During the grading period, CIE provided us with copies of the evidence they were using, and we held several meetings with them via telephone during July. In response to those concerns, in October Ofqual reviewed the available technical evidence provided by CIE in July. In recent years the entry for has nearly quadrupled. Ofqual monitored the awarding of the elements of this specification in summer and reviewed the awards in autumn in the light of concerns expressed by some schools. Your donations keep this site and others like it running Donate now.
As is normal practice, we have already turned our attention to the summer grading. They also mean that papers do not differentiate between students as intended. A site to help anyone submit a Freedom of Information request. Narrow grade widths provide particular challenges during awarding. It is normal for exam boards to routinely review the outcomes of their grading process and to make fine adjustments where appropriate once they have analysed all of the data from the exam series.
News story: CIE IGCSE® First Language English: Summer | WISE Tutors
As in summer, CIE provided us with the evidence they were using and we discussed this with them. Sign in or sign up.
Run by Volunteers and powered by Alaveteli. This supports similar analyses conducted by Cambridge Assessment. WhatDoTheyKnow also publishes and archives requests and responses, building a massive archive of information.
We concluded that, in the circumstances, CIE made appropriate grading decisions. McKenzie 25 January Delivered. Ultimately I’d like to know how close I might have been. Link to this Report. The request was successful.
If you use assistive technology and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications ofqual. The information contained in this email may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act and unless legally exempt from disclosure, the confidentiality of this email and your reply cannot be guaranteed.
At the same time, CIE issued very detailed explanations to HMC and to other stakeholders, which included their initial analysis of the summer outcomes. In gade years the entry for has nearly quadrupled. CIE concluded that the grading was carried out appropriately, although they anticipate making some further refinements to their awarding this boundarise, as is standard practice for exam boards. Make a request Browse requests View authorities Journalist?
Dedicated to Chris Lightfoot. Grade Igcsf University of Cambridge.
News story: CIE IGCSE® First Language English: Summer 2015
We concluded there was no case to re-open the award. During the grading period, CIE provided us with copies of the evidence they were using, and we held several meetings with them via telephone during July. McKenzie made this Freedom of Information request to University of Cambridge This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body.
UK entries for are far higher than for because only is approved by the Department for Education for use in maintained schools. A site to help anyone submit a Freedom of Information request. We’re seeking to fill a number of volunteer roles. Write to your politician. Following the issue of results, concerns were expressed by schools that were unhappy with their results. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Cambridge Assessment or OCR unless specifically stated.
Cambridgs main difference between them is that includes speaking and bounaries in the overall grade whereas reports optional speaking and listening separately. cambrudge
PDFKB9 pages. Below is the exam of which the grade boundaries I am enquiring: Again, we were content that their grading decisions were appropriate. If you have received this email in error, please let us know and then delete the original emails and any attachments. Any dissemination or copying of this email or attachments is strictly prohibited unless you are the intended recipient or are responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient.
For example on Paper 3 there were 10 marks between the boundary marks for A and C and on the coursework component there were 12 marks between A and C.
It is normal for exam boards to routinely review the outcomes of their boundaried process and to make fine adjustments where appropriate once they have analysed all of the data from the exam series. Reviews of summer awarding Following the issue of results, concerns were expressed by schools that graee unhappy with their results.