Statement of Intent

This section provides details of the purpose of this document, as appropriate to our centre:

The purpose of this policy is:

• To ensure that teacher assessed grades are determined fairly, consistently, free from bias and effectively within and across departments.
• To ensure the operation of effective processes with clear guidelines and support for staff.
• To ensure that all staff involved in the processes clearly understand their roles and responsibilities.
• To support teachers to take evidence-based decisions in line with Joint Council for Qualifications guidance.
• To ensure the consideration of historical centre data in the process, and the appropriate decision making in respect of, teacher assessed grades.
• To support a high standard of internal quality assurance in the allocation of teacher assessed grades.
• To support our centre in meeting its obligations in relation to equality legislation.
• To ensure our centre meets all requirements set out by the Department of Education, Ofqual, the Joint Council for Qualifications and awarding organisations for Summer 2021 qualifications.
• To ensure the process for communicating to candidates and their parents/carers how they will be assessed is clear, in order to give confidence.

Key Dates

Week Beginning 15th March

Subjects to review what has been taught from specification, aligning

AO’s. An audit trail to be conducted of what evidence is already available.

26th March

Inset Day - Moderation of existing evidence to be used and collation into

student evidence folders.

End March 2021

Exam board guidance to be issued

Week Beginning

17th May

Dept Moderation week. Grades to be uploaded to SIMs / SISRA for

analysis and comparison to previous cohorts.

Week Beginning

24th May

SLT / CC moderation week

Week beginning June 7th

Trust Data meeting to review final grades to be submitted with every academy (short, final check)

Week beginning 14th June

Final Grades submitted to the Examinations officer.

18 June 2021

Grades submitted to Exam boards

10 August 2021

and 12 August

A level and GCSE results day respectively

10 August

onwards

Appeals window opens

Roles and Responsibilities

This section gives details of the roles and responsibilities within our centre:

Head of Centre

• Our Head of Centre, Catherine Kelly, will be responsible for approving our policy for determining teacher assessed grades.
• Our Head of Centre, with Deputy Head for Curriculum and Standards will meet with the Academy Trust Board to quality assure our policy and procedures for determining teacher assessed grades
• Our Head of Centre has overall responsibility for the school as an examinations centre and will ensure that clear roles and responsibilities of all staff are defined.
• Our Head of Centre will confirm that teacher assessed grade decisions represent the academic judgement made by teachers and that the checks in place ensure these align with the guidance on standards provided by awarding organisations.
• Our Head of Centre will ensure a robust internal quality assurance process has been produced and signed-off in advance of results being submitted.
• Our Head of Centre, with Deputy Head for Curriculum and Standards will meet with the Academy Trust Directors to compare teacher assessed grades to results for previous cohorts.

Senior Leadership Team and Curriculum Coordinators

Our Senior Leadership Team and Curriculum Coordinators will:

• provide training and support to teachers and other staff, including our Alternative Provision Providers.
• support the Head of Centre in the quality assurance of the final teacher assessed grades.
• ensure an effective approach within and across departments and authenticating the preliminary outcome from single teacher subjects.
• be responsible for ensuring staff have a clear understanding of the internal and external quality assurance processes and their role within it.
• ensure that all teachers within their department make consistent judgements about student evidence in deriving a grade.
• ensure all staff conduct assessments under the appropriate levels of control with reference to guidance provided by the Joint Council for Qualifications.
• ensure teachers have the information required to make accurate and fair judgments.
• will meet together in Line Managed areas to discuss all processes and policy are understood - a checklist will be completed
• ensure that a Checklist is completed for each qualification that they are submitting.
• Ensure that evidence provided by Alternative Provision providers allows students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills of what they have been taught.Ensure that Alternative Provision Providers are given appropriate assessments for students to

complete.

