Carmen Vidal Rodeiro

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. & Chambers, L.(2022). Moderation of non-exam assessments: is Comparative Judgement a practical alternative? Research Matters: A Cambridge University Press & Assessment publication, 33, 100-119.

Many high-stakes qualifications include non-exam assessments that are marked by teachers. Awarding bodies then apply a moderation process to bring the marking of these assessments to an agreed standard. Comparative Judgement (CJ) is a technique where two (or more) pieces of work are compared at a time, allowing an overall rank order of work to be generated.

This study explored the practical feasibility of using CJ for moderation via an experimental moderation task requiring judgements of pairs of authentic portfolios of work. This included aspects such as whether moderators can view and navigate the portfolios sufficiently to enable them to make the comparative judgements, on what basis they make their decisions, whether moderators can be confident making CJ judgements on large pieces of candidate work (e.g., portfolios), and the time taken to moderate.

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. and Vitello, S. (2021). Progression to post-16 education in England: the role of vocational qualifications. Research Papers in Education (ahead of print). 

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L., & Vitello, S. (2020). Vocational Qualifications at Key Stage 4 and Key Stage 5: who takes them and how they fit into students' programmes of study. Cambridge Assessment Research Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Assessment.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2019). How does A-level subject choice and students' background characteristics relate to Higher Education participation? Presented at annual conference of the Society for Research in Higher Education, Newport (Wales), UK, 11-13 December 2019.

The slides and commentary can be viewed here.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. (2019). The impact of A Level subject choice and students' background characteristics on Higher Education participation. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 28, 17-26.

Policy makers and the general public have become increasingly concerned about the extent to which different qualifications/subjects prepare young people for Higher Education. Despite policy efforts and claims of equivalence, progression might differ depending on the qualifications/subjects studied, even after controlling for background characteristics.

In England, the principal measure of academic attainment for 18 year-olds is the A Level. Choosing A Levels, however, is not straightforward as some subjects are seen as providing better grounding for Higher Education than others. Furthermore, many courses require particular subjects and there is a disparity in the attitudes of admissions staff towards certain A Levels. 

This research provides a better understanding of how useful A Level subjects are for gaining admission to Higher Education. In particular, it investigated the A Levels (and combinations of A Levels) that students who enrolled in Higher Education institutions in 2016/17 took and how students’ background interacted with their A Level choices to influence the type of Higher Education institution attended. 

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. (2018). Which students benefit from retaking Mathematics and English GCSEs post-16? Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 25, 21-28.

Changes to the funding policy for 16-19-year-old students in UK state-funded schools and colleges and the reform of post-16 accountability measures are likely to have had an impact on entries for all types of qualifications in Key Stage 5, but in particular for GCSEs in English and Mathematics. The 2015/16 academic year was the first in which it became a condition of colleges' funding that students who had previously achieved a D grade in English or Mathematics should retake the qualification. As a result, the overall number of entries among students aged 17 and over increased. However, educational bodies across the sector have been recently calling for a change in the GCSE English and Mathematics resits policy.
The aim of this research is to contribute to the discussion on the GCSE English and Mathematics resits policy by investigating the uptake of GCSEs in English and Mathematics in post-16 schools and colleges in England, and the types of students who are more likely to improve their grades as a result of resitting the qualifications.

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. (2018). Cambridge Assessment Research Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Assessment.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2017). Partial absences in GCSE and AS/A level examinations. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 24, 23-30.

There are certain situations in which a candidate does not have a mark for a component/unit in a GCSE or AS/A level examination. For example, if they were ill on the day of the exam, if their paper was lost, or if their controlled assessment was invalid as a result of individual or centre malpractice. Subject to certain rules, the awarding body can calculate an estimated mark for the component/unit with the missing mark to enable the candidate to certificate, rather than having to wait for the next assessment opportunity.

