Legal action threat over A-level results fiasco

The government may face legal action on behalf of students affected by this year’s A-levels debacle.

At least two legal challenges are in the early stages of being mounted, following upset across England in response to grades issued yesterday.

It comes after the Equalities and Human Rights Commission warned it may intervene following a day of misery which saw 39.1 per cent of grades downgraded via the standardisation process.

Exam centres reported their students have missed out on university offers and other opportunities because results issued by exam boards were much lower than those given by schools.

Yesterday, law firm Foxglove said the A-level algorithm was “unfair and possible unlawful”, and that it was gathering evidence ahead of a potential judicial review.

The firm is supporting student Curtis Parfitt-Ford, whose petition calling for a fairer system has amassed over 135,000 signatures as of this morning.

And Jolyon Maugham, director of the Good Law Project, has announced this morning that his organisation was mounting a legal challenge to “compliment” the one brought by Foxglove.

Maugham said the challenge “will focus on the unfairness, and in particular the limited and flawed appeal rights”.

It comes as pressure mounts on ministers to address unfairness in the system for awarding grades this year.

Following the cancellation of exams, schools and colleges were asked to provide centre-assessment grades for their students, which were then standardised by exam boards.

Ofqual and the government have defended the standardisation process, insisting it was necessary to prevent grade inflation. They also pointed to a 2.4 percentage point rise in the proportion of top grades this year as evidence that the system had worked.

But exam centres have warned that the overall results mask volatility and inconsistency in the grades at a pupil level, and are expected to appeal against large numbers of grades issued through the process.

Although most of the grades downgraded were only lowered by one grade, 3.3 per cent, well over 20,000 grades, were adjusted down by two and 0.2 per cent – hundreds of grades – fell by three.

Maugham said today that his firm was “looking for students downgraded by at least two grades, especially the cases of students whose academic achievements have been downgraded”, adding that he knew of “one case from a C to a U”.

The system has also come under fire after it emerged poorer students were more likely to be downgraded, and that private schools had seen the biggest boost in top grades.

But the government continued to insist today that there was no bias in the system.

“Ofqual have been clear that the standardisation model does not distinguish between different types of schools and colleges, and therefore contains no bias, either in favour or against, types of schools or institutions,” a Department for Education spokesperson said.

The chaos generated by this year’s exam results lies squarely at the door of Gavin Williamson

The education secretary has, instead of neutralising problems with A-level and GCSE gradings, “taken a blow torch” to the English exams system, writes Tom Bewick.

Most people will remember the former US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, when he famously introduced to the lexicon, “known unknowns.” It sparked a whole public debate about the information politicians have to hand, including what data, reasonably, they do not have, which can lead to catastrophic consequences down the line. Rumsfeld deployed his set of idioms to explain why Iraq turned out not to have weapons of mass destruction.

The education secretary, Gavin Williamson, has deployed a similar tactic just twenty-four hours before A-Level results were published, by presenting to the media, a last minute decision based on the idea of, “unknown, unknowns.” In other words, when the secretary of state decided to cancel this summer’s examinations in April, he was not to know that the tutor-led model of calculation was an imperfect science; or that it was inevitable that the application of a national statistical moderation exercise would lead to various anomalies for some individual students. Yet, the secretary of state has known all along exactly what the implications of his decisions would be. Ofqual, the exams regulator, have delivered to the letter the two ministerial directions that he gave them at the start of the crisis. In the meantime, awarding bodies have worked day and night with their centres to put all the exceptional arrangements in place.

Following the debacle in Scotland, with the potential for high-profile political resignations, Williamson moved rapidly to avoid a similar situation happening in England. The real political problem for the secretary of state – is that far from neutralising the situation – as was evident when the Scottish education secretary, John Swinney, climbed down and apologised; he has in fact taken a blow torch to the whole English examinations system. Once again, Williamson has undermined the fundamental basis on which a robust, regulated and independent qualification system in England is based.

