Meritocracy Myth Shatters- The 2020 A Level Chaos

On the 13th of August 2020, thousands of students across the country opened their A Level results. What is supposed to be a day of celebration and relief, quickly turned into confusion and outrage- nationally. Nearly 40% of teacher's recommended grades (280,000 in total) were downgraded. Although this claim was made earlier in the week by parent Huy Duong- the end result still came as a shock to students. Although one could argue that results have improved this year (eg-the percentage of entries in England awarded a C or above has increased to 78% from 75.5%), this neglects the recent results in 2017 and 2018. Compared to those figures, today's results are only 0.5% higher, rather than the much more significant increase of 2.5% if viewed in isolation to last year's results. Furthermore many have argued that materially deprived pupils were more likely to have their grades lowered by Ofqual's algorithm- with the attainment gap between pupils on free schools meals and better off pupils widening in comparison to 2019. The impact of this, acknowledged by Gavin Williamson himself, is that an 'exceptionally high-performing child in a low-performing school' would not get their expected grade. This is likely a consequence of the emphasis the chosen algorithm puts on historical performance. Examples of this bias have been spreading rapidly across social media platforms such as Twitter, portraying how students who were achieving A grades throughout the year, from which teachers had made their CAG judgements, were ultimately being downgraded to E grades. An example of this is Elijah Baniaga who was predicted an A* and two As, but was downgraded to an A in biology, a C in maths and a D in chemistry- an overall downgrading of six grades. The consequence of this is that he has missed out on his opportunity to study biology at Oxford University this year- nor to study at his insurance choice of University College London. The outcry on social media from teachers, students and parents has been growing since the 13th of August- with more case studies of this nature emerging everyday. The artificial nature of an algorithm was criticised by a student on ITV News who poignantly stated 'we are real people... you're not just speaking to numbers in a system. There are actual real people here that are opening these envelopes and this determines their future.'

How were private schools influenced by the grading system?

Analysis of A Level results this year, has split the data in relation to different centre types. The statistics show that independent schools have seen a 4.7 point change between 2019 and 2020, whereas sixth forms have only seen a 0.4 change. This has called into question the issue of classism within the grading system, in which wealthier pupils benefit from this year circumstances, This is reinforced by analysts from the education research company FFL Datalab, who pointed out that cohorts with more than 15 entrants were moderated by Ofqual through schools' and colleges' historical performance, whereas cases where five or fewer from a particular establishment entered a subject, the grades awarded were based on teacher assessment. It should also be noted that for cohorts with 5-15 students, a combination of the two approaches was used. The reason this methodology is referenced by analysts, is because it can have a disproportionate effect on independent schools- and thus explaining, at least partly, the reason for their substantial improvement this year. It is estimated that independent schools enter 9.4 students for each A level subject on average, whereas for state funded schools the average is 11 and for sixth form/ further education colleges it is much higher at 33 students. The FFL datalab go on to argue that 'given the extensive analysis they carried out in advance of creating this model (on gender, ethnicity, economic status, etc.), we think it would have been possible for Ofqual to anticipate the potential biases this decision might create in favour of private schools'. This analysis is therefore highly critical of the moderation process implemented by Ofqual. Although the language of an 'algorithm' evokes connotations of objectivity and neutrality- the outcome on the 13th of August and subsequent statistical analysis has corroborated this perspective to be far from true. An algorithm will simply be a product of pre-existing biases held by authority, with Ofqual's failure to intercept this causing a reproduction of inequality- far from Boris Johnson's pledge to 'level up' the country.

Huy Duong, who had estimated 40% of students would have their results downgraded, has referred to the system as 'collective punishment by statistics'. Although he acknowledges that Ofqual 'want to control grade inflation', he raises the question of 'how confident are they they are not downgrading the wrong people'. He then formulates a fitting analogy to explain his objections to the 'standardisation process': 'Suppose you have 100 cars travelling on a motorway and 41 of them broke the speed limit. In the interest of road safety, as a matter of principle, it is correct to fine the 41 speeding drivers.

... However, suppose that in practice, for whatever reason, the speed trap catches the wrong car, say, 25% of the time. As a result, about 10 of the drivers caught by the speed trap weren’t speeding at all but have been wrongly accused. What sort of democratic society would accept that? It sounds like collective punishment by statistics.'

