Stricken A-Level students today face paying hundreds of pounds to appeal results for exams they were not even able to take.
Thousands of teenagers up and down the country have been left in despair after missing out on university places after their exam results were marked down.
Now, they face fees of up to £150 per exam if they wish to lodge an appeal – meaning it could cost as much as £600 if a student chose to have four papers remarked.
The Association of School and College Leaders said it would ‘favour fees not being charged for appeals’ this year, given the ‘unusual circumstances’ faced by schools.
A group of protesters, including students who received their A-levels on Thursday, marched down Whitehall in central London today towards the Department for Education building.
Thousands of teenagers up and down the country face fees of up to £150 per exam if they wish to lodge an appeal
A group of protesters, including students who received their A-levels on Thursday, marched down Whitehall in central London towards the Department for Education building
Nearly 40 per cent of results were downgraded by the computer model deployed when exams had to be cancelled due to the coronavirus crisis.
The Government announced late on Tuesday that A-level and GCSE students will be able to use results in valid mock exams to appeal if they are unhappy with their results.
But schools, colleges and universities are still unclear how the new appeals process will work and what the likely timescale will be.
England’s exams regulator, Ofqual, has said it is ‘working urgently’ to set out how mock exam results will form the basis of an appeal, but further details will not be ready until next week.
Students will not be able to appeal results directly, but must do so through the head of their college or school.
Ofqual has said schools will be able to challenge grades on behalf of their pupils, including where they have evidence that grades are ‘lower than expected because previous cohorts are not sufficiently representative of this year’s students’.
AQA, the largest provider of GCSEs and A-levels in England, will charge schools £25 for each appeal that is unsuccessful at the ‘initial review’ stage.
The charge will rise to £111.75 if the appeal was made on the grounds that there were ‘exceptional circumstances’.
Appeals that fail at the independent review will be charged at £111.75.
OCR will charge £9.50 per student for each unsuccessful initial review, with the amount payable capped at £95.
Schools will then have to pay £150 for every independent review that is not upheld.
Edexcel will not charge schools for initial reviews on the grounds of centre errors, but will charge £20 per student for unsuccessful initial reviews on the grounds that the exam board made an error, up to a cap of £120 per student subject.
It will charge £120 for failed initial reviews based on ‘exceptional circumstances’.
Appeals that fail at the second independent review stage will be charged at £150.
Beleaguered students have taken to social media today, riddled with anxiety as they face launching an appeal.
One wrote: ‘Given A*AA in teacher assessment having had AAA in mocks I thought my offers to study medicine were secured, but the system provides no leeway for a very high performing cohort in a high performing school.
‘And that’s only IF my appeal succeeds. if not, i’m forced to take a year out and pay to retake exams I never took, potentially twice because being ready for October A Level exams in a month will be massively difficult after zero study for five months.’
Ofqual has confirmed that, because there is grade protection this year, no grades will go down as a result of an appeal – as could normally happen in the appeal process.
Meanwhile, applicants to Oxford University who successfully appeal over their A-level results have been told they may have to wait a year before they can start their degree courses.
Some students who achieve the top grades after challenging their results could have their places at Oxford deferred until autumn 2021 if the institution reaches maximum capacity.
The university has said it would not be possible to meet ‘ongoing social-distancing restrictions’ and other challenges presented by Covid-19 if it went above its maximum intake of students.
The move comes after Universities Minister Michelle Donelan told universities to hold places for applicants challenging A-level grades until they receive the outcome of their appeal.
On the suggestion that some applicants could be asked to defer places until 2021 if they appeal, shadow health minister Justin Madders tweeted: ‘Haven’t these kids gone through enough already?’
The Ucas deadline for applicants to meet their academic offer conditions is September 7, which leaves exam boards less than four weeks to issue outcomes of appeals.
Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, told Schools Week: ‘In the unusual circumstances this year, we would favour fees not being charged for appeals.
‘This would ensure that there is a level playing field so that the ability to appeal would not be constrained by the funding that is available.
‘It would help to give people an additional level of confidence in the fairness of the process.’
AQA said: ‘We’ve always said we have no wish to gain financially from this summer’s special arrangements – so we’re already refunding 26% of exam entry fees, which can be used for any appeal costs.’
