During lockdown, exam boards sensibly kept a low profile. It was a period when the mainstay of their business was wiped out in a single - now seemingly rash - government decision to cancel exams.
This crisis has challenged the relationships, contracts and ways of doing things that we had to accept in the past. Perhaps a review of the role of exam boards in the system has been coming for a very long time: old grievances have been exacerbated by new causes of discontent.
In 12 weeks, teachers showed that they could do the assessment and grade awards - all while undergoing a major pedagogical revolution in online teaching.
Value for money with exam boards?
Some schools had even more of a DIY job to do. Our school’s international exams provider decided to cancel the moderation of speaking and listening tests, and consequently took away our students’ opportunity to have their oracy skills formally recognised.
It was the crowning irony of the whole period that, while schools had to evaluate a much wider range of evidence than exam boards ever had to cover - and under truly testing conditions - our board made a decision not to moderate tests that had actually been taken and were ready to upload from our system on to the board’s IT platform.
The oral endorsement is vital to some students. A number of universities offering sought-after degrees, such as medicine, insist on having the oral assessment in applicants’ portfolios. The best we could do for our students was to issue a certificate from the school, with the raw mark on it, as proof that the tests happened and were marked.
It was the moment when we really questioned the value we received for our money - the exam fees which had been paid up front, in full and on time in early 2020.
When the vexed question of markers’ pay was raised, the teaching profession expected boards to do the honourable thing and provide financial compensation for redundant examiners. Many of these examiners depend on that income, not for luxuries like holidays but for the necessities of life: the weekly shopping, the monthly mortgage payment.
The only real communication that schools received from exam boards during lockdown - apart from instructions already provided by Ofqual - was about what the money was supposedly for. One board revealed that: “As well as everything we’d invested in this summer before the decision to cancel exams, we’ve had extra costs such as building a completely new system for entering grades and rankings” (AQA update 7 August 2020).
Were customers now expected to pay for exam boards’ infrastructure as well? Would an examiner be able to claim for a new computer with sufficient capacity for online marking?
Widening the gulf between schools
As the secondary school system returns to a semblance of normality, it’s clear that some students have had a very hard time over the summer term. A significant number have not been able to access all the teaching they need to deal with the bigger (“reformed”) GCSEs created by Michael Gove.
Quite rightly, there has been lobbying for truncated question papers, with sufficient choice to enable those who have missed out the most to compete on more equal terms with those who had covered all the content so far.
Unfortunately, the concessions for English literature have come too late - two weeks into the new academic year - and simply widened the gulf between schools, as pointed out by Heidi Drake.
Those living in the real world know the fear that sets in, as early as September, that the content can’t be covered in time - and that’s under normal circumstances. Many schools are starting well behind the line now.
The wavering of AQA over set texts has not been an edifying spectacle. Edexcel, meanwhile, made easy popularity gains with its preferred model. The whole episode does not reflect well on boards. They could have sunk their differences and forgotten market pressures this year, listened to teachers and made the compromise over poetry. The AQA compromise on 15 September has come rather late in the day.
The meddling of government in exam content, by making Shakespeare compulsory, could not have been ignored. But circumventing it might well have won a lot of friends among teachers. Exam boards had it in their power to do more to help schools out.
Who would really mind if the 2021 cohort - which has already been through so much - had been given what looks to the superficial onlooker like a slightly easier ride?
How to restore faith
In this soured atmosphere, the exam boards have a lot to do to restore a favourable working relationship with their schools. Based on this year’s showing, they could do some or all of the following:
1. Make sure they fulfil the obligations for which they have been paid up front.
2. Genuinely engage with schools to offer the widest possible choice - now. Schools have so many uncertainties and need a break.
3. Re-establish cordial relations with markers for the summer of 2021. It’s going to be a hard summer, especially if exams are sat late and the marking window is very tight. Loyalties will be tested - all the more so if the sun shines again and holidays are more enticing than a stint at the computer indoors.
4. Revisit their fee and rebate structure. The most uncomfortable question that has been raised this summer is why only 23 to 27 per cent of the exam fees for 2020 is being returned. Is that all it really costs to mark the scripts and provide grades for every candidate?
5. Provide excellent CPD for free, to win back hearts and minds.
This summer, the profession has shown itself more than capable of running the show. Unless exam boards do some pretty nifty footwork now, they may be fighting for their very existence.
Yvonne Williams is head of English and drama in a secondary school in the South of England. She has contributed chapters on workload and wellbeing to Mentoring English Teachers in the Secondary School, edited by Debbie Hickman (Routledge)