Public Responses to the situation

Following the 'A Levels Fiasco', the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has told Ofqual it must mitigate any 'potential negative effect' against specific demographics eg- ethnic minorities, disabled children and those from deprived backgrounds. They have also called for Ofqual to 'publish a full breakdown of the differences between teacher-assessed grades and the final grade'. This hostility is reinforced by leader of the opposition Keir Starmer who said on Thursday 'something has obviously gone horribly wrong with this year's exam results... nearly 40% of young people have had their grades marked down and that's thousands of young people whose opportunities could have been dashed'. Along with data showing that only 20% of students in state academies or comprehensives were awarded a grade A or above (compared to 49% of entries at private schools), Natalie Perera (executive director of the Education Policy Institute) stated 'There are early signs that the results process may have had disproportionately negative impact on the most disadvantaged students'. Paired with peaceful protests across the country, students have also pursued legal action against the non-ministerial government department of Ofqual. Student Curtis Parfitt-Ford was awarded his predicted grades but aims to challenge the 'completely ridiculous' system. Parfitt-Ford went on to argue, with aid from his lawyers, that Ofqual acted outside its statutory responsibilities in basing judgements on schools' historical data, not 'individual achievement and attainment'. For many, the 'irrational, arbitrary' approach taken by Ofqual and Gavin Williamson is a threat to social mobility- influencing and restricting the the opportunities given to those from a lower socio-economic background. For many this is a clear message to young people to 'stay in your allocated place' and 'don't aspire above your station'. This is particularly evident when one recognises students were expected to pay for their appeals- an evident disadvantage for working class students from underfunded schools. Thankfully Gavin Williamson has reversed this decision to avoid appeals not being made 'on grounds of cost'.

But- can't students just appeal?

Well- yes. However the last few days have been complicated in terms of the appeals process. On Saturday Ofqual set out what constituted a 'valid' mock exam for students appealing against A level results in England. Although announcements had been made from the Department for Education of a 'triple-lock' system where students could use mock grades for their final results, Labour have criticised the new Ofqual criteria, arguing that some students would not be able to use their mocks as the basis for an appeal. An article by Clint Witchalls in The Conversation reinforced this criticism of mock exams- 'This is far less simple or equitable than it sounds. Preparatory exams have different forms and functions in different schools and colleges. In some they are staggered across two years; in others, sat in full just before exam leave. Some teachers use them as a cautionary, tough test, and others as a confidence-building warm-up. Some students have not sat them at all because of the closure of schools.'. Another issue is that non-examination assessments could be used within this appeals process- however only if they were marked before the 30th of March 2020. I know that for many people- this simply isn't true. Following this criticism, the prior criteria has now been suspended, with further information being published in 'due course'. The Conservative chairman of the education select committee, Robert Halfon viewed this decision as a 'huge mess'. He went on to argue that 'Ofqual shouldn't put things on websites, take them away, sow confusion. '. For many this is a consequence of Gavin Williamson's 'panicked and chaotic' implementation of the 'triple lock system'- which is perceived as a response to Scotland's earlier negative experience on results day

Government Response to Media representation of Results Day

In response to claims that 40% of pupils have been downgraded, the government released an article in order to 'debunk' media claims. The counterargument put in place used the statistic that 96% of case grades were the same as submitted by teachers. Now, this all seems very positive until you notice the following line 'or were just one grade different'. It is truly shocking that they can manipulate a statistic in this way- truly ignorant of the impact 'just one grade' can have on an individual student. I know that many of my peers wouldn't be at university this year if they were downgraded by 'just one grade'. Furthermore, although it is claimed results are up,the Sixth Form Colleges Association (SFCA) said it analysed 65,000 exam entries in 41 subjects from sixth form colleges and found that grades were 20% lower than historic performances for students in those colleges. The SFCA said its analysis of 41 subjects had not found a single one where the results were above the three year average. Ergo, although the objective for Ofqual was to ensure 'national results are broadly similar to previous years', the SFCA argue that the model used has 'not only failed to produce broadly similar results, but has in fact produced worse results in every single subject'.

Conclusion

This remains a rolling story for students, parents and teachers. With protests, petitions and general outcry remaining persistent- it is uncertain what Gavin Williamson will do. Just this morning it was announced Northern Ireland would follow Scotland's decision to use teacher assessment grades. In the wake of this chaos I have started a campaign on my Twitter (@SocStudent2020) where parents, students and teachers can send in quotes- expressing their opinions on the matter, It has been a really interesting project- and I hope it can aid a national conversation about results day, and the problems that inhabit it. An important debate re-birthed from the current situation is the idea of modular A levels. In 2013, Michael Gove announced that from 2015 students would sit their final exams at the end of the 2 years (linear), as opposed to sitting exams for both years of the course (modular). Although Gove views this as 'fit for purpose', many have criticised the policy for inducing stress in students- as their final grade was based on their exam performance. This paired with the almost complete abolishment of coursework in A levels- is a disaster for this year's cohort. Without Gove's call for a return to the 'golden age' of education, A level results this year would be largely based on their accumulated assessments, providing students with at least some agency over their future- not just determined by an algorithm. If anything, the chaos surrounding results day has reinforced the need for Sociology on the syllabus. I am certain Sociologists could have predicted these issues of classism, elitism and disparity within the system- all reinforcing the Sociological debate, do we truly live in a meritocratic society?