11.1 Determining results

To determine results, schools make judgments about student achievement using the evidence in student work matched to the syllabus standards, reporting standards or ISMG for the relevant syllabus. They make judgments and determine results at the required junctures for reporting to the QCAA and for the required QCAA quality assurance processes. They also make judgments for reporting to students and parents/carers as appropriate.

To do this, teachers develop an understanding of the standards in the syllabus by referring to the syllabus information, syllabus glossary and syllabus resources on the syllabus webpage and in the QCAA Portal. They engage in internal quality assurance processes and professional conversations about the match of student work to syllabus standards as part of making judgments about student achievement.

The following information refers to the standard delivery pattern. Schools offering alternative sequences refer to ‘Table: Pattern of units to deliver at the start of each alternative sequence subject offering’ (in Section 4.2.2: Flexible delivery) for information about the first two units completed, which may be Alternative sequence Units 1 and 2 or Alternative sequence Units 3 and 4, depending on the cycle.

11.1.1 Determining results: Units 1 and 2 — overview

Schools report student results for Unit 1 and Unit 2 in all subjects to the QCAA as satisfactory (S) or unsatisfactory (U). Where appropriate, schools may also report a not rated (NR). For more information, see Section 11.2.2: School reporting to the QCAA.

Before reporting to the QCAA for each unit, schools make judgments about student achievement, by matching the evidence in the student responses with the syllabus standards.

Evidence used to determine each student’s result is:

• authenticated as the student’s own work
• completed on or before the due date
• drawn from responses to the assessment designed for reporting to the QCAA.

The assessment program should:

• include at least two but no more than four assessments for Units 1 and 2 of the subject, with at least one assessment completed for each unit
• for Applied subjects, match the approved study plan
• use assessment techniques relevant to each syllabus
• support students in becoming familiar with assessment techniques that will be used in Unit 3 and 4 assessment instruments to meet syllabus requirements for the assessment of the objectives.

Determining results: Units 1 and 2 — 2019 Applied subjects

Schools make judgments on individual instruments using an instrument-specific standards matrix developed by the school. They develop an instrument-specific standards matrix by selecting the syllabus standards descriptors relevant to the task and the dimensions and objectives being assessed. They delete those objectives not being assessed (see the standards matrix in each syllabus).

The unit assessment program comprises the assessment instrument/s identified in the school’s approved study plan that allow students to demonstrate all dimensions and assess all objectives twice across Units 1 and 2. However, Unit 1 and Unit 2 judgments are made separately and reported individually based on the learning and assessment identified for the unit in the approved study plan.

The unit judgment of A–E is made in two parts using the syllabus standards.

First, schools determine the standard for each dimension as follows:

• If a school has chosen one instrument to assess all required objectives, teachers match the evidence in student work to the standards matrix.
• If a school has chosen two instruments to assess all required objectives, teachers make an on-balance judgment using all evidence from both responses. They match the qualities across both responses to the descriptors in the standards. It is not necessary for the responses to be matched to every descriptor for a particular standard in each dimension. Results by dimension for individual instruments are not added or averaged as each instrument may assess different dimensions and objectives. The result for one of the instruments alone is not used to determine the result.

Second, schools apply the minimum combination of standards in the syllabus to make a decision about the unit result of A–E. For example, to be awarded a C, there must be at least a Standard C in any two dimensions and no less than a Standard D in the remaining dimension (see the relevant Applied syllabus: Determining an exit result).

Unit 1 and 2 results for the 2019 Applied subjects will not be determined after 2023.

Determining results: Units 1 and 2 —2024 Applied subjects

Schools make A–E judgments on individual assessment instruments implemented in Unit 1 and Unit 2 using reporting standards.

The unit assessment program comprises the assessment instrument/s designed by the school to allow students to demonstrate the unit objectives.

The unit judgment of A–E is made using the reporting standards as follows:

• If a school has chosen one instrument to assess all required objectives, teachers make a judgment on the response to the instrument using the reporting standards.
• If a school has chosen two instruments to assess all unit objectives, teachers make an on-balance judgment about the pattern of evidence using both responses. The qualities in the student work across both instruments are matched to the reporting standards. Results for individual instruments are not added or averaged, as each instrument may have required students to demonstrate different objectives or aspects of an objective. The result for one of the instruments alone is not used to determine the result.

Determining results: Units 1 and 2 — Applied (Essential) subjects

Schools make judgments on individual instruments using a method determined by the school. They may either use the reporting standards or create instrument-specific standards.

The unit assessment program comprises the assessment instrument/s designed by the school to allow the students to demonstrate the unit objectives.

The unit judgment of A–E is made using the reporting standards as follows:

• If a school has chosen one instrument to assess all unit objectives, teachers make a judgment on the response to the instrument using the reporting standards.
• If a school has chosen two instruments to assess all unit objectives, teachers make an on-balance judgment about the pattern of evidence using both responses. The qualities in the student work across both instruments are matched to the reporting standards. Results for individual instruments are not added or averaged, as each instrument may have required students to demonstrate different objectives or aspects of an objective. The result for one of the instruments alone is not used to determine the result.

