I’d like to talk to you about 3 key things this afternoon, which I hope are relevant and pertinent to your work.
Firstly, I’d like to zoom out and talk about the role of qualifications in society. This situates why Ofqual regulates in the way that we do, and how we work together with other actors in the system.
Next, I’ll look at qualification reform, why it happens and what it means, taking a look at the current developments we’re working on and considering any potential change on the horizon. In this context I’ll reflect on the Curriculum and Assessment Review’s interim report, published yesterday. I’ll consider the introduction of the new qualifications coming in this September as a consequence of the Post-16 Qualifications Review. I will also cover the changes to Apprenticeship assessment, recently announced.
And finally, I will zoom in and look at some particular challenges and risks we might anticipate in the delivery of qualifications this spring and summer, which I think we all need to work together to mitigate.
The role of qualifications in society
Academic Patricia Broadfoot has described the English assessment system as a social construct with 4 purposes. Firstly, certifying achievement of competence to a certain standard, rooted in the history of craftsmanship. Secondly, providing a selection process for further progression based on educational attainment. Thirdly, as a policy tool for directing curriculum priorities. And fourthly, to provide a mechanism for accountability for teachers and school leaders.
Qualifications serve as a vital currency therefore in the particular culture we live in. In some of these contexts the stakes are very high for those involved. This is why qualifications must accurately reflect what students know, understand and can do at the time of assessment.
There are important conversations to have about why the stakes are high and whether they might be lowered – this is outside Ofqual’s control. The reliability of regulated qualifications underpins the trust that students, employers and society place in our education system, and fairness, as we all know, is paramount.
Roles and responsibilities
It is perhaps helpful to briefly set out the roles and responsibilities of the different actors within this eco-system, so you can see how we all fit together. The Department for Education sets curriculum including the subject content for GCSEs and A levels. It is the DfE that decides which qualifications to fund. It also sets accountability requirements, which affect the importance of the results of qualifications for schools and colleges.
IfATE, working with employers, sets occupational standards. These underpin the subject content for T Levels, and form the basis of Higher Technical Qualifications, Level 3 Technical Qualifications and Apprenticeships. Skills England will likely take over responsibility for these occupational standards in due course, ensuring they remain up-to-date and that new occupational standards are developed to support areas of the economy where new types of skills are needed. It is vital that we have an agency of government responsible for understanding what employers need both nationally and locally, for collecting labour market intelligence, and for using it to inform and shape the qualifications and training needed in the future.
Ofqual is a non-ministerial government department which regulates Awarding Organisations in England. We see our role as steward of the qualifications system. We take long-term, proactive regulatory decisions for the benefit of students, society and the economy. We work with others in the system to safeguard the value of qualifications – we recognise that our role is only one part of it.
We have a set of rules called the General Conditions of Recognition, to which we hold Awarding Organisations to account. We also set specific additional rules if necessary, such as where qualifications have a particular risk profile, such as being used for progression or used in accountability measures. A levels, GCSEs, and T Levels fall into this category.
Ofqual does not of course regulate training providers, colleges or schools, but our rules guide how awarding organisations interact with you. It is our job to hold them to account for the work that they do. I know you are working every day to ensure that students receive a high-quality education and are appropriately prepared for their assessments. And I know you are ably supported in this by initiatives such as those run by the Education and Training Foundation, such as the Industry Insights programme for T Levels and the Apprenticeship Workforce Development Programme.
I hope this brief overview of how the qualifications system works helps put what I am saying today in context.
Moving on then, to consider qualifications reform and the changes the system is going through. So firstly, what do we all mean when we talk about qualification reform? We know that there is a lot of it about. Qualification reform is a government-initiated programme of education sector improvement, with a particular type of qualification as its centrepiece, acting as the driving point for change. These programmes tend to focus on a category, or type, of qualification that then has a sub-set of individual qualifications as part of it. We have seen a lot of qualification reform in the post-16 vocational part of the education system in recent decades because, as there is no national curriculum post-16, it is a key mechanism for generating change. The content of the qualification, essentially, really matters. The introduction of GNVQs in the 1990s, and the 14 to 19 Diploma in the 2000s, for example, were important to governments seeking to persuade students to carry on learning post-16, and the qualification specification was the key location for putting engaging content.
By reforming a set of qualifications, government is seeking to change a significant proportion of what the cohort of learners are studying and what teachers are teaching, because it is assumed that this will be the impact that changing those qualifications will have. I’m interested in your views on the effectiveness of using qualification reform as a strategy for educational change in this way. At Ofqual, we would argue that it is absolutely crucial that changes to assessment are considered alongside developments to curriculum and pedagogy. This is why the Industry Insights programme is so important, because it is helping to embed T Levels, as a new set of qualifications, through investment in curriculum and pedagogy as well.