By making such a panicky last minute move, the education secretary has made an already challenging situation even worse. The SQA copped a lot of the blame for what happened north of the border, but interestingly, MPs in Westminster have been far more supportive of Ofqual, recognising that officials and awarding bodies have done an incredibly good job in very difficult circumstances. The fact that 36 per cent of A-Level grades in England that were changed from purely tutor predicted grades, following Ofqual’s statistical moderation exercise, have not been rescinded (as happened in Scotland), is testament to the resolve of the chief regulator, Sally Collier, who has ultimately stood up to any strong-arm tactics to follow Holyrood’s lead. Ofqual’s dedicated team of curriculum and statistical experts, however, now have the unenviable task of trying to define what a “valid mock exam” looks like.

At the end of the day, exams and qualifications are like a nation’s currency. They only have real value if the public has complete confidence in them. The Bank of England’s monetary policy committee operates independently of government for precisely this reason. Why would  investors or savers have confidence in our economy if they felt politicians could simply wipe out their hard earned cash by printing money, causing massive inflation. Robert Mugabe tried this approach in Zimbabwe. It lead to hyper-inflation of 79 billion per cent.

Similarly, on the face of it, students and parents may welcome the so-called “safety net” that the Department for Education has now introduced. But ultimately, the class of 2020 will have to be able to look future admissions tutors and employers in the eye; and be able to explain that despite not sitting an exam this summer, through absolutely no fault of their own, the calculated results they hold are directly comparable to all the other generations that will follow. It would be a complete tragedy, because of some last minute political manoeuvrings, if the Covid generation were to be sold so far short in such an egregious and unsensitive way.

Donald Rumsfeld was finally forced to resign in 2006, when his Generals revolted, accusing him of abysmal planning skills, appalling leadership qualities and strategic incompetence.

 

Colleges demand urgent review into “biased” A-level grading process

The Association of Colleges has written to education secretary Gavin Williamson and Ofqual chief regulator Sally Collier calling for an “urgent” review into the standardisation process used for A-level results from larger centres.

David Hughes, the association’s chief executive, writes in the letter it appears some colleges with larger numbers of A-level students have been “biased” against by the process, which was rolled out after exams were cancelled due to the coronavirus pandemic.

While the majority of students will achieve the grades they need and want, the association has heard from a number of colleges that over 50 per cent of their grades have been adjusted downwards.

Certain colleges have said their higher grade passes (meaning A to C) are much lower than their results from the last three years, whereas others have said the rate of A to C grades has increased compared to historical data, in what Hughes calls a “worrying inconsistency”.

“We cannot stand by when the evidence suggests that many thousands of students may have missed out on their grades because of a systemic bias.”

After A-level exams were cancelled this year, colleges were required to submit centre-assessed grades of what results pupils were most likely to achieve, which were then standardised nationally.

The inconsistency, Hughes suggests, could be due to a “quirk” in the process in which smaller centres with lower student numbers had their centre-assessed grades confirmed, so larger centres took a hit to minimise overall grade inflation. The algorithm has also “potentially” missed strong increases in performance in the last one or two years by “a number of colleges”, the letter continues.

Hughes added that colleges’ overall pass rates are in line and do not seem to be such an issue, so the problem is not “overoptimistic” assessed grades, but actual performance.

A technical review, he told Williamson and Collier, could now “avert hundreds of colleges from having to make individual appeals”.

“It would show that you are being transparent and taking the concerns seriously. It would allow the majority of students to focus on their next steps and move forward in confirming their HE places, apprenticeships or jobs, but also offer a robust backstop.”

Read David Hughes’ full letter to Gavin Williamson and Sally Collier HERE

Top results for vocational qualifications see “small increase,” reports Ofqual

Ofqual has found the number of top grades awarded for certain vocational qualifications has had a “small” increase on last year, but say there has been no “sudden slip of standards or introduction of bias” due to measures introduced for assessments during the coronavirus pandemic.