Training

This section provides details of the approach our centre will take to training, support and guidance in determining teacher assessed grades this year

• Teachers involved in determining grades in our centre will attend any centre-based training to help achieve consistency and fairness to all students.
• Teachers will engage fully with all training and support that has been provided by the Joint Council for Qualifications and the awarding organisations.
• We have a number of current exam board markers in the following subjects:

• Geography (1)
• English (8) one of whom is a team leader for AQA
• Maths (5)
• Computer Science (1)
• Spanish Speaking (1) Writing (1)

The exam markers take a lead on the standardisation and moderation process during department meetings and pair up to mentor any teachers unfamiliar with assessment.

• Examples of Types of Training undertaken by teachers are

All teachers awarding grades have watched the national college webinar for awarding qualifications

Specific training on bias and maintaining objectivity. This was delivered to CC’s by DHT. CCs delivered to their teams during a dept meeting. https://www.jcq.org.uk/maintaining- objectivity/#bias-mitigation

SLT / CC meetings to discuss roles, responsibilities, policies and practices and to complete SLT / CC Checklist see appendix 1

Dept meetings to discuss roles, responsibilities, policies, and practices Dept Standardisation - see appendix 3

Dept Moderation

Depts have attended individual exam board webinars and training.

Academy Trust support in the form of meetings,training, grade distribution and comparison of previous results, standardisation and moderation from Trust Subject Directors, for Geog, Maths, English, MFL and Science.

Academy Trust moderation for Art.

• Single Person Departments will combine with similar subjects or faculties:

• Music to work with Drama
• Psychology to work with Health and Social Care
• Hospitality and Catering, DT and Construction to work together

A.  Use of evidence

This section gives details in relation to our use of evidence.

• Teachers making judgements will have regard to the Ofqual Head of Centre guidance on recommended evidence, and further guidance provided by awarding organisations.
• All candidate evidence used to determine teacher assessed grades, and associated documentation, will be retained and made available for the purposes of external quality assurance and appeals.
• We will be using student work produced in response to assessment materials provided by our awarding organisation(s), including groups of questions, past papers or similar materials such as practice or sample papers.
• We will use non-exam assessment work (often referred to as coursework), even if this has not been fully completed - BTECs and similar courses only
• We may use student work produced in centre-devised tasks that reflect the specification, that follow the same format as awarding organisation materials, and have been marked in a way that reflects awarding organisation mark schemes.
• We may use substantial class or homework (including work that took place during remote learning).
• We may use internal tests taken by pupils.
• We may use mock exams taken over the course of study.
• We will use records of a student’s capability and performance over the course of study in performance-based subjects such as music, drama and PE where required.
• Alternative provision will be asked to provide evidence for students using the types of evidence above. If the same curriculum content has been taught, Alternative Provision Students will be given the same assessment materials provided by the awarding organisation(s) that those who remain in Coop Academy Bebington have sat. If the curriculum content differs, any questions that assess non taught content will be omitted. This evidence will be moderated by Coop Academy Bebington curriculum coordinators.
• Students being educated at home, because of medical circumstances, will, if possible, attend the centre to undertake assessments. Those who cannot attend, will complete assessments at home under the supervision of invigilators (covid restrictions dependant) or using Google Meet.

Additional Assessment Materials provided by Examination Boards

• We will use additional assessment materials provided by examination boards for use in Summer 2021 in all subjects, where relevant.
• Assessment materials will be used in the form provided or tailored to better match the content that has been taught. Subjects can decide which activities should be completed, with the task being set, the student work collected and then marked using the accompanying mark scheme - drawing on other available support materials where

provided.

• We will combine and/or remove elements of questions where, for example, a multi-part question includes a part which focuses on an element of the specification that hasn’t been taught.
• These assessments will be completed in the classroom under supervision.
• We will use these additional assessment materials to give students an opportunity to show improvement, for example, to validate or replace an existing piece of evidence.
• We will use these additional assessment materials to support consistency of judgement between teachers or classes by giving everyone the same task to complete.

