278
In 1992, attempts to bridge the academic∕vocational divide led to the creation of a
hybrid qualification which combined applied study with a core of general education,
the General National Vocational Qualification. Despite its initial success across the
post-16 sector, its assessment scheme was criticised as lacking the reliability that
external assessment provided for academic qualifications. The solution proposed in
the Dearing Report of 1996 was that the reputation for reliable assessment the
examining boards had established could benefit this new arrival if they were to
include it within their suite of qualifications. To this end, the Boards were required
from 1997 to become ‘unitary awarding bodies’ offering GNVQs as well as their
traditional A levels and GCSEs if they were to continue to be accredited within the
English state sector. This central diktat meant that the Boards’ organisational integrity
had been breached: they were forced into mergers if they wished to survive. The
effects of these imposed changes challenged their performance as never before.
I suggest that the third change to the examinations structure administered the coup de
grace to the Boards’ ability to apply their professional judgement to the complexities
of assessment. This was the introduction of Curriculum 2000, which substantially
changed the structure of A levels to that of two self-contained years involving three
modules in each year. In the discussions around the appropriate weighting of the
modules for the first year of study in relation to the second year, the Boards’ advice
was flatly over-ruled by both the Chief Executive of QCA and a Government
Minister. I submit that this is conclusive evidence that the Boards have become
reduced to the role of qualifications providers expected to work to specifications
designed by others. They are no longer permitted to fulfil their role as skilled
professionals whose expertise underwrites their product.