The exams watchdog, in an analysis of grades awarded for level 3 and 4 vocational and technical qualifications (VTQs) in spring and summer of this year, reported the increase may mean some cohorts of learners may have actually been afforded a “slight” advantage this year over previous cohorts.

Ofqual said the rise: “Might also be explained by centres in some cases not entering students for whom there was insufficient evidence to support a calculated grade or a pass.”

But there was also a small number of cases in VTQs where the proportion of top grades being awarded had decreased.

As the Coronavirus pandemic led to a number of vocational qualification exams being cancelled, Ofqual announced teachers would have to calculate grades for the majority of the exams, as well as provide a rank order for learners, as was the case with A-levels and GCSEs.

Due to the diversity and complexity of certain VTQs, however, alternative measures had to be taken to decide their results, including calculated results, moving paper-based assessments online, and in some instances, delaying the assessment.

The analysis also revealed grade distributions for VTQs appear generally similar to grade distributions observed for previous years and attainment gaps have not increased over time between different demographic groups in most cases.

The report said its analysis shows: “There has not been a sudden slip of standards nor a sudden introduction of bias in 2020 due to the measures adopted in response to the coronavirus pandemic. 

“A small degree of change is expected in any given year, and the majority of changes reported here are in line with those expectations. We shall continue to monitor the system as response measures change in the months to come.”

This comes after it was revealed this morning there had been a 2.4 per cent increase in the number of top grades being awarded in this year’s round of A-level results.

A-level results 2020: Top grades up by 2.4 percentage points

The proportion of top A-level grades handed to students in England has increased by 2.4 per cent this year.

But sector leaders have already warned of “volatility” among results at exam centre and student level, after teenagers began to receive their results today.

The exams regulator Ofqual has reported that 27.6 per cent of grades issued to students in England were As and A*s this year, up from 25.2 per cent in 2019. The proportion of A* grades, the highest available, also increased from 7.7 per cent to 8.9 per cent.

The Joint Council for Qualifications, which represents exam boards, today claimed that standards “have been maintained” despite disruption.

But Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said he was “very concerned” the overall rise in top grades “disguises a great deal of volatility among the results” at centre and student level, and has called for a government review.

“We have received heartbreaking feedback from leaders about grades being pulled down in a way that they feel to be utterly unfair and unfathomable,” he said. “They are extremely concerned about the detrimental impact on their students.”

The Sixth Form Colleges Association has also flagged concerns, after almost half of principals reported that their calculated grades were “much lower” than what they had submitted to exam boards, and more than a third reported that calculated grades bear “little or no resemblance” to performance in previous years.

Today’s data shows a substantial proportion of grades – 39.1 per cent – were adjusted down by exam boards during the standardisation of centre-assessment grades provided by centres.

Following the cancellation of exams due to the coronavirus outbreak, colleges were asked to provide centre-assessment grades to exam boards, which then standardised them to prevent grade inflation.

According to Ofqual, 35.6 per cent of grades were adjusted down by one grade, 3.3 per cent were adjusted down by two grades and 0.2 per cent were adjusted down by three grades.

Some grades were also raised during the standardisation process: 2.2 per cent were increased by one grade, 0.05 per cent by two grades and 0.01 per cent by three. But the majority of calculated grades, 58.7 per cent, remained the same as centre-assessment grades.

Centres are preparing for a spike in requests for appeals from students, especially those whose grades have been marked down via standardisation. Students can also sit alternative exams in the autumn.

Ofqual said today that had the standardisation process not gone ahead, the proportion of A and A* grades this year would have risen to 37.7 per cent.

The regulator said today that centre-assessment grades had been “optimistic”, and without moderation would have “likely” led to overall national results that were “implausibly high”.

Ofqual will today publish a technical report with further details of the standardisation model, along with interactive analysis of A-level outcomes in England.

Dr Philip Wright, director general of the JCQ, said: “Students across the UK receiving their A-level results today should be proud of their grades, which reflect their hard work and commitment over the previous two years.”

