Assessing the academic
attainment of children with visual impairment in public tests and examinations
Focus: School Years
Topic: Inclusive Education
Rory Cobb
Children’s Officer: Qualifications and Training
RNIB Education and Employment Centre: West Midlands
58-72 John Bright Street
Birmingham
B1 1BN
England
0121 633 3372
rory.cobb@rnib.org.uk
Children in England are subject to more external assessment
than most other countries in the world.
This paper considers some of the issues involved in ensuring that
visually impaired children enjoy equal access to the many tests and
examinations that they take during their school years. It raises a number of issues which I hope
will be of interest to teachers in other countries. I am currently undertaking research in this area and would be
very interested to find out what systems exist elsewhere, so that teachers in
England can learn from their experience.
The National Curriculum in England is divided by age into
four Key Stages as follows:
Key Stage 1 ages
5-7
Key Stage 2 ages
7-11
Key Stage 3 ages
11-14
Key Stage 4 ages
14-16
All children take national tests in English, mathematics and
science at the end of Key Stages 1, 2 and 3.
These tests are intended to establish children’s attainment in terms of
levels starting from 1 and rising to 8.
At Key Stage 4 pupils embark on courses which lead to the award of
formal qualifications. The main
academic qualification is known as GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary
Education) but there are also vocational alternatives. Although children can leave full-time
education at the age of 16, most stay on until the age of 18 or 19 studying
either academic or vocational courses.
The government introduces new tests and examinations almost every year
as part of their programme to drive up standards and to make schools more
accountable for the quality of education they provide. A recent study has estimated that some
children could take up to 105 examinations in their school careers.
Most visually impaired children in England are educated
within the National Curriculum and take the same tests and examinations as
other children. The question papers are
set by national bodies which are required to meet the needs of pupils with
special needs. Their policies state
that these arrangements should:
- focus on the individual
assessment needs of the child concerned
- replicate the child’s
normal method of working
- test the same assessment
objectives and not alter the nature of questions
- not provide an unfair
advantage over other children
- ensure that answers given
are the child’s own
- maintain the integrity and
validity of the assessment
For most
pupils with special requirements, special arrangements involve decisions about
extra time, the provision of adult support and the use of equipment such as
laptop computers to record the pupil’s answers. The common factor in these arrangements is that, once approved,
they are organised by the school concerned and take place on the day of the
examination. While pupils with visual
impairment may need many of these arrangements, they also require the examination
papers in large print or braille. This
is where the situation becomes complicated, because this provision has to be
organised well in advance.
The rest of
this paper will concentrate on the provision of papers for GCSE and similar
examinations, not on the national tests taken at 7, 11 and 14. The basic principles are the same
throughout, but the practical difficulties are greater at GCSE because of the
larger number of syllabuses involved.
At the same time, the consequences of poor provision are more serious as
these examinations lead to a formal qualification.
For GCSE and similar examinations the choice of alternative
formats for visually impaired candidates is as follows:
- A3
unmodified enlarged paper – this is the standard paper enlarged on a
photocopier from A4 to A3, thus enlarging the whole paper and retaining
the original layout and visual presentation.
- A4
modified large print (MLP) paper – this involves the paper being modified
to simplify visual complexity and layout and, where necessary, to reduce
content, while still meeting the same assessment objectives as those
tested in the original paper.
Papers are then re-printed in 18 point bold print on A4 paper with
modified diagrams incorporated.
- A3
MLP paper – this is an enlarged version of the A4 MLP paper onto A3 paper,
creating a print size of around 24 point.
- Braille
paper – this involves a similar process of modification to that for MLP
papers, with the paper subsequently produced in braille.
Initially many problems existed with the provision of MLP
and braille papers because these were not produced to any agreed
standards. The question of whether they
were produced correctly was therefore entirely subjective and one school might
object to a paper which others found quite acceptable. In 1994, the GCSE examining bodies approved
a set of specifications produced by teachers of the visually impaired in order
to overcome this difficulty. These
Specifications form the basis on which all GCSE examination papers for visually
impaired pupils are now produced. They
serve a number of important purposes:
- to
define the range of alternative formats to be provided, as listed above,
and to establish standards for each format.
- to
set out a system to ensure that papers are produced to a professional
standard. In the case of MLP and
braille papers, this system requires the involvement of subject modifiers
before the papers are sent for production.
- to
define the role of the subject modifier – teachers of the visually
impaired who advise on how the content of an examination paper
should be changed to make it accessible to visually impaired pupils.
- to
define the role of the producer – specialists in the layout and
presentation of large print or braille who produce the final copy of
the paper.
Standards of
provision
The introduction of agreed standards via the Specifications
has certainly improved the provision of examination papers in recent
years. A national survey of provision
in 2000 indicated a fairly high level of approval, with 63% of braille papers
and 75% of modified large print papers being judged to be excellent or
good. However, the survey also
identified a number of concerns about the system:
- Poor
modification and/or production in certain subjects, mainly mathematics and
science, where the original papers contain a large number of
diagrams.
- Some
papers being delivered late, incomplete or to the wrong school.
- The
range of alternative formats available being unsuitable for the visual
needs of particular pupils. In
most cases, these complaints concern partially sighted pupils who wish to
receive papers in print sizes other than 18 or 24 point.
These criticisms raise important concerns not only about the
efficiency of the system but also the philosophy which lies behind it.
System issues
- Papers
are only put into braille or large print in response to individual
requests and the time frame between ordering papers and the date of the
examination is often too short to allow the process set out in the
Specifications document to be followed properly. Consequently, some papers are not sent to specialist
modifiers at all and many braille and large print papers are not properly
proof-read.