Ofqual’s programme of research into CASLO qualifications – those that confirm the acquisition of specified learning outcomes – published in November, looks back at the history of the reforms to vocational and technical qualifications over the last 40 years and considers lessons that might be learned from them. The intersection between assessment, curriculum and pedagogy is one of the key reflections made – do check out report 9 from this series if you are interested in what our Research Chair, Paul Newton, has to say on this subject. I recommend you check out report 4, on the history, as well.
Let’s now turn our attention to the current set of initiatives and the steps being taken to ensure qualifications meet the needs of today’s learners.
Curriculum and Assessment Review
Yesterday, as you will have no doubt seen, the panel that formed the independent Curriculum and Assessment review published its interim report. I highly recommend you have a close read of it if you haven’t already. The panel has had the unenviable task of looking across the whole sweep of the education system, and identify in this report its key areas of future focus. They set out clearly that the educational offer for 16 to 19-year-olds is an important priority. They acknowledge that, while T Levels have had teething problems, they are here to stay. They also identify the need to think carefully about pathways for those unable to access A levels and T Levels, acknowledging the particular learning needs of this part of the cohort. They also identify the need to develop strong occupational pathways at level 2, and they commit to looking at how to strengthen progression routes from level 2 to level 3. They also prioritise how best to ensure that learners who did not achieve the required standard in English and maths are best supported to do so by the age of 18. These commitments will shape future policy developments and I’m sure will be of real interest to many in this room.
Qualifications Review
In terms of immediate next steps on the post-16 landscape, as you all know, the Department for Education has been reviewing post-16 qualifications at Level 3 and below, including in the context of introducing T Levels. The outcome of the Rapid Review, announced in December, indicates that, while the Curriculum and Assessment Review is in train, DfE will look to fund a balanced mix of qualifications that meet students’ needs.
This September, we will see the first teaching of several new qualifications, including the new T Level in Marketing, as well as some of the new Alternative Academic Qualifications, such as the Pearson level 3 BTEC National in early childhood development, and Technical Qualifications, such as the NCFE level 3 Technical Occupational Entry in cyber security. Ofqual will ensure that these qualifications reach the expected standards of quality and reliability under our regulatory scrutiny.
I want to highlight some key features of the new AAQs and how they differ from the applied generals that many of you will be familiar with. AAQs are available in fewer sizes than applied generals in terms of their guided learning hours – the first wave will be smaller qualifications of 150 to 420 guided learning hours, designed, like the smaller applied generals, to be taken alongside A levels. The plan was that from September 2026, larger ones of 720 to 1,080 guided learning hours would then be made available, however future policy is now being considered as part of the Curriculum and Assessment Review.
The smaller AAQs differ from applied generals in that there is less scope to move between sizes of a given qualification should a student’s original intentions change. Please make sure that you are aware of which qualifications your college or training provider is using and the rules around nesting so you can advise students appropriately on their options. The new AAQs have the same minimum requirement for external assessment as applied generals at 40%.
Apprenticeships
Moving now on to developments in apprenticeships. In February, at part of National Apprenticeships Week, the DfE announced changes to apprenticeship assessment, which will take effect in the coming months. These changes include the introduction of new assessment principles and a reduction in the minimum duration of apprenticeships where that makes sense for a given industry or where an individual has significant prior learning. Additionally, apprentices aged 19 and over will no longer need to hold or achieve English and maths qualifications to pass their apprenticeship, while this requirement remains in place for younger apprentices to support their career progression. The goal is to facilitate proportionate and flexible assessments and to enable faster certification of occupational competence where appropriate.
Ofqual is committed to ensuring that these reforms are implemented in a way that safeguards the quality and value of qualifications for employers and apprentices, and for the wider benefit of society. To this end, we are working closely with the Department for Education and IfATE (and in due course Skills England) to review our regulatory framework for apprenticeship assessment. We will be launching a public consultation on these changes soon. This is in line with the work that IfATE are doing to streamline apprenticeship assessment plans, which are held in Ofqual’s regulations. Together, we are dedicated to ensuring that our apprenticeship system remains robust, fair, and aligned with the needs of employers.
Working together on delivery
With these future directions in mind, let’s now zoom in to focus on the measures Ofqual is taking to ensure the integrity of regulated qualifications in delivery, particularly in the face of new challenges and technological advancements.
I want to firstly highlight the importance of parity of treatment for students taking Vocational and Technical Qualifications, which is a key focus for us at Ofqual. This means ensuring that VTQs are recognised as equally valuable qualifications for progression as GCSEs and A levels, and, importantly, that VTQ results are issued to students at the same time as GCSEs and A levels.
