Ofqual welcomes the Report of the Independent Commission on
Examination Malpractice, published today (10 September
2019). The Commission supports our view that there is not
an endemic problem of malpractice in the exam system in
England, and that the vast majority of people involved act
with integrity and professionalism. Nevertheless, it is
essential for public confidence that all opportunities are
taken to reduce the incentives and potential for
malpractice to occur, particularly in the light of growing
threats posed by the use of technology. We look forward to
working with JCQ and the exam boards to implement the
recommendations.
Many of the Report’s recommendations are ones that we have
also identified, support and have begun to work with other
stakeholders to address. In general, there is a need for
greater clarity and consistency in the ways in which
malpractice is identified, prevented and sanctioned, and
also how associated data should be collected and
communicated.
In particular, we agree that it is unhelpful to have
varying definitions of malpractice, which can create
confusion and inconsistency in approaches between
individuals and organisations. We therefore support efforts
to broaden understanding of what constitutes malpractice
and what the anticipated responses might be when issues
arise. From our perspective, we are at various stages of
consultation (either intended or already initiated) on
revisions to our guidance for awarding organisations around
issues of personal interest and what constitutes
malpractice and maladministration.
We agree with the Commission’s view that gathering good
quality data and reporting it in engaging ways is
important, and we are pleased that our work in this area
has been recognised. Nevertheless, we will reflect on the
Commission’s view that there is more that can be done and
we will work with counterpart organisations as appropriate.
With regard to access arrangements, the Commission’s report
supports our strong view that there is a need for more
meaningful candidate level data to be collected, alongside
greater clarity of different arrangement definitions. It is
only with this data that questions of fairness can be
answered satisfactorily. There is, of course, a balance to
be struck between gathering meaningful data and being
mindful of any extra burden this could place on schools and
colleges. We are discussing this trade-off with
stakeholders and will work to develop a way to ensure the
necessary data is collected in the most efficient way
possible.