The government must address ‘inexplicable variations’ in sixth form colleges’ A-level results

Sixth form colleges are reporting that their A-level results do not reflect the grades they provided, or three year trends. Here, Sixth Form Colleges Association chief executive Bill Watkin explains why government action is needed.

There is a huge discrepancy between the teacher-led centre-assessment grades (CAGs) and the exam board algorithm-led calculated grades. Just 4 per cent of the members that responded to an SFCA survey yesterday felt that their CAGs were in line with their calculated grades.

The survey also reported a huge disparity between this year’s results and colleges’ three-year trends. Not because the teaching was worse, not because the students were worse, not because the exams were more difficult. But because the lockdown algorithm has got it wrong.

This is not a sector lacking in experience or expertise. It is a sector that has consistently been among the highest performing in the country. This is not a problem of over-grading or wholesale blips. This is a clear indication that the statisticians have got it wrong this year. As one college leader quoted in the survey said, “We deliver over 30 different A-level subjects, and we are below the three year average by some distance in every single one”.

The model has not worked

Back in late March, when it was first clear that the summer exams in 2020 could not proceed as scheduled, Ofqual and the Department for Education immediately set out their position: exams are the most reliable form of assessment of a young person’s ability and potential, but in their absence, the system would rely on teachers’ professional judgement and every effort would be made to reduce bureaucracy.

Centres were asked to submit, using all the available evidence (including mock exams), CAGs based on their professional expertise to the exam boards. There would also be a statistical standardisation exercise, to be carried out by exam boards, to ensure that this year’s results were in line with the last three years. This would help preserve the integrity of the exam system and ensure that this year’s students were neither advantaged nor disadvantaged. The model was designed to ensure that there was comparability in outcomes, and no grade inflation. This year-on-year consistency became the holy grail at Ofqual and DfE.

But this was always going to be difficult, with no external assessment in a year when schools and colleges have only just switched to brand new exams – new content (more rigorous and extensive), new structure (linear), new assessment (terminal exams, not modules).

At the same time, teachers were also asked to rank order their students – a much more difficult exercise and one which pitted students against their classmates. But it became clear that the rank order was going to be critical, especially for those clustered around grade boundaries, who would be most at risk of dropping a grade if boundaries were moved by exam boards.

Last week saw two important changes:

1. Appeals were to be allowed in those cases where the centre’s population had changed, or where there had been a change of leadership or if evidence showed that a recent blip was not reflective of a trend.

2. The exam boards would now discount CAGs in classes of 15 or more students; for small classes they would only use CAGs, and in between they would take CAGs into consideration.

The latest decision – to allow mock exams to be used as part of the appeals process – is not as worrying as first thought. To use mock exam results as part of an appeals process is not unhelpful. Indeed, mock exams have already been used this summer as a vital piece of evidence in arriving at the CAGs, though the CAG is a much more sophisticated measure than the mock exam alone.

Mock exams are sometimes made deliberately difficult, they may address only a proportion of the syllabus, they may be taken six months before the actual exams, they are not subject to moderation. And – as our survey highlights – many centres did not hold mock exams this year, because they were scheduled to take place after lockdown started.

So, in a large class, which did not take mocks, the rank order and the boards’ standardisation will still determine the grades. In a small class, whose students had sat mocks, the CAGs and, in the event of an appeal, the mocks will be the determining factors.

The national picture will show no significant overall change in grades awarded this year, but the national picture is like an average; it masks huge variations. Sixth form colleges, in which one in four of all A-levels is taken, have experienced inexplicable variations. The solution is to shift the focus away from year-on-year comparability and use CAGs as the truest measure, even if it means accepting some grade inflation this year.

It is imperative that we revert to CAGs as the sole determinant for this year’s cohort. Not just those whose grades are lower than their CAGs. But every student. In this way, there will be some winners, those whose teachers were generous in the CAGs, but there will be no losers. All will get the grades their teachers said they would get if there had taken the exams this summer.

Sixth form colleges cry foul over standardisation as principals report problems with A-level results

The body representing sixth form colleges has demanded action after the vast majority of principals reported lower-than-expected A-level grades following this year’s moderation process.

