It’s nearly the end of the academic year and the teacher-assessed grades (TAGs) nightmare is (hopefully) behind us.
Even though it’s behind me, I still find myself wondering if they were the right thing to do. I think many would agree that they were an improvement on the centre-assessed grades (CAGs) from last year, but there were still some flaws that we need to consider if we are in a similar predicament to next year.
While I acknowledge that hindsight is a wonderful thing, our learners and our profession deserve timely decisions that are robust and support us in examining with integrity. And in my humble, mere lecturer opinion, that was not the case consistently across the country.
FE leadership: ‘The days of FE provider autonomy are numbered,’ says Bewick
More by Kate Watts: Should we assess spoken language in GCSE English?
TAGs, you’re it: Why this is a game teachers can’t win
Firstly, are TAGs awarded this year comparable with CAGs? Is a grade 4 awarded last year comparable with a grade 4 that will be awarded this year? After all, learners awarded CAGs last year wouldn’t have had the opportunity to sit a final assessment compared with learners this academic year. Would awarding CAGs for two years running have been more consistent and fair?
GCSEs 2021: The questions we’re left with about teacher-assessed grades
What about the schools and colleges that decided not to give their learners a final assessment compared with establishments that did? I’m sure most learners will have sat a final assessment, but I’m sure there are a few that chose not to for a variety of reasons. Is it fair that some have been judged on their mocks?
As far as I’m aware, the organisation of the assessments was up to the individual establishments, which means there would have been massive inconsistencies across the country. I overheard that one college had a mini-assessment a week for each GCSE English language question. Others had two assessments, one per GCSE English paper. The flexibility around this decision was welcomed, but at what cost?
Grade inflation is another grey area. It was an issue last year and I’m sure it will be this year as well. It will be remarkably interesting to compare the results of 2021-22 to the previous two academic years. Having to assess a large cohort of learners in a short space of time is going to affect the quality and accuracy of marking. Some teachers reported staying up late into the night to mark, while others gave up entire weekends to meet the tight deadlines.
While I personally didn’t find marking the TAGs too horrendous, I know others found it a real challenge and I wouldn’t be overjoyed at repeating the experience. I was pleased (and relieved) when education secretary Gavin Williamson announced that he wants GCSE and A-level exams to go ahead next year, with “adjustments and mitigations” for those in Year 10 and 12, but will these adjustments and mitigations extend to those resitting GCSE English or maths at college?
On a slightly different note, is one year’s worth of additional tutoring funded by the government really going to make a difference to learners who have historically been weak at English and/or maths and who have missed out on months’ worth of teaching? This needed to be a two- or three- or even five-year scheme for it to really be effective.
The government must have several contingency plans in place in case exams need to be modified or cannot resume next year, and we need information in a timelier manner. The announcement that exams were cancelled happened in January, and for weeks we had no idea what was happening and instead were drip-fed information that made planning impossible. If the government wants good quality results from schools and colleges during this pandemic and beyond, then the assessment planning, preparation and implementation must improve.
Kate Watts is a further education lecturer at a college in London
