Level 1-4 Guidance on Assessing Problem Solving

PS Guidance Final Version 19/01/2012

Introduction The purpose of this Guidance is to assist teachers and candidates in understanding the requirements of Problem Solving. Whilst this Guidance focuses upon the assessment of Part B of the Standards, it is emphasised that candidates must be wholly familiar with Part A - You Must Know How To to ensure mastery of the techniques and knowledge needed to successfully apply these skills. To this end, attention is drawn to the Guidance on Using the Part A Questions on the following page.

This Guidance should be read in conjunction with the following publications:

Key Skills Standards and Guidance Working with Others, Improving Own Learning and Performance and Problem Solving [DELLS, CCEA and QCA]

Current WJEC Key Skills Handbook for Centres WJEC and regulators example portfolios WJEC Candidate Workbooks or centre-produced equivalents Guidance on the use of Part A Questions.

The aim of this Key Skill is to encourage candidates to develop and demonstrate their ability to tackle problems systematically, for the purpose of working towards their solution and learning from this process. The Standards are most appropriate to three types or combinations of problems:

Diagnostic problems that depend primarily on analysis to arrive at conclusions, e.g. action to correct or improve a system

Design problems that depend mainly on synthesis to create a product or process, whether physical, social or abstract

Contingency problems that typically involve resource planning and gaining the cooperation of others, e.g. when organising an event.

The assessment of Part B is primarily on process skills, e.g. exploring, planning, implementing, checking and reviewing. In applying these skills, candidates will draw on different problem-solving methods, for example, in exploring a problem they might broaden its focus by using ideas mapping. Interpersonal skills, such as consulting or collaborating, and qualities such as persistence and reliability, are also important to problem solving. Progression from levels 1-3 Levels are related to the nature of the problem, as well as the range of complexity of the techniques used, and the extent to which candidates take responsibility for the problem-solving process. At levels 1 and 2, problems will have only a very small number of possible ways of solving them, the main features clearly identified. At level 3, the problem will have a number of sub-problems that are affected by a range of factors and there might be several ways of tackling it. At level 1 problems are given to candidates by a tutor or supervisor. Candidates use familiar resources and work within clear guidelines for deciding on options. Their plan is straightforward and they use advice and support given by others to follow it through. They follow step-by-step methods to check if problems have been solved and identify what went well/less well. They check what they need to do to improve their problem solving skills.

KEY SKILLS

Guidance on Assessing Problem Solving


At level 2 candidates are expected to help identify problems, take more responsibility for finding different ways of tackling them and obtain help from others when appropriate. Their plan is straightforward but might involve changes as they organise tasks and work through the problems. Some of the resources might be unfamiliar. They clearly describe results and identify the strengths and weaknesses of their approach. At level 3 candidates are expected to use a variety of methods and resources in exploring and identifying a problem and comparing options, including risk factors. They justify the approach they select to take forward. Their plan provides scope for reviewing and revising their approach, as necessary. Candidates apply systematically agreed methods for checking whether the problem has been solved. They draw conclusions from the results and consider alternative methods and options that might have been more effective. Guidance on Using the Part A Questions

o The Part A Questions are to be used by teachers to check candidates knowledge and understanding of Part A of the Problem Solving Standards. They are not designed to be part of the portfolio, which is assessed against Part B. The questions are part of WJECs Workbooks and Logbooks; alternatively, copies can be downloaded from:

http://www.wjec.co.uk/uploads/publications/1785.pdf

o The questions should be used flexibly and chosen to allow the candidate to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding where it is not explicitly shown within their portfolio. Therefore, some candidates will be asked more questions than others and some, none at all.

o Candidates can be given the questions as they begin to collect their evidence for Part B. They can be used by the candidate to reflect or evaluate what they have done or for reflection at the end.

o The candidates responses will be internally assessed and then externally moderated by WJEC.

o Answers must be recorded in an auditable format. Possible formats include:

o candidates written answers, either on paper or electronically o recorded on audio tape o recorded on video tape o assessor records of answers given

o The answers to the questions must be individual responses by each candidate, not a group activity.

o Candidates can be invited to expand/develop their answers with follow up prompts such as What if or How would you. Candidates should be encouraged to give examples of how they applied their knowledge and understanding.


