Two exam boards have defended their moderation processes after a slew of teachers claimed their students’ A-level history coursework grades were inexplicably “annihilated”.
History teachers have complained to Schools Week that coursework moderation by OCR and AQA this year was the harshest they’ve ever seen.
They claim a number of students missed out on first-place university picks as a result, with multiple claiming some pupils were docked 10 marks or more out of a possible 40.
But OCR said it has not “detected anything unusual” about the level of moderation this year. AQA insisted its moderation for A-level history “found almost three-quarters of centres did not require any alteration to their marking, broadly in line with previous years”.
For non-exam assessment (NEA), schools mark the coursework and exam boards moderate it. But some students have been docked more than a quarter of the available marks this year, teachers claimed.
‘Harsh’ marks reduced students to tears
Samuel, a head of history at a London secondary school who did not want his full name published, said that in his 16-year teaching career, his non-exam assessment grades for history have never been marked down before.
But this year all 10 of his students were marked down by around 12 to 15 marks by AQA for the history coursework component, he claimed.
“I literally can’t believe it, I’m shocked, I got a 70 per cent pass rate but the highest grade was a C (overall for history due to the lower NEA scores),” added the teacher.
“If you think a grade boundary is like one mark, that’s a lot of students that have been essentially cheated out of a B,” he said.
“So all of my students who have passed haven’t got the UCAS points to go on to the universities they wanted… it’s made a big impact on their lives.”
Adam, head of history at an outer London secondary school, has also “never seen so many student marks reduced” through the AQA moderation process.
“I have had years of unchanged scores and so have always used the same practices each year to ensure consistent outcomes for my students,” he said.
But he said about 15 of his 19-strong history cohort this year got unexpectedly low coursework marks; including a “star student” who had five marks docked from one of the “strongest” bits of history coursework the school had ever sent off.
“Some students have lost seven marks, some are saying, this has been the difference between getting their offer place or not,” he added.
While the unexpectedly harsh results were “heart-breaking for kids and humiliating for (his) department”, Adam said he had not yet received the moderator’s report, leaving him unable to explain the discrepancies to “distraught” students and their “angry” parents.
He said teachers’ last memory of some of these students will be “them going home in tears”.
‘Absurd and gut-wrenching’ moderation changes
Rosie Hainsworth, a history teacher at a school in the East Midlands, has only ever seen tweaks to NEA marking once or twice previously.
But she was “appalled” to find scores were widely “pulled down” after moderation, with some reduced by up to 12 marks out of 40.
She said almost all of their 25 students were downgraded but “on a sliding scale” with those with the highest initial marks the worst hit.
“All students who had received 17 out of 40 or more were downgraded significantly,” she added.
As a result, she claimed that none of the school’s A-level students got above a low B in their coursework, “despite sizeable percentages achieving A/A* in each of the examined units”.
Several students missed out on their overall grade due to the “extreme decrease” in coursework grades. “Many were understandably devastated upon receiving their results,” she added, saying the outcomes were “simultaneously absurd and gut-wrenching”.
“Having overseen this unit for eight years, I can say with all confidence that our internal processes have only improved since its inception, as well as our experience in delivering the skills required,” she added.
“We hope OCR realises the urgent need to review their own processes, in particular the consistency of moderation, and indeed of guidance provided, so that no more hardworking students are further disadvantaged in future.”
Elsewhere, Tom, a history teacher at a secondary school in Hertfordshire, said “some of the changes at my school were quite incredible”.
Half of the school’s A-level history appear to have been had “drastic reductions to coursework marks during moderation by OCR,” he claimed.
Students getting A*s and As on exams got Cs and Ds in their coursework. In total, Schools Week is aware of at least six schools that have been severely impacted.
An AQA spokesperson said its moderation of centre assessment for the subject found “almost three-quarters of centres did not require any alteration to their marking, which is broadly in line with previous years”.
But they invited feedback from teachers, adding schools can also apply for a review of moderation.
An OCR spokesperson added: “We haven’t detected anything unusual about the level of moderation in this year’s coursework, which remains at a similar level to the previous year.
