Predicted Grades- Help or Hinder?
Posted on: February 3, 2013
Throughout schooling, a lot of us, if not all of us have experienced being given predicted grades that we are expected to achieve at the end of each term or year. What are these grades based on? Are they giving something to aim towards and motivate us, or does it have the opposite effect?
Students generally receive predicted or expected grades midway through high school, around age 14. Predicted grades are used for GCSE’s, AS and A levels, but are also used for other examinations in college as well. However, these grades are formulated from teachers making a “professional judgement” about a student based on previous achievements in school. These are completely subjective. As there is no clear equation or formula to produce these predicted grades, is it fair that they are frequently used on university application forms? Do they give students something to work or aim towards?
Personally I don’t think that these grades give students something to aim towards or should be used in such an important application as there is no exact way of producing them. Research from UCAS suggests that 46.7% of the predicted grades given (and used on university application forms) are over estimated (http://www.ucasresearch.com/documents/Predicted_Grades_2005.
pdf) shown in the table. This was also suggested by a piece of research produced by Portsmouth University, calculating that expected results were only accurate 45% of the time; implying that teachers were being overly generous with grades in order for students to receive offers from universities of their choice. If these grades are completely subjective and susceptible to errors, why are they still used? Is there a better system that could be used instead, as predicted grades aren’t used into Higher Education, and applications into Postgraduate courses want to know what you can, and already have achieved?
Predicted grades are requested by the exam board for a couple of reasons:
- To check for discrepancies in the exam paper; if a student is predicted an A and only receives a D, this could indicate the paper was too hard if it happens on a frequent basis,
- The predicted grade could potentially be used as the final grade if the student falls ill or suffers bereavement around the exam period.
But then again, if these predicted grades are subjective, is it a true representation of the student’s ability? In my opinion, more than likely not.
So, looking at these grades from a students’ perspective, are these grades going to help in other ways? Could the predicted grades form an aim or target for the students to reach? If a target is set high, it gives the student something to work towards; although it has been shown to increase the level of stress and anxiety during an exam, actually lowering the student’s performance level. So these high predicted grades may get them an offer into university (when used at A-level), but they can actually hinder a pupil achieving what they are truly capable of. But looking at things from the opposite end of the scale, students being given lower predicted grades have actually been found to achieve grades a lot higher than expected, so having the opposite effect (Snell, Thorpe, Hoskins, & Chevalier, 2008). Pourgonabadi (2008) suggested that self-perception of abilities and their own expectations were key roles in motivation, and provided the basis of their achievements.
Although there have been two decades of research into motivation in education, we still know very little about it (Renchler, 1992). We are all “universally indifferent”; different things motivate us, and we all achieve in different ways. Maybe there is potential for the system of predicted grades to be changed to aspirational grades, making them more personal to each student and allow them to achieve what they think is appropriate- not aiming towards someone else’s opinion.
References
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/mortarboard/2008/dec/09/alevels-accesstouniversity
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/08/predicted-grades-levels-system
http://www.schoolfort.com/a-level/a-level-predicted-grades.html
Click to access Predicted_Grades_2005.pdf
Pourgonabadi, H. (2008).Cooperative Students on Intelligence Believe and Self-Efficacy Collage Students with
High and Low Academic Achievement. Dissertation for Postgraduate in Educational Psychology. Birjand: Azad
University, Branch of Birjand.
Renchler. R. (1992). Student Motivation, School Culture, and Academic Achievement What School Leaders Can Do. Trends & Issues.
Snell.M., Thorpe. A., Hoskins. S., & Chevalier. A. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions and A‐level performance: is there any evidence of systematic bias? Oxford Review of Education.
9 Responses to "Predicted Grades- Help or Hinder?"
February 5, 2013 at 3:11 pm
Really interesting blog, after weighing up both arguments for whether prediction grades are a help or hindrance and I’ve come to the conclusion that despite having some advantages as you mention they have a major flaw which is to the of detriment to students.
This flaw is that when a student is set a prediction grade that is low for example being predicted a D at GCSE. This can be damaging to the pupil as it can act as a self fulfilling prophecy where the pupil settles for the low grade because they think that’s all they can achieve, when in fact they could do so much better (Merton, 1948).
Also if pupils are set predicted grades that are low then there is the potential for teachers to only teach them to hit that standard. So instead of giving them advanced material so they can hit the top grades, they only receive basic instruction that will get them to hit their targets.