Our centre will ensure the appropriateness of evidence and balance of evidence in arriving at grades in the following ways:

• We will consider the level of control under which an assessment was completed, for example, whether the evidence was produced under high control and under supervision or at home. Teachers have been given guidance as to what constitutes the different levels of control.
• We will ensure that we are able to authenticate the work as the student’s own, especially where that work was not completed within the school. (Only Art GCSE, BTEC and vocational qualification coursework has been part completed at home. All GCSE assessment evidence has been completed in school)
• We will consider the limitations of assessing a student’s performance when using assessments that have been completed more than once, or drafted and redrafted, where this is not a skill being assessed. We will consider the specification and assessment objective coverage of the assessment.
• We will consider the depth and breadth of knowledge, understanding and skills assessed, especially higher order skills within individual assessments.

Awarding teacher assessed grades based on evidence

We give details here of our centre’s approach to awarding teacher assessed grades.

• Our teachers will determine grades based on evidence which is commensurate with the standard at which a student is performing, i.e. their demonstrated knowledge, understanding and skills across the content of the course they have been taught.
• Our teachers will record how the evidence was used to arrive at a fair and objective grade, which is free from bias.
• Our teachers will produce an Assessment Record for each subject cohort and will share this with their Curriculum Coordinator. Any necessary variations for individual students will also be shared.

Internal quality assurance

This section gives details of our approach to internal standardisation, within and across subject departments.

• We will ensure that all teachers involved in deriving teacher assessed grades read and understand this Centre Policy document.
• In subjects where there is more than one teacher and/or class in the department, we will ensure that our centre carries out an internal standardisation and moderation process. Where we have subject directors within the Trust, standardisation and moderation will occur between schools.
• We will ensure that all teachers are provided with training and support to ensure they take a consistent approach to:

• Arriving at teacher assessed grades
• Marking of evidence
• Reaching a holistic grading decision
• Applying the use of grading support and documentation

• We will conduct internal standardisation across all grades.
• We will ensure that the Assessment Record will form the basis of internal standardisation and discussions across teachers to agree the awarding of teacher assessed grades.
• SLT Line Managers will meet with Curriculum Coordinators to sample and quality assure evidence and to ensure that policy and processes are being followed.
• Where necessary, we will review and reflect on individual grading decisions to ensure alignment with the standards as outlined by our awarding organisation(s).
• Where appropriate, we will amend individual grade decisions to ensure alignment with the standards as outlined by our awarding organisation(s).
• Where there is only one teacher involved in marking assessments and determining grades, then the output of this activity will be reviewed by an appropriate member of staff within the centre.

• This will be the Deputy Head - Debbie Jennings for Music and Psychology. Deputy Head Lisa Hesketh for Hospitality and Catering.

• In respect of equality legislation, we will consider the range of evidence for students of different protected characteristics that are included in our internal standardisation.

Comparison of Teacher Assessed Grades to results for previous cohorts

This section gives details of our internal process to ensure a comparison of teacher assessed grades at qualification level to results for previous cohorts in our centre taking the same qualification.

• After all grading decisions have been made, we will review the aggregate cumulative grade distribution for each subject, and qualification type (e.g. GCSE, A level). If outcomes are much higher than in previous years, or much lower, the reasons for it should be considered. We will pay particular close attention to grade 4 awards.
• We will compile information on the grades awarded to our students in past June series in which exams took place (e.g. 2017 - 2019), using analytic tools within SISRA and DfE subject Transition matrices.
• From SISRA will take into consideration data such as the

• Subject Performance Indicator for all included subjects, this shows how each student has performed in each subject compared with all students with the same KS2 Prior in their Data Collaboration (similar to P8 but for subjects)
• Progress 8 for English and Maths
• VA for Science, MFL and Humanities
• Basics 9-5 and 9-4 for English and Maths

• Coop Academy Bebington Head of Centre and Deputy Head Curriculum and Standards, will meet with the Coop Academy Trust Board to review current data in comparison with past subject and whole school performance (2017-2019) We will also take into consideration how grades were distributed in 2020.
• We will consider the size of our cohort from year to year, being mindful that low cohorts can make data comparison statistically insignificant.
• We will consider the stability of our centre’s overall grade outcomes from year to year.
• We will consider both subject and centre level variation in our outcomes during the internal quality assurance process.
• We will prepare a succinct narrative on the outcomes of the review against historic data which, in the event of significant divergence from the qualifications-levels profiles attained in previous examined years, which address the reasons for this divergence. This commentary will be available for subsequent review during the QA process.

