Awarding

What is awarding?

Awarding (also known as grading or grade awarding) is the process by which candidates' grades for a qualification are determined from the marks scored by candidates on the components of that qualification.

Who does the awarding?

Each specification or syllabus is graded by an awarding committee chaired by the chair of examiners for the subject. Committee membership includes the chief examiner, principal examiner(s) and principal moderator(s) for the specification concerned and the committee is serviced by awarding body officers.

The purpose of awarding

The main objective of the awarding committee is to maintain the standards of grades awarded over time and across the different specifications of a particular qualification, including within a particular subject. For example, members of a GCSE Geography awarding committee should seek to ensure that they establish grades that are consistent in standard with previous years in the same syllabus, but also with other GCSE syllabuses, including other GCSE Geography syllabuses.

How does awarding work?

In accordance with the QCA Code of Practice, the awarding committee operates by setting certain key boundaries in each component or unit of a specification. For all GCE A Level specifications the key boundaries are the grade A/B boundary and the E/U boundary. For all GCSE specifications the key boundaries include A/B, C/D and F/G but in tiered specifications further key boundaries also need to be set. The key boundaries are considered component by component in a sequence laid down by the Code of Practice. Once the key boundaries have been set, all remaining boundaries are determined arithmetically. For example, the B/C boundary for any GCSE component is set half way between the two key boundaries A/B and C/D. In A Level components the three non-key boundaries (B/C, C/D and D/E) are equally spaced between the A/B and E/U boundaries.

Evidence used in setting key boundaries

In order to set the key boundaries the awarding committee is required to consider a wide range of evidence, including both qualitative and quantitative information. The qualitative information includes:

• reports from the appropriate principal examiner or moderator
• grade descriptions
• archive materials illustrating standards from previous years
• samples of candidates' examination scripts, tasks, coursework etc from the current examination in the appropriate mark ranges.

The quantitative or statistical information includes:

• mark distributions
• mean marks
• standard deviations
• information on entry patterns, including any option choices
• summaries of the estimated grades submitted by the candidates' teachers.

Data is provided for the current examination and for several previous sessions.

Setting key boundaries

In the light of all this information, and for each key boundary in turn, members of the awarding committee scrutinise the samples of candidates' work across mark ranges recommended by the principal examiners and moderators. For example, the principal examiner may have suggested that the C/D boundary is likely to fall within the mark range 45 - 52 on a component. After scrutinising all the available work in this range, the committee agrees a narrower zone of marks within which the boundary mark is likely to fall - for example, 48 - 51. Having considered all the qualitative and quantitative evidence, they then agree the single mark which best represents this session's equivalent to the same key boundary in previous sessions - for example here, 50.

Reviewing overall outcomes

When all component or unit key boundaries have been agreed, overall key boundaries for each syllabus option are calculated by aggregating the component boundaries in their appropriate weightings. The overall outcomes are then reviewed to ensure that they are consistent with all the available evidence. For major subjects with large, stable entry patterns it is to be expected that the outcomes will not differ significantly from year to year. For less stable syllabuses or, for example, from January to June, the grade distributions may however vary quite significantly.

After the awarding committee

At the end of the awarding committee meeting, which may take several days to complete its business, the chair of examiners recommends the committee's decisions to the awarding body's accountable officer. The accountable officer then reviews all the recommended grade boundaries in the light of the supporting technical evidence and the report of the awarding committee meeting. In most cases the accountable officer endorses the chair of examiners' recommendations but occasionally one or more key boundaries may be referred back for further consideration.

Once all the boundaries have been signed off by the accountable officer, the awarding body officer for the specification is able to process all candidates' grades in preparation for the marking review and eventually for the publication of results.