The interim report from the government’s curriculum and assessment review landed earlier this week and it was clear that the focus was more on curriculum, which dominated throughout, rather than assessment, which was covered in about four pages at the end.
What’s more, it seems clear that current school exams - notably Sats, GCSEs and A levels - are likely to continue into the foreseeable future, perhaps somewhat tweaked but substantially unchanged.
If that is the case then it means students will need high-quality marking and reliable grades, as the report acknowledges.
It states: “For learners, these assessments are high-stakes because the grades they achieve in these qualifications will likely inform future study and employment choices and because they are used by providers to determine entry to programmes.”
Concerns over GCSE and A-level marking
Yet despite this acknowledgement, I was surprised (although perhaps not that surprised) to see no mention at all of the importance of accurate marking. In fact, the word “marking” appears only once in the report, in a footnote.
Even the section reflecting on submissions made in response to the review’s call for evidence does not flag up any concerns with marking, despite such concerns being commonly voiced in the sector.
For Example, Ofqual data from 2023 showed that, from 245,920 GCSE grade challenges, there were 157,850 situations where marks were changed on a paper, including 13,085 where five or more marks were added.
For AS and A levels, there were 48,300 instances of marks being changed after 57,350 challenges, with 5,500 occasions where five or more marks were added.
To my mind, a hallmark of high-quality marking is that the number of marking errors discovered following a challenge is very small - this data shows it is not.
Perhaps even more alarming is the general unreliability of GCSE and A-level grades: former Ofqual chief regulator Dame Glenys Stacey told the Commons Education Select Committee in 2020 that grades “are reliable to one grade either way”.
That’s a comment that really warrants reflection. Imagine how many students who received a grade 3 in English last year should actually have been awarded a grade 4, and the impact that has had relating to resits and onward study options. Or what about a student relying on a grade 7 to get into their university of choice but who got a 6?
Yet the review’s interim report has nothing to say on any of this.
Exam appeals overlooked
Similarly, the report also has nothing to say about the appeals process, with a search for the words “appeal”, “review of marking” and “challenge” (in the sense of an appeal) in it returning nothing.
Does this imply that the review team consider the appeals process to be perfect?
It would seem surprising if that is the case, with numerous leaders citing concerns about costs, consistency and visibility into marking, and how hard it can be to know if and when to appeal a mark - especially as annotation is not even a requirement for some boards.
Clearly the review team are aware of the importance of exams and it is heartening that they do acknowledge the importance of ensuring that the “assessment system captures learning in a way that is fair, reliable and inclusive”.
Yet if that is to be done there needs to be an acknowledgement, too, that accurate marking, reliable grades and an appeals system that is simple, fair and fast are fundamental to that aim. Let’s hope the final report has something more to say about all of this.
Dennis Sherwood is author of Missing the Mark: why so many school exam grades are wrong, and how to get results we can trust
For the latest education news and analysis delivered every weekday morning, sign up for the Tes Daily newsletter
