Central Verification HNC/D AIT Graded Units

2. Central VerificationHNC/D AIT Graded Units June 2006

3. Graded Unit 1 (Examination) June 2006

4. Verification Activity • 24 centres selected for external verification • Team of 5 moderators over 3 days • Individual verification reports • No holds • Various approaches to marking and verification • Some good practice

5. Assessment Exemplars • Revised exemplars addressed some of the difficulties experienced last session • Questions more demanding in revised assessment exemplars – still not demanding enough for the level • Headroom for better answers needs addressing through the unit specification

6. Marking and Verification • Good practice identified at Graded Unit Workshops had been incorporated in marking and verification • good evidence of prior verification and expanded marking schemes • Clearer indication of marks within questions • Action points from previous year had been addressed, where applicable.

7. Suggestions • Continued development opportunities for centres (dissemination of good practice and networking) • Clearer guidance on central verification (dates, material to be provided, checklist of material submitted) • Amended unit specification and exemplar material

8. Graded Unit 2 (Examination) June 2006

9. Verification Activity • 6 centres selected for external verification • Team of 5 moderators over 2 days • Late submissions addressed by postal verification • Individual verification reports • One hold • Various approaches to marking and verification • Some good practice

10. Assessment Exemplars • Demanding papers • Marking scheme very prescriptive • Value of the case scenario? • Marks were not awarded for referencing case scenario • Did not allow the range of grades expected

11. Marking and Verification • Good evidence of prior and post-delivery verification • Marking scheme amended to allow answers well below that expected at SCQF Level 8.

12. Suggestions • Continued development opportunities for centres (events to focus on delivery and marking of HND AIT graded units) • Clearer guidance on central verification (dates, material to be provided, checklist of material submitted)

13. Graded Unit 3 (Project) June 2006

14. Verification Activity • 6 centres selected for external verification • Team of 5 moderators over 2 days • Late submissions addressed by postal verification and visiting verification (one postal and one visiting) • Individual verification reports • No holds • Various approaches to marking and verification • Some good practice

15. Assessment Exemplars • Inconsistencies between unit specification and exemplars • Poor guidance on making an assessment decision • Scenario presented in Exemplar 1 was flawed and was open to misinterpretation • Did not allow the range of grades expected

16. Marking and Verification • Good evidence of prior, ongoing and delivery verification, together with expanded marking schemes and marking checklists • Good evidence of support given to students and feedback • Need to reinforce independent working

17. Suggestions • Withdrawal of Exemplar 1 • Continued development opportunities for centres (events to focus on delivery and marking of HND AIT graded units) • Clearer guidance on central verification (dates, material to be provided, checklist of material submitted)