UAL Awarding Body External Moderator Training
Sarah Atkinson
Head of Academic Standards
Introductions
Aims of the Meeting
Attendees
The Process
 The EM Role
 The EM Handbook
 UALab Approach
 Setting the schedule
 Communicating with Centres
Dear name of Course leader / Centre contact
I am writing to confirm arrangements for the forthcoming name of course moderation visit, and I am attaching a proposed schedule for the day.
To ensure that the assessment process is sound and that the standard meets the UAL Awarding Body assessment criteria for level of course, I will be
moderating a sample of completed and formatively assessed assignments for the name of course – Unit number.
The sample size for the qualification will be 10% of the cohort (or a minimum of 6) and the actual candidates decided in discussion with you on the day of
moderation, to ensure that a representative range is included.
I will also need to see evidence of the tracking, monitoring, assessment and internal verification of the non-graded units, please can you also make
available schemes of work, assignment briefs and assessment tracking for units unit numbers, it is not necessary to present student work for these
preceding units.
Please have ready a completed final results sheet with student ULNs. I will need to sign this off and send to the Awarding Body shortly after
Awarding Body shortly after the visit.
The moderation team will be myself and if applicable cc'd.
Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any queries
I look forward to seeing you on confirm date of visit
Best Wishes
Your name and contact details
Selecting the Sample
 The sample for UAL Awarding Body qualifications is usually set at 10% of the cohort.
 This ensures that a sufficient number of sets of assessment evidence, covering all
disciplines and/or pathways and a range of internal assessors are externally
moderated and checked.
 Where a cohort or specialist pathway is below 50 Students a minimum sample of six is
acceptable.
 The External Moderator will always select the sample
 Samples should contain:
Grades in all categories, Pass, Merit and Distinction where a
qualification is graded.
Sufficient examples of the Referral Category, to establish the
Pass/Referral boundary and guidance for students to redeem
the grade
A range of disciplines reflecting the range of qualification
experience.
Assessment evidence assessed by a range of internal
assessors.
Documentation
To support the Sample Centres should
provide External Moderators with:
An outline of the structure of the course internal assessment,
standardisation and verification and process Schemes of
work and Assignment/Project briefs.
Examples of assessment and verification records sufficient to
enable the External Moderator to confirm that the
methodology is working and adheres to UALab guidelines
for good practice
EMs are required to confirm that the assessment and IV
processes for the assessment of the non-graded units
support decisions that are fair reliable and valid
Moderator Assessment Record Sheets
Reporting
Part 1: Candidate Sample
Part 2: Candidate Authentication
 Grade Confirmation
Part 3: Profile of Assessment Evidence
 Marks/Results Sheets
Part 4: Assessment Methodology
 Completing the Report
Part 5: General Commentary
 Coversheet
Part 6: Recommendations
Part 7: Actions
 EM handbook
Part 1: Candidate Sample
Candidate sample must be 10% of the cohort.
Candidate sample may be extended by 5% to clarify the accuracy of centre grading decisions.
Candidates in the sample should be identified only by their Unique Learner Number (ULN) which
can be retrieved from the Course Leader.
Part 2 : Candidate Authentication
Indicate either YES or NO to confirm that Candidate Authentication Forms were made available at
the point of the external moderation visit.
If the response is NO this must be an action for the following year.
Part 3: Profile of Assessment Evidence
Number of candidates in the cohort
Number of candidates in the sample
List the pathways and select a representative sample as a percentage of each area (10%-15%)
Number and percentage of D/M/P/R/W
Any special consideration or reasonable adjustment should be supported by the correct UAL
paperwork.
 Any areas of concern in regards to malpractice and maladministration in the assessment and
internal verification process.





EMs should use this section to report on the candidate evidence in relation to the assessment criteria
Part 4: Assessment Methodology









Assessment paperwork is fit for purpose.
Internally assessed units are rigorous and assessment decisions are fair, valid and free from bias.
Assessment internal verification and standardisation processes are suitably robust.
Assessment and internal verification documentation clearly evidences the decision making
process in borderline candidates.
Referred students are given clear feedback and time frame for resubmission.
Grading decisions across all pathways are consistent
The External Moderator is able to confirm that assessment decisions made by the centre are
consistent with national standards
If they are unsound the External Moderator should provide a commentary on those aspects which
require re-design or strengthening.
Any aspects described should be noted as actions
EMs should use this section to confirm that the assessment methodology conforms to good practice
Part 5: General Commentary











Teaching and Learning Materials
Student understanding of criteria and expectations as evidenced in self assessment
Opportunities for tutorial group critiques and peer review
Employer engagement
Quality of project proposals or overarching briefs – stretch and challenge
Range and depth of topics
Breadth and depth of research in informing project development
Level of investigation and experimentation
Quality of Centre documentation
Student progression
Overall quality of work by pathway
Provides an opportunity for a brief summary identifying areas of good practice as appropriate
The EM should select the appropriate definition to comment on each of the identified grading
themes for the level and qualification being assessed
Context
Research
Problem Solving
Planning and Production
Practical Skills
Evaluation and Reflection
Presentation
 Use sub headings
 Note differences between
pathways
 Note good practice and areas
for improvement
 Identify by ULN but not name
candidates
 Refer to EM handbook
Part 6: Recommendations
Recommendations are for guidance only and can be carried out at the discretion of the Centre
Recommendations should refer directly to commentary made in the report
The EM should report on any recommendations carried out from the preceding EM or Advisory
report and what if any impact this has had on quality improvement
Part 7: Actions
Actions are essential measures for improving standards for assessment and must be carried out by
the date agreed between the EM and the Centre
The EM must follow up on any actions required in the preceding EM or Advisory report
Questions?
The Extras
 Training and Events
 Standardisation
 Website
 Visual Standards Platform
 Senior Moderators
Training – Events – Standardisation – Conferences
2016
 FAD
EM Annual Training Event: Jan
External Assessor Training: Feb/Mar
Conferences: Jan/Feb/Mar
Standardisation Events: Apr/May/Jun
Exhibition: July
 Fashion Business and Retail
 Art and Design
 Media
 Performing Arts
 Music
Visual Standards Platform
http://workflow.arts.ac.uk/group/awarding-body-grade-standards/level2-diploma-in-art-design
Website
http://www.arts.ac.uk/about-ual/awarding-body/
Regions and Senior Moderators
North East
 FAD
North West
 Fashion Business and Retail
Midlands
South East
South West
 Art and Design
 Media
 Performing Arts
 Music
Chief Examiners
Sue Cook: sue.cook@arts.ac.uk
Sarah Atkinson: s.j.atkinson@arts.ac.uk
Martin Vella: m.vella@arts.ac.uk
 FAD
 Fashion Business and Retail
Andy Sankey: a.sankey@arts.ac.uk
 Art and Design
Marc Mollica: m.mollica@arts.ac.uk
 Media
 Performing Arts
 Music
In Practice
 Breakout Groups
 Scenarios – Exercise
 Reviewing Reports – Exercise
 Handling Difficult Situations
 Giving Feedback
 Observations
Reviewing Reports - Exercise
On your own read through the example reports and make notes in
relation to:
 Good reporting
 Poor reporting
You have 20 minutes to complete this task
 Discuss your findings with the others in your group
 Agree headline issues and appoint spokesperson
You have 10 minutes to complete this task
 Feedback to delegates
Final Questions and Next Steps