1 of 36

Level 1 Art and Design Standardisation 2025

11 March 2025, Patrick Caines – UAL Senior External Moderator

2 of 36

2

UAL Awarding Body believes in transformative education. We design

and award creative qualifications that empower and inspire educators to help students reach their potential.

Our mission

Abi Beaton, Reigate School of Art

3 of 36

Level 1 - the national standards in 2025

OUR AIMS TODAY

To scrutinise, assess and share our collective judgments
To agree a diverse variety of valid evidence for assessment
To identify the authenticity of evidence for submission
To confirm the national benchmarks of success for Level 1 art, design & media
To clarify the ‘grey’ areas of doubt in relation to the national standards
Preparing for June digital moderation submission (DMS)

3

From the digital portfolios in the UAL library and in relation to visual language, level of competence, ability to communicate ideas and concepts
What is considered as valid evidence for our L1 students? (ranged widely, not exhaustively or prescriptively)
Understand the authentication measures that must be in place for successful DMS
GRADE AVERAGES FOR 2023/4 INDICATE: 33.62 = PASS; 20.21 = MERIT; 16.27 = DISTINCTION. In your assessment teams or as a single teacher you might want to consider what trends this suggests and how does your own centre grade average compare?
Does this influence how we BEST manage cusp student work? What about reasonable adjustment and special consideration this year? It’s often the cusp student work which needs to go through a rigorous IS process. See the latest published guidance on RA and SC. SC managed by centres after notifying Ops via the SCC online form.
Top Tips for DMS – what we would advise right now? Check that host website links work for student references. Check and re-check that your own security firewalls don’t impede the external modeartors ability to access the student folders. Ensure students maintain and on-going realistic log of their FMP journey via their social media apps or smartphones.

4 of 36

Level 1 - the national standards in 2025

What the Senior External Moderators learned from last year…..

The national variance in assessment judgements
The quality of “high grade” work
The diversity of journey enquiry at all grades
The strength of written assessment feedback to students

4

Since the end of the pandemic years the national grade averages for the Level 1 Diploma suggest that standards have remained fairly static with if anything a moderate decline in higher grades (<2% merit grade in 2024). With this in mind we would anticipate that the national picture will continue in this vein. With a review and update of our L1 and L2 qualifications in the pipeline this is set to continue until these qualifications are fully revised.
The work which employed the MASTERY MODEL continues to be strong with our external moderators reporting a wide variety of alternative approaches and evidence sources for our young students. . Being already familiar with remote DPS submissions through the DMS process in 2024 assessors and students used the digital platform extremely effectively to present their ideas and projects. The most successful DMS submitted were those from centres who had planned to test their digital links exhaustively before releasing them to moderators. With the added security which centres are placing their college files into these days it is worth checking that external visitors can gain successful entry to secure paperwork etc in plenty of time before moderation. If moderators find difficulty then they will likely declare ”actions” for the centre. We all want to avoid additional duties wherever possible so it’s about careful forward planning and preparation.
As assessors and moderator’s our judgments are all about assessing the evidence in whatever form that this might take. We need to ensure that we use the Learning Outcomes in combination with the grading matrices to widen our field of possibility in terms of evidence source and materiality. Our advice would be try not to look for the apparently absent and often isolated criterion that could be missing at first; try to get a feel for portfolio submission as a whole “package” then begin to unravel the content. The evidence may be digital or analogue and photographically documented in a number of different ways. Reflective critique may be sound bites or take the form of witness statements from assessors or professional advisors. As an assessor be open minded about how you assess the student work. Our moderators are. It’s also essential to assess the DIGITAL PORTFOLIO not the physical artwork. You risk too much disparity between the any physical evidence which you assess and the digital evidence that your moderator assesses.
Your Assessment Feedback should address the specific skills and knowledge that are associated with the learning outcome and it should be framed in a way that links to the exemplification matrices. If a centre have provided clear, understandable written feedback then any proposed grade would be more readily accepted where the work itself may not at first appear to be sufficient. Remember, moderators are not purposefully looking to find inaccuracy in centres’ assessment judgments. Their job as moderators is to confirm the accuracy of YOUR assessment and report on only this. This is why your centre’s CP3 report is unlike your CP2 report from earlier in the year.

