Teachers gave ‘implausibly high’ predicted grades, says exam regulator
Head teachers of state and private schools attack system over ‘individual tragedies buried in data’
THE exam regulator last night accused teachers of submitting “implausibly high” predicted grades amid a growing fallout over A-level results day.
Close to 40 per cent of results were downgraded from teachers’ predictions, prompting students to complain they had been let down by the system.
But the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) said that while the vast majority of teachers submitted accurate estimates, some put forward wildly inflated grades.
“Because there was no opportunity to develop a common approach to grading, the standard applied by different schools and colleges varies greatly,” an Ofqual spokesman said. “A rare few centres put in implausibly high judgments, including one which submitted all A* and A grades for students in two subjects, where previously there had been normal distribution.”
One student said he had been predicted BBB by his teachers, despite getting Ds, Cs or Bs in coursework and mock exams. “I checked my results this morning and it said U-D-D,” he said.
Gavin Williamson, the Education Secretary, came under pressure to switch the grading system to that adopted in Scotland, where results created by an algorithm were replaced by teachers’ predictions.
He faced calls to address the “huge injustice” for this year’s pupils from Labour as well as head teachers after results showed that poorer pupils in England were more likely to have their marks downgraded by the algorithm.
Sources close to Mr Williamson insisted that the model was the fairest in the circumstances. They pointed to Ofqual figures that showed almost twice as many pupils would have been awarded A*s than in previous years if teachers’ “optimistic” grades had stood.
“Do teachers really think this year’s cohort at the top end is nearly twice as bright as previous years? It just doesn’t stack up,” one source said.
Grades were calculated using a statistical model – which took pupils’ past performance into account and their school’s historic grades – combined with a rank order from teachers. A government source said: “People seem to be operating with the notion that everyone should get what their teachers think they should have got.”
Last night, Amanda Spielman, the chief inspector of schools, said: “We have to minimise the amount of extra unfairness created. Standardising grades, with a right of appeal, is an important part of the jigsaw. Not to do so would be unfair for last year’s school and college leavers, and next year’s, who are competing for jobs, training and higher education places.”
Head teachers called for an urgent review, with some claiming the model may be systematically biased against disadvantaged pupils who were more likely to have results downgraded.
One Tory MP said: “Clearly they are getting the guillotine ready [for Mr Williamson]. The mocks change came at lastminute.com and should have been done weeks ago.” However, Mr Williamson’s allies last night said he had the support of Boris Johnson. The Prime Minister said the results published were “robust” and “dependable”.
‘Do teachers really think this year’s cohort at the top end is nearly twice as bright?’
THE exam watchdog has been accused of creating an A-level grading system that punished poorer students at state schools while their wealthier, privately educated peers had their results upgraded.
The proportion of grades awarded to pupils at independent schools increased more than twice as much as those handed to students at state schools, official figures showed. Overall, 27.6 per cent of A-levels in England were graded A or A* this year – a 2.4 increase on last year and the highest proportion of top grades since 2001.
However, data published by the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual) showed students from wealthier backgrounds were more likely to have a grades boost than those from more deprived families.
A*s and As rose by 4.7 per cent at feepaying institutions since last year, but only rose by 2 per cent at comprehensives, 1.7 per cent at academies and 1.2 per cent at grammar schools.
This year’s grades have been calculated by a statistical model – which took into account factors including pupils’ past performance and their school’s historic grades – combined with the rank order drawn up by teachers.
A total of 39.1 per cent of grades in England were lowered from teachers’ predictions, data from Ofqual showed.
But pupils of “lower socio-economic status” were more likely to have grades marked down from their teachers’ predictions. One in 10 from this group had A-level marks lowered, compared to 8 per cent of pupils of “higher socio-economic status”, Ofqual’s data revealed.
Head teachers last night urged ministers to perform a Scotland-style about-turn and award grades based on teachers’ recommendations.
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said head teachers “are very concerned that this disguises a great deal of volatility among the results at school and student level”. He said: “We have received heartbreaking feedback from school leaders about grades being pulled down in a way they feel to be utterly unfair and unfathomable. They are extremely concerned about the detrimental impact on their students. We are calling on the Government and exam regulator Ofqual to review the situation as a matter of urgency.”
David Hughes, chief executive of the Sixth Form Colleges Association, wrote to the education secretary demanding an urgent review into the model.
“We are deeply concerned that the adjustment process may have disadvantaged larger centres, such as colleges, and those with historically strong value-added data,” he said. “We are hearing from a number of colleges that over 50 per cent of their grades have been adjusted downwards.”
He said that as students from poorer backgrounds are more likely to attend further education colleges, there may be “systemic bias” against them.
Head teachers of the country’s leading private schools also attacked the system, saying they are “gravely concerned” about “the individual tragedies lying buried in the data”.
Ian Power, general secretary of the Headmasters’ and Headmistresses’ Conference, which represents fee-paying institutions including Eton, Harrow and Winchester, said: “We have heard of students marked down by two or more grades to results which bear no relation to their previous record.
“The futures of young people from all sorts of backgrounds in every type of school are being put at risk and we are as frustrated and confused as colleagues in the state sector.” Michelle Meadows of Ofqual said the final grades showed “simply no evidence of systematic bias” in this year’s results. “It’s important to remember that what the research literature shows on A-level predictions for university entrance is that there is a tendency to be more generous for students of lower socio-economic status,” she said.
‘We are deeply concerned … the adjustment process may have disadvantaged larger centres, such as colleges’