This section gives details of the approach our centre will follow if our initial teacher assessed grades for a qualification are viewed as overly lenient or harsh compared to results in previous years.

• We will compile historical data giving appropriate regard to potential mixtures of A*-G and 9-1 grades in GCSEs. Where required, we will use the Ofqual guidance to convert legacy grades into the new 9 to 1 scale.
• We will bring together other data sources that will help to quality assure the grades we intend to award in 2021.

This section gives details of changes in our cohorts that need to be reflected in our comparisons.

• We will omit subjects that we no longer offer from the historical data.
• We will omit subjects from current data when comparing to historical that we do have not prior results for i.e Events
• We will omit subjects when comparing current and historical that have changed significantly in their content eg GCSE Music and BTEC Music

Reasonable adjustments and mitigating circumstances (special consideration)

This section gives details of our approach to access arrangements and mitigating circumstances (special consideration).

• Where students have agreed access arrangements or reasonable adjustments (for example a reader or scribe) we will make every effort to ensure that these arrangements are in place when assessments are being taken.
• If students decline access arrangements, they will sign a disclaimer form. This form will be copied and sent home to parents.
• Where an assessment has taken place without an agreed reasonable adjustment or access arrangement, we will remove that assessment from the basket of evidence and alternative

evidence obtained.

B.  Addressing Disruption/Differentiated Lost Learning (DLL)

This section gives details of our approach to address disruption or differentiated lost teaching.

• Teacher assessed grades will be determined based on evidence of the content that has been taught and assessed for each student.

Objectivity

This section gives a summary of the arrangements in place within our centre in relation to objectivity.

Staff will fulfil their duties and responsibilities in relation to relevant equality and disability legislation.

Senior Leaders, Curriculum Coordinators and Heads of Centre will consider:

• sources of unfairness and bias (situations/contexts, difficulty, presentation and format, language, conditions for assessment, marker preconceptions);
• how to minimise bias in questions and marking and hidden forms of bias); and
• bias in teacher assessed grades.

To ensure objectivity, all staff involved in determining teacher assessed grades will be made aware that:

• unconscious bias can skew judgements;
• the evidence presented should be valued for its own merit as an indication of performance and attainment;
• teacher assessed grades should not be influenced by candidates’ positive or challenging personal circumstances, character, behaviour, appearance, socio-economic background, or protected characteristics;
• unconscious bias is more likely to occur when quick opinions are formed; and our internal standardisation process will help to ensure that there are different perspectives to the quality assurance process.
• All teachers have read the ‘Information for centres about making objective judgements 2021’ document

C.  Recording Decisions and Retention of Evidence and Data

This section outlines our approach to recording decisions and retaining evidence and data.

• We will ensure that teachers and curriculum coordinators maintain records that show how the teacher assessed grades process operated, including the rationale for decisions in relation to individual marks/grades.
• We will ensure that evidence is maintained across a variety of tasks to develop a holistic view of each student’s demonstrated knowledge, understanding and skills in the areas of content taught.
• We will put in place recording requirements for the various stages of the process to ensure the accurate and secure retention of the evidence used to make decisions.
• We will comply with our obligations regarding data protection legislation.
• We will ensure that the grades accurately reflect the evidence submitted.
• We will ensure that evidence is retained electronically or on paper in a secure centre-based system that can be readily shared with our awarding organisation(s).

D. Authenticating evidence

This section of our Centre Policy details the mechanisms in place to ensure that teachers are confident in the authenticity of evidence, and the process for dealing with cases where evidence is not thought to be authentic.