5 of 36

The U7 Project

Includes a choice of 2D, 3D and time-based work
Uses a theme with 3 potential contexts
Celebrates individuality and diversity
Links the evidence to grading opportunities
Uses vocational language that is tailored to Level
Has clear, measurable parameters
Offers a solid framework for development and progress

5

Now, turning to our standardised portfolios of student work I want to start by talking a little about setting the right context for the synoptic unit project, the FMP. The centre has in this case offered a good, well-rounded project couched in language easily understood by students at this level. It is a very simple thematic (Natural Form) FMP which provides several choices in terms of potential outcomes that can be derived. Three possible environmental contexts (Kitchen Sink View, Birds Eye View or Time & Life) are afforded with three potential visual language contexts (2D,3D and 4D). The drive of the project focusses on primary and secondary research sources which for the Level 1 is good and appropriate in terms of the student’s forward qualification progress. The context and presentation is informal and there is a coherent emphasis placed upon the student to understand the nature of their development against a context of performance grading. Staff have designed a single project as a launchpad for students to explore their ideas etc through the most appropriate and available physical resources. This is excellent practice since it addresses the student’s access to physical resources in a realistic way. Staff have set out a scheme of work as a constituent part of the project which, if followed will enable the individual student to achieve all the distinction criteria within the vocational framework of the Learning Outcome. The project itself is ambitious in terms of emphasis on sound research and thorough reflective practice.

Things that you may want to consider when planning an FMP project might include:

- Is the project sufficiently ambitious to meet the Distinction standard for each and every student in your cohort?

How important is an emphasis on the student’s understanding of performance grading against the learning outcomes?
How important is the use of visual reinforcement within the project itself, when trying to secure broader understanding from your cohort?
How effectively does the FMP project meet the specific learning styles and evidence generators of students? In other words, does it inspire progress? (implicit versus explicit)?

6 of 36

UAL Awarding Body Library

As a member of staff delivering UAL Awarding Body qualifications, you can access the library and the range of resources stored there to support you throughout the academic year. Please either scan the QR code below with your smartphone or type the following URL into your web browser:

Standardisation 2025

bit.ly/UALLibrary

Please let the academic standards team know if you have any questions that can’t be answered by the resources provided, or if there is anything else we can help with by emailing academic.awarding@arts.ac.uk.

6

7 of 36

Student 1�PASS

'All The Quilts I Never Made' by Christine Williams, Leeds Arts University

Add Section title, quote or statement text 2 lines max

8 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 1

9 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOMES 1 AND 4

10 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 3

11 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 4

12 of 36

Student 2�MERIT

'All The Quilts I Never Made' by Christine Williams, Leeds Arts University

Add Section title, quote or statement text 2 lines max

13 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 1

Some strong evidence to corroborate a good level of planning with clear and purposeful exploration is presented. Student 2 offers a coherent insight into their thinking and reasoning. Interestingly student 2 offers contextual reference to the work that they produced during the formative units of the qualification to provide a basis for their further FMP exploration and development (implicit knowledge). This is evidence of strong reflective analysis impacting future strategic decision-making (could be distinctive). The planning is evidently sequential and compounded through a developing series of experimental exploratory scenarios which are well documented and subsequently evaluated. Further ideas spring from these and go on to inform the development progress of the project. This clearly hits all the MERIT standards.

14 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 2

A good range and variety of alternative research sources have been explored to inform this project. This has provided coherent links between the research and the ideas development (DIST) In many ways this submission is hitting Distinction standard. However, some aspects of the ability to problem solve do lack sophistication. The final work whilst strong in terms of technical competence falls short in relation to the evaluative choices taken by student 2. These choices are linked to problem solving especially in relation to the selection of final imagery and their presentation. In some ways there are too many contextual references and these have tended to confuse rather than inform the selection of most appropriate sources and technical processes. The FMP project asks for 4 examples of design ideas to be completed. Student 2 has more than adequately fulfilled this requirement but is their submission too much? Might they have been better investing time in critically analysing and selecting more carefully what to submit?

Aspects to consider might include:

Recommended quantity of contextual research material for a Level 1 student?
Should the amount of FMP work be quantified or not?

15 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 3

16 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 4

Insightful observations are offered with a confident understanding of reasoning and purposes. This is all very well documented and can be seen in the visual records of the journey. There are many instances where student 2 provides a realistic judgment of their continuing endeavours however, the impact of this critical judgment is not always consistent. The final work is confusing because there are too many alternatives. Is student 2 equating performance success with quantity? Often as a simple model the ratio of work product to skill dexterity is misaligned. Critical here is the skill and aptitude expressed and determined through the ability to select in relation to the message or idea conveyed. For student 2 the final submitted work is confusing. The skills associated with critical thinking in this sense are not sufficiently effective in informing progress. This said they do sit comfortably within the MERIT banding.