Determining results: Units 1 and 2 — General subjects

Schools make judgments on individual instruments using a method determined by the school. They may use the reporting standards or develop an ISMG. Marks are not required for determining a unit result for reporting to the QCAA.

The unit assessment program comprises the assessment instrument/s designed by the school to allow the students to demonstrate the unit objectives. The unit judgment of A–E is made using the reporting standards as follows:

• If a school has chosen one instrument to assess all unit objectives, teachers make a judgment on the response to the instrument using the reporting standards.
• If a school has chosen two instruments to assess all unit objectives, teachers make an on-balance judgment using both responses. The qualities in the student work across both instruments are matched to the reporting standards. Results for individual instruments are not added or averaged as each instrument may have required students to demonstrate different objectives or aspects of an objective. The result for one of the instruments alone is not used to determine the result.
• For subjects that have 50% external assessment in Units 3 and 4, schools may decide to replicate this technique at the end of Unit 2. If a school has chosen to assess an objective from Unit 1 in an examination assessment at the end of Unit 2, teachers do not finalise the decision about the Unit 1 result or enter a result into the Student Management application until the assessment program for the unit is complete. In this case, the school is not updating the Unit 1 result; they are making an on-balance decision after completing the assessment program designed to assess all objectives of the unit. If all objectives are assessed in Unit 1, the result can be determined and no further opportunities to demonstrate the objectives are provided to the students.

11.1.2 Determining results: Units 3 and 4 — overview

Students need to respond to all instruments in all subjects to receive a final subject result (see Section 8.2.1: Engaging in learning and assessment). All evidence used to determine each student’s results is authenticated as their own work and completed on or before the due date.

When students leave a subject or school without completing an internal assessment, the school should record Did Not Administer (DNA) as the result value in Student Management.

If the student has been given the opportunity to engage in the teaching and learning program in preparation for an assessment instrument, but has not provided any evidence of a response, the school is to record a not rated (NR) for the assessment. When an NR is recorded for an instrument, the final result for Unit 3 and 4 will automatically be determined to be NR (see Section 11.1.4: Non-submission of a student response and Section 11.2.2: School reporting to the QCAA).

Determining results: Units 3 and 4 — 2019 Applied subjects

An exit folio is a collection of evidence of student responses to all assessment instruments in the assessment program. The assessment program is defined in the school’s approved study plan and includes the four instruments designed to allow the students to demonstrate the objectives twice across Units 3 and 4. Schools make judgments on the exit folio using the syllabus standards and report the results by dimension to the QCAA in the Student Management application as internal assessment (IA) 1–4 corresponding to the four instruments on the study plan (see Section 11.2.2: School reporting to the QCAA).

Schools make judgments:

• about the responses to each instrument
• as a result A–E by dimension
• by matching the qualities in the student response to an instrument-specific standards matrix
• at exit
• to determine the standard by dimension
• by making an on-balance judgment about evidence from all responses matched to the exit standards descriptor for each dimension. The process for making an on-balance judgment is the same as for Units 1 and 2, with the qualities across all responses for Units 3 and 4 being matched to the exit standards to determine the standard for each dimension. Responses to more recent assessment are not prioritised over responses to assessment completed earlier in the year. The QCAA determines the exit result in the Student Management application using the minimum combination of standards in the syllabus.

For more information about making judgments, see the relevant Applied syllabus: Determining an exit result.

Unit 3 and 4 results for the 2019 Applied subjects will not be determined after 2024.

Determining results: Units 3 and 4 — 2024 Applied subjects

Schools make A–E judgments on each of the four assessment instruments implemented in Units 3 and 4 using instrument-specific standards.

Schools report instrument results to the QCAA in the Student Management application for students enrolled in Units 3 and 4 for each of the four assessments implemented (see Section 11.2.2: School reporting to the QCAA).

Schools are also responsible for determining and reporting an A–E final subject result to the QCAA. The subject result is an on-balance judgment about how the pattern of evidence across the four assessments in Units 3 and 4 best matches the characteristics of the reporting standards at one of five levels (A–E).

Unit 3 and 4 results for the 2024 Applied subjects can only be entered in Student Management from 2025.

Determining results: Units 3 and 4 — Applied (Essential) subjects

Schools make an on-balance judgment using evidence in each exit folio, matched to the reporting standards. The folio includes responses to the three school-developed assessment instruments and the common internal assessment (CIA) instrument, which provide evidence of achievement in relation to all objectives of the syllabus and standards. Schools report the results to the QCAA in the Student Management application (see Section 11.2: School reporting responsibilities).

Schools make judgments:

• about the responses to each internal assessment instrument — expressed as an A–E by criterion — using the instrument-specific standards or the QCAA-supplied marking guide for IA2, the common internal assessment (CIA)
• at exit — an A–E exit result.

