Uruguay has a forest resource of 1 million ha plantation of fast-growing eucalyptus and pine. Short-fiber pulp is the country second export product in value, but there is also a significant production of plywood and graded kiln-dried timber from both species, used mainly for appearance applications. However, the value chain of the wood industry is not yet fully developed, particularly for pine. This study classified different existing and potential wood products using added value as criteria, calculated at the industry level by adopting a system of inputs and outputs. Hypothetical plants to manufacture these products were technical and economically analyzed: thermally modified timber, cross laminated timber, laminated veneer lumber, pine timber, bleached Eucalyptus kraft pulp, pine bleached chemical thermo-mechanical, medium density fiberboards, oriented strand board and a power plant fueled with forest biomass. The data used for this study was obtained from the final project of undergraduate engineer students of the Faculty of Engineering, Universidad de la República, Uruguay, except for the eucalyptus pulp mill, which was proposed by the authors. The results showed that wood products obtained from logs that are the main objective of the plantation presented a higher added value than those manufactured from forest residues, thinnings or chips from the sawmilling industry. Solid wood products for appearance or structural applications are at the top of added value list, considering value added per product, unit of biomass or unit of forest land per year. The integration of the value chain of the products analyzed, linking solid wood products with panels or pulp, has the potential to boost the addition of value of the forest biomass in Uruguay

