State of Readiness NSC 2010

1. State of ReadinessNSC 2010 Presentation to the Select Committee on Educationand Recreation25 August 2010 Vijayen D Naidoo Vijayen D Naidoo

2. Quality Assurance of the 2010 National Senior Certificate Examination

3. Regulatory Framework QAA NQF Act Section 27 (h) The QC must develop and implement policy and criteria for assessment for the qualifications on its sub-framework.

4. Section17 of the GENFETQA Act (5) The Council must, with the concurrence of the Director-General and after consultation with the relevant assessment body or education institution, approve the publication of the results of learners if the Council is satisfied that the assessment body or education institution has— (i) conducted the assessment free from any irregularity that may jeopardise the integrity of the assessment or its outcomes; (ii) complied with the requirements prescribed by the Council for conducting assessments; (iii) applied the standards prescribed by the Council which a learner is required to comply with in order to obtain a certificate; and (iv) complied with every other condition determined by the Council.

5. Framework for QA of Learner Achievement Based on established and existing practices in assessment for certification Prescribed components of External assessment (examinations) and Site based/ internal / continuous assessment Use of systems, processes, and procedures to evaluate, inspect, monitor and report on examination systems, processes and procedures of public and private assessment bodies.

6. Framework for Quality Assurance of Assessment Evaluation and /or accreditation of assessment bodies Periodic inspection of assessment bodies Ongoing monitoring of assessment bodies Quality assurance of external examinations through: Moderation of examination question papers Monitoring the conduct of examinations Moderation of marking Standardization of assessment outcomes

7. Framework for Quality Assurance of Assessment Quality assurance of internal assessment through: Monitoring the implementation of internal assessment Moderation of learner tasks and educator portfolios Statistical moderation of internal assessment results.

8. Approval of Results Compliance with minimum requirements Shift from Moderation to Verification (Moderation for verification) Emphasis on Assessment Body reports The monitoring of the conduct of examinations and the moderation of marking as well as the monitoring of the implementation of internal assessment and the moderation of internal assessment is undertaken by Umalusi to verify the veracity of the assessment body reports in respect of these process. Broadened definition of irregularities.

9. PURPOSE to ensure that the question papers are of the required standard To ensure that the question papers are relatively: - fair - reliable - representative of an adequate sample of the curriculum - representative of relevant conceptual domains - representative of relevant levels of cognitive challenge External moderators Moderation of question papers

10. Scope of the quality assurance processes Number of NSC 2010 question papers moderated

11. Internal assessment refers to any assessment conducted by the provider, the outcomes of which count towards the achievement of the qualification panels of moderators / subject specialists Moderation at all levels Directives for internal assessment Prescribed criteria - Educator Portfolios - Learner portfolios Moderation of internal /continuous assessment

12. Ascertain the appropriateness and standard of the assessment tasks being developed within colleges Ascertain the degree to which assessment bodies/provinces are attempting to ensure standardisation across Determine the extent and quality of internal moderation and educator development Determine the reliability and validity of the assessment outcomes Moderation of internal assessment cont

13. Moderation of SBA Previous model - moderation of learner and educator portfolios at the end of the year. Implementation of new model in 2010 –focus on tasks rather than on portfolios Ongoing – 3 moderations across 9 PDE’s, IEB & ERCO Feed back to educators Improvement in SBA implementation

15. Policy development and implementation Systems, processes and procedures Plan for assessment and moderation Availability and training of staff Planning for the development of learner portfolios and educator portfolios Focus of the monitoring visits

16. Monitoring of Examinations

17. PURPOSE Moderation of marking determines the standard and quality of marking and ensures that marking is conducted in accordance with agreed practices Umalusi engages the following during the moderation of marking 1. Pre-marking/memorandum discussion: centralised memo discussions recommended - this will ensure consistency across marking centres 2. Off-site moderation of marking 3. On-site moderation of marking Verification of marking

18. Verification of Marking

19. Verification of the Resulting Process

20. Monitoring the State of Readiness New approach One Assessment body (DBE) with 9 provincial arms vs. 9 separate assessment bodies. Avoid duplication (parallel processes)and burden on provincial authorities “Lift” the system – Umalusi to assume a verification role. “Shadowing” the DBE team to establish the veracity of the DBE monitoring processes and to authenticate DBE reports.

21. The DBE Monitoring Process PDE’s required to complete a self-evaluation instrument. DBE analysis of the responses informs DBE presentation and discussion with the PDE’s Monitoring visits to Head Office, District & Exam Centers- monitored against Management Plan for Examinations and Assessment. Initial impression report back to PDE’s Submission of composite report to relevant authorities (Umalusi included) Comprehensive approach that monitors exam systems (including SBA) as well as Annual National Assessments (ANA)

22. Umalusi findings-Western Cape Compliance / Strong points Adequate provincial structure District offices well resourced with expertise Capturing of marks (per question) Diagnosis of poor performance and implementation of remedial/intervention programmes. Concerns Use of courier services for the delivery of question papers Use of community members as invigilators

23. Umalusi findings-KZN Compliance / Strong points Adequate provincial structure District offices well resourced with expertise Registration of Candidates Concerns Security of the printing process Unavailability of secure facilities at exam centers (outlying areas)

24. Umalusi findings-EC Compliance / Strong points Adequate provincial structure Province conducts state of readiness visits to Districts Printing of Question Papers Concerns No centralised moderation of SBA Candidate registration not complete at time of Monitoring

25. Umalusi findings-Mpumalanga Compliance / Strong points Task team appointed to manage 2010 examinations. Experts appointed to implement revised exam system. DBE responsible for printing question papers. Registration of Candidates De-registration of private examination centers. Concerns Major threat if no “buy in” is secured from Mpumalanga staff. Staffing at Regional and District levels New question paper distribution nodes Unavailability of secure facilities at exam centers (outlying areas)

26. Umalusi findings-Mpumalanga Umalusi Council received the DBE report on the Management of Public Examinations in Mpumalanga Province (dated 21 June 2010) Council acknowledges the interventions but remains concerned with the “new” challenges emanating from these interventions. Council requested DBE to submit a further report by 3rd September 2010.

27. Way forward Awaiting further DBE report on the Management of Public Examinations in Mpumalanga Province. Awaiting DBE composite “State of readiness” report. Independent Umalusi monitoring. Report to Umalusi Council.

28. Thank you!