Guidance on Evidence and Assessment Essential Points for all three levels 1. A problem is defined as the need to bridge a gap between a current situation

Situation A and a desired situation Situation B. Or, in other words, How will I get from A to B?

2. The problem does not have to be solved as it is the process of tackling the problem

that is important. The chosen problem, however, must have a realistic chance of being solved to enable the whole of the Plan B Do B Review process of Part B to be covered. In most cases, this will lead to a solution, but it may not.

3. The problem must be tackled individually by the candidate; an entirely collaborative

approach to the specific problem is NOT acceptable. On rare occasions, there may be an overall group problem but in these cases, each candidate must show their own individual approach to Problem Solving within the scenario, with individual solutions considered, a record of their personal contribution to resolving the problem and a review that evaluates their own Problem Solving performance. Each problem must also be appropriate in complexity to the level.

4. The evidence must meet each of the Part B criteria in full and can take any

appropriate form. Candidates experiencing difficulty writing can submit evidence in another form e.g. audio/video records

5. All scenarios must be fit for purpose and not contrived. Whilst problems such as

building a tower of straws or getting over an obstacle help candidates to appreciate the problem-solving process, their use as potential evidence gathering opportunities for Part B of the Standards should be avoided.

6. The problem must be meaningful and relevant to the candidates needs and experience and it must allow for the generation of the Recommended Evidence in full. 7. The candidate should be supported at all times. The higher the level, the more

demanding the Standards become and the more the candidate is expected to demonstrate greater autonomy and analysis of performance. The higher the level, the less support should be required please refer to Progression above.

8. Though it may be the same person, the tutor and the assessor have different roles.

The tutor guides and supports the candidate as appropriate throughout the process whilst the assessor makes a considered judgement of the evidence submitted and ultimately decides whether the completed portfolio has met all the requirements of the Standards.

9. The evidence should be accurately tracked against every aspect of the nine criteria in

Part B and an appropriate tracking sheet included. All pages in the portfolio should be numbered and the evidence presented in a logical sequence.

10. The evidence must be assessed against the evidence component criteria with the

assessor making appropriate supporting comments. 11. There must be evidence of internal moderation having been carried out where two or

more assessors are assessing portfolios. 12. All records and statements should be signed and dated. In the case of a tutor,

assessor or witness, that person should give details of his/her role.


Level 1 The candidate must provide at least two examples of meeting the standard for PS1.1,

PS1.2 and PS1.3. Each example should cover a different problem and identify at least two different ways of tackling it for PS1.1.

The candidate must identify at least two different ways of tackling the problem; this is

more than simply different solutions e.g. a variety of visual, numerical, physical methods and mind-mapping, asking others about similar problems, by experimenting, by studying, by imitation.

Each example must show that the candidate has met all the Part B criteria in full and to

the depth required in Part A of the Standards. Evidence must be gathered as a continuous process by following the three stages of the, 1. PlanB2. DoB3. Review cycle.

Tutor advice and support will be central to the success of the candidates work and

evidence collection. An idea of the type of activities that could be covered by the two required examples is given below. It should also be noted that it is the rigour with which candidates approach and evidence their chosen activities that will demonstrate their competence. Example 1: A customer has brought her car to my workshop with a fault as the battery warning light is staying on all the time when the engine has started. My problem is to find out what is causing this.