“Students and teachers have again performed really well at A Level History this year and produced some excellent results.
“The variety and volume of history coursework means there will always be some moderating of marks to ensure grading is consistent nationally and across years. The vast majority of mark changes are minor.”
In 30 years of teaching I have never seen moderated marks change after asking for a review.
AQA and OCR leave teachers without knowledge to help next years groups. Often nothing will have changed in the school – same teachers and same process. The difference, the moderator.
I have been teaching the coursework option for over 20 years. In those 20 years it changed slightly but it has always been the most difficult piece of work that students do in History. The exam boards are quite open about that. However, it goes too far in that regard. Something I’ ve spoken to leading historians about. The exam board is basically asking 17 and 18 year olds to critically evaluate historians arguments to achieve top grades. Something that many university students struggle with. Also it isn’t a level playing field. A few years ago, during an exam board feedback day, I spoke to another teacher from a private school about his teaching. He only taught the coursework. No other classes at all. Some schools will be able to give their students more guidance, resources and support.
Now to get back to this year’s debacle. For the past two years our moderation was passed without change. Before that if there were any changes it was only ever one or two marks within banding. Last year we gave a student 35 out of 40 and it was marked up to 40. Before that we had always been wary as once we gave a student 40 and it was marked down to 36. Our rule of thumb became ” don’t give anyone 40 even if you think it is otherwise it may get marked down and prompt the moderator to reduce everything else”. Low and behold this year we had a student whose essay was exceptional and the best I had read from our school. Given the moderation of the previous year we were more confident about giving 40. Needless to say it was marked down by 8 marks. The rest were put on a sliding scale. The overall result was that 10 out of 32 students missed out on their predicted and expected grade. That was not in line with their predictions or our historic performance as a school. I have appealled it. However, what a lot of these threads miss out is that to appeal coursework you have to get the permission of all the students. That is no easy feat and I am guessing something which the exam boards hope would put centres off appealing. I am a strong advocate of stopping coursework altogether and in the day of AI feel that it is now a priority. I wouldn’t normally write on these sites as the job of exam boards is not an easy one – but this is a bit of a mess this year and needs addressed for many centres.
Everyone in my class this year including me got sizeable downgrades to our history marks, with mine personally going from a 39 to a 33 and everyone else seeing a similar decrease. Our history teacher was shocked. Luckily it didn’t affect my choice of uni but I can only imagine how horrible this must be for students who lost their places due to this and teachers who have suddenly seen their students results decimated
This happened at my daughters school in Northumberland again causing students to miss out on their first choice universities. It would be great to know how many schools are affected and the justification for it. If the exam board are stating that work is being over generously marked then why are the same students achieving A and A* in the exam papers that are independently marked and in schools where in previous years the same staff have had no moderation they now have sweeping changes made?
It seems a real lottery and the exam boards should be accountable to justify their decisions.
Our school has appealed the shocking deduction in marks and we have just discovered that the appeal has been unsucessful. Anyone who received a mark above 30/40 had approx 10 marks deducted. However students with marks in the 20s received no deduction.
I understand the school is planning on taking this further. My son went from a Grade A to a B and has missed his place at university and now has to take an unplanned gap year.
I am considering suing the Board for negligence and contemplating a Group Action.
I am putting this out there in case any other schools or parents would be interested in taking this further.
We had our marks drastically reduced this year – first time in fourteen years – by OCR. Of a cohort of 7, 3 saw their overall grade go down. The rank order was changed in a way that made absolutely no sense at all. The impact on the students and staff has been horrendous and students in current A level years are now worried what will happen to them, and if their teachers know what they are doing (we have a highly experienced staff team, and we do know). This is likely to also cause an issue with recruitment to A level. The NEA is extremely difficult for students, they and we work hard to get them through it. I cannot believe that OCR have behaved in such a high handed manner with no regard for the consequences for students, families and teachers. A despondent and devastated head of history.
I know this relates to History, but has this impacted anyone in A level English Lit?