Mr. Aidan Farrell:

The State Examinations Commission, SEC, and our colleagues in the Department of Education and Skills very much welcome the opportunity to attend today’s committee meeting to assist the committee in fully considering the petition to make the new English junior certificate exam fairer by adding 30 extra minutes. I note that the committee would particularly like to discuss how the mock examination papers provided by commercial suppliers might be scrutinised in advance of their sale to schools. Before dealing with the issue at hand I might briefly set out to the committee the role and functions of the SEC within the State examinations system.

The SEC is a statutory body established in 2003 under section 54 of the Education Act 1998. Our role is to provide a high-quality State examinations and assessment system incorporating the highest standards of openness, fairness and accountability in operating the Irish State examinations, principally the junior and leaving certificate and the leaving certificate applied examinations. Examinations and assessment policy is set by the Minister for Education and Skills and the SEC is then responsible for the operation and delivery of the State examinations system.

The commission is headed by a board of commissioners, appointed by Government on the nomination of the Minister for Education and Skills. The role of the commissioners is to act as the custodians of the State examinations in terms of affirming and upholding the principles and integrity underpinning the system and the need to maintain public confidence in the examinations themselves. The functions of the SEC are precisely defined in the State Examinations Commission (Establishment) Order 2003. These encompass the preparation of State examination materials to their marking, resulting and ultimately appeal processes, along with arrangements for the conduct of the examinations. The SEC prepares over 500 test items each year, which are taken by almost 120,000 candidates, leading to the marking of 1.9 million items of candidate work and the award of 1 million grades.

The purpose of the State examinations is to measure the extent to which candidates demonstrate achievement in terms of meeting the aims and objectives of each particular subject specification, or syllabus as they are often known.

Examination papers do not exist in a vacuum. Central to the SEC’s role in maintaining public confidence in the State examinations is the setting and maintenance of examination standards from year to year. We do this through the relationship between the preparation of examination papers and their marking schemes, how we standardise these in order to maintain standards year on year and then how we quality assure these through our marking and appeal processes. The examination paper preparation process itself involves the key personnel of chief examiners, drafters, setters, translators, and in the case of the leaving certificate, university observers and scrutineers. The process takes over 15 months to conclude and contains a number of overlapping steps to provide examination papers of the highest possible standard to test, and to give candidates the opportunity to answer on, the appropriate aspects of the subject specification, or syllabus.

The SEC provides a range of supports and services to teachers and candidates in preparing for the examinations. These are an important element of the work of the SEC as candidates are understandably apprehensive in the lead-up to the State examinations, particularly when a new programme is being introduced, as happened this year with the introduction of a new style of examination in junior cycle English. To provide appropriate support for future candidates and their teachers, the SEC provides full, open, and free access to its entire electronic archive of past examination materials. This includes past examination papers, past marking schemes and chief examiners’ reports on previous examinations. Such access to past papers and marking schemes allows all stakeholders to have equal and fair access to information about what to expect as regards the structure, format, and style of the examinations, so as to be appropriately prepared. Chief examiners’ reports are issued periodically in each subject and provide additional information and insights into how candidates have performed with respect to the various assessment objectives of the syllabus, as well as offering advice to future candidates.

When a new subject specification or syllabus is introduced, such as the new junior cycle English examination which candidates sat for the first time earlier this month, past examination papers in that subject are of more limited use for the purposes described above.

For this reason, sample examination papers are produced by the SEC, in consultation with the Department of Education and Skills and the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, in advance of the first State examinations for any new subject or revised subject specification. These sample papers are produced as a guide to students, teachers and the public as to the structure and format of the new examination and, like real examinations, are produced with a high level of oversight and quality assurance to ensure their fitness for purpose.

Mock examinations take place in many schools in spring each year. These examinations, as the name suggests, are intended to mimic the forthcoming State examinations in June. Despite the fact they have no official status and their use is not approved or endorsed by the Department of Education and Skills or any other State body, they have been used by schools for some time as a means to help prepare students for State examinations. The teachers and schools that choose to use them believe their value rests in providing students with an opportunity to sit a full-length examination that attempts to replicate the demands of the State examinations when they come around and thereby enhance candidate preparedness. While in the past many teachers prepared their own papers for this purpose, commercially available alternatives have existed for a long time and have become increasingly prevalent. Decisions to hold mock examinations are taken by schools themselves. The SEC and Department play no role in this activity.

