Assessment Design: Modular or Linear?

The surprising answer, according to the research, is that it depends on whether you are talking about GCSEs or A-levels.

In 2019, following a three-year research project, Oxford University’s Centre for Educational Assessment and Ofqual, the UK exams regulator, published a joint report into the advantages and disadvantages of linear and modular GCSEs. It was based on a systematic review of existing literature, analysis of student outcomes and interviews with stakeholders. Primed by the switch from modular to linear GCSEs in the UK in 2007, the researchers were interested to see if the change had impacted on student outcomes, particularly in the key subjects of English, Maths and Science. 

Their findings make for fascinating reading. Most notably, the report drew an important distinction between the way linear exams favour longer-term retention of information and deep learning, whereas modular exams allow for regular feedback on student performance. Both approaches, therefore, have benefits for students. Although, it appears that these benefits largely cancel each other out in terms of student performance, regardless of the student’s gender, socioeconomic demographic, mother tongue or individual educational needs. Everyone did just as well in terms of their final grades.  

So, if student outcomes are unchanged, what might lead schools to prefer one route over the other? 

Research found that key reasons were stress, long-term impact, teaching time and logistics. Those surveyed identified that GCSE students didn’t yet possess the maturity to handle the scrutiny of a modular system, and some exams came too early in their academic and emotional development. As a result, students felt under enormous pressure at too early a stage in the course, before they were fully confident with the subject matter and the skills the exam required. This is especially true given that GCSE students typically take far more subjects than at A-level, meaning they were swiftly becoming overwhelmed and anxious. 

Schools were becoming worried about the impact on student wellbeing, in both the short- and long-term. While students could perform well in the modular exams, it was harming their perception of school and the very concept of learning. For them, school seemed to reflect an ‘exam factory’, where everything was built around the short-term retention of information and one eye always on the next assessment. Once an exam was finished, that knowledge was ‘forgotten’ and attention would turn to the next unit of work. This was particularly noticeable when students progressed into A-level – which is always a challenging step up – and lacked the strong knowledge and skills base needed to make that transition with confidence. 

Teachers also felt the strain of constantly preparing students for assessments. The loss of classroom time, as multiple exam windows interrupted teaching, meant learning became disjointed and curriculum plans had to be condensed into fewer and fewer weeks. 

As GCSEs shift focus away from knowledge-based curricula towards a more skills-focused approach, these concerns become increasingly true. Short-term memorisation of key facts can work if you are preparing for a rote-learning style assessment, but GCSEs now prioritise skills and applying knowledge. This has been the trend since the UK education reforms in 2015 and requires time for students to develop these aptitudes. 

Why, then, is this not the case for students preparing for AS and A-level assessments? 

The environment and ethos of A-level study is very different from GCSEs. Students are older, more mature, and are only studying subjects they have chosen, so automatically are more engaged. Furthermore, they are aware that their university applications are based primarily on their A-level performance, so are far more invested. By studying significantly fewer subjects than at GCSE, modularity at A-level doesn’t exponentially multiply the exam load to the same degree. 

As such, teachers consistently say they prefer modular A-levels, as it gives students a flexible framework to approach their studies. Given the higher subject content demand that A-levels present, students find breaking the learning down into individual units far more manageable. It also lowers the pressure on exam performance, as they know one bad day or one mistake isn’t going to undermine their chances of a good overall grade, as they can re-sit individual exams where things didn’t go to plan. It even allows students the option of not taking their AS results forward to A-level, they can ‘cash in’ their AS assessments and receive an AS-level qualification. They then have the option of reducing the number of subjects they are studying at A2 level to prioritise the subjects they want to take forward. 

When OxfordAQA launched our international qualifications, we wanted to be sure that we offered an assessment structure that was right for all students. We have always aligned closely with the UK on key fundamentals: we made sure our qualifications replicated the progressive skills-based approach and adopted 9-1 grades at GCSE so exceptional students could access the prestigious Grade 9. As an international exam board, though, we could also make decisions that were right for our students without being confined by the UK regulator. 

Our decision to split our assessment structure – with linear GCSEs (in line with the UK) but modular A-levels (the UK reverted to linear A-levels in 2015) – reflected this. We felt, and teachers generally agree, that the two systems work best for students at different stages of their educational journey. Our linear GCSEs are designed to give students time to develop their skills without the stress of multiple exam series, while giving teachers the maximum amount of classroom time. Modular A-levels, on the other hand, provide an effective balance between structure and flexibility, meaning students can compartmentalise their learning and exam preparation, while working with the safety net of knowing they can re-sit individual units. 

We are delighted with the positive response we have had from teachers on this approach, with many expressing their belief that it has benefitted them and their students. As with our syllabus content, we will continue to ensure we align with the needs of our OxfordAQA schools, staff and students, when it comes to assessment design.