must cover sufficient content to demonstrate achievement of the assessment criteria. Assignment Briefs should make the coverage of content clear. This does not necessarily mean listing all the content, as this may be too leading at some levels. The extent to which learners have to cover the unit content to achieve an assessment criterion is subjective. This may depend on the precise wording of the assessment criterion and may have aspects of quality as well as quantity. Some relevant content may be covered in depth which may result in covering more aspects in less depth. Some questions may ask you to judge whether there is over assessment of a criterion by a task. The assessment guidance section in each unit amplifies the assessment criteria and may give specific directives on quantity and depth. Questions that relate to coverage are addressing what the learner is being asked to do and not the presentation of their evidence. Example questions
• Do the assignment tasks match and fully address the target assessment criteria in accordance with the assessment guidance?
• Is Task 1 likely to result in over-assessment of criterion P1? Evidence Assignment Briefs should specify the format of the evidence learners should produce and its audience. At Entry and Level 1 it may be inappropriate for learners to be given a loose vocational format (“produce a report for your manager” would be too demanding). Nevertheless, even at lower levels, providing some form of rationale and audience is desirable. At higher levels the evidence should not be unduly structured for learners. For example, learners should normally define their own evaluation criteria and structure their own plans and records. The relationship between evidence requirements and assessment criteria must be considered carefully. Assignment Briefs may be interesting, relevant and written in a way that is easy to understand without, in fact, enabling learners to generate evidence that is appropriate to the assessment criteria.

Authentication Work provided by a learner must be their own and, within the body of the work, the learner must confirm that this is the case. The learner should sign a declaration as authentication that all the work submitted is their own. This might be on a coversheet of the Assignment Brief or on a central record. Learner signatures on other documents, such as Assessment Feedback Sheets and Observation Records, can add validity to the authentication of the process but do not add to the authentication of the work unless they include statements to that effect. Please note that the standardisation exercise does not seek to establish whether the learner’s evidence shows signs of plagiarism or authenticity. The fact that the work has been authenticated does not necessarily make it “valid and authentic” but, for the purposes of the exercise, it may be assumed that it is unless a question specifically calls for it to be considered. Example question
• Has the learner work been fully and correctly authenticated? Assessor and Internal Verifier Activity - Audit accuracy Attention to detail is vital, as otherwise records do not present a valid account of the assessment process. Internal verification should always be reported and records should show names, dates, signatures, what is being signed off, and what is being covered in the unit. A record is only invalid if it is clearly incomplete or incorrect, or has been amended without the amendment being signed off. Internal verification of Assignment Briefs must take place before they are issued to learners. The Internal Verifier must provide clear corrective actions to the Assessor if there are any issues with an Assignment Brief, before it can be issued to learners. Assessment of learner work should take place shortly after the submission deadline so that feedback and guidance can be given promptly to learners. For internal verification of assessment decisions to take place, some assessment of learner work should have taken place. Assessment decisions should be internally verified soon after assessment, and not end-loaded. This will improve the quality of assessment and not disadvantage learners. If any remedial action is identified by the Internal Verifier, this should be carried out by the Assessor before the Assignment Brief or learner work is handed to learners. Questions here are concerned with the accuracy and documentation of the process and not the accuracy of the assessment decisions.

Quality of feedback to Assessor The Internal Verifier should provide clear feedback to the Assessor on the Assignment Brief, the assessment decisions reached and on the conduct of assessment as a whole. This might include accuracy of details, suitability of duration, suitability of evidence requirements, vocational relevance, presentation, accuracy of decisions, and comments on the annotation of the learners work and feedback to learners. Completion of internal verification records should not be treated as a tick box exercise; the comments and feedback section on the form should be used appropriately. A rigorous Internal Verifier will give advice to the Assessor on what can be done to improve the assessment process in a developmental and supportive manner. Example questions
• Does the feedback related to the internal verification of the Assignment Brief provide sufficient guidance to the Assessor?
• Is the internal verification of the assessment decisions supportive? Feedback and annotation of learner work The Assessor should give learners feedback on their performance so that they understand how a decision has been reached. The feedback should signpost opportunities for learners to develop further. General encouragement without reference to the assessment criteria achieved (“well done”), random ticks, and negative comments (“more effort needed”) are deemed inappropriate and poor practice. Annotation of learner work by the Assessor is important not only in showing learners where and how they have achieved specific assessment criteria but also in highlighting areas for development and improvement. Example questions
• Is the feedback from the Assessor to the learner appropriately developmental?
• Has the Assessor made clear and constructive annotations within the learner’s work highlighting evidence for achievement, weaknesses and areas for development?
• Has the Assessor provided clear and constructive feedback related to the live practical work as captured on video, highlighting achievement, weaknesses and areas for improvement?