17 of 36

Student 3�DISTINCTION

'All The Quilts I Never Made' by Christine Williams, Leeds Arts University

Add Section title, quote or statement text 2 lines max

18 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 1

There is a refreshing honesty to the insightful justifications offered by student 3. They have taken time to consider and reflect on the reasons for making the choices which have determined the outcomes of this FMP. This is a feature of the submission in it’s entirety and provides an in-depth insight into the development of the journey. Student 3 provides powerful arguments to enforce rigor to their journey and its’ progress. They have clear purposeful milestones and acknowledge success and failure as they progress through this very broad and wide-ranging project. At all stages it is well documented indicating a high and sustained good level of organisation. (DIST). Whilst no formal tabular plan is given student 3 writes continuously about what they have done, it’s impact in relation to what they will go on to do next? They cautiously apply the reflective process to their on-going development suggesting a very well organised individual. (DIST).

19 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 2

A coherent ability to assess images and their visual effectiveness in context suggests confidence that is both sustained and overarching. The research is being used in a meaningful way to inform the ideas and drive forward the project with impetus. There is ample evidence of student 3 adapting their subsequent ideas and practices as a consequence of problems or difficulties encountered. There are also instances highlighted by student 3 where they have chosen to deliberately undermine their idea in an attempt to test and further the creativity parameters of their FMP journey. An awareness and appreciation of serendipitous events or outcomes are applauded and always encouraged as a key component of the creative journey. Student 3 cautiously applies the reflective process to their on-going development progress suggesting a very well organised and thorough approach has been determined (DIST).

20 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 2

21 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 3

22 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 3

23 of 36

LEARNING OUTCOME 4

24 of 36

What have we learnt?

Look at the “totality” of the DPS not any single “missing” criterion
Be aware that you are assessing a MASTERY MODEL (a student is only as good as the lowest grade they achieve)
Keep in mind the “Level” of the qualification when making judgments (use of language etc are NOT assessed)
Be aware of the constraints of a digital portfolio submission (DPS)
Be aware of relevant statistical information when INTERNALLY GRADING.
Assess against criteria not the project objectives
Evidence can and should be diverse encouraging individuality
Be clear, reasoned and qualify the judgments that you make

24

Try to avoid a, “ticking the box” approach to assessment. Before you assess look through all of the work without assessing against the criteria. It’s important to remember that the criteria are a benchmark measure of the standard. Not every student will necessarily behave in exactly the same way and it’s the assessor’s job to interpret and apply the standards on an individual AND cohort basis. Get a general feel for the submitted work before you start to judge it.
Do remember that this qualification is NOT a Diploma in Foundation or A Level. We are not tasked to assess the language skills of our students. We should only use the assessment criteria to help us formulate our judgment.
Some students understand the DPS process more than others. It follows that these students are often more confident in their development choices and approaches. This must not unfairly bias the assessment and it’s important that all evidence (diverse and accessible) is seen and forms part of the student assessment.
All centres will have copies of their own results from last year. Consult these as part of your own CENTRE INTERNAL STANDRADS MODERATION activities. UAL have the grade averages from 2023/24 and your EM will access these to provide a simple context for their moderation this year. 33.62% PASS 20.21% MERIT AND 16.27% DISTINCTION.
It is easy to overlook the criteria in place of project objectives that have been centre devised. Don’t be misled or confused because your moderator won’t be. Stay focused on the assessment and grading criteria when making judgments and only offer judgments that you can qualify. Just because you may not like something that has been submitted should not be the determining factor when making an assessment judgment.
This year our students will not receive their final result until mid-August. This must mean that their individual feedback must be held in secure and confidential locations until August. Assessors must think carefully about how they will offer their final feedback.
The more diverse and challenging the evidence the better. It will test your professional judgment whilst pushing forward our creative boundaries. How good is that?
Assessors and moderators should always provide coherent and well-reasoned judgments in relation to the assessment criteria which qualify their professional opinions. If these judgments are random and vague then problems will almost certainly emerge at a later stage. Either through an external appeal or a quality assurance procedure. For centres the internal verification quality procedures should aim to iron out the random inexplicable judgment(s) when they do occur. IV is NOT an administrative exercise providing further box ticking. It should be recognised as a key component ensuring FAIR and BALANCED grading judgements operate within the centre. For external moderators the senior moderators provide guidance and support. For senior moderators the chief examiners advise and provide support.

25 of 36

A digital portfolio is a curated collection of all the original assessed work completed for the unit.
The portfolio must be constructed and presented so that it can easily be shared with others.
The information contained within must be legible and easy to navigate. With this in mind, it should NOT be a folder with 180 separate PDFs that require opening individually and are NOT in a logical order.
Work should be presented to meet the specification requirements of the unit.
The structure of the portfolio should reflect the most appropriate approach to present and communicate the creative journey. There is no size limitation.

