Ofqual and Oxford University’s Centre
for Educational Assessment are today (Monday 29
April) publishing the findings of a 3-year joint research
project on the impact of modular and linear exam structures
at GCSE.
Academics and researchers from both organisations
collaborated on the project, Examination Reform: The Impact
of Linear and Modular Examinations at GCSE. The research
considers whether change in the structure of GCSE exams has
affected standards, fairness, teaching and learning
practices, cost, and students themselves. The project
included a systematic review of existing literature on the
advantages and disadvantages of modular and linear
structures; extensive analysis of GCSE outcomes between
2007 and 2014, focusing on English, maths and science; and
research into teachers’ views.
The research is part of Ofqual’s ongoing work to ensure
that exam reforms are operating well for the young people
who take them. In summary, we conclude from the range of
evidence gathered, that in the current educational context,
linear exams are more suitable at GCSE than modular exams.
In particular:
- Overall, the literature review points to claims that
linear exams favour longer-term retention of information
and deep learning, whereas modular exams allow regular
feedback on performance which can be motivating for some
students. However, reflecting a number of caveats, the
quantitative evidence suggests that modular and linear
GCSEs lead to similar outcomes overall.
- The research did not support claims that modular or
linear exams tend to favour male or female students, or
affect the outcomes of low and high socio-economic status
students differently.
- During interviews conducted between April and November
2015, and again in May 2017 following the introduction of
the first reformed GCSEs, many teachers reflected
positively that student performance could be assessed with
greater fairness and validity through linear GCSEs.
- Teachers had mixed views on the subject of stress. Some
expressed concerns about the potential impact of linearity
on the wellbeing of those students who require additional
support, others noted that the elimination of the continual
testing associated with modular GCSEs may reduce stress for
some students.
Teachers and education leaders will discuss the findings at
an event in London today that will further understanding of
the effect of assessment structure and policy on students
in England. The research will be published shortly after
today’s event has concluded.
Dr Michelle Meadows, Executive Director for Strategy,
Research and Risk, Ofqual, said:
Teachers were concerned about the change to linear GCSEs
when we spoke to them before the recent reforms. How they
adapted during the period of this research has been
impressive. We have been able to look at the effects of
the changes on teachers’ practices and many can see
benefits to the introduction of linear examinations. They
also report that they would now like a period of
stability.
Professor Jo-Anne Baird, Professor of Educational
Assessment, University of Oxford, said:
Our findings have been really surprising in a number of
ways. We might have expected to see that modular
examinations were easier, or at least easier for some of
the groups we investigated, but we found no such
differences. The comparable outcomes approach to setting
standards has played a key role in this.
