ESW Communication – May Series 2014
Principal Moderator’s Report
Overview
Some very good practice was seen in a number of centres. Candidates had engaged in
purposeful activities and produced well-organised portfolios of evidence. A significant
number encompassed the Welsh Baccalaureate, particularly at level 3; this is to be
encouraged since the subject matter is generally of a complex nature and broad in coverage.
Most centres had understood and applied the standards accurately. Nevertheless, those that
did not, and/or failed to ensure candidates had provided sufficient evidence for each criterion
highlights the need for robust internal quality assurance.
Areas for further attention
1.
Administrative paperwork and procedures
There was evidence of very good support from assessors for candidates, with
encouraging written comments on the draft written documents and personal comments
in the speaking and listening assessment records.
However, centres must ensure that administrative paperwork and procedures are fully
completed. This includes the completion of logbooks, assessment records and
assessor annotation. For speaking and listening, for example, candidates must
demonstrate the ability to communicate feelings, information, opinions, questions and
instructions within different contexts. If a ‘’ is missing from an assessor record or the
purpose or audience has been omitted then candidates are unable to evidence this
element of the standards.
Likewise, where logbooks have not been fully completed, it can be difficult for the
Moderator to determine where the evidence is located. Candidates should be
encouraged to take ownership of their portfolios and track the relevant evidence, and
not just at level 3.
Whilst assessors should annotate candidates’ work - especially to draw attention to
aspects that require attention - in a minority of portfolios, assessors appear to have
made the corrections on evidence submitted for the writing component. Centres must
make their assessors aware that this is not acceptable for ESW Communication. At all
levels, evidence must show that candidates have checked that their work is correct
and that they themselves have made any necessary corrections. Indeed, as the
standard of work increases, so does the level of independence expected of the
candidate.
2.
Synthesis at level 3
Candidates are required to select a minimum of two documents (each of which is 1000
words or more) that contain complex information or reasoning and an image, and then
bring together into a ‘synthesis’. Synthesis goes beyond summary, the latter being a
level 2 skill. Synthesis requires the candidate to assess and sort facts, opinions and
ideas which are then brought together to present a consistent and coherent
interpretation. Synthesis is often best developed by centres posing a question, such
as ‘Should euthanasia be legalised?’
WJEC ESW Communication Principal Moderator’s Report May Series 2014
3.
Spelling, punctuation and grammar across all levels
ESW Communication aims to equip candidates with the ability to use correct
punctuation, grammar and spelling and the skills to check and re-draft when required.
The standards:





allow for one or two spelling mistakes and one-off slips in a document that is for
personal use or for limited informal circulation, providing meaning is still clear (p.
86 of the ESW standards);
require that paragraphing must be appropriate;
require the correct use of punctuation marks;
require that documents intended for public consumption should be without
mistakes (p. 86);
state that teachers/assessors can help identify errors but candidates must do
their own corrections (p.86).
Some centres presented very little evidence of candidates having checked their work
whilst, in some cases, a number of spelling, punctuation and grammar mistakes
remained in the final written documents. Centres must ensure they equip candidates
with effective skills of checking and drafting. Centres must also ensure that their
candidates are entered at the correct level.
Administration
Whilst the majority of centres adhered to entry and portfolio submission dates, there were a
number that did not, including those for the initial and/or second samples. It is very important
that centres meet these deadlines; not only for parity with other centres but also due to the
set time frame allotted to each series.
Authentication
Centres must provide evidence that all candidate work has been assessed and
authenticated. There must be records/notes, written by a competent assessor, confirming
that each candidate’s work is their own and that (it) the portfolio has achieved the required
standard.
Work that has not been properly authenticated should have been identified during the
centre’s quality assurance and returned accordingly to the assessor and/or candidate.
Candidates can only be awarded the qualification for which they are entered if they are able
to provide authenticated evidence.
Quality Assurance
Some centres demonstrated robust quality assurance that ensured candidates were
consistently meeting standards. Nevertheless, whilst some centres provided evidence for
this having taken place, their portfolios when submitted for external moderation still
contained deficiencies. It is essential that assessors and internal verifiers/moderators fully
understand the standards in order to provide candidates with the correct guidance, as well
as having thorough internal procedures. Rigorous quality assurance should enable the
identification and adjustment of any deficiencies before portfolios are presented for external
moderation by WJEC.
WJEC ESW Communication Principal Moderator’s Report May Series 2014
Examples of good practice
There were many examples of good practice across all levels. Some centres undertake
themed weeks and base their level 1 activity around that selected theme. For example, fair
trade or a sporting event. This approach clearly engaged the candidates who produced
detailed and interesting portfolios as a result. Nevertheless, care must be taken in ensuring
that candidates take part in discussions within different contexts.
Much of the evidence was naturally occurring which again demonstrates good practice. At
level 2, for example, summaries have been produced via a vocational course or a similar,
purposeful context. Some effective leaflets were seen that summarised methods within, for
example, construction and hairdressing. Attempting to produce a summary purely for the
sake of meeting the standards must be avoided.
At level 3 synthesis is often effective when it is rooted in AS/A2/equivalent programmes.
Responding to a question in philosophy or history, for example, often demonstrates highly
effective synthesis skills as long as the reading documents meet the word length, type and
image requirements.
Overall, the majority of portfolios were a pleasure to moderate; this should extend to all in
future series once centres ensure their quality assurance is robust.
WJEC ESW Communication Principal Moderator’s Report May Series 2014