This article explores the use of statistical methods for handling missing data, specifically regression imputation, to estimate the mark for a missing unit/component in GCSE and AS/A level qualifications. The marks (and grades) obtained in this way are compared with the marks (and grades) obtained applying two different methods currently used by some of the awarding boards in England: the z-score method and the percentile (cum% position) method.

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. and Williamson, J. (2017). Presented at the European Conference of Educational Research, Copenhagen, Denmark, 22-25 August 2017.

Sutch, T., Zanini, N. and Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. (2016). The effect of specialism and attainment in secondary school on the choice of Higher Education institution and field of study. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 21, 2-11.

Progression from secondary to Higher Education (HE) has direct implications on wage returns and social mobility. The recent expansion of HE in the majority of European countries has highlighted that returns to HE are not just associated with the decision to study at university rather than enter the labour market, but also with the choice of studying in a particular field at a specific HE institution. Because the process of application and admission to universities in the United Kingdom (UK) places a strong weight on attainment, both overall and in specific subjects, the educational background of students is a key factor influencing progression from secondary education to specific fields of study and HE institutions. The aim of this article is to provide evidence about the relationship between educational background, measured by subject choice and attainment in the final years of secondary education,and HE participation in terms of institution attended and choice of the field of study, an area in which not much research has been carried out so far.

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L., Sutch, T. and Zanini, N. (2015). Progressing to Higher Education in the UK: The effect of prior learning on institution and field of study. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 20, 13-21.

Students applying to study a course in a Higher Education (HE) institution have to make two choices: what subject to study and at which institution. These decisions are influenced by a range of different factors, for example their personal interests, their socio-economic background and, in particular, their prior qualifications and performance. However, new qualifications that aim to prepare learners for study at university have been introduced quite recently, some qualifications have been withdrawn, and others are being comprehensively reformed. It is therefore crucial to better understand how current qualifications, both academic and vocational, are used by young people to progress to HE. The main aim of this work was to provide detailed quantitative evidence to shed light on this topic. Specifically, the research focused on the following issues: understanding the range of qualifications and combinations of qualifications held by learners aged 16-19 who progressed to different types of HE institutions to study different subjects, and identifying the HE destinations (both institutions and subjects) of learners holding different types of qualifications and of learners with a mixed economy of qualifications.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. Sutch, T. and Zanini, N. (2015). Progressing to Higher Education in the UK: The effect of prior learning on institution and field of study. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 20, 13-21.

Students applying to study a course in a Higher Education (HE) institution have to make two choices: what subject to study and at which institution. These decisions are influenced by a range of different factors, for example their personal interests, their socio-economic background and, in particular, their prior qualifications and performance. However, new qualifications that aim to prepare learners for study at university have been introduced quite recently, some qualifications have been withdrawn, and others are being comprehensively reformed. It is therefore crucial to better understand how current qualifications, both academic and vocational, are used by young people to progress to HE. The main aim of this work was to provide detailed quantitative evidence to shed light on this topic. Specifically, the research focused on the following issues: understanding the range of qualifications and combinations of qualifications held by learners aged 16-19 who progressed to different types of HE institutions to study different subjects, and identifying the HE destinations (both institutions and subjects) of learners holding different types of qualifications and of learners with a mixed economy of qualifications.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2013). Comparing progression routes to post-16 Science qualifications. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 16, 15-23.

Awarding bodies in England provide schools and students with a wide choice of level 2 (aimed to 14-16 year-olds) science qualifications designed to ensure that pupils study science that is relevant and up-to-date. However, it has been argued that some courses may not be good preparation for the study of science at a higher level. Consequently some students may decide not to pursue a science subject post-16 or, if they do so, they may drop it or not fulfil their potential. This work aimed to collect detailed information (e.g., prior attainment, level of deprivation and school attended) about the students who obtained different level 2 science qualifications and investigate their uptake of and performance in post-16 science courses.

Emery, J., Gill, T., Grayson, R. and Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2012). Cambridge Assessment Statistics Reports: Recent highlights. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 14, 45-50.