I’ll leave you with a quote from Clement Stone on which neatly sums up my views on setting target grades for pupils ‘Always aim for the moon, even if you miss, you’ll land among the stars’ i.e. Always get pupils to aim to hit the maximum grade possible
February 7, 2013 at 2:23 pm
Research has demonstrated there to be an element of individual difference when it comes to assigning predicted grades to students. Delap (1994) noted that predictions for males were slightly more over-estimated compared to predicted grades for females. Furthermore, an age bias was also demonstrated. Predictions for participants aged 19 were under-estimated compared to those for 18 year olds. This raises issues for those applying for university, if offers are contingent on predicted grades. It implies that an 18 year old male would be in a better position to get a conditional offer than a 19 year old female.
However, predicted grades at A level do serve an alternative function. If a student suddenly finds themselves in a position in which exams can not be possible, for family or health reasons, exam bodies can then award them their predicted grade. That way unfortunate students may still be able to attain higher education without wasting a further year sitting formal exams.
February 7, 2013 at 2:40 pm
I agree with you blog entirely – and really enjoyed your talk today!
Lynch (2006) found evidence that students with a high intrinsic motivation to do well (I.e. they found learning worthwhile to satisfy their curiosity for knowledge) tended to excel past those students who were extrinsically oriented (I.e. students work to satisfy external goals: good grades or to please others). Lynch’s research also found that freshman students’ grades could be predicted by self-efficacy and extrinsic goal orientation, whereas upper class students’ grades were associated with effort and self-efficacy.
Indeed Pintrich, McKeachie, and Smith (1989) observed that control, self-efficacy, and high expectancy for success were associated with greater cognitive engagement and course success.
If an intrinsically motivated student is told that they are predicted a lower grade than they first assumed, they may feel slightly downhearted but are still likely to continue their work due to an affinity for the learning itself. An extrinsically motivated student might feel more pressure as they are working to for the grades as opposed to the learning aspect of the work. However both could go on to succeed because – as you said – they want to prove to themselves and the world that they can do it.
Lynch, D.J. (2006). Motivational factors, learning strategies and resource management as predictors of course grades. College Student Journal. 40(2).
Pintrich, P. R., McKeachie, W. J., and Smith, D. (1989) The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Ann Arbor: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan.
February 7, 2013 at 7:45 pm
Educational boards split students according to their abilities in order to decide which exam paper they should sit. This divide is made due to the students predicted grades and their viewed capability as to what level of difficulty suits their specific needs. When subjected to the foundation paper there is no chance of achieving above a C grade, the papers are capped so that the highest grade you can achieve is a C grade, which is slightly de motivating for students undertaking the foundation paper. Going into an exam knowing that 100% in the exam will still only leave you with a C grade, no matter how hard you work. This is almost as if you are telling a student they cannot achieve anything, and this is very detrimental on a students learning. If you are told you can’t achieve something you will potentially give up, thus living up to the self fulfilling prophecy. However, as you mentioned, this may also cause a counter effect and give you the drive to prove everybody wrong.
February 7, 2013 at 8:52 pm
I never thought predicted grades were ever the best way for universities to assess whether they wanted to accept you or not either. I remember my teachers saying that if we needed higher predicted grades for a particular university then to talk to them about changing it. I always found this a bit counterproductive, but at the same time we had to prove that we would work harder. Looking into it setting high goals and targets often led to higher performance than having “do your best goals”, easy goals or no goal at all according to Locke et al (1980). However these goals need to be sufficiently challenging but also specific. Maybe, high predicted grades will work as a high goal that will increase performance and will therefore attain that goal, but on the other hand is a grade on a piece of paper specific enough to work as a good target.
Often I found that if a predictive grade was too above my abilities it made me worry more about the test. Test anxiety can often worsen grades but even a difficult task ,when paired with reassurance that failure is not a problem, test anxious people performed better than when it was an easy task with no reassurance (Sarason, 1961). Predicated grades do not work to reassure us so regardless of the test difficulty there we be a disadvantaged placed on us. I completely agree with you. Predicted grades are too subjective and aspirational grades seem like a much better option.
References
Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1980). Goal setting and task performance. Psychological Bulletin. 90(1). 125-152.
Sarason, I. G. (1961). The effects of anxiety and threat on the solution of a difficult task. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 62(1). 165-168.
February 7, 2013 at 9:06 pm
A really insightful blog and you have a lot of research to back up your opinion that predicted grades should not be used in schools. However, my belief is that predicted grades can be beneficial for students, although when giving the grades more clarity should be used by teachers to explain what students can do to achieve or improve this grade.