The exams regulator Ofqual has said schools will be able to challenge grades on behalf of their pupils, including where they have evidence that grades are ‘lower than expected because previous cohorts are not sufficiently representative of this year’s students’
Around 100 demonstrators gathered outside Downing Street today, chanting ‘sack Gavin Williamson’ and ‘teachers not Tories’ whilst holding placards
Around 100 demonstrators gathered outside Downing Street today, chanting ‘sack Gavin Williamson’ and ‘teachers not Tories’ whilst holding placards.
Student Harry Mayes, from Stoke Newington in north London, missed out on a place at both his firm and insurance university places after receiving A, B and C in his A-levels.
The 18-year-old, who had been hoping to study neuroscience at the University of Bristol and had grades of A*, A and B submitted by his teachers, called the system a ‘complete injustice’.
‘I’m a free school meals student and it seems like people like me have been lowered the most,’ he said.
Ofqual blames the teachers: Regulator says ‘implausibly high’ predicted grades for A-level pupils are behind exams chaos as Starmer calls for Scottish-style U-turn and equalities watchdog threatens to step in
By James Tapsfield Political Editor for MailOnline
Ofqual blamed teachers for suggesting ‘implausibly high’ A-Level grades today as Keir Starmer joined the backlash by demanding standardisation is ditched.
The government is facing a storm after nearly 40 per cent of results were downgraded by the computer model deployed when exams had to be cancelled due to the coronavirus crisis.
Boris Johnson and Education Secretary Gavin Williamson have defended the outcome as ‘robust’ and ‘credible’, while Ofqual pointed out that there would have been massive grade inflation if moderation had not been used.
But Sir Keir today turned up the heat by calling for England to follow Scotland’s example by scrapping the standardisation altogether, and relying on estimates from teachers.
‘The unprecedented and chaotic circumstances created by the UK Government’s mishandling of education during recent months mean that a return to teacher assessments is now the best option available,’ the Labour leader said.
‘No young person should be at a detriment due to Government incompetence.
‘Time is running out. We need action in days, not weeks.’
When the huge U-turn was made on a similar computer model in Scotland, the Higher pass rate soared by 14 percentage points from last year.
Meanwhile, the equalities watchdog has threatened to step in unless Ofqual ensures that children from disadvantaged backgrounds and minority groups do not miss out.
Sir Keir Starmer ([pictured on a visit to Darlington yesterday) has urged the government to emulate the U-turn on A-Level grading in Scotland
Education Secretary Gavin Williamson had faced pressure to address the ‘huge injustice’ of the 2020 results by head teachers and the Labour Party
Data revealed that the marks of poorer pupils in England were more likely to be downgraded by the algorithm
Ofqual had estimated the A-Level pass rate would be 12 points higher if teacher assessments alone were used.
And a spokesman told the Telegraph today that the ‘standard applied by different schools and colleges varies greatly’.
‘A rare few centres put in implausibly high judgments, including one which submitted all A* and A grades for students in two subjects, where previously there had been normal distribution,’ the spokesman said.
After the 2020 exams were cancelled due to coronavirus, this year’s grades were been calculated by a statistical model that considers the pupils’ past performance along with the historic grades of their school, along with a rank order drawn up by teachers.
But results day has seen growing complaints by pupils and schools about the statistical mechanism used to award grades – which, it is claimed, has unfairly punished some.
Several pupils at one sixth form college were downgraded after getting top predicted grades.
Wiktoria Sniadowska said she would ‘definitely’ appeal after a computer algorithm cut her straight As to BBC. She is continuing her studies at Leyton Sixth Form College in London, where she will take an art foundation diploma.
But she said: ‘I know that if I’d done my exams, I’d have got better grades. It’s unfair.’
Tamzin Iyayi lost out on a place at Cambridge after being marked down from A*AA in history, law and politics. She said: ‘I just feel let down by the Government.’
Aqsa Ali had been offered places to study politics and international relations. But she missed out after being downgraded to a B in politics and Cs in history and religious studies.
She said: ‘It’s had a big impact on my mental health and confidence.’
Elsewhere, a young carer had his A levels lowered by as much as three grades, putting his university plans in doubt.
Maks Ovnik cares for his grandmother, 102, alongside his mother on the Isle of Wight. He got ABB in his mocks and his school gave him AAB in maths, computing and physics.
