This is the evidence & data on this issue. If you are evidence & data led then these findings will be helpful for forming accurate conclusions. All modes of assessment have strengths & weaknesses - but you can't conclude exams are unilaterally 'better' for disadv. students 6/6

"the few changes noted... could be understood as the impact of the pandemic on students’ education and the impact of the change in assessment arrangements. The 2 sources of impact are impossible to disentangle." 5/6

www.gov.uk/government/p...

2021: At A-Level - no change in gap between FSM and non-FSM. At GCSE - potentially small decrease in outcomes for FSM students however not attributable to mode of assessment 4/6

In fact, it suggests 2020 outcomes may've been better for disadv. students "those candidates attending centres in areas with the highest deprivation indices received relatively higher grades than previously in 2020, closing the gap with candidates from less deprived areas" 3/6

2020: "although teacher grades were moderately higher than previous years’ grades, they did not introduce any substantial bias or different patterns of grading [than previous years]" 2/6 assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6107c8...

The QA process in 2021 is not a model teachers would want to see repeated - it was high-workload and low-support. However even in a worst case scenario, its clear teachers can grade their students with high levels of accuracy 2/2