Predicted grades are a lottery of privilege where Black students almost always lose
The cancelling of A-Level and GCSE examinations this year has resurged conversations on the inherent inequalities that predicted grades pose for Black students. We must plan for life after COVID-19 and scrap this archaic system.
From primary to higher education, systemic barriers vigorously and consistently deny Black students the opportunity of a level playing field — or as this individualistic society likes to call it, meritocracy. It is been long-held by many African and Caribbean elders that education is a vital part of life and therefore highly regarded — many of us will have memories of our parents encouraging us to study hard. But what is also long-held, is the belief that we must ‘work twice as hard, to get just as far,’ an adage that has very real implications in 21st century UK schooling.
Over the past decade or so there has been a huge influx of research and reporting that shines a very revealing light on the covert nature of racism in education, bringing to the fore, conversations on attainment gaps, expulsion rates and now, predicted grading. By simply mapping out these key areas of student life (and more), we can see that through the education system, success and progression becomes a lottery of privilege, in which Black students almost always lose, whilst white, middle and upper-class students cash in.
In addition to closing schools and colleges, the Government announced scrapping all summer-term exams this year — GCSE, A-Level and primary assessments — in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Initial plans proposed that teachers work alongside exam-boards to manufacture predicted grades, in place of grades obtained through examination. This announcement re-ignited a debate on the efficacy of predicted grades and their inherent biases.
As we near what would have been exam period for over a million students in England, exam regulator Ofqual announced a self-described more ‘fair’ and ‘robust’ system to temporarily take its place, instead using teacher assessments, class rankings and past performance. Whilst the new system does not rely solely on predicted grading, they do state that they are “asking schools and colleges to use their professional experience to make a fair and objective judgement of the grade they believe a student would have achieved had they sat their exams this year.” In whatever way you disguise predicted grading, we are left with the government and educators scrambling to find the most objective way of facilitating what, in its essence, is a biased task.
This debate has urged us to look beyond COVID-19, in examining why we still use predicted grades as markers of intellect, when they are inherently biased and notoriously inaccurate.
In particular, we must examine and challenge the impact that this has on Black students, who are consistently failed by our education system both historically and in the future if we continue to deploy this fundamentally flawed system.
Neil Brownhill who started a petition calling for predicted grades, misleadingly claims that “teacher predictions will likely be a more accurate reflection of the vast majority of students’ educational journey.” But this of course, is evidentially not true. In March 2020 UCL’s Centre for Educational Policy and Equalising Opportunities found that only 16% of A-Level grade predictions are accurate — an extraordinarily low rate, with potential life-long implications on students selecting and gaining entry into their chosen universities, and ultimately their career paths.
In only 39.1% of cases predicted grades for Black students are accurate.
According to the Department for Business Innovation and Skills, they are also the most under-predicted and over-predicted ethnicity at a rate of 7.1% and 53.8% respectively. By contrast, white students had the most accurate grade predictions, at 53%. Let’s break this down, over-predicted grades are not a good thing, students with overpredicted grades may end up with no secured university placements if they do not reach their predicted grades, or they may have to endure the process of ‘clearing’ which is notoriously stressful for applicants whose future relies on a phone call. Underpredicted grades are also transparently terrible — students may end up not applying to university, or enrolling on courses that do not challenge them intellectually as a result of being predicted lower grades than their ability — everyone should have the right to the best level of education. Both outcomes have an immeasurable impact on their future choices and paths.
After the fact, Black students come up against the ‘big boss’ in a not-so-final showdown. The heavily-guardian ivory-tower, or as some know it, the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS), continue the tradition of structural racism. Between 2013, and 2017 Black students’ university applications were 22 times more likely to be investigated by their ‘verification’ service than their white counterparts, despite making up only 9% of all applicants. Ironically, UCAS state that their investigations are to “help prevent anyone gaining an unfair advantage,” but they unsurprisingly remain “unclear” as to why their “robust” process does exactly the opposite.
The very concept of racism is often inaccurately equated to levels of education, therefore educational environments often lack widespread recognition that racism does, in fact, permeate these spaces.
Which means there is an abundance of inaction when it comes to anti-racist praxis. Therefore seemingly innocent words such as ‘trust,’ ‘fair’ and ‘honest[ty],’ which featured heavily throughout the initial government announcement and petition are disingenuous. These are notions loaded with privilege, which if you read the small print, are not afforded to Black students.
The experiences of others are examples of how pervasive this problem is. Remi Joseph-Salisbury, a sociologist at Manchester University and member of the Race Justice Network, explains how subjective predictions affect Black students prior to GCSE:
“Not only can such judgements affect the educational streaming of students — that is, the ability groups students are placed into — but also the level of exams students are entered for, and, in turn, the grades that students are able to acquire.”
This is evidenced by research which shows that one-third of Black students at the age of 14 are excluded from sitting upper-tier exams, thus determining which GCSE’s they can select. Joseph-Salisbury continues “The subjective views of teachers are shaped by racialized and classed ideologies that construct Black students, and working-class students, as being less academically capable.”
This is an experience also shared by Melissa Cummings-Quarry, co-founder of Black Girls Book Club, who denounced the petition. She recalls her a-level teacher being removed from her class due to concerns of “certain pupils coursework [being] marked incredibly low,” despite “consistently achiev[ing] the highest marks in the exams.” Years later Cummings-Quarry
“found out that the teacher who had predicted me a D had done the same to all other non-white students who had taken her class.”
The use of predicted grades has always, whether intentionally or not, served to uphold the fortresses of institutional racism. Its archaic system is based on nothing more than a total belief in the subjective predictions of educators. This is not a new issue, but one that has been brought to the fore by COVID-19. I am calling on the Education Secretary Gavin Williamson to scrap grade predictions entirely and reform the school-to-university admissions process, allowing entry offers to be made on the real, tangible outcomes of student assessments and not the predictions of their teachers. He states that his “priority now is to ensure no young person faces a barrier when it comes to moving onto the next stage of their lives,” well let’s put him to the task.