Option 1 Option 2Check to see if the alternator belt is loose Check if the wires are loose or brokenPros

Quick Easy Cheap

ConsBelt could be broken so it would need replacing

Pros Quick Cheap

Cons Difficult to

reach May need

new parts so could be expensive

I have chosen Option 1 to solve the problem because it is quicker and easier to do this and if the belt is loose it will be cheaper for the customer to fix it. If it is not the belt at fault, I will know that it is the wiring. Example 2: I have to replace a section of fascia board that is being damaged by a protruding overflow pipe.

Option 1 Option 2Drill a hole in the fascia board the same size as the overflow pipe and place it in the correct place. It will look neater but you have to be precise and it will take longer to do.

Cut a slot out of the facia board and slot it over the overflow pipe. It is easier to do but it is more likely to rot and will not look as good.

I have chosen Option 1 because it will look very neat when finished and is less likely to rot. I will now complete my Action Plans and follow them through to solve my problems.


Evidence CriterionRecommended Evidence

(These requirements should bemet by detailed completion ofWJECs Candidate Workbook)

Optional Evidence Important

PS1.1: Confirm with an appropriate person that you understand the given problem and identify different ways of tackling it.

PS 1.1.1Check you clearlyunderstand theproblem you havebeen given.

A candidate statement demonstratingunderstanding.

A record of assessorquestioning.

There need only be a few possible solutions. It should be possible to try and solve the problem in a comparatively short

time. The solutions must the candidates and not a group solution.

PS 1.1.2Check how you knowit has been solved.

A record of a discussion with a tutor orsupervisor.


The problem need not be solved, but it is likely that it will be. The candidate should be able to measure success against simple criteria.

PS 1.1.3Come up withdifferent ways oftackling the problem.

A candidate statement clearlyshowing he/she has considered atleast two different approaches totackling the problem e.g. a variety ofvisual, numerical, physical methodsand mind-mapping, asking othersabout similar problems, byexperimenting, by studying, byimitation.


The possible solutions must demonstrate different approaches. They must not bevariations of the same approach.



(These requirements should be met bydetailed completion of WJECs Candidate

Workbook)


PS1.2: Confirm with an appropriate person what you will do and follow your plan for solving the problem.

PS 1.2.1Help decide how you tryto solve the problem.

A record of a discussion between thecandidate and an appropriate person.


An observation record.

There should be some indication that the tutor (or otherappropriate person) and the candidate have consideredthis together.

The candidate must know what is and what is notpossible.

PS 1.2.2Plan what you need todo.

A detailed action plan A record of assessorquestioning.


Planning cannot be retrospective. The plan should refer to timings, support, resources. Each step, however, minor, should be noted in the plan.

PS 1.2.3Follow your plan, workingsafely and using supportgiven by others to helptackle the problem.

An authenticated log or workbook. It maybe confirmed by anyone in authority whohas observed the candidate at work.

A statement by a third party referring toany support offered and taken.

A candidate statement showing that safeworking practices were adopted.


A witness statement thatclearly shows what wasseen and by whom.

Graphic and/or tapedevidence.

The candidate must show not only that support wassought, but also that it was used.

A peer is an acceptable source of support. There should be a reference to and examples of safe

working practices. The Action Plan is a working document and can be

amended as circumstances dictate. An annotated log showing amendments etc. is more

acceptable than a log that does not appear to havebeen a working document.



(These requirements should be met bydetailed completion of WJECs

Candidate Workbook)


PS1.3: Check with an appropriate person if the problem has been solved and how to improve your problem solving skills.

PS 1.3.1Check if the problem hasbeen solved using themethods you have beengiven.

A record of assessor questioning. A candidate account of the checking

process.

An observation record. The candidate must understand how to check resultsagainst the desired outcome.

Various and different checking methods, such asmeasuring, testing, questioning etc. should be adoptedas appropriate.

PS 1.3.2Identify clearly what wentwell and less well intackling the problem.

A candidate statement listing what went welland what went less well in the problemsolving process.


The outcome is less important than the process. Thecandidate must focus on what went well and less well in thechosen method of tackling the problem.

