I think that the grade statistics have settled in about the right place for GCSE Mathematics to recognise students having a good day in the exam.

In very broad terms, every normal year there’s about 1% of the cohort scoring a total mark that’s one below the boundary for 4.

1/6

Most students aren’t on one mark below the grade boundary for 4 because they’ve done the best they can, they’re there because they’ve made a silly error somewhere, often in one of the first five questions. Or they’ve panicked on the working for a simple calculation...

2/6

Imagine if you could appeal on those grounds? “Adam made a daft mistake, one he knows he shouldn’t have. He’s a grade 4 student really, and he promises he’ll never make such an error again.” That might save some heartache for students and teachers.

3/6

And then there’s another 1% of students a mark below that, two from the boundary and another 1% below that - they do tend to bunch around the grade 4 boundary mark.

4/6

So how many daft mistakes should we allow? One, two? Perhaps up to two per paper and then we’d see the pass rate at grade 4 go up by around 6%. Which is more or less what we have seen. Then less at other grades where there aren’t so many one mark below the boundary.

5/6

In conclusion, the grade distribution has allowed students to show what they can do on a good day, even though they haven’t had a good day to show us. The best we can be to those students is magnanimous in the circumstances and perhaps this crisis has now allowed that.

6/6

I should have concluded, of course, that the process has shown, at least for GCSE Maths, that teachers have been able to provide CAGs which have been honest and accurate and that’s a huge testament to everyone’s professionalism. We’ll hear no teacher bashing about this!

7/7