Government “must have a Plan B” for next year’s GCSEs and A-levels, AI summit hears

Ministers need to have a “Plan B” in place if England is to avoid another crisis over GCSE and A-level grades next year, a conference of artificial intelligence experts has heard.

And the plan must include consultation and engagement of heads, teachers, parents and students to avoid “having a generation questioning the validity of their own exam results”, the three-day Global Summit on the Ethics of AI in Education was told. The event was hosted by the Institute for Ethical AI in Education whose co-founder, Professor Rose Luckin, is director of EDUCATE Ventures.

The online session, What Happens When it All Goes Wrong? and chaired by Lord Jim Knight, a former schools minister, discussed the implications of what the government described as a “mutant algorithm” that resulted in thousands of students receiving lower than expected GCSE and A-level grades, and missing out on university places.

Baroness Estelle Morris, Secretary of State for Education and Skills during the Tony Blair government, suggested that Ministers needed to act quickly to put in place a Plan B system of assessment in case examinations needed to be cancelled again. She warned that “a year is not a long time to put in a new system because there is no opportunity to trial it”.

Baroness Morris added: “There is no excuse. They know that next summer they might have this problem again. We’ve had discussions about the algorithm, external examinations and teacher assessment but they don’t seem to have put any steps in place to use teacher assessment more effectively.”

Baroness Morris, who resigned from her post as Secretary of State in 2002, partly as a result of a row over A-level grade inflation, said that “an army of assessors to check teacher assessment” could be put in place to ensure that the system was rigorous. However, Ministers “want to show that they are tough on standards and assessment and don’t want to compromise”.

She added: “They [the Department for Education] should have done themselves a favour and respected the view of head teachers and kept students on their side. But they made an announcement that exams are going ahead next year and now they have to win hearts. Sometimes it is better to do it the other way round.”

Trish Shaw, of Beyond Reach Consulting and an expert on AI and data ethics, questioned what data was used to develop the algorithm, whether the impact on students was fully considered and what engagement there was with organisations such as UCAS and Universities UK which had to deal with the fall-out of the grading controversy.

Ms Shaw said one of her biggest concerns were the ethical issues, and the impact on young people and their education, life chances and choices. Many had already entered legal and moral commitments over university choices which then had to be changed because they failed to get into the university of their choice.

She feared the controversy had undermined young people’s faith and confidence in the examinations system, the government and other organisations involved, leaving them disillusioned and disengaged.

“We should not have a generation of young people questioning the validity of their own exam results. We have to look at the data and the algorithm system” Ms Shaw added.

Among the panellists was Curtis Parfitt-Ford, who instigated a legal challenge against the Department for Education following results day which he later withdrew when Ministers confirmed students’ teacher assessed grades would stand.

He said he was against the use of algorithms for working out exam grades, but if they were to be used then better engagement was needed with students and teachers.

“If you’re the first year to use a new system for grading, and in emergency circumstances, there will always be a question mark over whether you got what you deserved,” he said.

“No-one knows me and my work better than those who taught me for years. It [teacher assessment] is not an ideal scenario but there is no better alternative, especially as there is no coursework.”

The summit website will be active for another month for anyone wishing to catch up on the debates and discussions.