PS 1.3.3Check what you will needto do to improve yourproblem solving skills.

A record of assessor feedback andquestioning.

A candidate account of the checkingprocess and assessor feedback.

An observation record. The candidate must consider how to improve his/herproblem solving skills. Assessor questioning will contributeto the candidates understanding and evaluation.


Level 2 The candidate must provide at least two examples of meeting the standard for PS2.1,

PS2.2 and PS2.3. Each example should cover a different problem and identify at least two different ways of tackling it for PS2.1.

The candidate must identify at least two different ways of tackling the problem; this is



the depth required in Part A of the Standards. Evidence must be gathered as a continuous process by following the three stages of the 1. PlanB2. DoB3. Review cycle.


evidence collection. An idea of the type of activities that could be covered by the two required examples is given below. It should also be noted that it is the rigour with which candidates approach and evidence their chosen activities that will demonstrate their competence. Example 1: I need to discover the attitudes of the local people and peers to the development of sports facilities in my local area. I will know the problem has been solved when I have gathered enough information to be able to draw sound conclusions.

Option 1- Interview Option 2-QuestionnaireI will randomly select peer members and ask them questions

I will produce a multiple choice questionnaire

Pros You can ask

for more specific information

Less chance people will lie!

Cons Time

consuming People may

not like face-to-face questioning

Pros Quick to

complete Will get

information Can be

completed at own pace

Cons Could offend

people Difficult to

summarise Questions

could be mis-interpreted.

After checking with my learning coach, I chose Option 2. I will now follow this through to solve the problem. Example 2: I need to find a work placement for a week in July that is relevant to what I would like to do in the future. I will know the problem is solved when I get my placement.

Option 1 - Research Option 2-Career AdvisorI will do this by looking at the Yellow Pages and contact those that interest me

I will meet with my schools adviser to ask about where to go

Pros Lots of potential

contacts Can telephone

(email/write correctly)

Cons Might not find

the right placement hit or miss

Might not have insurance

Pros Will get

professional advice

Up to date list of places

ConsMight not be able to help me

I chose Option 1 because it has lots of up to date contacts. I will now complete my Action Plans and follow these through to solve my problems.




Workbook)


PS2.1: Identify a problem, with help from an appropriate person, and identify different ways of tackling it.

PS 2.1.1Provide information tohelp identify a problem,accurately describing itsmain features.

An account of a discussion between thecandidate and another appropriate person.

A detailed description of the problemsmain features.

An observation record. The candidate must take an active role in thediscussion.

The problem need only have a few possible waysof being tackled.

Features include things such as different aspectswithin the problem, how it arose, when it was firstnoted, what effect it has on people and whateffect a possible solution might have.

PS 2.1.2Identify how you willknow the problem hasbeen solved.

A candidate statement describing, in detail,the desired outcome(s).


The candidate must be clear in his/her own mindwhat exactly an acceptable outcome is.

Tutor support will probably be needed here.

PS 2.1.3Come up with differentways of tackling theproblem.

A candidate statement clearly showing he/sheconsidered at least two different approaches totackling the problem e.g. a variety of visual,numerical, physical methods and mind-mapping,asking others about similar problems, byexperimenting, by studying, by imitation.


The possible solutions must demonstratedifferent approaches. They must not bevariations of the same approach.

Though group work is not acceptable, thecandidate could brainstorm ideas with others.However, he/she must select the method andtackle it alone but with a degree of tutor support.

The candidate must be aware of possible risks.




Workbook)


PS2.2: Plan and try out at least one way of solving the problem.

PS 2.2.1Confirm with anappropriate person howyou will try to solve theproblem.

A signed record of a discussion with anappropriate person.

An observation record. The discussion should consider matters such asrisk factors and what is and what is not possible.

The appropriate person must be satisfied thatthe proposed method of tackling the problem issafe and feasible.

PS 2.2.2Plan what you need todo, identifying themethods and resourcesyou will use.

