Differences between academic levels in Certificate in Education (Level 5) and PGCE (Level 6) initial teacher training courses

1. What do we mean by
academic levels?
Rebecca Eliahoo

2. Comparing FE and HE levels
FE examples
• Level 1 Foundation
• Level 2 GCSE
• Level 3 A level
• Level 4 HNC
• Level 5 HND
HE examples
• Level 3 Access course
• Level 4 First year undergrad
• Level 5 Second year
undergrad
• Level 6 Third year
undergrad
• Level 7 Masters
• Level 8 EdD/PhD

3. Different ways of articulating
levels
• Bloom’s taxonomy – a hierarchy of six
cognitive domains
• Learning Outcomes – verbs which can
express levels of difficulty
• Academic descriptors and assessment
criteria
• Differences between level 5 and 6
assignments

4. Evaluation • Able to make judgements about the relative
value of competing ideas and solutions
• Able to compare, contrast and criticise different
solutions
Synthesis • Solves problems using concepts in an unfamiliar
context
• Able to combine several concepts together to
form a new understanding of a situation
Analysis • Able to break a concept down into its
component parts
• Able to distinguish between fact and inference
• Able to use logical reasoning and deduction to
analyse a situation
Application • Able to apply the concept to an unfamiliar
situation
• Able to create something new using the concept
Understanding • Comprehends meaning
• Able to explain the concept in their own words
• Can answer a ‘worksheet’ or ‘textbook’ question
Knowledge • Recall of simple facts and data.
Bloom’s
taxonomy

5. Bloom’s taxonomy
• One familiar model of teaching is to explain a topic to
the whole class, supplement this with questioning, and
set an individual task – for example, doing one or more
questions from a worksheet or textbook. The teacher
can circulate to check on progress and then lead brief
feedback on the answers before repeating the cycle
with a new topic.
• At first glance this seems effective. There are checks on
learning and time to help individuals. It also appears
time efficient at ‘getting through’ the curriculum.
• However, learners have only climbed the first two rungs
of the ladder. They have successfully completed
relatively simple ‘mastery’ tasks.
• Engineers would say that ‘Application’ is right at the top
of the ladder!

6. Differences between level 5
and 6
• Breadth of focus
• Depth of knowledge
• Levels of criticality
• Applying theories and literature to your
practice
• Variety and breadth of referenced sources
• Language of Learning Outcomes
• Academic descriptors
• Comparisons of Assessment Criteria

7. Lower Cognitive Levels Higher Cognitive Levels
Knowledge Comprehension Application Analysis Synthesis Evaluation
arrange characterise administer analyse combine appraise
define classify apply appraise compose argue
duplicate complete calculate categorise consolidate assess
know depict choose compare construct critique
label describe compute contrast create defend
list discuss conduct critique design envision
match establish demonstrate diagram formulate estimate
memorise explain dramatise differentiate hypothesise evaluate
name express employ discriminate integrate examine
order identify implement distinguish merge grade
quote illustrate interpret examine organise inspect
recall locate operate experiment plan judge
recognise recognise perform explore propose justify
repeat report practice inventory synthesise rank
reproduce relate prescribe investigate systematize rate
restate review sketch question theorise review
retain sort solve research unite value

8. Focus LEVEL 5 PASS LEVEL 6 PASS
KNOWLEDGE &
UNDERSTANDING
The participant demonstrates:
 a comprehensive knowledge of the
concepts and principles associated
with the module and its specified
learning outcomes
 an understanding of key texts and
research findings associated with the
module
 ability to relate module content to a
range of contexts in which children
and young people learn
The participant demonstrates:
 a systematic understanding of the
knowledge base, concepts and
principles associated with the module
and its specified learning outcomes
 a critical understanding of key texts
and research findings associated with
the module
 ability to relate module content to a
range of local, regional and/or national
contexts in which people learn
VIEWS AND
ARGUMENT
The participant demonstrates:
 a recognition of the limitations of
clearly articulated views associated
with the content of particular
modules
 an awareness of the danger of making
assumptions when presenting a range
of views associated with particular
modules
 an ability to analyse evidence in a
critical way to inform their own views
The participant demonstrates:
 works with ideas at a level of
abstraction, arguing from competing
perspectives associated with the
content of particular modules
 confidence and flexibility in identifying
and defining complex problems when
presenting a range of views associated
with particular modules
 an ability to analyse and evaluate
evidence in a critical way to inform
their own views

9. Assessment Criteria examples
• Level 5
• evaluate feedback and
prepare an action plan;
• reflect on issues and values
relevant to own
professional role;
• provide evidence of the
importance of inclusive
practice to professional
practice.
• Level 6
• evaluate feedback and
justify an action plan;
• critically reflect on issues
and values relevant to own
professional role in a local
and national context;
• evidence and justify the
importance of inclusive
practice to professional
practice;
• fully relate their research
and personal development
activities to their learners’
needs

10. Assessment myths
• Myth 1 Institutions create transparency through writing
Learning Outcomes that are so precise and clear that no
one can misunderstand them. Words are not enough to
make things transparent. There is no such thing as a
transparent standard. It is only arrived at through
discussion and negotiation.
• Myth 2 Feedback for improvement is straightforward.
Feedback can be obscure; the ubiquitous praise
sandwich is very difficult for weak students to
understand. It confuses formative and summative
comments.
• Ecclestone, K. (2001) 'I know a 2:1 when I see it': Understanding criteria for degree
classifications in franchised university programmes, Journal of Further and Higher
Education 25:3, p301-313

11. Help with judging levels
• Look at moderated exemplars of good, very good
and bad assignments at different levels
• Read, note and reference a variety of sources
• Read formative feedback and make changes
accordingly
• Check that your work meets the assessment
criteria (the way we judge work).
• Keep an eye on the level above which you are
asked to work.