Name: Sample Assignment 4

Assignment title: The Extended Project Qualification (EPQ)

Assessment I have applied my learning to: Extended Project Qualification (EPQ)
Word count: 1526
Course date: Wi nter 2019

The Extended Project Qualification (EPQ)

Introduction and context of the EPQ Comment [A1 ]: This is a good
introduction, with a clear and helpf
The Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) is a level 3 s tandalone qualification, often taken by explanation of context – well done!

s tudents alongside A l evels. Since its introduction in 2009, i ts popularity has grown and
approximately 30 000 s tudents take it every year (UCAS, 2019). While its popularity is growing
among different schools and students, a s tudy by Gill (2016) found that i t was most popular in
academies, grammar s chools and sixth form colleges and was more likely to be taken by s tudents
wi th higher prior attainment (Gill, 2016).

I ts main aim is to develop skills i n project management and extended writing to aid with progression
to uni versity and employment (UCAS, 2019). I ts development was largely driven by s takeholders in
hi gher education (HE), who criticised A l evels for inadequately preparing students for university. An
i mportant consideration, according to the A102 course materials, is whether a qualification is used in
the way i t was intended (fitness for purpose). Currently, the EPQ i s used in various ways to inform
uni versity admission. The University of Southampton was the first university to implement an
al ternative offer scheme for students who have achieved well in their EPQ. Those who have done
well in their EPQ can apply wi th one grade lower than the usual requirements for one of their A
l evels (University of Southampton, 2019). This appears to be an appropriate use as it is in line with Comment [A2 ]: It would be
interesting to know how many othe
the purpose of the qualification and there is evidence to suggest that the EPQ may i mprove universities have since adopted this
approach…..
uni versity performance (Gill & Vi dal Rodeiro, 2014).
Comment [A3 ]: Clearly referenced
supporting evidence
I n addition to HE, s tudents and teachers also value the qualification for the independent learning,
cri tical thinking and research s kills it imparts (Higton et al., 2012). I t i s perceived as an enjoyable
qualification that enhances student teacher relationships (Vitello & Williamson, 2018). This is in line
wi th the information provided in the A102 course materials, which states that course work based
qualifications are valuable because they are more student-centred, i nteresting and engaging, and
Comment [A4 ]: This demonstrates
are arguably a more accurate reflection of a student’s ability than an examination result. application of knowledge and
understanding of the A102 course
Challenges during development of the EPQ content.
Comment [A5 ]: Issues during the E
The forum discussions during the A102 course highlighted that the main challenge of developing a development phase clearly identifie
Good application of A102 knowledg
qualification is managing expectations from different stakeholders. I n the case of the EPQ, the and understanding
qualification is highly s upported among HE, s tudents and teachers but there was likely to have been
s ome concerns regarding marking and grading from Ofqual, exam boards and teachers. According to
the A102 course materials, ensuring the qualification can be accurately marked and graded is a key
concern during development. Hypothetically speaking, this would have posed a challenge for the
EPQ duri ng i ts development given that the projects vary s o widely and the main purpose it to
develop skills which are difficult to assess. Students can complete the EPQ on a wi de range of topics,
l eading to vastly different outcomes. For example, they may elect to produce a dance performance
or develop a computer programme. There is no prescribed s ubject content as the qualification is
ai med at developing skills rather than s ubject knowledge. The main s kill areas include: project
management, using resources effectively, planning and operationalising a project and reviewing it
afterwards (UCAS, 2019).

Duri ng development, difficult decisions would have needed to be made about how to fairly and
accurately assess this range of outcomes and s kills development. Since i nternal assessment was
opted for, moderation would have been a key concern to ensure that all schools and teachers mark
and set the task in the same way. According to the A102 course materials, a common issue with any
course work is its vulnerability to cheating and malpractice. Qualification developers would have
needed to persuade s takeholders s uch as Ofqual that such a qualification can in fact be accurately
and fairly marked and graded despite the wide variation in outcomes, the internal nature and the
di fficulty assessing skills rather than content.

One consideration would have been to balance the need to assess s kills development fairly and
accurately while not creating an overly arduous process for teachers and students. OCR’s website
alludes to this challenge as one of their unique s elling points is a claim that their EPQ is easier to
administrate and mark, and involves less paperwork (OCR, 2019). Comment [A6 ]: There is an
opportunity here to discuss how thi
might compare with other awarding
Development of the assessment materials bodies, e.g. Is the AQA/Edexcel
approach similar?
According to the A102 course materials, fitness for purpose is a key consideration when developing Comment [A7 ]: Issues of the EPQ
assessment clearly identified
assessment materials. The materials need to be appropriate for demonstrating the skills the Good application of A102 knowledg
and understanding
qualification aims to impart. For the EPQ, s tudents are required to produce an artefact and a report.
Al ong with this, a variety of supporting documents is required, s ome of which are completed by
teachers and others by students. These seem appropriate for assessing the target skills but must
have been challenging to produce given that the skills are difficult to measure and the project s pans
a wi de range of different topics and outcomes.
There are Unit Recording Sheets (URS) which need to be annotated by teachers to explain their
rationale for marks awarded (OCR, 2017). The URS from OCR l ooks like a descriptive levels-based
mark scheme, where there are descriptors of what level of achievement is required to earn different
marks (OCR, 2013).

