Consultation outcome

Future assessment arrangements for GCSE (9 to 1) computer science

Applies to England

This consultation has concluded

Read the full outcome

Decisions on future assessment arrangements for GCSE (9 to 1) computer science

Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@ofqual.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Computer science GCSE (9 to 1): Regulatory Impact Assessment

Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@ofqual.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Detail of outcome

We have decided to implement our preferred option – assessing programming skills via examination. However, we are not specifying the form this assessment should take beyond the requirement that it meets our definition of an exam. This affords exam boards the opportunity to be innovative in their approach to assessing programming skills.

Feedback received

Analysis of responses to our consultation on future assessment arrangements for GCSE (9 to 1) computer science

Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@ofqual.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Detail of feedback received

We received 394 responses to our consultation. 73 of these were from organisations and 321 were personal responses.


Original consultation

Summary

This consultation is about how the programming skills of students taking GCSE computer science should be assessed.

This consultation ran from
to

Consultation description

This consultation follows interim changes we made to the qualification’s assessment arrangements in early 2018. It does not concern the subject content for GCSE computer science, which is set by the government. Programming will remain a key feature of the qualification. Rather, in considering the options for the longer term, our priority has been to ensure the assessments validly assess all of the subject content in a way that contributes towards students’ final grades.

We have discussed with teachers and subject associations the potential ways by which students’ programming skills could be assessed in the longer term.

We have concluded that it is not possible to use non-exam assessment in this qualification to assess programming skills in a way that is manageable, reliable and fair. We have also concluded that exam boards could assess programming skills in different and potentially innovative ways under exam conditions (whereby all students take assessments set and marked by exam boards at the same time, under supervision). Moreover, we think this approach is likely to lead to the most effective development of programming skills, as it allows teachers to adopt the approach to developing those skills they feel is best for their students.

Documents

Future assessment arrangements for GCSE (9 to 1) computer science

Request an accessible format.
If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email publications@ofqual.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use.

Updates to this page

Published 5 November 2018
Last updated 18 February 2019 + show all updates
  1. In line with arrangements in place when the qualification was reformed, the following sentence has been added to page 10 of the decisions document: Students who wish to resit GCSE computer science in 2022 will not be able to do so under the interim assessment arrangements, and must instead take qualifications which meet the requirements of the revised subject-level conditions.

  2. Consultation outcome published

  3. First published.

Sign up for emails or print this page