Rethinking the non-examined assessment (NEA): Time Well Spent in D&T?

Subscriber-only episode

In this thought-provoking episode of Talking D&T, I dive into the controversial topic of assessment in design and technology education, particularly focusing on the Non-Examined Assessment (NEA) at GCSE level in England. Drawing from my recent conversation with Louise and ongoing discussions in the field, I challenge the status quo and present what some might consider a radical view: that the current NEA structure may be wasting precious teaching time.

I explore the potential for shorter, more effective assessments, backed by research dating back to the late 80s and international practices. Highlighting the curriculum and assessment review led by Professor Becky Francis, I discuss the opportunity to revolutionize how we evaluate D&T capability.

Key points include:

1. Questioning the time allocated to NEAs in our already tight timetables
2. Examining alternative assessment methods that could better capture students' skills
3. The importance of clearly defined curriculum objectives in exam specifications

For D&T educators, this episode offers a fresh perspective on assessment practices and curriculum design. How might reducing formal assessment time impact your teaching and students' learning? Could we achieve more meaningful evaluations with less time?

Whether you're based in England or part of our growing international audience, this conversation encourages us to rethink our approach to D&T education. How can we ensure our assessments truly reflect the aims of D&T while maximizing learning time?

Let's keep this important dialogue going! Share your thoughts with colleagues and join the conversation about shaping the future of D&T assessment.

If you like the podcast, you can always buy me a coffee to say 'thanks!'

Please offer your feedback about the show or ideas for future episodes and topics by connecting with me on Threads @hardy_alison or by emailing me.

If you listen to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, please take a moment to rate and/or review the show.

If you want to support me by becoming a Patron click here.

If you are not able to support me financially, please consider leaving a review on Apple Podcasts or sharing a link to my work on social media. Thank you!

Chapters

• 0:06 Rethinking Formal Assessment in Education
• 8:27 Optimizing Student Assessment Strategies

Transcript

Alison Hardy: 0:06

I really enjoyed the conversation I had, as I enjoy all the conversations I have for the podcast with Louise this week. You know, louise and I have met in several different places, talked about, um, all sorts of different things and had really good fun sort of in those conversations as well as kind of really learning a lot and had some really critical conversations that have challenged how I've thought about the kind of official part of examining and what I got from the conversation that came out on Tuesday was about the processes and how much teachers can and can't be involved and where they can be involved and what we can do as an educational community to to challenge some of the systems. And so you know I've been in a few more conversations this week, um, about how we assess and what we assess, and you know I've written about it and I've I've read stuff about it and it's really kind of got me thinking. So I kind of feel like I'm rambling a bit here because I'm still processing some thoughts and trying to, as I always try to do, join dots up, to kind of think about a way forward, about how we're addressing what's going on in design and technology. Now, forgive me for those of you who are listening outside of England, because I'm going to refer again to the curriculum and assessment review that's going on in England at the moment, led by Professor Becky Francis, and I've been really focusing on the curriculum aspects and sort of forgotten about the assessment. The assessment part is up for review. So I think we've got a real opportunity here to talk to those involved on the review, about what needs assessing and how it can be assessed and what the evidence says about how these things can be assessed in design and technology.

Alison Hardy: 1:55

But first I'm going to say something that people might find quite radical about formal assessment for GCSEs, for for external exams, that is, in England. I don't think the NEA does what it needs to do in terms of assessment and I think it's given too much time. There we go, so let me just pause on that one for a moment. What do I mean? So the NEA, the non-examined assessment, used to be called coursework. You know when I was teaching we did coursework as an assessment. But it's. I think we're at a real crucial point.

Alison Hardy: 2:35

In England, timetabling time for upper secondary and lower secondary has been slashed to the bone for all sorts of reasons I'm not going into now. Yet for some reason we still think it's acceptable for a significant amount of timetabled time when children are 15 and 16 to be used up for a formal assessment. To be used up for a formal assessment. How is that right? Given that timetabling time, teaching time we're told so often in education and I remember as a teacher that is precious time why are we using so much of it for formal assessment? So my radical view is that, as we're going through reviewing assessment methods in England, maybe it's time to say the NEA I'm not saying non-examined assessment. I'm not saying children shouldn't be assessed for their designer technology capability which is my next thing but maybe we need to say let's stop giving it so much timetabled time, because that's time when children could be learning and actively developing their D&T capability.

