The Student Room Group

A unified exam board - equal for all

Why exactly do we have so many exam boards. Each asks different questions and work from different specifications. Many believe that the boards are not equal in their levels of difficulty so how we can ever compare one another result when an A* from a board such as Edexcel is unequal to possibly an A* from AQA for example.

Surely it would make more sense for the entire country to follow one specification and take one exam. No higher or lower and tier allowing everyone to be compared equally. This would allow us to assess the ability of each candidate without other factors effecting the score of each student.

What are your opinions on this idea of a unified exam board? If you disagree with these ideas please try and give a reason for the sake of a good debate

Scroll to see replies

I think it's a matter of preference and some schools have different opinions on what their students should (or shouldn't) learn - such as the content in the Edexcel and AQA Science (1,2 and 3) courses.
Original post by Flyer24
Why exactly do we have so many exam boards. Each asks different questions and work from different specifications. Many believe that the boards are not equal in their levels of difficulty so how we can ever compare one another result when an A* from a board such as Edexcel is unequal to possibly an A* from AQA for example.

Surely it would make more sense for the entire country to follow one specification and take one exam. No higher or lower and tier allowing everyone to be compared equally. This would allow us to assess the ability of each candidate without other factors effecting the score of each student.

What are your opinions on this idea of a unified exam board? If you disagree with these ideas please try and give a reason for the sake of a good debate


That means that the unified exam board could make a ridiculous paper, and nobody could do anything about it. For example, if a school isn't happy with the exams, they can change exam board - it gives them an incentive to create fair papers so that they can have their money.
Reply 3
Original post by Fractite
I think it's a matter of preference and some schools have different opinions on what their students should (or shouldn't) learn - such as the content in the Edexcel and AQA Science (1,2 and 3) courses.


I do accept the idea of fair content with schools benefitting from a choice of exam boards. However, I believe the disparity between some of the information used by different exam boards means schools being given the option of easier exam boards for their pupils by picking their content encourages this lack of equality in the eventual results achieved by the students.
Reply 4
Original post by danielwinstanley
That means that the unified exam board could make a ridiculous paper, and nobody could do anything about it. For example, if a school isn't happy with the exams, they can change exam board - it gives them an incentive to create fair papers so that they can have their money.


While i take the point that exams would be technically harder as they are written by one board. The exam would be comprised of the usual content, it's just that all student do this one exam. If everyone found the exam difficult then the grade boundaries would be representative of the level of difficulty thus still producing results that can be compared to one another.
Original post by Flyer24
While i take the point that exams would be technically harder as they are written by one board. The exam would be comprised of the usual content, it's just that all student do this one exam. If everyone found the exam difficult then the grade boundaries would be representative of the level of difficulty thus still producing results that can be compared to one another.


But exam boards currently have content, and some don't fully follow it. I understand the lower grade boundaries but it would have to be a long test to accommodate the high A* student down to those getting Fs.
Reply 6
What an exam board can put in a specification is quite tightly controlled by OFQUAL (some exam boards are currently on their 5th draft of the new specs as OFQUAL keeps rejecting them) and not that different. Similarly, the grade boundaries are policed by OFQUAL to maintain parity of standards between the boards. That said, some disparities exist but it does at least mean there's a market and schools can go elsewhere if they are unhappy with the product from one board.
Original post by Flyer24
Why exactly do we have so many exam boards. Each asks different questions and work from different specifications. Many believe that the boards are not equal in their levels of difficulty so how we can ever compare one another result when an A* from a board such as Edexcel is unequal to possibly an A* from AQA for example.

Surely it would make more sense for the entire country to follow one specification and take one exam. No higher or lower and tier allowing everyone to be compared equally. This would allow us to assess the ability of each candidate without other factors effecting the score of each student.

What are your opinions on this idea of a unified exam board? If you disagree with these ideas please try and give a reason for the sake of a good debate

To be honest I agree with you, but one thing to consdier is this: some exam boards are actually private companies and so noone can really stop them from starting up. Of course, the government could just not allow all boards but one to be recognised as "formal education", but that cannot stop it really. I mean, if a new company, which we will call "Exams Unlimited" for the sake of this example, makes exams which universities credit and believe in, who can stop them? If universities generally recognise them, all that governments can do is to ban them - which would be virtually impossible and quite frankly ridiculous. So from a practical point of view, many exist, as they are profit making companies.
Original post by danielwinstanley
That means that the unified exam board could make a ridiculous paper, and nobody could do anything about it. For example, if a school isn't happy with the exams, they can change exam board - it gives them an incentive to create fair papers so that they can have their money.