Cassella, Norberto

Clavijo, Leonardo

Dieste, Andrés

Noel Cabrera, María

Digital Education Resource Archive

    Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams A summary of our monitoring  August 2018 Ofqual/18/6412 Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 1 Contents 1. Maintaining standards .......................................................................................... 2 2. Setting standards in reformed GCSE, AS and A level qualifications .................... 3 3. Setting standards in GCSE combined science double award .............................. 3 4. Monitoring the quality of delivery .......................................................................... 4 5. Quality of marking ................................................................................................ 4 6. Reviews of marking .............................................................................................. 4 7. Summary of 2018 awarding outcomes ................................................................. 5 Appendix – Awarding outcomes in summer 2017 ..................................................... 12    Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 2 This document summarises our monitoring of GCSE, AS and A level awarding in summer 2018, provides a summary of out of tolerance awards and highlights some delivery related actions.  1. Maintaining standards Our aim in monitoring the GCSE, AS and A level awards is to achieve a level playing field for students, so that it is no easier or harder to achieve a grade in a subject with one exam board than another. To do this, we agree with exam boards the basis for statistical predictions using prior attainment for the cohort: AS and A level predictions are based on GCSE prior attainment, and GCSE predictions are based on key stage 2 prior attainment. We then monitor how closely the exam boards’ results are to those predictions.  For reformed qualifications being awarded for the first or second time (GCSE, AS and A level qualifications first awarded in 2017 or 2018), we agreed that exam boards should meet the predictions as closely as possible. It was possible for exam boards to set boundaries that led to an award away from prediction, but they had to provide supporting evidence to do so.  For legacy and non-reformed qualifications, as in previous years, we set reporting tolerances around the predictions. This summer, we also set tolerances around the predictions for reformed qualifications that were being awarded for the third time – those AS qualifications that were first awarded in 2016. For all of these qualifications, exam boards were required to provide additional evidence to support any awards that were out of tolerance. Section 4 of this report provides further details of qualifications where the award was out of tolerance or not as close as possible to prediction.  We pay close attention to the way in which different exam boards’ grade standards in a subject are aligned. Ahead of results being issued, we meet with the exam boards to review the emerging results. This enables us to judge whether standards have been maintained at overall subject level. Where we believe that exam boards’ grade standards are not aligned within a subject, we have the power to require them to bring their award into line with other boards.   Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 3 2. Setting standards in reformed GCSE, AS and A level qualifications In England, new GCSE, AS and A level qualifications were awarded in most subjects1 this summer.2 For the reformed qualifications, we agreed with exam boards that they should carry forward standards from the legacy qualifications by using statistical predictions. Our intention was that, in general, a student who would have achieved a particular grade on the previous qualification would achieve the same or equivalent grade on the reformed qualification.  Statistical predictions are the most effective way to carry forward grade standards to new qualifications, so that students in the first cohort of a new qualification are not unfairly disadvantaged. In the first and second awards of the reformed qualifications, senior examiners were asked to check whether the quality of student work at the grade boundaries suggested by the statistical predictions was acceptable (at grade A or E for AS and A level, and at grade 7, 4 and 1 for GCSE). To ensure that exam boards were following these requirements in the same way, we worked with exam boards to develop a set of principles, with which they all agreed.3 From the third year onwards, senior examiners will continue to have a role in judging the quality of student’s work, but reporting tolerances will be applied to the outcomes compared to the statistical predictions.   3. Setting standards in GCSE combined science double award The content of GCSE combined science is the same size as two GCSEs and so students will get a double grade, from 9-9, 9-8, 8-8 through to 1-1. It is a tiered qualification.  Schools and colleges had to decide whether to enter each student for the higher tier (targeted at grades 9-9 to 4-4) or the foundation tier (targeted at grades 5-5 to 1-1). When deciding for which tier to enter students, schools and colleges should choose the one which will give a student scope to reach their full potential but avoids the risk of their result being unclassified (U) if they enter higher tier and fall below the standard required for a 4-4.  Entry decisions will be most difficult in the first year of a qualification. Decisions will have been particularly difficult for combined science, because of the structural                                              1 For subjects, see: Get the facts: GCSE and AS and A level reform. 2 There were also new qualifications awarded in Wales and Northern Ireland this summer. However, we do not regulate these new qualifications so they are not part of our monitoring. 3 See Appendix 3 of the data exchange procedures. Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 4 changes - including the removal of untiered controlled assessment and the introduction of the double award. We allow a ‘safety net’ grade of 4-3 for students whose mark falls just below the 4-4 boundary. During the awarding period exam boards reported to us that, while they were confident in standards set at 4-4, more higher tier students than expected would receive an unclassified result. Exam boards believed that some of these students should have been entered for the foundation tier; their performance was in line with that required for a 3-3, an award available to students entered for the foundation tier.  