Alison Hardy: 4:05

So what's the alternative? So if we take away that amount of time for the NEA, what's the alternative? And I think the first big question we need to ask is what are we assessing? Well, we're assessing what children's position is at a moment in time with regards to their design and technology capability and their ability to engage with and understand and change the made world, their ability to critique. How does an NEA do that? So it gives them a design context. Do we still need that amount of time to assess it? No, there is research evidence right starting back into the late 80s to current day that says we don't need to give that amount of time. And OCR led the way, working with research leads Kay Stables and Richard Kimball and put together I forget what it was called now a shortened version of the NEA that still did the same thing that assessed pupils' D&T capability. And I've just been talking with colleagues about how do we assess D&T capability? How much time do we need? And there's been some really exciting stuff internationally that's informed by research, designed by research that is assessing this construct of design and technology capability that is out there to give the evidence. So I think that is something we need to think about and I think one of the things that has led to us losing our way over assessment in terms of formal assessment that's examined and other countries don't do this.

Alison Hardy: 5:48

Okay, let's take notes on that. It's done. On teacher assessment, that's all about government's respect for teachers. Professional judgment in different countries is better established than it is in England. Let's hopefully we can get that back. But I think you know this formal assessment how and why have we got to this point?

Alison Hardy: 6:11

Well, I think we need to bring back in that teachers and those involved in shaping assessment have a really good, strong grounding in what we're assessing. And so we need to have a really good, strong grounding in what we're assessing. And so we need to have a really good, strong understanding of what's the curriculum objective. And I think we need to be banging on off qual's door, and it's not just for design and technology, I think it's across every specification. We need to know what the aims are of this specification. If we look in a spec these days, that's the formal publication of what's going to be assessed, that comes from the exam boards, that has to meet the off-qualite requirements. And if you're not quite sure where all these different boards are, go back and have a listen to my conversation with Louise. They're the ones that kind of set the parameters that the exam boards have to say we need to be going back to them and saying that kind of set the parameters that the examples have to say we need to be going back to them and saying put the aims and the objectives back in so we know and it's really clear about why we're teaching children this stuff, what are they getting better at?

Alison Hardy: 7:11

And if we look at the Ofsted curriculum research reviews and we look at the curriculum framework, it's all about what are we? You know? Why are we teaching children this knowledge? And that's where, if we don't understand that, it just becomes a loose bundle of stuff. That you know. I use a graphic, a photograph, an image when I talk in schools about design and technology capability and knowledge of different lego pieces all over the place that are random and that's what it's like. The children aren't able to make connections. They're not saying why, why do I need to know this? And that answer that we seem to hear over and over again and I've given it as well when I was teaching because it's on the exam specification, because you're going to be tested on it. No, the reason children are having these bits of knowledge and it's another podcast about knowledge it's about knowledge and skills. The reason children have been taught it and learning it is so that they have it in their toolkit Not a great analogy their box of bits that they can pull out and draw on when they're given a new design context. That's why the design contexts that are used in the NEA are crucial and children have to respond to them.

Alison Hardy: 8:27

And I think if we look back at some of the stuff that was done by the Assessment Performance Unit I'll put a link in the show notes to the 2004 report I think we've got really strong evidence that we do not need the amount of time. We do not need the amount of time when children should be being taught and learning and have opportunities to draw on, experiment and develop their D&D capability. That's different. Developing their D&D capability is different than assessing it, and I think we need to really question. And so I think there's a couple of things.

Alison Hardy: 8:59

I think for me, I'll be challenging Ofqual and the curriculum and assessment review about. Is one NEAs valuable? Yes, important, because they're assessing de-intercapability, but they don't need so much time because there is research evidence that says they don't need to be done like that and it can be done. And then, second, let's put the aims and objectives of a GCSE, any exam content, back in the specification or any publication that says what's the purpose of this, what is being grown and developed in children? That's what we need to do anyway. Kip's now barking tell me I've got to go, so I'm going to leave it there. Lots of things to think about, about Come back to me and let me know what you think.