1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Business Lead IV

Discussion in 'Business studies' started by Rappers1, Dec 10, 2010.

  1. I’m obviously concerned to hear all this, and have followed up with the relevant teams here at Edexcel. As I’m sure you appreciate, I can’t address each message individually, so I’d like to give you some insight into the main reasons some Lead Internal Verifiers have not been given accreditation. This is a new process that people are unfamiliar with, and experienced people may have misinterpreted questions or materials. Trained Standard Verifiers will often score 33 or above on these materials, as will some Lead Internal Verifiers. Nearly 5,000 Lead IVs completed the online standardisation exercise. Overall the assessment materials have performed in line with our expectations. We set a high but realistic pass mark for accreditation based on performance, but there is not an absolute fixed mark or a limitation on how many Lead IVs can be accredited If you want to talk through what you are doing as a Lead IV, please contact your
    Edexcel Regional Quality Manager.

    Colin Leith
    Subject Advisor - Edexcel
  2. rambhai

    rambhai New commenter

    Hi, it is not about the procss but Business was vague, difficult and poor standard accepted by SSV. When brief, assessment and IV is sent for NSS, this would have not been acceptable. I passed OSCA for ICT so I do have the capability and I followed the same process for Business LIV keeping in mind the purpose, standard, assessment and IV process. The brief in the assessment was so confusing, learners in our centre would not be able to follow it. Also for P1, few lines for aims and objectives? This is L2 IA*-C) and the standard should reflect that.
  3. Colin, i understand what you are saying but there was an edexcel admin mess up this time, and they are no prepared to give any leeway
    In part 1 of business level 2 there was the assignment brief, then the IV sheet. What followed was a task sheet without any mention that this was part of the assignment. If Lead IV's assumed (as i did, that this task sheet was produced by the student rather than being part of the assignment, it made it impossible to be correct on at least 5 questions. Therefore the lead IV is not being marked on their ability to monitor standards but on their interpretation of edexcels poor preparation of the materials.
    For example, the assignment brief itself talks about the first pass criteria relating to aims and objectives (which was unit 1 rather than unit 2) but the task sheet (which was, I repeat, after the IV sheet) has the correct criteria for unit 2 how is it possible to assume they were produced at the same time?
    In my case, one page which was assembled in the wrong order by edexcel meant i failed Lead IV. My RQM even acknowledged this. My problem is not that i have a major problem with the standards (although i did raise an eyebrow about some of the judgements) but that i dont have that much faith left in Edexcel to prepare unambiguous materials. If i am to lead other subjects in the Lead IV process it is difficult to prepare them thoroughly when their decisions are affected by poor preparation by edexcel
  4. Have just passed OSCA in the second window, but I'm concerned that the SV suggested that the assessment guidance should be disregarded if the assessment criteria is satisfied. This meant that where the a/c said produce a break even chart and the guidance said it must be labelled with profit, loss and the margin of safety, when the learner hadn't labelled an otherwise acceptable graph this was a pass. This just makes me wonder - what is the point of the assessment guidance?
  5. Glamchic19

    Glamchic19 New commenter

    I've been teaching Business for 7 years and was surprised that I had failed OSCAR window 2, I just couldn't understand that BTEC were allowing what I believed to be half finished tasks to be a PASS.
    I am deeply concerned that I am expecting my own students to do "too much" to pass the criteria as I always ask for explanations and applied examples to a business or scenario. I couldn't fathom it when a cash flow forecast just by itself with not explanation could be a PASS.
    I've had no problems in the past with my samples submitted so I know that I am interpreting the Criteria correctly - so will just have to keep sending the samples off.

  6. I am waiting for the Wolf Report to cement in my mind what to offer pupils in the future. The amount of time spent on a) OSCA2 test and b) Standards verification sample c) Second sample because of disagreement on awarding of assessment criteria (which we have successfully passed previously) therefore d) Lead IV to be attempted again next year has me slowly starting to look at alternatives.
    The first step will be to reintroduce a GCSE Business class which was in the cards already. But the intention was always to offer a vocational alternative, but maybe one could look at courses with little or no coursework element to offer pupils in years to come. We could use existing partnerships with local colleges for vocational courses e.g. Young apprentice.
  7. Okay, shoot me. I thought OSCA2 was an EXCELLENT training exercise. I passed both Business and Travel & Tourism in window 1. The assignment briefs, IV forms and student work were not meant to be perfect. The exercise was all about how YOU can check what was produced against the national standards written in the BTEC specifications. It also highlighted certain practises that everyone should be doing, for example subject title, unit title.
    I spent 14 years teaching Business level 3 in further education and am now teaching level 2 as a NQT. I learnt a lot from doing the OSCA2, was impressed with the quality of the training materials and am grateful that Edexcel are being so thorough.

Share This Page