Exam watchdog accused over marks pressure

The exam regulator’s chief executive Glenys Stacey appeared in front of the Education Select Committee yesterday as letters were published showing the regulator had put pressure on an exam board to move grade boundaries.

This year’s GCSE results have been overshadowed by a row over the marking of English assessments as exam boards moved the grade boundaries between January and June meaning the same standard of work could get two different grades depending on when it was sat.

Leeds Council’s executive member for Children’s Services Coun Judith Blake has called for an independent inquiry following Ms Stacey’s appearance at the select committee.

Leaked correspondence published yesterday showed Ofqual asked Edexcel – one of the exam boards involved – to move its boundaries in order to produce results which were closer to the levels which had been predicted.

When Edexcel replied saying it believed its award was fair Ofqual sent another letter saying the exam board was obliged to ensure its results were consistent with other awarding bodies, whose results were close enough to predictions.

Yesterday Ms Stacey was asked by MPs whether Edexcel had moved its boundaries as a result of Ofqual adopting “a strong-arm tactic to tell them ‘you must ensure that these grades are downgraded’?”

Ms Stacey replied: “What changed was, that we knew, looking at that, that there would be a six or seven per cent increase, grade inflation, that we did not think to be right or justifiable.

“We therefore wrote to Edexcel pointing out that they needed to bring the qualification in appropriately. They reflected on that and it’s quite right and proper that they should have done.”

She said that had results improved by six or seven per cent there would have been “have been a different outcry”.

She added: “They were certainly out of line with the other awarding body results.”

Ms Stacey also told the cross-party group of MPs that English was a particularly difficult subject to set standards for and there was a “large element of judgment” involved in marking the exams.

She told MPs Ofqual wrote to not only Edexcel but also the WJEC exam board after its preliminary results were too generous.

This response has angered Coun Blake who said hundreds of young people’s life chances had been affected by the decision to move GCSE boundaries.

She said: “Ofqual are talking about percentages but skirting around the main issue which is how this fiasco is affecting young people’s lives.

“Hundreds of pupils in Leeds and thousands of people across the country have had their life chances affected.”

She added: “The leaked letters show what a central role Ofqual has had in this and it cannot be right that they are in a position to investigate themselves. There needs to be an independent inquiry to get underneath what has happened here. Whether it is incompetence of the exam boards or the regulator, young people should not be made to pay the price for it.”

Coun Blake and Leeds Council have previously led calls for English GCSE marks to be regraded in line with the boundaries used in January.

The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) have raised concerns about the numbers of schools which have seen GCSE results drop.

This year secondary schools fall below the Government’s floor target if they fail to have at least 40 per cent of their pupils getting at least five Cs, including English and maths, and less than the national average of pupils making two levels of progress.

ASCL said that a survey of its members had found that 143 schools said, in the wake of the grading fiasco, their results had gone down, taking them below the target when they had expected to be above it. In total, 730 schools had responded, with 641 saying that their results had been lower than expected this year. Of these, around 500 had said the main reason for this was GCSE English.

ASCL deputy general secretary Malcolm Trobe said: “There’s a huge risk as soon as you enter the position of falling below the floor target.”

He warned these schools could be converted into academies, and there could be “a significant risk to jobs, not only to the headteacher but other members of the leadership team.”