To prevent such students receiving an unclassified result we allowed exam boards to use grade 3-3 on the higher tier this summer. We wrote to the boards to explain the position. Senior examiners in each of the exam boards reviewed the work of students and confirmed that it was of an appropriate standard before deciding to award a 3-3 to any students entered for the higher tier 4. Monitoring the quality of delivery Exam boards must notify us of events that could have an impact on the effective delivery of valid and reliable assessments, such as question paper errors, concerns about serious malpractice and breaches to the security of exam materials. We will consider the summer 2018 notifications in our report on the summer series that we will publish in December 2018.  5. Quality of marking We have an on-going programme of work to monitor the quality of exam boards’ marking. We expect exam boards to use our findings to bring about improvements where needed. In response to our concerns about OCR’s progress in making improvements, OCR gave us an undertaking in June 2018 in which it set out its commitment to enhance the way it secured the quality of its marking this summer 6. Reviews of marking Schools and colleges can ask an exam board to review a student’s mark if they believe the mark reflects a marking error. Exam boards must comply with our rules, which require them to correct any marking error, however large or small, and only to change a mark on review to correct an error.  In 2017, our analyses of initial marking and reviews of marking data provided clear evidence that not all exam boards had fully complied with our rules on reviews of marking. Some marks had been changed on review where there was no error. We have been clear with the exams boards that this must not be repeated this year. AQA gave us an undertaking in December 2017 in which it confirmed its commitment to comply with our rules.  In response to our concerns with OCR’s progress towards Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 5 ensuring compliance with our rules, it gave us an undertaking in July 2018 in which it set out its commitment to enhance the way it monitored its reviewers this summer.  7. Summary of 2018 awarding outcomes Exam boards report data to us from each of their awards.4 For legacy and unreformed qualifications, and reformed AS qualifications first awarded in 2016, the outcomes of each award were evaluated compared to a given reporting tolerance. Where the actual and predicted outcomes for a specification differ beyond this reporting tolerance (that depends on entry size), the exam board must inform us and provide additional information to support an out of tolerance award. The reporting tolerances for legacy and unreformed qualifications, and reformed AS qualifications first awarded in 2016, are as follows. Matched entry5 Reporting tolerance 500 or less Not applicable 501 – 1,000 ±3% 1,001 – 3,000 ±2% 3,001 or more ±1%  The above reporting tolerances applied to the following grades:  unreformed/legacy GCSE – grades A and C  unreformed/legacy AS – grade A   reformed AS first awarded in 2016 – grade A  unreformed/legacy A level – grade A For A*, the allowable tolerance between predicted and actual outcomes for unreformed and legacy qualifications is ± 2%.6                                               4 More detail on the reporting procedures and tolerances can be found in our 2018 data exchange procedures document. 5 Matched entry refers to the number of students who can be matched to their prior attainment (GCSE or key stage 2). 6 For qualifications where there were more than 500 matched entries and more than 100 of the matched entries obtained grade A cumulative overall. Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 6 For reformed GCSE, AS and A level qualifications being awarded for the first or second time (qualifications first awarded in 2017 and 2018), we agreed that exam boards should meet the prediction as closely as possible. Where the matched entry was greater than 500 and outcomes were not as close as possible to the prediction, the exam board had to inform us and provide additional information to support the award.  This applied to the following grades:  GCSE – grades 9, 7 and 4  AS – grades A and E  A level – grades A*, A and E This summary includes only AQA, OCR, Pearson and WJEC/Eduqas awards.7 Prior to 2016, we have also reported out of tolerance awards from the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA). However, we do not regulate GCSEs, AS or A levels awarded in Northern Ireland and CCEA no longer offers its qualifications to students in England.  For comparison, a summary of out of tolerance awards for 2017 is reported in the  Appendix.  Figure 1 shows the number of awards reviewed against a prediction in 2017 and 2018, and the number outside of reporting tolerances or not as close as possible to prediction. In total, data for 666 awards were reviewed in 2018 (201 GCSE awards, 246 AS awards, and 219 A level awards), and of these, 347 were reviewed against a prediction.                                              7 As we do not regulate reformed GCSE, AS and A level qualifications in Wales, these qualifications are not part of our monitoring. Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 7  Figure 1. Summary of awards reviewed against prediction in 2017 and 2018   20182017117 125 74 118 156 1966 5 6 3 11 19Awards out of reporting tolerance or not as close to prediction as possibleAwards reviewed against a predictionAwards outside of reporting tolerances or not as close to prediction as possibleA level AS GCSE050100150200 Chart TitleSummer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 8 Table 1 shows the out of tolerance awards for legacy and unreformed A level qualifications at grades A* and A, and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for the out of tolerance award, according to the reasons outlined as part of the summer 2018 data exchange procedures.8 In summary, the classifications are as follows:  technical – a technical reason for being out of tolerance, such as where it is not possible to meet predictions for all grades in a qualification  aligning standards – where exam boards have evidence to support an adjustment to standards  cohort – where the cohort for a qualification is different from previous years in a way that might make predictions less reliable  other – any other relevant factor                                                8 See: 2018 data exchange procedures. Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 9 Table 1. A level (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards   Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome  Rationale A* A Health and social care 2% - Above Technical  Table 2 shows the reformed A level awards that were not as close to prediction as possible at grades A*, A and E, and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for each award. Reformed A level qualifications were awarded in 25 subjects this summer. Table 2. A level (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction   Grade Rationale  A* A E Biology Above Above Above Cohort Computer science - - Below Cohort Latin - - Below Cohort Music - Below Above Cohort Music -  Below Cohort  Table 3 shows the out of tolerance awards for legacy and unreformed AS qualifications at grade A, and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for the out of tolerance award. Table 3. AS (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards   Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome  Rationale A Further mathematics 2% Below Cohort Mathematics 1% Below Cohort Mathematics 1% Below Cohort Mathematics 1% Below Technical  Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 10 Table 4 shows the reformed AS subjects (first or second awards) that were not as close to prediction as possible at grades A and E and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for each award. For reformed AS qualifications first awarded in 2016, outcomes were reviewed against reporting tolerances at grade A. There were no out of tolerance awards for these qualifications. Table 4. AS (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction    Grade Rationale   A E Physical education  - Above Technical Religious studies Below Below Cohort  Table 5 shows the out of tolerance awards for legacy and unreformed GCSE qualifications at grades A*, A and C, and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for the out of tolerance award. Table 5. GCSE (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards   Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome   Rationale   A* A C Applied business 3% - - Above Technical Arabic 3% (2% at A*) Below Below - Cohort Chinese 3% (2% at A*) Below - - Technical Design and technology: electronic products 2% - - Above Cohort Design and technology: product design 2% -  Above Above Cohort Design and technology: textiles technology 3% - Above - Cohort ICT 1% (2% at A*) Below Below Above Cohort Turkish 3% Above - - Technical    Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 11 Reformed GCSE qualifications were awarded in 23 subjects this summer. Table 6 shows the reformed GCSE awards that were not as close to prediction as possible and our classification of the evidence provided by the respective exam board for each award.  Table 6. GCSE (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction    Grade Rationale  9 7 4 Combined science Below Below Below Cohort Mathematics - Below Below Cohort Religious studies (short course) - - Above Cohort    Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 12 Appendix – Awarding outcomes in summer 2017 Table 7. A level (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards - 2017  Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome  Rationale A* A German 3% - Above Cohort Mathematics  1% (2% at A*) Above - Technical    Table 8. A level (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction - 2017  Grade Rationale A* A E Chemistry - - Below Cohort Computer science - - Below Cohort English language - - Below Cohort     Table 9. AS (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards - 2017  Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome  Rationale A Religious studies  2% Below Cohort     Table 10. AS (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction - 2017  Grade Rationale A E  Art and design Below - Technical Art and design - Above Cohort  Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams: a summary of our monitoring  Ofqual 2018 13 Table 11. GCSE (unreformed and legacy) out of tolerance awards - 2017  Reporting tolerance Difference between actual and predicted outcome  Rationale A* A C Additional science 1% (2% at A*) - - Below Cohort Arabic 3% (2% at A*) Below Below - Cohort Classical civilisation 3% (2% at A*) Above Above - Cohort Computer science 1% (2% at A*) - Below - Cohort D&T electronic products 2% - Above Above Cohort D&T product design 2% - - Above Cohort Engineering 1% (2% at A*) - - Above Aligning standards Further add science A 3% (2% at A*) Below Below Below Technical Home economics: child dev 2% - Above Above Cohort Home economics: food  2% - - Above Cohort Latin 2% Above Above Above Aligning standards Media studies 1% (2% at A*) - - Above Cohort Performing arts 2% Above - - Technical Religious studies A 1% (2% at A*) Above Above Above Technical Science A 2% - - Below Cohort Urdu 3% (2% at A*) Above - - Technical Additional science 1% (2% at A*) - - Below Cohort Arabic 3% (2% at A*) Below Below - Cohort    Table 12. GCSE (reformed) awards not as close as possible to prediction - 2017  Grade Rationale 9 7 4 Mathematics - - Below Cohort      We wish to make our publications widely accessible. Please contact us at publications@ofqual.gov.uk if you have any specific accessibility requirements.           © Crown copyright 2018 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit http://nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: publications@ofqual.gov.uk. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/ofqual. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation Spring Place Coventry Business Park Herald Avenue Coventry CV5 6UB Telephone 0300 303 3344  

Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams : a summary of our monitoring

Revistas Universidad del Bío-Bío

Analysis of wood products from an added value perspective: The uruguayan forestry case

https://dera.ioe.ac.uk//32095/1/Summer_2018_monitoring_summary_-_FINAL.pdf

Summer 2018 GCSE, AS and A level exams : a summary of our monitoring

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Digital Education Resource Archive

Revistas Universidad del Bío-Bío