EN DOS PASOS
91 Entrecruzamiento de PVC en disolución en dos pasos
Analysis of the four main awarding body specifications shows that there is a common structure to A-level in Art & Design courses that is largely dictated by the regulatory documents provided by the exams regulator, Ofqual. The areas in which awarding bodies have the freedom to structure their own curricula include the duration of examinations and the proportion of each unit as a contribution to the marking of the AS or A2 years of the course.
The specifications leave freedom for teachers to structure their own particular course content, in terms of which artists, genres and movements should be covered, and the specifications allow teachers freedom to deliver the course in their own pedagogical styles. The specifications also allow for a degree of flexibility in terms of
assessment; within the bounds of the subject criteria, awarding bodies have scope to adjust the range of marks used to grade candidates’ work, the weighting of these marks in the AS and A2 units, and the weighting of the assessment objectives as they are applied to each of the units of assessment.
Participants in the research are generally frustrated with the AS component of the A-level in Art & Design, perceiving that it stifles creativity and puts undue pressure on students to conform to rigid and structured practice (Chapter 3). As such, they appear to have responded positively to the proposed reforms to the A-levels, including the change from a modular to linear assessment structure and offering the AS as a separate qualification (discussed in Chapter 2). The perception being that there will be more room for experimentation, flexibility in teaching and creative expression through the course.
Participants reported that students require specific sets of skills to progress into higher education (whether this be, into art and design courses or other higher education). The main skills highlighted included the ability to learn independently, to think critically and to be open to new and varied approaches to learning. This means that the content of the A-level in Art & Design requires a balance of specialist and/or technical content and generic/transferable content.
Respondents, however, express lower levels of agreement with the idea that ‘the specification places sufficient emphasis on the development of generic/ transferable skills’ than other aspects of the overall content of the A-level. For example, respondents on average disagree that the current specification supports students to develop team work skills, and are most likely to express a neutral opinion in relation to the extent to which the course contributed to candidate’s skills in using information and
communication technology (ICT).
Opinions on the extent to which the A-level in Art & Design supports the development of generic and transferrable skills vary by programmes taught, by institutional Ofsted rating and by institution types. Those who teach the A-level in Art & Design and another qualification, those from an institution with a higher Ofsted rating and those from institutions that traditionally teach a more varied or vocationally driven curriculum are more likely to disagree that the content of the A-level supports students to develop generic and/or transferrable skills, than those who only teach the A-level in Art & Design, are from institutions with a lower Ofsted rating or are from more traditionally academic institutions (such as independent schools and academies). Given that teamwork and the use of ICT are integral to many of the careers that Art & Design students may eventually progress into, the focus of these skills within the content of the A-level specification would seem to be critical area of improvement.
In terms of the delivery of the A-level in Art & Design, the most common teaching method, taught group sessions, is regarded as one of the three most effective methods by only half of respondents. Similar proportions of respondents report that they use, and regard as the most effective, one-to-one tutorials and studio based learning. This finding suggests that a variety of delivery methods is important to ensure that student experience a fully rounded and valuable learning experience. This point is emphasised when
focusing on the time spent by institutions teaching the A-level. While the current specifications allow for a great deal of flexibility and freedom in delivery, the quality of the teaching in practice is equally important. Our findings show a correlation between institution Ofsted rating and amount of time spent delivering the A-level: Those institutions rated ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted, for example, spend on average 1h and 30m longer teaching the A-level every week than those rated ‘requires improvement’. Similar views were expressed throughout the research, with teaching quality considered to be the key enabler that allows students to succeed and progress further in their ambitions. Analysis of the assessment methods identifies portfolio
assessment and individual ‘crits’ among the most commonly cited methods. The research highlights, however, that group ‘crits’, while not as commonly used as other assessment methods, are regarded as one of the three most effective methods by nearly a third of respondents, with a higher rating than examinations and written assignments, despite these being more commonly used. This, in common with delivery methods, implies that more traditional or established assessment methods are not always the most effective for learners. Assessment methods that more accurately reflect real-world experiences and encourage diversity in student submissions (particularly in regard to portfolio work) are seen as important
The weighting of assessment objectives is highlighted as a key issue. Participants suggested that issues regarding assessment objectives and criteria are inconsistently aligned to changes in grading over periods of time. This finding links to perceptions amongst respondents that the external moderation of the A-level in Art & Design is problematic. In particular, the issue is a lack of transparency surrounding the moderation process, and inconsistency in the subject specific experience of the moderators themselves. A particularly important factor in assessment is the
lack of information exchange that takes place between institutions and their awarding bodies with respect to the processes and procedures undertaken and how this links fairly, and in a balanced way, to appropriate grading structures. Transparency, openness and communication in regard to feedback were cited as important for schools and colleges to be able to improve their performances where necessary.