The Research Division publishes a number of Statistics Reports each year based on the latest national examinations data. These are statistical summaries of various aspects of the English examination system, covering topics such as subject provision and uptake, popular subject combinations, trends over time in the uptake of particular subjects and the examination attainment of different groups of candidates. The National Pupil Database (NPD) is the source of most of these reports. This is a very large longitudinal database, owned by the Department for Education, which tracks the examination attainment of all pupils within schools in England from their early years up to Key Stage 5 (A level or equivalent). Another database, the Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC), can be requested matched to the NPD. This contains background information on candidates such as deprivation indicators, language, ethnicity and special educational needs. Other sources of data used to produce the Statistics Reports include the Inter-Awarding Body Statistics produced by the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ). This article highlights some of the most recent Statistics Reports, published between 2010 and 2011.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2012). An investigation into the number of special consideration enhancements and their impact on examination grades. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 13, 11-17.

Special consideration is a reasonable adjustment for students who were fully prepared for an examination and covered the course, but whose performance was affected by circumstances beyond their control (e.g., recent bereavement, serious accident, illness). This research investigated the number of special consideration requests (over time, by qualification and by school type) and the effect of the enhancements on the overall grades in a range of GCSE and A level subjects.

The research shows that the number of special consideration applications rose in the period of study, with more requests at A level than at GCSE. Furthermore, candidates in independent schools were more likely to submit a request for special consideration than candidates in state schools. The special consideration enhancements considered in this work were minor adjustments to candidates’ marks, with the most common tariff applied being 2% of the unit/component mark (normally due to minor illnesses at the time of the examination). As a result, the percentages of students improving their overall grades in GCSE and A level subjects were very small (lower than 1% in all subjects considered). 

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. and Nadas, R. (2011). The effects of GCSE modularisation: a comparison between modular and linear examinations in secondary education. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 11, 7-13.

As part of a recent reform in education, the assessment of GCSEs is now organised into modules which can either be taken at the end of the course in a linear fashion, or can be taken throughout the course in a modular approach to teaching and learning.

Previous research suggested that students who are assessed early in the course are disadvantaged by their immaturity, if not by their narrower experience of the subject and perform worse than those assessed at the end. Also, it has been argued that regular feedback on performance helps to identify learning needs and encourages students to do better.

The present study set out to investigate the above claims combining quantitative and qualitative research. In the quantitative strand of the research, the performances of English and mathematics students were analysed. In the qualitative strand, questionnaires and interviews with students and teachers of both subjects were conducted.

Oates, T., Sykes, E., Emery, J., Bell, J.F. and Vidal Rodeiro, C.L. (2009). Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 8, 43-45.

For years, evidence of a birthdate effect has stared out of qualifications data for the United Kingdom; summer-born children appear to be strongly disadvantaged. Whilst those responsible for working on this data have tried to bring public attention to this issue, it has been neglected by agencies central to education and training policy.
Researchers at Cambridge Assessment have had a long interest in the birthdate effect because it is so readily observable in the assessment data with which they have worked. More recently, Cambridge Assessment decided to review the issue with the intention to advance the understanding of the extent and causes of the birthdate effect in the English education system. Although the review focuses on understanding the birthdate effect in England, it uses international comparisons as one means of throwing light on key factors. This article outlines the findings of the review.

Vidal Rodeiro, C.L., Bell, J.F. and Emery, J.L. (2009). Can emotional and social abilities predict differences in attainment at secondary school? Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 7, 17-23.

Trait emotional intelligence (trait EI) covers a wide range of self-perceived skills and personality dispositions such as motivation, confidence, optimism, peer relations and coping with stress. In recent years, there has been a growing awareness that social and emotional factors play an important part in students’ academic success and it has been claimed that those with high scores on a trait EI measure perform better. This research investigated whether scores on a questionnaire measure of trait EI were related to school performance in a sample of British pupils.

