Evaluation of the February 2008 confirmation method awarding trial

Abstract

This report presents the findings of the Confirmation Method awarding trial carried out on four subjects in the February 2008 series. The Confirmation Method requires awarders to look at a script on the SRB and decide if it is certainly worth the grade, borderline worth the grade or certainly not worth the grade.

It has been argued that as awarders are unable to differentiate between scripts within a small range of marks, and because they already rely on statistical evidence provided to them before recommending a mark away from the SRB, they should need to find compelling evidence against accepting the SRB.

Quantitative analyses of the data show that there was a non-significant difference in the outcome of recommended boundaries between the method trialled and traditional awarding methods highlighting that awarders are already highly influenced by the SRB.

Awarding time, as well as the width of zone of uncertainty, was found to be greatly reduced using the Confirmation Method. Feedback was gathered from the awarding committee at the end of the trial and is discussed. Smooth running of all meetings was reported. Some committees commented that they would have felt more comfortable had they been allowed to look at more scripts on each mark; the increased comparisons with archive material was considered to be beneficial and also focus in meetings was more easily maintained.

The report concludes that looking at two scripts on each mark might be an improvement and a development of the method in future trials.

How to cite

Davenport, C. (2008). Evaluation of the February 2008 confirmation method awarding trial, Manchester: AQA Centre for Education Research and Policy.

Keywords

• Examiners
• Transparency