Yeah precisely; my shcool got fed up with english AQA igcse and so my year is the last year doing it. My school also prefers us to do some of the harder boards "in preparation for A level". We also mostly do iGCSE as my school does not like controlled assessments (we do not do any) and also many subjects dislike coursework.
Reply 8
Original post by Compost
What an exam board can put in a specification is quite tightly controlled by OFQUAL (some exam boards are currently on their 5th draft of the new specs as OFQUAL keeps rejecting them) and not that different. Similarly, the grade boundaries are policed by OFQUAL to maintain parity of standards between the boards. That said, some disparities exist but it does at least mean there's a market and schools can go elsewhere if they are unhappy with the product from one board.



I do agree with the notion that schools should have options and they should be able to get the best available specification for their students. However, I believe that the number of exam boards that exist currently allows some exam boards to produce papers that are far easier then other boards, through repetitive questions or the emphasis on areas such as coursework that each board offers. I could possibly understand the presence of 2-3 boards but having upwards of 6 exam boards allows uncontrollable disparity between the marks that different students achieve
Original post by Flyer24
Why exactly do we have so many exam boards. Each asks different questions and work from different specifications. Many believe that the boards are not equal in their levels of difficulty so how we can ever compare one another result when an A* from a board such as Edexcel is unequal to possibly an A* from AQA for example.

Surely it would make more sense for the entire country to follow one specification and take one exam. No higher or lower and tier allowing everyone to be compared equally. This would allow us to assess the ability of each candidate without other factors effecting the score of each student.

What are your opinions on this idea of a unified exam board? If you disagree with these ideas please try and give a reason for the sake of a good debate


Absolutely should be the case. If all students are taught the same curriculum it helps admissions tutors at universities and also it stops the variety in knowledge of certain subjects.

Quick example (because I'm a med student) All American medical grads have to sit the USMLEs to be able to work as a Dr in the States. It is an exam written by a single board to make sure regardless of which institution you were educated at, you're all at the same minimum required standard to practice. And future employers look at the grade you achieved for certain specialties as they can rank people because you've all sat the same exam!
Original post by Flyer24
I do agree with the notion that schools should have options and they should be able to get the best available specification for their students. However, I believe that the number of exam boards that exist currently allows some exam boards to produce papers that are far easier then other boards, through repetitive questions or the emphasis on areas such as coursework that each board offers. I could possibly understand the presence of 2-3 boards but having upwards of 6 exam boards allows uncontrollable disparity between the marks that different students achieve


Upwards of 6? Realistically there are only 4 (AQA, Edexcel, OCR and WJEC - no one in Great Britain really uses CCEA) and not all of them offer all subjects.
I understand what you mean. But at the end of the day, the best students get the best results. The differences between exam boards, as (for example) the style of questions suiting certain people, it's only going to create a few mark difference. And no University or Sixth Form decides a place based on a few marks, so these disparities are almost useless.

Before you get to University, none of the content is particularly challenging, just lengthy. Changing an exam board will not improve your grades, you will still achieve a top top grade if you're a top student.

Also, for example, I sat an A2 module at AS level for one of my maths qualifications, whereas most schools sit one of the easier AS modules. I still don't see that as unfair, as Universities can see the modules we're taking. They're able to account for the differences. Plus, I've never met anywhere that takes GCSE's particularly seriously beyond the general "you must've not failed".

I just think that the difference in your score if you were to take the "best exam board for you" (if that even exists) would be so insignificant it's hardly worth the debate.

Nobody is ever a couple marks off their target for a reason (outside the extremes of course) that could not have been solved by trying harder.
Reply 12
Original post by Compost
Upwards of 6? Realistically there are only 4 (AQA, Edexcel, OCR and WJEC - no one in Great Britain really uses CCEA) and not all of them offer all subjects.




