Home / Blog / Criteria & marking
Criteria & marking

Evidence types in BTEC: what each is good for

BTEC units accept more evidence types than any exam-board qualification — and each type carries different strengths and different verifier-shaped holes. The full inventory, with usage notes.

The inventory

TypeServes bestWeakness to design around
Written reports / documentsThe default: explain, analyse, evaluate criteria across most unitsGeneric prose; page-count theatre
Portfolios (curated collections)Units assessed across a period — practical plus reflective criteriaCuration drift: old work, thin reflection
Presentations / pitchesCommunication, persuasion, pitching criteriaBullets that assert; the "say more than the slides" problem
Observation recordsPractical performance, demonstrated skillsVagueness — must capture criterion verbs happening
Witness statementsReal-world placements, client interactionsKindness bias: "excellent throughout" assesses nothing
Recordings (audio/video)Role plays, interviews, delivered sessionsNo chapters = no evidence locations; timecode everything
Artefacts (systems, spreadsheets, code, designs)Implementation/make criteria — IT, Sport practice, Business modelsResult without reasoning; the justification criteria starve
Logs (session, development, decision logs)Process criteria, review criteriaDiary entries with no analysis attached

Matching evidence type to criterion type

  1. Explain/analyse/evaluate criteria → written evidence wins, whatever the topic. The verb needs sentences.
  2. Demonstrate/apply criteria → observation, recording, artefact — with the written component carrying any review/justification riding along.
  3. Review criteria → logs plus reflection; the log without the review is an activity diary.

The brief usually dictates the mix — its tasks map criteria to outputs (brief anatomy). Where you have freedom, pick per the table and design the weakness out: captioned screenshots, timecoded recordings, observation prompts that name the criterion.

What verifiers probe, by type

  • Written: verb depth and scenario anchoring.
  • Observation/witness: specificity — the criterion's verb must be visible in the record (the Sport guide's classic case).
  • Recordings/artefacts: the location problem — can anyone find the 40 seconds that evidences B.P3?
  • Group-produced evidence: who did what — the separations.

Where checking fits

Criterion-level checking reads the written/reflective components — which is where most criteria's verdicts actually live — and returns per-criterion verdicts with cited evidence (checkb.tech across the supported units). The practical evidence stays exactly where it belongs: in front of human eyes at assessment and IV.

FAQ

Can one submission mix evidence types?

Yes — most real assignments do: report plus recording plus observation record. Record each criterion's verdict against its specific evidence location, whatever the type.

Are photos evidence?

Of events, yes — captioned, dated, criterion-linked. An uncaptioned photo is a souvenir.

Check the criteria before the IV does.

checkb.tech reads learner evidence against the official Pearson criteria and reports every criterion as met, partly met or not met — with the evidence cited. It never awards a grade; the teacher stays the assessor.

Try checkb.tech free →