But these were downgraded by Ofqual to ADE, meaning he loses his place to study physics at Southampton.
Maks, 18, who plans to appeal, thinks his results were downgraded due to his school’s performance last year. He said: ‘It’s not a nice feeling at all.’
Students burn their A-Level results at the London Dungeon as students find out whether they have got a university place
Equality and Human Rights Commission Chief Executive, Rebecca Hilsenrath said there must not be a disproportionate impact on already disadvantaged groups.
‘Many of these children come from disadvantaged backgrounds. If we are going to build back better and not make things worse, it needs to start with our children’s future,’ she said.
‘We have been clear with Ofqual that they must consider the equality impacts of all their actions and mitigate against any potential negative affect on these groups.
‘Ofqual should be clear about the impact of the algorithm used in the standardisation model and the steps taken to remove bias and take into account equality.’
She added: ‘Students who have been downgraded must be able to appeal directly if they believe their grades are unfair.
‘We will continue to discuss this with Ofqual and consider all our powers so that ethnic minority and disabled children, for example, are treated fairly in this process.’
But in a round of interviews this morning Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, said that more pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds have been accepted to university than last year.
Asked if he would accept that poorer students have been hardest hit by the downgrading, Mr Shapps told BBC Breakfast: ‘No, I think again you should go on the evidence here – that’s not been the upshot.
‘I was having a look at the numbers and 18-year-olds from the most disadvantaged backgrounds, on the basis of the exam results yesterday, 7.3 per cent more are going to university, have been accepted for university, than just last year.’
Left to right: Victoria Sniadowska, Tamzin Iyayi and Aqsa Ali. Wiktoria Sniadowska said she would ‘definitely’ appeal after a computer algorithm cut her straight As to BBC
Maks Ovnik cares for his grandmother, 102, alongside his mother on the Isle of Wight
He added: ‘The figures show that both disadvantaged, and indeed the overall numbers of students who’ve got 9,000 more university places confirmed than last year, 179,000 18-year-olds accepted already for university, so the figures look good in terms of students being able to go to university this year.’
Presenter Charlie Stayt suggested to Mr Shapps that he was discounting statistics indicating that children from the most deprived areas have been hardest hit by results being downgraded.
Mr Shapps responded: ‘I don’t (discount it), it’s just that I’m reading an actual statistic – 7.3 per cent more children from disadvantaged backgrounds, 18-year-olds, accepted to university this than last year, to which you’re coming back and saying I don’t agree with that, but you’re not providing me any numbers.
‘So yes, I do think that more students from disadvantaged backgrounds are going to university and overall, as I say, we’ve got more been accepted to university than previously as well.
‘So look, those are the figures. If you’ve got up some other figures then tell me, but that’s the numbers I’ve got in front of me.’
Mr Williamson had faced pressure to address the ‘huge injustice’ of the 2020 results by head teachers and the Labour Party after data revealed that the marks of poorer pupils in England were more likely to be downgraded by the algorithm.
Sources close to Mr Williamson say that there will be no U-turn, adding that the model used had been the fairest way to deal with the matter, given the circumstances.
They highlighted Ofqual figures that revealed nearly twice the number of pupils would be awarded A*s than in previous years if ‘optimistic’ grades were permitted to stand.
Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has written to Mr Williamson saying he is ‘very concerned at the publication of, and issues surrounding, [this year’s] A-level results’.
He said: ‘The Government’s last-minute decision to revise A-Level grading options is the latest in a series of bewildering exam announcements at a time when pupils need clarity and certainty.
‘I am particularly concerned at disadvantaged pupils and those in state sixth-form and further education colleges losing out disproportionately.
‘It is absolutely vital that ministers now provide clear information on the process for contesting grades to ensure every teenager receives a mark which reflects their effort and ability – both this week with A-levels and next week with GCSEs.
‘I urge you, on behalf on London’s next generation, to look at what Scotland has done, to admit that mistakes have been made, and to ensure that teachers’ assessments are properly taken into account as these provide overall a far fairer way of attributing grades compared to what we have seen today.
‘I would welcome your urgent response to this letter.’
One Government source said: ‘There are always people who do not get their predicted grades. People seem to be operating with the notion that everyone should just get what their teachers think they should have got.’