I n order for s tudents to achieve high grades, teachers need to demonstrate evidence that students
us ed research and project management skills appropriately, critically engaged with the topic, and
demonstrated the appropriate level of independent s tudy (for example, not too many teacher set
deadlines or teacher developed templates). This seems to be a very challenging balancing act.
According to the examiner’s report, there needs to be a balance between too much and too little
teacher support, and an equal focus on both research and project management s kills (OCR, 2017)
These balancing acts appear to function to ensure the right level of challenge for s tudents taking the
qualification. I f there is too much teacher involvement, this will s tifle skills development and not
offer an appropriate challenge, which according to the A102 course materials is an important aspect
when developing assessments.

Students are required to submit records like a Project Progression Record, diaries and commentary
documents in order to demonstrate the development of target s kills. These are also evidenced in
part by the outcome of the project (OCR, 2017).

When the qualification was first introduced i t must have been difficult to find the right experts to
create the assessment materials, since the qualification is a departure from traditional qualifications
s uch as A l evels. According to the A102 course materials, assessments are often sat by a s ubject
expert to quality check them. Since this project takes a long time to produce, having an expert sit the
assessment was unlikely to be practical or feasible in this case, which explains why the qualification
required piloting instead to refine the materials. Comment [A8 ]: Good application o
knowledge and understanding

Setting and maintaining standards Comment [A9 ]: Issues relating to

setting and maintaining standards
clearly identified
According to the A102 course materials, Ofqual is the regulator of school assessments in the UK and, Good application of A102 knowledg
and understanding
al ong with exam boards, is responsible for ensuring the EPQ i s comparable with other level 3
qualifications and for ensuring the comparability of standards over time. The course materials state
that A l evel exams s hould require extended response, where students must develop a coherent,
l ogical, and evidenced line of thinking. The EPQ is i n itself an extended response, consisting of a
product and a write-up, which contributes to making it in line with other A l evels. However, given
that higher attaining students are more likely to take it, it may be perceived as more difficult. On the
other hand, one could argue it is easier since there is no pressurized examination. Possible variations Comment [A10]: Valid comparison

i n difficulty compared with other level 3 qualifications would need to be taken into account during
grading. Syllabus pairs could be used to compare EPQ res ults with the results of those candidates on
other level 3 qualifications to determine whether it is on par and make necessary adjustments i f
needed to ensure the maintenance of s tandards.

A cri tical process for ensuring standardisation is external moderation. Since the qualification is
i nternally assessed, this makes it vulnerable to cheating and malpractice. The moderation process is
l ikely to be quite challenging for the EPQ, due to the varied nature of the outcomes. The write-ups,
URS, s tudent diaries and so on could be distributed fairly easily to moderators electronically, but it
would be more of a challenge to distribute possible outcomes such as art works, dance
performances or fashion s hows. Vi deo recordings could be generated however, this creates
additional logistical challenges due to large file sizes and one could argue that a vi deo recording or
an i mage of an art work is different to the live product and this could affect moderation decisions. Comment [A11]: Valid point!

Conclusion

I n conclusion, the EPQ is an i nteresting and valuable qualification which plays an i mportant role in
developing skills for progression to HE. The unique nature of each of the projects and the focus on
assessing difficult to measure s kills, however, was likely to have posed several challenges during
development and the creation of assessment materials and continues to pose challenges for setting
and maintaining standards. However, the confidence that stakeholders s how in this qualification, for
example, universities altering admissions policies, s uggests that these challenges are being
s uccessfully addressed. Comment [A12]: An excellent
conclusion. Well done!

References Comment [A13]: Sources

acknowledged

Gi ll, T. (2016). Uptake and results in the Extended Project Qualification (2008-2015). (Statistics
Report Series No. 101). Cambridge Assessment research report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
As s essment

Gi ll, T. and C. L. Vi dal Rodeiro (2014). Predictive validity of level 3 qualifications: Extended project,
Cambridge Pre-U, International Baccalaureate, BTEC Diploma. Cambridge Assessment
res earch report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Assessment

OCR (2013). Extended project level 3, unit H856: Unit recording sheet. Retrieved from
https://www.ocr.org.uk/images/67424-unit-h856-recording-sheet-interactive-.pdf
OCR (2017). Projects, extended project, OCR level 3 H856: OCR report to centres for June 2017.
Retrieved from https://www.ocr.org.uk/Images/415386-examiners-report-june.pdf

OCR (2019). Extended project – H856. Retrieved from

https://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/projects/extended-project-h856/

UCAS (2019). Extended project qualification. Retrieved from https://qips.ucas.com/qip/extended-

project-qualification-epq

Uni versity of Southampton (2019). EPQ admissions policy. Retrieved from

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/learnwithustransition/epq-support/admissions-
policy.page

Vi tello, S. & Williamson, J. (2018). AS level trends 2017. Cambridge Assessment Research Report.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Assessment.

Assignment Marker’s feedback

Pass

Thank you for your assignment and for the hard work that has clearly gone into to it.

You have presented a well-organised, clear and convincing explanation of the issues in
assessment practice in relation to the EPQ. Your assignment evidences that you have
reflected very well on the topics covered in the A102 online course and can confidently apply
your knowledge and understanding to an assessment which is of personal interest.

You have made good use of relevant source material to support your points and have clearly
acknowledged this.
In applying your knowledge and understanding, you have demonstrated a good conceptual
understanding of the assessment cycle.
Congratulations on completing your assignment so successfully.