A detailed candidate action plan. A record of assessorquestioning.


Planning must not be retrospective. The plan should refer to timings, support and

necessary resources. Each step, however minor, should be noted in

the plan. There should be evidence that the candidate

has considered how to cope with possibledifficulties.

PS 2.2.3Use your plan effectively,getting support andrevising your plan whenneeded to help tackle theproblem.

An authenticated log or workbook. It maybe confirmed by anyone in authority whohas observed the candidate at work.

A statement by a third party referring toany support offered and taken.

Annotations on the plan showing whenand why revisions were needed and whatrevisions were made.


A witness statementthat clearly shows whatwas seen and bywhom.

Graphic and/or tapedevidence

There should be a reference to and examples ofsafe working practices.

There must be evidence of effective use of theplan. The Action Plan is a working documentand can be amended as circumstances dictate.

An annotated log or workbook, showingamendments etc. is more acceptable than a logthat does not appear to have been a workingdocument.




Workbook)


PS2.3: Check if the problem has been solved and identify ways to improve problem solving skills.

PS 2.3.1Check if the problem hasbeen solved byaccurately using themethods you have beengiven.

A candidate record showing in detail what waschecked and which method was used.

An observer record ofthe checking process.


The candidate must have been shown how tocheck and be able to use a variety of methods.

The checking must be done in detail and beaccurate.

The evidence here will relate back to PS2.1.2

PS 2.3.2Describe clearly theresults, including thestrengthsand weaknesses of howyou tackled the problem.

A detailed account of the results by thecandidate.

A brief analysis by the candidate of boththe strengths and weaknesses of how theproblem was tackled.


The results must be described in detail. The strengths and weaknesses must focus on

the process and not on the product. Saying, forexample, that it all went well as the problem wassolved is not enough.

The candidate may find it easier to considereach stage of the process in turn.

PS 2.3.3Identify ways ofimproving your problemsolving skills.

A record of assessor feedback andquestioning.

A candidate account of the checkingprocess and assessor feedback.


There is no requirement for a detailed analysis here.The candidate merely needs to list suggestedimprovements. However, these will come as theresult of the candidate analysing his/her ownperformance. Brief comments alongside eachsuggestion including the views of others would begood practice.


Level 3 The candidate must provide at least one example of meeting the standard for PS3.1,

PS3.2 and PS3.3. The example should include at least three different ways of tackling a problem for PS3.1

The candidate must identify at least three different ways of tackling the problem; this is



the depth required in Part A of the Standards. Evidence must be gathered as a continuous process by following the three stages of the 1. PlanB2. DoB3. Review cycle.


evidence collection. An idea of the type of activity that could be covered by the one required example is given below. It should also be noted that it is the rigour with which candidates approach and evidence their chosen activities that will demonstrate their competence.

To provide sufferers of Rheumatoid Arthritis clear information on their condition

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Design a website

Design and produce an effective brochure

Set up a discussion group for sufferers in my local area

Pros Reaches a wider

audience Excellent value for

money Easy to update I can work from home in

my own time

Pros Can be read anywhere Can be colourful and

eye-catching

Pros Sufferers could share

concerns It would have value as a

social event

Cons Setting-up fees

Cons Too many brochures in

circulation Could get lost and the

information would not then be easily available

Cons High publicity costs Room hire costs Sufferers have to travel Potential audience is

small

I have chosen Option 1 as it is the most effective way to get the message across. I will now complete my Action Plan that I will follow to solve this problem.




Workbook)


PS3.1: Explore a problem and identify different ways of tackling it.

PS 3.1.1Identify, analyse andaccurately describe theproblem and agreewith others how youwill know it has beensolved.

A detailed candidate statement whichfully analysises the problem.

Record of a discussion between thecandidate and appropriate otherpeople clearly showing that they areagreed on the indicators that will showthem that the problem has beensolved. This will generate agreedchecking methods.