We put a number of new measures in place in 2023 to underline this commitment to parity. These include a checkpoint – a deadline for colleges and training providers to tell their awarding organisations which students need to receive their qualification result on results day, because they will be used for progression. These measures also include asking all colleges and training providers to provide the awarding organisations with a senior designated contact who is available outside of term time in the run up to summer results in case of any issues. The new measures include an expectation that results for VTQs will be provided to colleges and training providers in advance of results days, to check and resolve any discrepancies. And alongside this, we will be continuing our work with AOs to encourage clear, timely and consistent communications with schools and colleges. This is all about ensuring that results are delivered on time for those who need them.
New technology
Another key aspect of qualification delivery is new technology. I’ll start with a word on artificial intelligence (AI). It’s the topic everyone is discussing. I think we’re all pretty settled on the tension between exciting opportunity and clear threats to things we value. That’s definitely true when it comes to qualifications. Right now, the key message is a simple one – that students’ work must be their own. It’s important that students have a clear understanding of the rules and are not using AI to cheat. The Joint Council for Qualifications has produced clear and important guidance on this issue, to inform schools’ and colleges’ policies on malpractice and use of AI.
It may be helpful to clearly set out to students what constitutes cheating, particularly where they attempt to generate work to pass off as their own for assessment purposes. While this may seem obvious, this isn’t always well understood. It is also important that students are aware of the consequences of using AI to cheat.
More broadly, Ofqual’s approach to the regulation of AI in qualifications is of course centred around protecting students, fairness and standards. In particular, our rules do not allow AI to be used as a sole marker for students’ work, which also applies where teachers are marking non-exam assessments. In line with other regulators, we published a policy statement outlining our position on the use of AI last year, which is available on gov.uk if you’d like further information.
Turning now to the use of on-screen assessment. I know this also attracts a lot of attention and interest. I think our message here is simple too. Any increased use of technology in how qualifications are delivered must be implemented cautiously and with careful oversight. It is important that how students are assessed protects fairness, maintains standards and commands confidence for those that take, use and value qualifications. We hear consistently when visiting schools and colleges that this is what really matters – high stakes qualifications is not an area where we should move fast and break things. We proceed with caution with on-screen assessment therefore, acknowledging that developments are reliant on an appropriate digital infrastructure being in place across the whole education system. You will hear more from us on this soon.
Cyber security
Finally, in terms of delivery challenges, let’s address the critical issue of cyber security in the context of exams and assessments, which poses a real threat to the secure delivery of results. The cyber security of colleges and training providers is vital to ensure the integrity of exams and assessments – and ultimately to protect students. This includes managing the safe storage and distribution of exam materials.
In 2024, Ofqual conducted a poll of teachers and discovered that 34% of colleges and schools in England experienced a cyber incident in the last academic year, underscoring the need for robust cyber security measures. We also found that one in 3 secondary teachers did not have cyber security training, and 42% reported using the same or similar passwords for multiple accounts. Many colleges and schools do take cyber security seriously, but poor cyber hygiene can be distressing for students if, for instance, coursework or assessment evidence is lost.
Colleges and training providers should reflect on their contingency arrangements to consider practical matters. If you are a senior leader, you can support your exams officer by making sure that procedures are in place should systems go down. You should also consider how staff would access awarding organisation systems if the usual IT were unavailable. It would obviously be wise to back up non-exam assessment evidence and marks to prevent data loss in the event of a cyber-attack.
All colleges and training providers should meet the DfE’s cyber security standards. Jisc has accessible training and cyber security advice available for member colleges. The Joint Council for Qualifications has also published guidance for colleges and schools on cyber security.
Conclusion
To conclude overall, therefore – as you will have gathered, the qualifications system is a complex, sophisticated eco-system which requires careful stewardship through risks, challenges and opportunities. This eco-system works because of the commitment, dedication and investment of everyone involved – teachers, parents and students, exams officers and invigilators, assessment experts, school and college leaders. It is used and relied on by many, and we all have our part to play in it.
We will continue to see change in this part of the system – we have come to expect it, and changes in society, in politics, and with new technological developments, it is almost inevitable. I remain of the view, however, that those of us in the system who have been part of it for a long time must ensure that this change is well informed. We have a duty to provide evidence to policy makers, whether through research or other engagement mechanisms, about what works and what doesn’t work. We will continue to advise the Curriculum and Assessment Review panel so that they have appropriate input from assessment experts. We will continue with programmes of research like CASLO to deepen our collective knowledge and understanding of how vocational qualifications work, and so that future policy has a strong evidence base for change. And we will continue to work hard to steward the system through its delivery challenges appropriately.
The system must continue to meet the needs of students and others who depend on it. I encourage you to all play your part.
Thank you.