HEADLINE ISSUES: Digital Portfolios

25

Due to the holistic approach to assessment within the art and design group of specifications, we strongly recommend that folders are NOT separated under the descriptor, assessment outcome, or criteria headings, but rather presents work in a chronological order that best communicates the progress through the creative journey.

We accept that centres have individualised approaches to how students manage and present their work through the digital interface but recommend the following points are considered:

Some centres divide the folder into discrete sections, e.g.

Paperwork might include: A Project Proposal (and appendix), A Final Evaluation, & Authentication Form
Studio Notebook
Critical Research, Ethics and Sustainability (Where these are a part of the qualification)
Critical reflection and Planning

or

A single document containing all the relevant information in a logical, sequential structure .

26 of 36

All student digital portfolios
All candidate authentication forms
Detailed assessment tracking
Internal verification records for synoptic units.
All assessment commentary grade record forms
Project brief and any additional FMP support information given to students.

HEADLINE ISSUES: Digital Moderation Submission DMS

26

All student digital portfolios are checked, organised and uploaded in preparation for external moderation.

All candidate authentication forms

Assessment tracking to include detailed tracking on spreadsheet or similar to include the tracking of individuals’ grades across the process of synoptic assessment, IV and rationale for final decisions or equivalent data records and minutes presented in an organised and accessible manner.

Internal verification records for synoptic units.

Assessment commentary to include all records made by assessors through the synoptic assessment process. (For some students there may be as many as three completed assessment grade records.).

Project brief and any additional support information that is given to students to aid the framing of a project starting point or proposal, e.g. pitch brief/support handouts

27 of 36

Questions?

'All The Quilts I Never Made' by Christine Williams, Leeds Arts University

Add Section title, quote or statement text 2 lines max

28 of 36

Feedback - Art and Design

We'd really appreciate it if you took the time to fill in this short feedback form about your experience today. This will help to inform future standardisation events we hold.

Please either scan the QR code on the right with your smartphone or type the following URL into your web browser:

bit.ly/Standardisation25AD

Standardisation 2025

28

29 of 36

Scan to sign up �to our newsletter!

30 of 36

Upcoming events

Origins Creatives 2022, Stefano Massè

31 of 36

Community Groups

An opportunity for teachers around the country to come together and share best practice, but also to exchange academic questions a relaxed environment.

The next community groups we will be holding are:

Art and Design Foundation Art and Design - Wednesday 26 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
Art and Design Sub Dip Visual Arts - Wednesday 26 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
Art and Design Wales - Wednesday 26 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
Art and Design Level 2 - Wednesday 26 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
Art and Design Creative Practice - Thursday 27 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
A & D Level 1 & Entry Level 3 – Thursday 27 March, 4.30pm - 5.30pm
Art and Design Scotland/ Northern Ireland/ Carlisle – TBC

If you would like to join or would like more information about any of these community groups, please email academic.awarding@arts.ac.uk and specify which group you are interested in.

�

Standardisation 2025

31

32 of 36

Upcoming Events

Origins Creatives

We are delighted that our annual exhibition of incredible student work will be returning to Mall Galleries again this year! Origins Creatives is a wonderful opportunity for students, guardians and teachers to come together and celebrate student creativity and hard work and will be taking place Wednesday 16 – Saturday 19 July, opening night Tuesday 15 July. Submissions window: Monday 19 May and closing on Friday 20 June.

Teach Inspire Create

The Teach Inspire Create Conference is returning in November 2025! This one-day CPD event provides the opportunity for creative educators to meet, network and be inspired by creative industry specialists. It is also an opportunity for UAL Awarding Body to connect with our centres and provide updates on the sector. We can’t wait to see you there!�

Standardisation 2025

Photo: Origins Creatives 2024, Ana Blumenkron.

Photo: Teach Inspire Create Conference 2024, Ana Blumenkron.

32

33 of 36

Teach Inspire Create podcast

Series 4 of the Teach Inspire Create podcast is here!

With new episodes released weekly, this 8-episode series delves into a different topic within creative industries and education; you do not want to miss!

Listen to the TIC podcast here:

Standardisation 2025

33

34 of 36

Follow us @UALAwardingBody

35 of 36

Share your news with us online

_

Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn and tag us in your posts!

@UALAwardingBody

35

36 of 36

Thank you

Origins Creatives 2022, Stefano Massè