I'd still argue that 4 different boards is excessive. My initial quote of 6 includes boards commonly used by foreign students who then emigrate to country before they enter university. Thus putting themselves in a situation where they need to be judged alongside students that have gone through the education system in this country.
Reply 13
Original post by ComputerMaths97
I understand what you mean. But at the end of the day, the best students get the best results. The differences between exam boards, as (for example) the style of questions suiting certain people, it's only going to create a few mark difference. And no University or Sixth Form decides a place based on a few marks, so these disparities are almost useless.

Before you get to University, none of the content is particularly challenging, just lengthy. Changing an exam board will not improve your grades, you will still achieve a top top grade if you're a top student.

Also, for example, I sat an A2 module at AS level for one of my maths qualifications, whereas most schools sit one of the easier AS modules. I still don't see that as unfair, as Universities can see the modules we're taking. They're able to account for the differences. Plus, I've never met anywhere that takes GCSE's particularly seriously beyond the general "you must've not failed".

I just think that the difference in your score if you were to take the "best exam board for you" (if that even exists) would be so insignificant it's hardly worth the debate.

Nobody is ever a couple marks off their target for a reason (outside the extremes of course) that could not have been solved by trying harder.



Thats's a fair response. My question is more of a comment on inequality all ready visible in the education system rather than a complaint that exam boards are the reason for failure. While i do hold the opinion that if we were intent on being extremely fair then we should scrap the ideas of coursework and base all results on a final set of exams at the end of Year 11 and Year 13 rather than breaking the exam up. However, I do understand your point that the disparity may only be a few marks in the majority of cases.
For Northern Ireland, CCEA's GCSEs are more specific to our region. That's probably the case for Wales too. Our history includes Northern Irish modules, they offer Irish GCSEs and sometimes different random exam questions will relate to Northern Ireland.
Reply 15
Original post by panicattheteacup
For Northern Ireland, CCEA's GCSEs are more specific to our region. That's probably the case for Wales too. Our history includes Northern Irish modules, they offer Irish GCSEs and sometimes different random exam questions will relate to Northern Ireland.


I wouldn't propose 1 exam board for the whole of the UK as it would be unfair to ask for specific detail on a particular region. Perhaps, an exam board for each nation. So 1 for Scotland, 1 for Wales, 1 for Northern Ireland, 1 for England
Original post by Compost
Upwards of 6? Realistically there are only 4 (AQA, Edexcel, OCR and WJEC - no one in Great Britain really uses CCEA) and not all of them offer all subjects.


Our school uses CIE a lot. I'd count CIE for sure.
Overall I think that the worst that can happen between exam boards if you put in enough work is a one grade difference, and the fact is that because it is unlikely to occur often, that will often only happen in a max of 1/4 of your subjects.
If you do 10 GCSE's, then that means you could still get 7 A*s and around 3A's, which even Oxbridge will take seriously...
Original post by Flyer24
Why exactly do we have so many exam boards. Each asks different questions and work from different specifications. Many believe that the boards are not equal in their levels of difficulty so how we can ever compare one another result when an A* from a board such as Edexcel is unequal to possibly an A* from AQA for example.

Surely it would make more sense for the entire country to follow one specification and take one exam. No higher or lower and tier allowing everyone to be compared equally. This would allow us to assess the ability of each candidate without other factors effecting the score of each student.

What are your opinions on this idea of a unified exam board? If you disagree with these ideas please try and give a reason for the sake of a good debate


Certainly! I agree 100%. There should also be ONE tier for all too which is capable of assessing both lower ability candidates and higher ability candidates. I think it is ridiculous that this is already not the case.
Original post by Kryptonian
Certainly! I agree 100%. There should also be ONE tier for all too which is capable of assessing both lower ability candidates and higher ability candidates. I think it is ridiculous that this is already not the case.


How simple would it be if we all did GCSE Biology - no change between iGCSE and GCSE; no change between higher tier and lower tier, no change between additional/core/double/triple and no differences between AQA, OCR etc...?
Original post by Martins1
How simple would it be if we all did GCSE Biology - no change between iGCSE and GCSE; no change between higher tier and lower tier, no change between additional/core/double/triple and no differences between AQA, OCR etc...?


Only one exam would have to be designed so quite simple?
Everyone should have to do triple.

Quick Reply

Latest