One of the main roles of the 14-19 Qualifications Team is to ensure that qualifications entered onto the Register of Regulated Qualifications meet our regulatory requirements including the General Conditions of Recognition and relevant qualification and subject criteria. One of the mechanisms for achieving this is through accreditation. The aim of accreditation is to reduce the likelihood that a regulated qualification will impact negatively on learners and verifies the integrity of the qualification. We can only allow the submission to become a regulated qualification and included on the Register if the regulatory requirements are met in full. We can only reject a submission because the regulatory requirements are not met in full.

As part of the accreditation process, the 14-19 Qualifications Team carry out an in depth review of the qualification. The review of a qualification aims to:

• determine that the specification (content) is appropriate for the level and delivers the relevant knowledge, skills and understanding
• determine whether or not the assessments are valid and reliable in measuring achievement by candidates in respect of the stated assessment objectives / learning outcomes
• identify any aspects of the specification that appear to have constrained fair, effective and reliable assessment
• Following the scrutiny process, the 14-19 Qualifications Team recommend whether or not a submission meets the regulatory requirements for a regulated qualification.

The 14-19 Qualifications Team deal with the following qualification types:

• ESOL
• Entry Level
• GCSE
• GCE
• Functional Skills
• Diploma Principal learning and Project
• Other General Qualifications e.g Pre U, International Baccalaureates, Level 1/2 Certificates, BTECs and OCR Nationals

For some qualifications we will involve a subject expert to carry out reviews on our behalf. Their responsibilities are to:

• review specifications, sample question papers, internal assessments and mark schemes against the regulatory requirements and to ensure that submissions are accurate, fit for purpose, contain the correct required content and are of a sufficient level of demand
• produce a formal report on the qualification's compliance with the regulatory requirements
• attend meetings convened by the 14-19 Qualifications Team to discuss their findings if necessary.

We have a responsibility to ensure that the standard of GCE (A level) and GCSE qualifications are maintained. A key part of this work is the Standards-Over-Time programme. In this ten-year rolling programme we work with the other national regulators where these qualifications are offered to compare subject specifications (syllabuses), assessment instruments and candidate work to ensure that the standards are comparable both over time and across awarding bodies.

Given the large variety of GCSE and GCE qualifications it is necessary that we seek external expertise to assist in our Standards-Over-Time programme. Experts would be required to review subject specifications, assessment instruments and candidate work in order to:

• analyse the nature of the requirements different examinations make on candidates and
• compare the levels of performance required for a particular grade.

We carry out a programme of monitoring activities each year to assess the performance of awarding organisations against the requirements of the regulatory criteria and any associated code of practice. These documents are designed to promote high quality, consistency, accuracy and fairness in assessment and awarding, in order to help maintain standards across specifications, both within and between awarding organisations, and over time.

One of these monitoring activities is the scrutiny programme. This is an in-depth study of the assessment process across a sample of qualifications offered by the different awarding organisations each year. The scrutiny of a qualification aims to:

• determine whether or not the required qualification criteria, associated code of practice and any regulatory requirements have been met
• determine whether or not the assessments were fair and effective in measuring achievement by candidates in respect of the stated assessment objectives / learning outcomes
• determine whether or not the procedures designed to ensure consistency of practice and comparability of standards were implemented effectively
• identify any aspects of the specification(s) that appear to have constrained fair, effective and reliable assessment
• identify any good practice that is worthy of encouragement and dissemination, to promote continuing improvement in the quality of examinations.

Following the scrutiny process, we report our findings to the awarding organisation, indicating how, if necessary, it should improve its provision.

Each scrutiny involves a team of subject experts known as scrutineers. All of these are required to comply with a Regulators' code of conduct, which includes as key principles the requirement for competence, objectivity, integrity and confidentiality.

The main subject experts involved in the scrutiny process are principal scrutineers. Their responsibilities are to:

• observe and report on awarding organisation meetings relating to the different stages of the assessment and awarding process
• analyse question papers, internal assessments and mark schemes, and participate in the review of a related sample of candidates’ work
• attend meetings with Ofqual staff, as required, to prepare for the scrutiny process and to confirm the findings from the work.

The additional subject experts involved in the scrutiny process are subject scrutineers. Their responsibilities are to:

• assist the principal scrutineers in the analysis of question papers, internal assessments and mark schemes, and the related review of candidates' work.

In an age when learners cross international boundaries to study it is important that the qualifications we regulate are comparable with those studied by learners in other high-performing countries, since UK learners will often be competing with international learners for higher education and employment opportunities.

In 2010 Ofqual began a rolling programme to look at the demand of assessments and qualifications internationally. In the first study we compared the demand of pre-university qualifications available to candidates in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, against a range of qualifications available to similar learners in other parts of the world. As part of the study, reviewers from a range of backgrounds were asked to analyse a cross-section of all the qualifications in the study and to contribute to the final report, due out at the end of 2011.

The future phases of our international comparisons study will see us benchmarking key stage 2 (upper primary) and GCSE (secondary) assessments in England with those available in other countries around the world. Assessment and subject experts will be required to review a sample of these specifications and question papers and meet with Ofqual staff to report their findings as and when required.

We ensure that appropriate standards are set and maintained in vocational qualifications.

A key part of this work is to judge whether standards for vocational qualifications are comparable across awarding organisations and between levels. Subject experts would be required to take part in some / all of the following tasks to judge if:

• qualifications have been correctly levelled
• qualifications are valid for the purpose they were designed for
• awarding organisation processes and procedures are likely to lead to reliable assessment
• qualifications are likely to meet sector, employer and learner needs
• the qualifications meet national occupational standards and/or regulatory criteria
• standards of levels of attainment are comparable across awarding organisations

Subject experts may be required to:

• Observe and report on awarding organisation meetings or centre visits
• Review specifications, question papers, internal assessments and marking criteria
• Review samples of candidates’ work
• Meet with Ofqual staff, as required, to prepare and to confirm the findings from the work