My main argument for the use of predicted grades is the fact that it is the only way that universities can really accept applications. The alternative would be waiting until August to apply to university for entrance in September, a pressure that none of us really want. However, the UCAS research you noted, whereby 46.7% of predicted grades were inflated was a shocking statistic. Clearly, as you say, there is the problem of predicted grades being based on the teachers opinion. Perhaps instead pupils and teachers should work together, identifying past results, desired grades, and methods of reaching that grade or better.
An argument against the notion that predicted grades are wrong was found by Lumb and Vail (1997) whereby only 7% of achieved grades were below the predicted grades. Due to the fact that the UCAS research is considerably more recent than Lumb and Vail’s (1997) research, this might suggest that predicted grades 20 years ago were more accurate than current predicted grades. This could be the result of increased pressue on schools for first-university choice acceptance and higher expectations for A and B grades compared to 20 years ago.
Another valid argument you made was the motivation in terms of if the predicted grade is set too high, then anxiety and depression can occur; if the predicted grade is set too low, then the student may not try. Either way, the student is made to suffer. Again, one way of solving this issue is for students and teachers to discuss the grades that they are capable of, and even if the predicted grade is lower than the student wishes, the teacher should encourage the student to aim for above that grade.
In conclusion, I believe that predicted grades should be used but would encourage caution. Teachers should ensure that students know the reasons for their predicted grades fully and be encouraged that they have the ability to go above these grades if they work hard.
References:
Lumb, A. B., & Vail, A. (1997). Applicants to medical school: The value of predicted school leaving grades. Medical Education, 31(5), 307-311.
February 7, 2013 at 11:17 pm
I too believe that using predicted grades for University application forms is the lesser of two evils, because as natberry2013 points out it would be much worse to have to wait until August to receive offers from Universities.
In a recent (2009) government report*, predicted grades were shown to be accurate the majority of the time, (51.74%). Although this does leave a large portion of inaccurate predictions, the fact remains that for the majority of students and universities, the system of using predicted grades has worked well.
The report also showed that in the portion of inaccurate cases, 41.67% of students’ grades were over estimated, whereas only 6.59% were underestimated. I think these figures support the point made previously – that teachers deliberately inflate predicted grades in order to give their students a better chance of receiving a University offer.
Perhaps the best way to get around this issue would be for the government to issue every student with a chart (for each academic subject) capable of tracking their academic progress from primary school to a-levels. Plots could be made on the chart on a bi-yearly basis, and when the time came to make a prediction about a student’s grade, it could be done scientifically (using a line of best fit, or a similar method).
I think having aspirational grades would be beneficial to the student, but they should be used in conjunction with predicted grades. This way the accuracy of predicted grades will be maintained, but the benefits to the students’ self esteem gained by having a positive view of their academic capabilities (Chevalier et al. 2009*) can still be maintained using higher aspirational grades.
*https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/32412/11-1043-investigating-accuracy-predicted-a-level-grades.pdf
* http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272775709000934
Science of Education 
February 3, 2013 at 7:21 pm
Although teachers may predict higher grades to “help students get into uni” there’s also the issue that the uni may give an offer that is too high based on these grades, which is potentially an explanation for the raised stress levels you mention.
It’s interesting that predicting lower grades was related to achieving higher grades and vice verca – it would be interesting to research whether this was due to a conscious effort by students predicted low grades to “prove them wrong” or just innacurate perceptions by the teachers. Clearly both of these explanations but it would be interesting to know the causality (particularly as lower grades could have led to uni rejections for able students)
There’s already been talk of using AS levels instead of predicted grades http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9612659/AS-level-results-should-be-used-to-dictate-university-entry.html, though I guess you still have the issue that students may work harder for A levels than AS.
You’ve raised some interesting arguments here – I hadn’t realized predicted grades were so inaccurate before!
February 4, 2013 at 3:23 pm
After reading the link you put in your comment (which I was very thankful for), I can understand that the use of AS grades as a basis for the predicted grades but I have two problems:
1) on application forms for university, they are just asking for this “predicted grade” but not a break down of the AS scores that its being based on; therefore it still being hugely open to errors,
2) if the predicted grades are based on the AS results the students have just sat, can these predictions not be made by the students themselves with guidance from teachers? This could then reduce the amount of students who don’t apply for university due to a poor self-perception, as they could apply to university’s they think they could get into (as mentioned in Snell, Thorpe, Hoskins, & Chevalier, 2008).
I just think that if predicted grades were made into aspirational grades, they could be used as a better motivational tool used in schools. Aspirational grades are used to set grade that will become a challenge to the student that is realistic and achievable, being negotiated with teachers and pastoral staff (Minimum Target Grades, Aspirational Grades and Predicted Grades). This could lead to reduced exam anxiety as they have a expectation set by themselves, that they will be more comfortable with.