Ofqual under fire as grading fiasco continues

Exam watchdog Ofqual released guidance for teachers at the end of last week on how to generate GCSE and A Level grades.

However, educational professionals have criticised the guidance for being too open and encouraging inconsistency in grading across schools.

The guidance comes as GCSEs and A Levels have been cancelled for the second year in a row, and final grades are instead decided by teachers.

The grades will be based on a range of evidence collected over the coming months demonstrating students' performances on the subject content which they have been taught.

Dr Gill Wyness, Associate Professor in Economics of Education at UCL, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities however, notes that the approach may have similar results to controversial predicted grades of the past:

“Teachers have to base their judgement on students' performance on a range of evidence, which could include mock exams, coursework, as well as other assessments done in class. 

“The criteria is quite open so teachers can decide themselves which types of assessment to use.

“The lack of standardization in the approach leaves open the possibility that grades will be awarded inconsistently across settings.”

Sam Freedman, former Executive Director of Teach First, and Senior Policy Advisor at the Department for Education, described the grading system as a '"clusterf**k" on Twitter.

When asked to elaborate by South West Londoner he explained: "The basic problem is that schools are allowed to use pretty much any method they want to generate evidence of the grades.

"Ofqual is then insisting evidence for grades is sent to the exam boards who are supposed to moderate a sample.

"But what are they moderating against? And how are they supposed to compare completely different forms of assessment done in entirely inconsistent ways?

"It can't be done."

An official Ofqual spokesperson said: "Exam boards are supporting schools to make sure that their approach to grading is consistent, and there are quality assurance arrangements in place.

"For instance, each grade for a subject must be signed off by at least 2 teachers in that subject, one of whom should be the head of department or subject lead.

"The head of centre is required to confirm that the grades are a true representation of student performance.

"For more measures, the Joint Council for Qualifications has published guidance for schools and colleges, and we have published guidance on how to make objective judgements."

What happened last year?

In August 2020, thousands of A Level students across England and Wales received their exam results.

However, since exams in 2020 had also been cancelled due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, grades were instead decided by an Ofqual created algorithm.

Almost 40% of students ended up receiving lower grades than expected and some ended up being rejected from their chosen university course.

Four days later, the Government u-turned and decided to award grades estimated by teachers instead.

By then the damage had been done, and many discovered they would have to take an unexpected gap year less than one month before they had expected to start university.

This year the Government has chosen to award grades estimated by teachers, in a move similar to predicted grades of the past.

Predicted grades have had a problematic reputation in their 50 year history. 

A report by Wyness and her colleague Dr Richard Murphy, found that only 16% of applicants achieve the A Level grade points that they were predicted by their teachers, based on their best three A Levels.

Alongside this, 75% of students received predictions that were over-inflated.

However, among the highest achieving students, those from disadvantaged backgrounds received predicted grades that were lower than those from more advantaged backgrounds. 

Dr Gill Wyness discusses this research in full on Who cares about Research?.

An official Ofqual spokesperson said: “UCAS predicted grades are different from teacher assessed grades based on evidence.

"Predictions for universities are given at the beginning of the second year, so there is quite a lot of learning time still to happen. They are also made in a slightly different spirit.

"Our evaluations of 2020 awarding found no evidence that either the calculated grades or the final grades awarded in 2020 were systematically biased against candidates with particular protected characteristics or from disadvantaged backgrounds."