The Sixth Form Colleges Association fears its members have been disproportionately impacted by problems with the system which replaced exams this year, with almost half of principals reporting that overall, their calculated grades were “much lower” than what they had submitted to exam boards.

The government must address this as a matter of urgency and we will do everything we can to ensure that students are not penalised as result of what has turned out to be a failed experiment

Students across England will receive their A-level results tomorrow, which are based on centre-assessment grades which have been standardised by exam boards. Schools and colleges received the results yesterday.

The government has said that around 40 per cent of A-level grades have been amended during the standardisation process, but that overall results will be slightly higher this year than last year.

But in survey of 81 sixth form college principals, responsible for some 75,000 students receiving results this week, 96 per cent said that overall their calculated grades were “lower than centre-assessed grades”, and more than a third reported that calculated grades bear “little or no resemblance” to performance in previous years

The revelation comes after Ofqual confirmed that more weight had been placed on centre judgments for institutions with lower entries “overall, or in particular subjects”, prompting fears that larger settings like sixth form colleges would be worse affected than smaller school sixth forms.

Bill Watkin

Bill Watkin, the SFCA’s chief executive, today called on the government to revert to the grades provided by schools and colleges.

“The government must address this as a matter of urgency and we will do everything we can to ensure that students are not penalised as result of what has turned out to be a failed experiment,” he said.

Principals were also encouraged to give their reaction to the grades in response to the survey. One described being “lost for words as to this outcome and devastated for our staff and students,” while another said their grades this year were “significantly lower” than at any point in the past 5 years.

“We would appear to be below our historic data both at centre- and in some cases subject-level and making this year’s set of results the college’s worst results in the last 15 years,” another respondent said.

On Tuesday night, in response to concerns about calculated grades, the Department for Education announced some students would be appeal to receive a “valid” grade from a mock exam if it was higher than the grade provided by exam boards.

But Watkin said the announcement “paled into insignificance in the face of the two far bigger challenges highlighted by our survey: the gulf between centre assessed grades and calculated grades; and the utter failure of the statistical standardisation model to ensure year-on-year comparability in results”.

The SFCA survey also found just 56 per cent of respondents had used mock exams for all their subjects during 2019-20, as many had been scheduled to take place after the pandemic forced education providers to close in March.

Writing for FE Week, Watkin said that while using mock results was “not unhelpful” as they had already been used in calculating centre-assessment grades, the tests “are sometimes made deliberately difficult, they may address only a proportion of the syllabus, they may be taken six months before the actual exams, and they are not subject to moderation”.

“It is imperative that we revert to CAGs as the sole determinant for this year’s cohort. Not just those whose grades are lower than their CAGs. But every student. In this way, there will be some winners, those whose teachers were generous in the CAGs, but there will be no losers. All will get the grades their teachers said they would get if there had taken the exams this summer.”

The DfE was approached for comment.

Key workers of tomorrow are taking their first steps today

On the day BTEC learners will be finding out their results, Cindy Rampersaud writes about how their skills will help the country rebuild.

This year, 250,000 post-16 young people and adults will be receiving their BTEC qualifications. It is a time of anticipation, nervousness and hope but set against the unprecedented disruption caused by COVID-19 the class of 2020 are truly deserving of special recognition for their hard-work and tenacity.

But while it has presented its evident challenges, COVID–19 has provided an opportunity to reassess and genuinely appreciate the contribution of key workers. Throughout the lockdown we relied heavily on care workers, nurses, and food retailers, to keep so many aspects of our daily lives going. Many of these individuals would have gone to a further education college or studied with a training provider, and many of these will have taken a BTEC, apprenticeship or other vocational qualification.

Included in the class of 2020 receiving their BTEC results this year will be 65,000 taking their first steps towards being the key workers of tomorrow, helping the country to rebuild. 4,000 prospective construction workers will receive their results this year, along with a further 45,000 health and social care professionals and 15,000 engineers. Many others will be progressing onto university.