- Examining
bodies are greatly concerned to prevent breaches of security which might
lead to cheating. As a
consequence, they will not allow schools to open papers more than one hour
early to check their appropriateness for individual visually impaired
candidates and to modify their presentation further if necessary. In many cases, one hour is not enough
time to carry out this work properly.
- Initial
plans to require modifiers and producers to demonstrate their competence
have never been fulfilled, mainly because there are too few people willing
to take on the work in the first place.
Modifiers and producers are expected to adhere to the
Specifications but at present there is no training programme to ensure the
quality of their work.
- Standardisation. Despite the improvement brought about by the Specifications,
disagreements over ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ approaches to the modification or
production of examination papers continue, with much being left to the
professional judgement of the modifier or producer concerned. Teachers of visually impaired children
do not share a common understanding of this important issue.
- Professional
awareness. The system can only
work effectively if schools know what to expect and to ask for when
ordering papers and then prepare their candidates accordingly. This is not such a problem for special
schools for whom these special arrangements form a regular part of their
work. However, the majority of
visually impaired children are now educated in mainstream schools where
teachers may have no previous experience of special arrangements for
examinations.
Philosophical issues
Some of the issues outlined below relate to the whole system
and apply equally to braille and large print.
Evidence suggests, however, that the current practice of producing
standard sizes of large print is the focus of greatest disagreement and several
questions relate to this alone.
- The
present system can be seen as one where the needs of a small minority are
‘tacked on’ to a larger system designed around different priorities. For example, requests to examining
bodies to increase the time available for the production of modified
papers have been unsuccessful, on the basis that the needs of a few
hundred visually impaired candidates cannot dictate to a system designed
to provide standard papers for several hundred thousand children each
year. Teachers of visually
impaired children argue that the needs of their children should be built
into the system from the start, not treated as an afterthought.
- The
examining bodies argue that they already put a great deal of time and
money into the production of alternative formats for visually impaired
candidates. This is true – each of
the three main bodies employs staff specifically to administer the system,
as well as paying for the modification and production of braille and large
print papers which can amount to around £80,000 per examining body
each year. These costs are not
passed on to the individual schools concerned. However, while the examining bodies emphasise how much they
already do, teachers of the visually impaired point out that it is not yet
enough – a classic case of one side seeing the glass as half full while
the other sees it as half empty.
- Many
teachers of the visually impaired argue that, by limiting the range of
alternative formats available for examinations, we are denying some children
the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and understanding
properly. If so, should we asking
for an unlimited range of print sizes in examinations? Or is the present system a useful way
of encouraging teachers of the visually impaired to teach their pupils
independent access skills and thus to reduce their reliance on
individualised materials? If this
is the case, perhaps we should be asking for less rather than more
formats.
- It is
interesting to consider the role of educational context in determining
what format is required. If a child is regularly provided with educational
material in a particular format and style at school, may he or she become
dependent on that form of presentation and be disadvantaged by a
different, unfamiliar style presented in examinations? In other words, what is the
relationship between familiarity and need?
- In
practice, there will always be some children whose visual conditions
cannot be accommodated within a standardised approach. How can we distinguish between those
who can reasonably be expected to manage with a limited range of print
sizes and those whose visual needs genuinely require an individual
approach? Do we need to develop an
assessment tool which enables us to distinguish between preference and
need in the presentation of educational materials?
- A
fundamental principle followed by the examining bodies is that any special
arrangement should not alter the nature of the assessment, so that the
candidate is still required to demonstrate the same knowledge,
understanding and skills as other pupils.
However, how can we be sure when we modify the content of the
question that we are testing the same things as the original? If we are not, can we justify the
changes on the basis that what we are testing instead is more relevant to
a visually impaired person?
- In
the end, can we really hope to modify all examinations to remove fully the
effect of disability? Most
examinations are designed to discriminate between individuals on the basis
of their knowledge, understanding and skills in specific areas. While disability should not be used as
a reason to deny individuals access to a course of study, should the fact
of their disability allow them to gain a qualification at the end of it if
they cannot fulfil the standard assessment requirements?
It will be clear from all these questions that the issue of
access to examinations and qualifications is a complex one which challenges a
number of our basic assumptions about the nature of educational entitlement and
opportunity. Looking again at the
principles governing special
arrangements which I listed earlier, it becomes clear that they raise more
questions then they answer, because not all of them are mutually compatible.
Essentially,
the issue can be seen as one of conflicting priorities. First and foremost is a conflict around the
nature of assessment itself, between the rights of the individual and the
integrity and validity of the qualification.
There is also potential conflict for many children around access to
examinations themselves, between the preferred working practices of an
individual child and the limited range of formats which an examining body can
realistically be expected to provide.
Is it reasonable to expect children to develop independent access skills
to manage with this limited range? Or
should examinations, because they are potentially so important to a child’s
future, be designed to meet and reflect the needs and preferences of the individual
in a positive manner and not just meet minimum requirements for
accessibility? The argument against
this individualised provision is primarily one of cost but it may be that new
technology will in time make it both possible and affordable.
A new law takes effect in England in September 2002 which
will outlaw discrimination in education against children with
disabilities. This new law will place
the issues raised in this paper in a new legal context. It will be interesting to see how examining
bodies, teachers of the visually impaired, parents and children themselves
respond. Depending on the
interpretation of the courts, we may soon know to what extent the balance will
shift so that future assessment systems are required to fit around the needs of
the individual, in contrast to the current position where the emphasis is on
the individual being required to fit in with the demands of the system.
(2400 words)
