If the system is dependent on exams to allocate the grades, but it can’t have the exams, then it can’t allocate the grades. Fitting grades to a predetermined distribution is a much easier task, so it’s not surprising that it achieved this aim. Which raises the question: when we see a big gap between the teachers’ predicted grades, and the “adjusted” versions meant to bring those grades into line with previous years’ exam results, why would we necessarily believe that it was the teachers who were wrong and the exam results that were right? Exam results are not by any means a fact of nature. • Dan Davies is a former Bank of England economist and investment banking analyst

Source: The Guardian August 15, 2020 12:00 UTC