Despite the wider economic backdrop, employment prospects for those heading into these careers are promising. Currently, there is a shortage of over 100,000 full-time equivalent staff in the NHS and a further 122,000 in adult social care; by 2035 there will be around 950,000 new adult social care workers needed and the King’s Fund suggests the NHS workforce gap could reach almost 250,000 by 2030.

In addition, experts forecast that around 203,000 people with engineering skills are needed every year and around 168,500 construction jobs will be created by 2023.

The Chancellor has recently recognised just how vital these workers will be to the national effort by committing a further £100m to fund further training places for health and social care, engineering and construction at his recent economic statement.

Globally, we are also seeing confidence in vocational education rising. This week Pearson released its second annual Global Learner Survey, capturing the voice of over 7,000 people worldwide (from seven countries, including 1000 respondents from the UK). 69 per cent in UK (72 per cent globally) in 2020 said a degree or certificate from a vocational college or trade school is more likely to result in a good job with career prospects than a university degree (up from 66 per cent last year in UK and 68 per cent globally). This is a pattern we’re seeing with our BTECs, with students in countries as far away as Thailand and China signing up to study them and seeing the value of these vocational career focused qualifications.

Conducted in May 2020, in the midst of the pandemic, the data throws up some interesting questions for the education sector in this increasingly digital environment and disrupted economy. The findings show learners see COVID as a turning point for modern learning, with online schooling and the need for more digital skills leaving a lasting mark. Globally and in the UK, 87 per cent of respondents said that the economic disruption of COVID means people now need to be comfortable working remotely and in highly digital environments. To achieve this, traditional education programs won’t be enough, with 89 per cent of learners globally (88 per cent in UK) saying that people will need to develop more digital skills such as virtual collaboration, communication, analysing data or managing remote teams to move forward in this economy.

Building these core skills and employability through the course of study has always been the central part of the BTEC offer. We place a real focus on developing content and curriculum to allow access and progression for the specific sector a course is related to, as well as the transferable skills that are relevant to many different sectors. We’re also working to look at what the emerging industries are and where the jobs of the future will be, especially post-Covid and with our ever-increasing reliance on technology.

Today is a moment to salute the hard work and dedication of the class of 2020, who have had to continue their studies during an extraordinary time. We should also reflect on the value that the FE sector brings to communities and the wider UK PLC economy and the importance it holds for our future economic recovery. I look forward to seeing what careers this cohort goes on to and the impact they’ll have on our society

Ofqual to provide guidance on “valid mock grades”

Ofqual has announced it will publish guidance on how colleges can use “valid mock grades” to appeal A-levels and GCSE results next week.

The Department for Education confirmed late last night that some students will be offered the option to use grades given in mock exams instead of their standardised A-level and GCSE grades.

The DfE said students “could receive the higher result out of their calculated grade, valid mock grade, or autumn exam grade” – with the mock exam option available via the appeal process.

Exams regulator Ofqual has shed some light on when education leaders can expect the information: “We understand why the government has wanted to provide some additional assurance for students, by confirming that evidence from valid mock exams can be considered as part of an appeal,” the regulator said today.

“We are working urgently to operationalise this as fairly as possible and to determine what standards of evidence will be required for the appeal. We will provide more detail early next week.”

The regulator added: “We will continue to do everything possible to ensure students achieve grades that are as fair as possible in the circumstances this summer.”

Last week Ofqual set out the full arrangements for appeals this year, which confirmed colleges will be able to appeal if they were expecting results this year to “show a very different pattern of grades to results in previous years”.

Elsewhere the regulator reiterated that under the current exams system brought in to facilitate the cancellation of summer exams the “vast majority of the grades students receive will be the same as, or within one grade of, their centre’s grade”,

“Adjustments were only made where necessary to bring consistency to the standards between schools and colleges. However, that moderation was essential to create a level playing for students.”

The deadline for colleges to submit appeals is September 17.