Trait EI was measured with the Trait Emotional Intelligence Questionnaire. Participants completed the questionnaire prior to the June 2007 examination session and their responses were matched to their Key Stage 3 and GCSE results.

The research showed that some aspects of trait EI (motivation and low impulsivity) as well as total trait EI were significant predictors of attainment in GCSE subjects after controlling for prior attainment at school.

Emery, J. and Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2008). Statistical reports: Patterns of GCSE and A-level uptake. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 5, 36-38.

Two new statistical reports have been added to the ‘Statistics Reports’ series on the Cambridge Assessment website (http://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/ca/Our_Services/Research/Statistical_Reports):

-    Statistics Report Series No. 4: Uptake of GCSE subjects 2000 – 2006   
-    Statistics Report Series No. 5: Uptake of GCE A-Level subjects in England 2006

Data for these reports were extracted from the 16+/18+ databases. These databases are compiled for the Department for Children, Schools and Families from data supplied by all the awarding bodies in England. They contain background details and national examination data for all candidates who have their 16th, 17th and 18th birthdays in a particular school year. Candidates are allocated a unique number that remains the same throughout their Key Stage tests, allowing matching of examination data for longitudinal investigations. Records are present only if the candidate has sat an examination in a particular subject, not just attended classes. This brief article outlines some of the results from both reports.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2007). Agreement between outcomes from different double marking models. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 4, 28-34.

In the context of marking examinations, double marking is a means to enhance reliability. However, deciding if it is worthwhile incorporates a dilemma. Intuitively, it increases the reliability of the assessment and shows fairness in marking, but it needs to be proven a benefit in order to justify the additional time and effort that it takes. One factor which affects the re-marking is whether or not the second marker is aware of the marks awarded by the first marker. Higher agreement is observed between two examiners when the second knows how, and perhaps why, the first marked an exam. This may suggest that the second examiner took advantage of the annotations available when trying to judge the best mark for a candidate. An alternative perspective may suggest that the second examiner was influenced by the first examiner’s marks.

The purpose of this research is to evaluate the extent to which examiners agree when using different double marking models, in particular, blind and annotated double marking. The impact of examiner experience is also investigated.

Bell, J. F., Malacova, E., Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. and Shannon, M. (2007). A-level uptake: 'Crunchier subjects' and the 'Cracker effect'. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 3, 19-25.

One of the recent claims made about A-levels is that students are opting for the allegedly easier subjects. Furthermore, Cambridge University produced a list of A-level subjects that provide a less effective preparation for their courses, for example, Business Studies, Media Studies or Sports Studies.

In this article we investigate the uptake of A-levels in England from 2001 to 2005. This period covers the transition to Curriculum 2000. The aim of this reform was that students would study for four or five subjects at AS-level in the first year of the sixth form and then choose three of them to continue on to A-level. Its objective was to broaden the curriculum and to provide more balance.

For most subjects and groups of subjects there has been very little change in uptake during the period under study. For some subjects and groups of subjects, there have been changes associated with Curriculum 2000 but the uptakes have subsequently stabilised. Of greater concern are the subjects that have declined through the whole period, for example, Geography, Physics and Modern Languages. For Science and Mathematics, there is a need to consider how these subjects are extended beyond a very able elite.

Vidal Rodeiro, C. L. (2007). Factors affecting examination success at A-level. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, 3, 14-19.

Previous research has shown that background information about students (such as gender or ethnicity) is an important predictor of attainment. This previous research has also provided evidence of links between socio-economic characteristics of students and their educational attainment, for example, measures of socio-economic status, parents’ educational background, family structure and income have been shown to be important predictors of attainment at secondary level. Such factors have also been found to be strongly related to measures of prior attainment at entry to school. In this research, we use information from different databases in order to investigate the contribution of students’ attainment at GCSE, family background, schooling and neighbourhood to their success in GCE A-levels. In particular, we focus on the students’ performance in GCE A-level in Chemistry.