An observer record of thediscussion.

The problem must be complex. It must have anumber of sub-problems and its solution must bedemanding.

At this level, a detailed and searching analysis isrequired.

There must be evidence of agreement.Candidates should agree with others, such as ateacher, supervisor, line-manager, how he/shewill know the problem has been solved.

PS 3.1.2Select and use avariety of methods tocome up with differentways of tackling theproblem.

A statement by the candidate clearlyshowing that he/she has chosen avariety of methods.

Evidence that the candidate has madeuse of some of these methods.


The selection must be made by the candidate. Different ways is more than different solutions.

The approach should be fundamentally differentin each case.

The candidate must put some of the methodsinto practice.

PS 3.1.3Compare the mainfeatures and risks ofeach approach andjustify the method youdecide to use.

A detailed comparison by thecandidate of each of the possibleapproaches.

An account by the candidateexplaining why the selected methodwas chosen.


Features include matters such as the impact ofthe chosen approach on other people and thelikelihood of success.

Risk could include physical risk and also the riskand consequences of failure.

The candidates justification should be thorough.The assessor must be convinced that everythinghas been thought through carefully and thecorrect decision has been made.




Workbook)


PS3.2: Plan and implement at least one way of solving the problem.

PS 3.2.1Plan your chosen wayof solving the problemand get the go-aheadfrom an appropriateperson.

A detailed action plan, noting everyaction, resources and a timescale.

Signed written agreement from anappropriate person.


The action plan must be detailed and takeaccount of all actions. The candidate may wish tohave a series of action plans to cover all the sub-problems.

The plan should be used as working documentand, as such, be annotated and amended asappropriate.

The appropriate person will be a supervisor,tutor, instructor etc., but not a peer in this case.

PS 3.2.2Put your plan intoaction, effectivelyusing support andfeedback from othersto help tackle theproblem.

A detailed candidate log or workbook. An account from the candidate

detailing the support received andused.

A copy of feedback from anappropriate person.


An observation record. Any other relevant

evidence in graphic,written or taped form.

The candidate must work through the plan.Should there be a need for amendments, thesemust be justified.

Health and safety is very important. The support can come from any relevant source,

including a peer. The candidate must be able to demonstrate that

he/she knows when support is needed. The feedback should be constructive and

supportive and from a person qualified to give it.

PS 3.2.3Check regularlyprogress towardssolving the problem,revising your approachas necessary.

An account by the candidate of eachcheck on progress.

Amendments evident on the actionplan.


The candidate must be able to judge whenchecks are needed.

There must be clear evidence in the action plan,log or workbook that the candidate has reactedappropriately following each check.




Workbook)


PS3.3: Check if the problem has been solved and review your approach to problem solving.

PS 3.3.1Apply systematicallymethods agreed withan appropriate personto check if the problemhas been solved.

A detailed and logical check following closelythe agreed methods (See PS3.1.1)


The checks on success must be thorough and applied atdifferent stages and not just at the end of the problem.Simple, brief statements will not be sufficient.

PS 3.3.2Describe fully theresults and drawconclusions on howsuccessful you were insolving the problem.

A detailed account by the candidate ofthe process and the results.

An argued statement by the candidateconsidering the level of success.


The candidate must give a detailed andanalytical account of the process.

When considering success, the candidate mustrefer to the desired outcome.

Well-argued adverse criticism is perfectlyacceptable evidence.

PS 3.3.3Review your approachto problem solving,including whetherother approachesmight have provedmore effective.

A critical consideration by the candidate of howthe problem was approached. Detailedreflection by the candidate on how successfulsome of the rejected approaches (PS3.1.3)might have been.


The assessor should probe to check the level ofcandidate reflection on his/her performance byasking searching questions.

It is possible that, once the candidate begun tosolve the problem that other solutions becameapparent. These should also be included in thereview.

Documents

Level 1-4 Guidance on Assessing Problem Solving