• Robust mechanisms, which will include

• The vast majority of assessments will be undertaken in the classroom where examination conditions as far as possible will be in place.
• Teachers will be reminded of the protocol for invigilation.
• Students and parents will be reminded of the meaning of malpractice and the expectations and consequences of malpractice.
• The examinations officer and SLT will drop into classrooms during assessments to check examination protocol is being adhered to by both students and teachers.
• Seating plans will be used to enable checking for copying.
• Where possible students will be spaced apart from other students.
• Any malpractice will be reported to the exams officer.
• The exams officer will deal with malpractice according to the malpractice policy.
•         All students will sign to verify that all assessments are their own work. Teachers will countersign.
• For work completed with alternative provision providers, both students, teachers and the head of centre will sign to verify that all assessments submitted as evidence are their own work and no inappropriate levels of support have been given.
• Teachers will use professional judgement when marking assessments, being vigilant to observe for scores and / or work which far exceeds previous performance.

• This will ensure that teachers are confident that work used as evidence is the students’ own and that no inappropriate levels of support have been given to students to complete it, either within the centre or with external tutors.
• It is understood that awarding organisations will investigate instances where it appears evidence is not authentic. We will follow all guidance provided by awarding organisations https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/awarding-qualifications-in-summer- 2021/awarding-qualifications-in-summer-2021 to support these determinations of

authenticity.

A.  Confidentiality

This section details the measures in place in our centre to maintain the confidentiality of grades, while sharing information regarding the range of evidence on which the grades will be based.

• All staff involved have been made aware of the need to maintain the confidentiality of teacher assessed grades.
• All teaching staff have been briefed on the requirement to share details of the range of evidence on which students’ grades will be based, while ensuring that details of the final grades remain confidential.
• Relevant details from this Policy, including requirements around sharing details of evidence and the confidentiality requirements, have been shared with parents/guardians.

B.  Malpractice

This section details the measures in place in our centre to prevent malpractice and, where that proves impossible, to handle cases in accordance with awarding organisation requirements.

• Our general centre policies regarding malpractice, maladministration and conflicts of interest have been reviewed to ensure they address the specific challenges of delivery in Summer 2021.
• All staff involved have been made aware of these policies, and have received training in them as necessary.
• All students and parents have been informed about the Malpractice Policy and implications.
• All staff involved have been made aware of the specific types of malpractice which may affect the Summer 2021 series including:

• breaches of internal security;
• deception;
• improper assistance to students;
• failure to appropriately authenticate a student’s work;
• over direction of students in preparation for common assessments;

C.  Conflicts of Interest

This section details our approach to addressing conflicts of interest, and how we will respond to such allegations.

• To protect the integrity of assessments, all staff involved in the determination of grades must declare any conflict of interest such as relationships with students to our Head of Centre for further consideration.
• Our Head of Centre will take appropriate action to manage any conflicts of interest arising with centre staff in accordance with the JCQ documents - General Regulations for Approved Centres, 1 September 2020 to 31 August 2021.
• We will also carefully consider the need to separate duties and personnel to ensure fairness in later process reviews and appeals.

A.  External Quality Assurance

This section outlines the arrangements we have in place to ensure the relevant documentation and assessment evidence can be provided in a timely manner for the purposes of External Quality Assurance sampling, and that staff can be made available to respond to enquiries.

• All staff involved have been made aware of the awarding organisation requirements for External Quality Assurance as set out in the JCQ Guidance.
• All necessary records of decision-making in relation to determining grades have been properly kept and can be made available for review as required.
• All student evidence on which decisions regarding the determination of grades has been retained and can be made available for review as required.
• Instances where student evidence used to decide teacher assessed grades is not available, for example where the material has previously been returned to students and cannot now be retrieved, will be clearly recorded on the appropriate documentation.
• All staff involved have been briefed on the possibility of interaction with awarding organisations during the different stages of the External Quality Assurance process and can respond promptly and fully to enquiries, including attendance at Virtual Visits should this prove necessary.
• Arrangements are in place to respond fully and promptly to any additional requirements/reviews that may be identified as a result of the External Quality Assurance process.
• Staff have been made aware that a failure to respond fully and effectively to such additional requirements may result in further action by the awarding organisations, including the withholding of results.