For more information about making judgments, see the relevant Applied (Essential) syllabus: Exiting a course of study.

Determining results: Units 3 and 4 — General subjects

Schools make judgments about the evidence in students’ responses using the ISMG to indicate the alignment of student work with performance level descriptors. They award a mark for each criterion assessed by the assessment instrument.

For more information about making judgments, see the relevant General syllabus: Summative assessments — Units 3 and 4

11.1.3 Determining results: Short courses

Students need to respond to all instruments to receive a final subject result (see Section 8.2.1: Engaging in learning and assessment). All evidence used to determine each student’s results is authenticated as their own work and completed on or before the due date.

Schools make an on-balance judgment using evidence in each exit folio, matched to the reporting standards. The folio includes responses to the two school-developed assessment instruments, which provide evidence of achievement in relation to the objectives of the syllabus and standards matched to the instrument-specific standards. Schools report the results to the QCAA in the Student Management application (see Section 11.2: School reporting responsibilities).

Schools make judgments:

• about the responses to each internal assessment instrument — expressed as an A–E by criterion using the instrument-specific standards in the syllabus
• at exit — an A–E exit result by making an on-balance judgment about how the responses to both assessments match to the reporting standards.

For more information about making judgments, see the relevant Short Course syllabus: Exiting a course of study.

11.1.4 Non-submission of a student response

When a student does not submit a final response to an assessment instrument (other than for an examination) on or before the due date set by the school, a result should be awarded using evidence:

• from the preparation of the response to the assessment instrument gathered during the assessment preparation period
• available on or before the due date
• that is in the same mode as the required response.

If a student does not attend an examination on the due date, they:

• will receive a not rated (NR) for the instrument and will not receive a subject result
• are not to sit the examination or a comparable examination after the due date.

If a student is eligible for AARA and an extension of time is approved by the principal, this becomes the revised due date for this student. They may sit a comparable examination or complete other assessment on or before the new due date. See Section 9.7: Confirmation (Units 3 and 4) and Section 9.7.7: Confirmation requirements for illness and misadventure for more information about confirmation timelines and the Student Management application.

If a student has transferred, for example from interstate or overseas, timelines for teaching, learning and assessment may be revised for this student and they may not be able to produce a response by the due date. The school sets a new due date for completion of the assessment. See Section 9.7: Confirmation (Units 3 and 4) and Section 9.7.1: Preparing for confirmation for more information about confirmation timelines and the Student Management application.

Students with a school-approved absence may have completed a comparable assessment before the due date.

It is not appropriate to award a lower result, mark or standard as a penalty for non-submission. Any evidence collected on or before the due date should be matched to the relevant syllabus marking guides or standards.

Where there is no evidence collected by the school in response to the planned assessment instrument, a not rated (NR) is awarded for the response to the instrument. In this case, the student will not receive a result for the subject (Units 3 and 4) or Units 1 and 2 because:

• for 2019 and 2024 Applied, Applied (Essential) subjects and Short Courses, an E cannot be awarded when there is no evidence for that grade
• for General and General (Extension) subjects in Units 3 and 4, a mark of zero for the internal assessment instrument cannot be allocated if there is no evidence for that mark, e.g. the student writing their name on an examination is not a response to the assessment.

For more information, see Section 8.2.7: Gathering evidence of student achievement.

11.1.5 Inability to establish authorship

To make judgments about student achievement, schools must have sufficient evidence of the student’s own knowledge and skills to match with the relevant ISMG, instrument-specific standards or syllabus standards.

Schools may use a range of strategies to establish authorship, as appropriate to the assessment technique. These may include strategies identified on the assessment instrument, such as plagiarism software, teacher observation of work in class, checkpoints and drafts or other strategies that may be identified in the school’s assessment policy.

If a response cannot be authenticated as the student’s own, it cannot be used to make a judgment. When authorship of student work cannot be established, or a response is not entirely a student’s own work, schools:

• provide an opportunity for the student to demonstrate that the submitted response is their own work, if appropriate
• make a judgment about the student’s knowledge and skills, using the parts of the response that can be identified as the student’s own work.

In these instances, judgments about student achievement are made using the available student work and relevant ISMG, instrument-specific standards or syllabus standards. If none of the work submitted can be established by the school as the student’s own work, then a not rated (NR) may be awarded. This will mean the student will not be awarded a unit or subject result. Students are not to complete the assessment again.

For more information, see Section 8.2.8: Authenticating student responses.

11.1.6 AARA

Where schools have used AARA, judgments made about student responses are still made in the same way, for all students. The relevant syllabus standards, instrument-specific standards or ISMGs are used to make a judgment and are not modified (see Section 6.1: Principles).

Where provisional marks for internal assessments in General subjects cannot be submitted because a student has been granted an extension of time due to principal-approved AARA, Not Yet Administered (NYA) should be recorded as the result value for the assessment in Student Management. For information about replacing NYA, see Section 13.2.5: Enrolments and results.