Following two years of cancelled public exams due to the pandemic, the 2022 results mark a return to the way the system was before acronyms like CAG and TAG became part of the vernacular. I say marks a return, it is not a complete return as 2022 saw examination boards modify their expectations based on learning lost. Nevertheless, some 700,000 students with a combined 5.7 million entries between them completed papers under examination conditions. And, on the day they received their results, instead of hearing positive affirmations of all they have achieved given the level of disruption they have experienced, they hear education minister Will Quince say that “lower grades are “part of the plan” even though papers have been assessed more generously to ensure the drop off isn’t too big following the return of exams after teacher assessments during COVID”. There is so much in this statement that needs to be unpacked and this is the point of this post.

It had already been decided that overall performance of this cohort was to be lower than the covid cohorts but higher than the last examined cohort in 2019. How can it be known in advance of taking their examinations that the 2022 cohort was going to do less well than their 2021 peers? It’s due to the fact that proportion of students achieving each grade is controlled: if, as in 2022, it was decided that 73% of all grades awarded were to be 4+, grade boundaries are set so that 73% of all grades awarded are 4+. What this means is that the number of marks needed to achieve a particular grade are different year on year: grade boundaries are set after the examinations have been marked and depend on how the cohort as a whole has performed.

Grade inflation refers to an upward trend in the average grades awarded to students for a particular qualification. The use of CAGs (Centre Assessed Grades) to replace the cancelled examinations in 2020 saw grade inflation reach a record high with 75.9% of GCSE entries achieving a 4+, up from 67.1% the previous year. This is the year that Ofqual created and used an algorithm to combat grade inflation by moderating the grades submitted by teachers. Following the impact the algorithm had on the A-Level results of that year its absolute use was withdrawn for GCSE: the final grade awarded being either the CAG or the grade produced by the algorithm, whichever was the highest. My point here is to question how it is possible to be awarded two different grades for for the same qualification so that one can be the highest … how can a grade 4 not be a grade 4? Surely a grade 4 represents a particular standard? The examination system determines the standard in any one particular year depending on the performance of the cohort as a whole instead of judging the work on its individual merit.

The impact of setting the standard after the event has happened is used to create a narrative. For example, when the examinations in GCSE English and mathematics were first graded 9-1 in 2017 as opposed to the A*-C grades used in the previous year, the proportion of students who achieved a standard pass in both remained stable. A good outcome is the message, teachers and students have risen to the challenge of the reformed qualifications ensuring the same proportion of students achieve a standard pass in both albeit a raised bar in the standard given the increased rigor of the courses. Sorry, but the cynic in me has yet to be convinced: the reason standards remained stable was because grade boundaries were set to make standards stable.

The ongoing pandemic resulted in the cancellation of the 2021 examinations. Given algorithm-gate the previous year, in 2021 final grades were awarded by teachers alone. These Teacher Assessed Grades or TAGs gave 76.9% of entries a grade 4 or more, inline with the proportion awarded the previous year but up almost 10% on the last year of grades from examinations in 2019. Is this really an example of grade inflation or were the 2021 results actually a more realistic picture of the standards schools leavers achieved? I understand the issues surrounding a lack of moderation when it came to awarding these grades but instead of grade inflation is the assigning of grade boundaries pending performance not actually an example of grade deflation? The impact of achieving a grade 4 or more on the life-chances of young people can not be underplayed, but this year, it was already decided that less than 76.9% of entries would achieve grade 4+.

If we are to look to outcomes as evidence of the negative impact the pandemic had on education we would actually find the opposite in terms of grades awarded. I leave you to decide what to infer from this. In an era where schools are judged on the progress students make in comparing estimated performance to actual performance I think it is worth noting this: the 2021 cohort were the first students to have taken the reformed key stage 2 assessments back in 2016. The results of these students have been eagerly anticipated to analyse trajectories and revise projections for the performance of future cohorts. Estimated performance at GCSE starts with performance at key stage 2: this made awarding CAGs in 2020 more straightforward as students has estimates in place for GCSE based on a well worked methodology. Methods to create estimates for 2021 based on the new 2016 assessments were waiting on the examination results to confirm their reliability. Of course, these results never came and neither have they in 2022 given the modification to examinations to compensate for the pandemic and the generous assessment of papers sat. Although the proportion of TAGs awarded at 4+ was consistant with those awarded in 2020, this wasn’t so for performance at 7+ (28.5% in 2021, 25.9% in 2020). It’s difficult to know what this tells us, as progress measures were not calculated in 2021, and as I write schools and academies are waiting on confirmation on what their progress score is for 2022. However, if teachers have assigned grades according to the standard of the work then 28.5% of entries in 2021 achieved a 7+.

As the 2023 GCSE cohort commence their final year they do so in the knowledge that the system has returned to how it was prior to the pandemic. They face examinations without adaptation and will have grades assigned in accordance with the boundaries set by a) the performance of the entire cohort who took the same examination and b) what is deemed to be an acceptable proportion of entries to be awarded each grade. No one yet knows what marks will be needed to fall within a boundary. What is known is that at least 20% of entries will not be awarded 4+ on this system even if the standard of their work is that of a grade 4 student. Whilst boundaries are decided on and schools are judged accordingly, we lose sight of the very real impact grades have on the individuals who recieve them. I say receive deliberately instead achieve: the grade must reflect the standard of work produced by an individual, not be relative to the performance of others in any one year.