A.  Results

This section details our approach to the issue of results to students and the provision of advice and guidance.

• All staff involved have been made aware of the specific arrangements for the issue of results in Summer 2021, including the issuing of A/AS and GCSE results in the same week.
• Arrangements will be made to ensure the necessary staffing, including exams office and support staff, to enable the efficient receipt and release of results to our students.
• Arrangements will be in place for the provision of all necessary advice, guidance and support, including pastoral support, to students on receipt of their results.
• Such guidance will include advice on the appeals process in place in 2021 (see below).
• Appropriate staff will be available to respond promptly to any requests for information from awarding organisations, for example regarding missing or incomplete results, to enable such issues to be swiftly resolved.
• Parents/guardians will be made aware of arrangements for results days.

A.  Appeals

This section details our approach to managing appeals, including Centre Reviews, and subsequent appeals to awarding organisations.

• All staff involved have been made aware of the arrangements for, and the requirements of, appeals in Summer 2021, as set out in the JCQ Guidance.
• Internal arrangements will be in place for the swift and effective handling of Centre Reviews in compliance with the requirements.
• All necessary staff have been briefed on the process for, and timing of, such reviews, and will be available to ensure their prompt and efficient handling.
• Learners will have been appropriately guided as to the necessary stages of appeal.
• Arrangements will be in place for the timely submission of appeals to awarding organisations, including any priority appeals, for example those on which university places depend.
• Arrangements will be in place to obtain the written consent of students to the initiation of appeals, and to record their awareness that grades may go down as well as up on appeal.
• Appropriate information on the appeals process will be provided to parents/carers.

Y/

N

Comments

1.  CCs are confident that all teachers within their subject area have read the Coop Academy

Bebington Centre Policy for awarding A’ level and GCSE grades for summer 2012 (In the

process of being completed)

2.Subject SOW or similar illustrates what has been taught across the curriculum, indicating what Assessment Objectives have been covered. The completed documentation has been uploaded to the CAG folder. Only this content should be assessed to make any judgements on

students' performance.

3. CCs and their teaching team have considered the various sources of potential evidence including all the resources provided by the examination board and have decided which best evidence will determine teacher assessed grades. – dept minutes? Conversation

between CC / SLT why assessments have been chosen.The assessments are detailed in the Assessment Record (Tab 3) Subject Centre Assessment Record Spreadsheet

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kVB30SJ5XhbGLOsU9mQheAe3q--BXAhB

4. Planned and prior assessments provide sufficient evidence and coverage of what has been taught and will demonstrate a fair valid and reliable reflection for each student.

The assessments used for evidence adhere to the ofquals Head of Centre guidance on

recommended evidence, and further guidance provided by the awarding organisations.

5. The 10 week Overview Plan in the Subject Centre Assessment Record Spreadsheet (Tab2

)

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kVB30SJ5XhbGLOsU9mQheAe3q--BXAh  has been completed and uploaded to the folder. SLT are confident that subjects are only using the evidence detailed in the Assessment Record (Tab 3), including any variations for individual

students.

