Ofqual refuses to back down over GCSE grading row

The exams watchdog has provoked a furious backlash after insisting that controversial GCSE English test papers would not be re-graded.

Ofqual said that results handed down to pupils last week would stand, despite claims that marks had been deliberately suppressed by examination boards.

In a report, the watchdog admitted that grade boundaries set in January were too “generous” – resulting in a sudden raising of pass marks for June papers.

It said that pupils marked down following the change would be given the opportunity to re-sit papers in November as part of a special concession.

But officials insisted that June grade boundaries were accurate after “two decades of grade inflation”, adding that any retrospective change would “undermine the integrity and rigour of the qualifications we regulate”.

It also warned that teachers were partly to blame for the fiasco after “over-marking” internally-assessed papers and unfairly raising pupils’ expectations this summer.

The conclusions sparked anger among head teachers’ leaders who said they were considering legal action against examination boards.

Labour called for Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, to answer urgent questions on episode in the House of Commons on Monday.

But Glenys Stacey, Ofqual chief regulator, said: “We have found that examiners acted properly, and set the boundaries using their best professional judgement. The June boundaries have been properly set, and candidates’ work properly graded.”

Figures published last week showed that the proportion of pupils gaining A* to C grades across all GCSE subjects fell for the first time in the exam’s 24-year history.

Particular concerns were raised about English, where 63.9 per cent of pupils gained at least a C, compared with 65.4 per cent a year earlier.

Teachers claimed at least 67,000 pupils aiming for a C gained Ds instead, robbing them of college places and put schools under threat of closure for failing to hit Government floor targets.

In an official report, Ofqual admitted that the number of marks needed to secure good grades had jumped in 17 out of 19 English papers set in June compared with those in January.

It admitted that January exams were too lenient, but suggested this was down to the unfamiliarity of a new exam combined with a much smaller cohort, making it harder to make accurate predictions.

Ofqual insisted it would be unfair to retrospectively raise grade boundaries for more than 50,000 pupils taking assessments in the winter.

The watchdog also criticised schools’ internal marking of so-called “controlled assessments” – coursework-style tasks – insisting they had been “over-reliant” on the January grade boundaries as a standards guide. Examiners were “at pains to explain to teachers that grade boundaries could change”, said Ofqual, but many schools failed to heed the warnings.

The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance, the exam board at the centre of most complaints, said there was “evidence of significant teacher over-marking”.

Ofqual said any student left disappointed would be able to re-take exams in November free of charge – earlier than the usual January re-sit window.

But the National Association of Head Teachers branded the report a “fudge”.

Brian Lightman, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said the outcome was “wholly unacceptable”, adding: “If necessary ASCL will resort to a legal challenge to this unfairness.”

Kevin Courtney, deputy general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: “Resits are of no use whatsoever to pupils who need their results this week, not in a few months time. This year’s English GCSEs need to be urgently re-graded using the January boundaries which schools, teachers and pupils have all been working towards.”

A spokesman for the Department for Education said: "The department is considering the issues raised by the report and we look forward to discussing these issues with Ofqual next week.”




Original source here