Professor Michael O'Leary:

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend. I wish to focus my comments on the issue of assessment options for senior cycle. There is broad consensus in the research literature that high-quality educational assessments are underpinned by several key principles. The first is that all assessments should be designed to support accurate, consistent and fair decision-making in respect of the progress and achievement of all learners. The principle that all assessments contain measurement error means that single assessments are a poor basis for making high-stakes decisions about learners.

Think about that. That is a fundamental principle of assessment. In addition, while assessment systems provide information to many stakeholders, including policymakers like the committee, learners are the most important users of assessment information. For this reason a balance needs to be struck between assessments that support learning and those that measure it. The positive consequences, negative consequences, or both, that derive from the use of an individual assessment or an assessment system mean we must always consider the fallout or what happens when we implement these assessments. We need to make judgments about quality.

These principles underpin the arguments outlined in my submission and in what I am about to say and why I think the certification of achievement at the end of senior cycle needs to be based on the outcomes of a broad range of assessment approaches. I offer four proposals for consideration. The first is exams spread out over fifth and sixth year with reduced content that, in time, move from paper-based to computer-based so that the power of digital technology can be leveraged to broaden the scope of what can be assessed with exams. The second is continuous assessments that involve a combination of tasks externally set and marked by say, the State Examinations Commission, SEC, but also tasks assessed by the student’s own teacher. The third is the collective judgment of in-school teams of teachers about the achievement of students across the key skills framework for senior cycle. That must count for something. It cannot be on one side of a certification page that does not count the same as physics and maths. My fourth proposal is perhaps the most radical thing I am going to say today. It consists of an element of student self-assessment contributing to decisions around the grading of some assignments and, in particular, competences associated with the key skills framework. Data from all four modes of assessment would support a more balanced system of certifying achievement at the end of post-primary education in Ireland.

However, there are obstacles. There is no magic bullet with assessment. It is a difficult thing. The potential for over-assessment and increased workloads and stress for students and teachers is a threat that needs to be considered when evaluating the proposals I have written about. My last point has been said many times. The current relationship between the leaving certificate examination and the CAO points system poses a formidable barrier not just to what I am proposing but to what many others are proposing as well.