6. Where students have agreed access arrangements or reasonable adjustments (eg extra time or a scribe) appropriate arrangements have been planned for each assessment and have been documented in the Access Arrangement (Tab 5) Subject Centre Assessment

Record Spreadsheet. If these arrangements were not in place, an alternative piece of evidence

has been planned for or obtained

7. Where applicable, mitigating circumstances (special consideration) that affected candidates in producing evidence that contributed to their grade was taken into account in determining

candidates’ grades according to the document p34 JCQ Guidance on the determination of grades for A/AS Levels and GCSEs for summer 2021, and this has been documented - Please see JGo or DJe

8. CCs are confident that work used as evidence is the students own and that no inappropriate

levels of support have been given e.g Scaffolding; Relevant Classroom displays are not on show

; Seating plans used to enable checking of copying; Submitted work is original and not redrafted work etc

9. Where applicable, evidence from other centres has been taken into account (e.g. when a student has moved schools or is dual registered) – Do CC’s know who these students are (mainly maths and english? See JGo if unsure

10. The grades for this year’s cohort have been compared to cohorts from previous years when exams have taken place. Significant deviations are explained below – This will be completed at the next meeting, further information will be given to CCs to support this process.

11. In subjects where there is more than one teacher, internal standardisation procedures are in place for each assessment and across all grades (refer to Standardisation Policy).

-Annotated assessments are available for each grade, these should align with the grade descriptors provided by the examination board.

-Subject Exemplar work is to be used for reference.

12. Moderation procedures are in place. Please indicate below if they are different from the guidance provided.

If your subject is participating in Standardisation / Moderation across the Trust schools, please give details below.

13. Each marked assessment to be used as evidence will reference the Teacher Assessed Grade and how it was derived - eg either by using the Subject Descriptor provided by the examination board; A score and converted Grade using Exam Board Grade Boundaries (or subject alternative) eg TAG = 5        65 / 100 - 2019 Marking scheme and Grade Boundary applied. or TAG = 5 10/12 - Subject Descriptor Mostly accurate and appropriate knowledge

and understanding of fundamental concepts and principles including digital systems and societal impacts.

14. Consideration has been given to ensure decisions made are free from bias and aligned to appropriate equality and discrimination legislation – All staff involved in the CAG and TAG process have read the information for centres about making objective judgements, see linked document.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachme nt_data/file/972286/6768-5- Information_for_centres_about_making_objective_judgements_2021.pdf

15. All student evidence on which decisions regarding the determination of grades must

be retained in a safe secure place (please indicate below where) . If electronic please copy into your subject area folder give a copy to JGo

Student Evidence for <course> will be safely stored :

These paper or electronic folders must be made available for review as required by Ofqual or anyone representing Ofqual.

16. Indicate below what training teachers have undertaken to support them with the process of determining consistent and fairness in awarding grades to all students. What support has been given to recently qualified or inexperienced teachers? eg

-Teachers have watched https://thenationalcollege.co.uk/hub/view/webinar/awarding- qualifications-summer-2021

-Dept meetings – Roles, responsibilities, policies and practices discussed

-SLT / CC meetings - Roles, responsibilities, policies and practices discussed

-Standardisation policy and training

-Moderation policy and training

Please add to this list if your team has completed any other relevant training eg Meetings within the Trust with Directors of Education.

17. CCs are confident that teachers within their subject are aware of the requirement to share details of the range of evidence with students on which grades will be based, while ensuring that details of the final grades remain confidential.

Provide detail and justification where you have indicated N to any of the above:

Subject

Teacher

Assessment title

Date of Assessment

Student name

Form

Upward Trend

Subject Progress Index

Name

KS2 Banding

2018

2019

2020

Computer Science

All

-0.71

0.05

0.3

English Language

All

-0.57

-0.33

-0.16

English Literature

All

-0.64

-0.54

-0.44

Geography

All

-1.32

-0.97

-0.53

History

All

-1.3

-0.16

-0.17

Science Combined

All

-0.5

-0.22

0.14

Spanish

All

-1.83

-1.2

-0.75

History

All

-1.3

-0.16

-0.17

Steady High

Performers

Subject Progress Index

Name

KS2 Banding

2018

2019

2020

Sport BTEC

All

1.02

0.79

0.76

Art

All

0.38

0.33

0.5

Fluctuating Trend

Subject Progress Index

Name

KS2 Banding

2018

2019

2020

Drama BTEC

All

0.06

-0.7

0.23

Maths

All

-0.39

-0.56

-0.4