Mock examinations are not the business of the SEC. We have no role or involvement in the preparation or delivery of examinations provided by mock examination providers that are private commercial entities. The companies involved go to lengths to make their products look similar to the State examinations. They mimic the layout and fonts of the State examinations, including in some instances logos and subject codes akin to those used by the SEC. These companies usually provide solutions and marking schemes. In some instances they also provide, on a commercial basis, a marking service and return marked scripts and results to schools that engage them to provide this additional service.

Due to the efforts made by such providers to mimic the look and feel of the SEC's examination papers, many students and parents may incorrectly believe that these mock examinations have some official status or are subject to some form of State endorsement or oversight, but this is not the case. The SEC does not engage with the mock examination providers or the public in respect of mock examinations. As with any other commercially produced educational service or product, such as school textbooks, both the SEC and Department consider that it is inappropriate for a State agency to comment on the quality of either the papers or marking service provided. Indeed, to do so would certainly constitute inappropriate interference by a State agency in a private commercial market.

The proposal that the SEC would provide commentary or advice on mock papers to the providers of those papers or any degree of oversight on the papers or the process of their preparation is a cause for concern. The reality is that mock examinations are produced by private companies within a competitive commercial market. In our view, it would have a number of inevitable inappropriate implications. It would imply an endorsement by the State of the very process of conducting mock examinations in schools, enhancing their perceived value despite the fact the Department does not endorse their use or consider them to be an appropriate and effective use of school time. It would effectively provide endorsement or criticism of the products and services of private commercial companies. The legislative and administrative architecture that would be required to ensure such oversight and-or involvement with a commercial market by a State body was in full compliance with Irish and EU competition law would be onerous in the extreme. The resources required to provide an adequate level of oversight to allow any credible endorsement by a State body of the quality of these commercial products and services, including the large numbers of additional staff required, would not be tenable, particularly in pursuit of a goal that is at variance with stated educational policy. The SEC, in giving its observations or guidance, would as a result inevitably provide insights into examination paper development in such a way as to increase the predictability of examinations and-or provide inappropriate guidance as to future live examination paper content. The SEC's endorsement would result in inappropriate expectations as to the relationship between material that appears on mock papers and material that might appear on the real State examinations provided by the SEC. It would expose the SEC to legitimate avenues of criticism if, by sheer coincidence, the content of a mock paper from one company turned out to be a closer match than the content of a paper from another company as to the content that later appeared on the real examination, both mock papers having received the endorsement of the SEC.

In short, unless mock examinations could be subjected to the same level of preparative rigour as the real State examinations, with suitable oversight mechanisms placed on a sound legislative footing, it would not be credible for the SEC to provide an endorsement of these products. Even if the substantial resources required to implement this oversight role were made available, the negative consequences of carrying out this role would substantially outweigh conceivable positive effects. Consequently, the SEC considers that it would be inappropriate for us to have any involvement in the setting or oversight of mock examination papers.

Today's meeting came about as a result of an online petition organised by junior cycle candidates arising from their concerns based on the adverse experience of some candidates who sat mock examinations last spring in advance of the new 2017 junior cycle English examinations. The petition sought the addition of an extra 30 minutes for the completion of these examinations as many candidates had experienced real-time pressures in the mock examination. Candidates, who face the first examination in this new programme this year, were understandably concerned for their prospects in the real English examination in June based on this experience in their mock examination. Following receipt of the online petition last March, the SEC moved to reassure candidates that the examination papers in preparation for the June 2017 sitting of junior cycle English would be suitable for completion in a two-hour examination and that they would be fair to candidates.

The English examination sat by candidates earlier this month was fully in accordance with the structure, format and likely time demands of the sample papers at higher and ordinary level set by the SEC and issued in November 2015 for the assistance of teachers, candidates and, indeed, for the guidance of the producers of the mock examinations. I am pleased to report to the committee that the reports from teachers and candidates on the 2017 junior cycle English examinations set by the SEC show that they were executed without any issues arising and no difficulties were experienced by candidates in respect of completion time.

The SEC and the Department do not believe it is appropriate for the State to make any intervention aimed at improving the quality of commercial products and services in a market, especially since those products and services do not advance the Government's educational policy. The reality is that commercial producers have identified an opportunity in a market, which is their right. The SEC and the Department cannot get involved in endorsing any such commercial opportunities or activities.

My colleagues and I would welcome observations and will answer any questions that members wish to raise.