As teachers, you know better than anyone that GCSEs, AS and A levels are high-stakes qualifications that shape young people's futures. Every decision about how these exams are delivered must start with one question: is this fair for students? That's why we're consulting on a carefully balanced approach to on-screen assessment. One that protects the integrity of qualifications you and your students work so hard for, while enabling measured innovation where the evidence supports it. ## A balanced approach We're proposing a controlled approach that enables innovation while protecting what matters most: standards, fairness, and your ability to prepare students effectively. Here's what this means in practice: * Pen and paper remain central. We're not proposing that traditional exams disappear. Handwriting isn't going anywhere. Most GCSEs, AS and A levels will continue to be assessed the way they always have been. * Your school or college retains autonomy and choice. In the vast majority of cases schools and colleges have a choice of specifications across exam boards. You can choose the specification that best meets your needs, factoring in the mode of assessment to your choice. * Limited, manageable pace of change. Each exam board would be allowed to introduce up to 2 new on-screen specifications, making up a maximum of 3% of the total specifications, on top of the small number already available today. * Restrictions on high-volume subjects. The most widely taken subjects (those with over 100,000 entries nationally) won't be moving to on-screen assessment for the foreseeable future. * Clear guardrails. We recognise the importance of safeguarding the security, accessibility and fairness of new qualifications. Any new on-screen assessment must pass rigorous accreditation by Ofqual. ## Protecting fairness for all students We know you're concerned about fairness – and so are we. Our proposals include specific protections: * No student-owned devices. Students won't use their own laptops for exams. This prevents unfairness arising from differences in device quality or access. Schools will provide the devices, ensuring consistency. * Strong accessibility standards. Platforms must be easy to use for students. * Consistent standards. Standards will be maintained across specifications that are on paper and those on screen. ## Built on solid evidence These proposals are informed by extensive research, including: * studies on how students perform differently on paper versus on screen * analysis of the practical challenges schools and colleges face * international evidence on digital assessment * direct feedback from teachers, school leaders, and exams officers We've also been clear about the risks. On-screen assessment introduces new challenges around cyber-security, technical failures during exams, and maintaining standards across different modes. Our controlled approach ensures these risks are carefully managed. ## We're listening to your concerns Our research tells us that while there's interest in greater use of technology in assessment, teachers have legitimate concerns. You've told us about: * concerns about fairness for students who don't have equal access to technology * variable IT infrastructure in schools and colleges * differences in students' and staff digital skills and confidence * the operational demands of running on-screen exams alongside paper-based assessments * space requirements, including larger desks and suitable exam venues * uncertainty about whether certain subjects are suited to on-screen assessment We've listened. Our proposals reflect these realities. ## What won't change Your professional expertise remains at the heart of preparing students for qualifications. The knowledge and skills being assessed won't change. The rigour and value of qualifications won't be compromised. And traditional pen and paper assessment will remain the primary mode for most exams. ## We need your voice This consultation runs for 12 weeks, and we particularly want to hear from teachers and school leaders. You understand the realities of exam delivery. You know your students. You see what works and what doesn't. Your responses will help us ensure that any changes serve students' interests and are deliverable in schools and colleges. ## Looking ahead If these proposals are taken forward, detailed rules and guidance will follow in 2026. We'll keep the 2-specification limit under review, learning from how on-screen assessments work in practice. This is about evolution, not revolution. It's about protecting the qualifications system that serves your students well, while carefully enabling innovation where the evidence supports it. It’s worth remembering that this is optional.  In the vast majority of cases you can choose the specification that suits your preferences. You will be able to read the full consultation and share your views from 9:30am. Your expertise and experience are essential to getting this right. Together, we can ensure that any changes maintain the standards and fairness that make England's qualifications trusted and valued. **Jo Handford** **Associate Director Strategic Projects and Innovation, Ofqual**

Back in July we withdrew our official statistics on access arrangements for GCSEs, AS and A levels covering 2014 to 2024, after identifying significant issues with how data had been recorded and reported. Today we are pleased to be following that up by publishing revised statistics, alongside new research and a regulatory report that confirms what we expect from exam boards. The report sets out several specific areas where we believe improvements can be made. Here's a summary of: * what the new stats show * what our research found * what we expect from exam boards ## What the official statistics show As we explained in July, previous figures did not give an accurate picture of the number of students receiving access arrangements within a specific year’s exam cohort. This was not because arrangements were being granted inappropriately, but rather due to limitations of the data source we used for our reporting. These included counting students who held valid arrangements but didn't sit exams in the given year, and not being able to filter out duplicate applications. The new statistics – for the 2024 to 2025 academic year and going back to 2015 to 2016 – use an improved methodology that focuses only on arrangements granted to students who were actually assessed in each year. They show that 25% extra time was granted for 16.6% to 25.5% of all students being assessed in 2024 to 2025, compared with 14.7% to 20.6% in 2023 to 2024. This means the proportion of exam students with an approval for 25% extra time is lower than the previous data suggested, and broadly in line with the rate of special educational needs (SEN) in the student population (as reported by the Department for Education). We have given ranges rather than absolute numbers to reflect the complexity of the data. The upper end of the ranges will decrease when these figures are updated next year, as new data becomes available. You can read more about our improved methodology in the regulatory report. ## What our research found Like everyone else, we had seen for some time that demand for access arrangements had been rising, and with it pressure on exam boards and schools and colleges to keep on meeting that demand. We wanted to better understand this, and to identify anything that could be done to improve the system. So our research, data and policy experts went to work, analysing the available evidence and data. Our work focused on the granting of 25% extra time in exams, as this is the most common exam-board approved arrangement, as well as the concept of time in assessment. Our research found limited evidence of students experiencing time pressure (also known as “speededness”) in GCSE, AS and A level exams, although this varied across subjects and student groups. While these exams are not designed to assess students' ability to work under time pressure, the interaction between exam tasks, duration and individual students can create unintended speededness for some students. We heard a range of views about the current system, including concerns from schools and colleges about the increasing workload and costs involved in identifying appropriate arrangements, evidencing student need, and administering access arrangements. There was, however, support for the core principle that access arrangements should be based on a student’s individual needs. The system generally meets this purpose, but we have identified some aspects which could be improved. ## What we expect exam boards to do, and what we will do Ofqual already has rules in place for what exam boards need to do in relation to access arrangements. They must also comply with equalities law. But as well as this, and as a result of our findings, we have told the exam boards that we expect them to: * review and improve the access arrangements system, focusing on the clarity and accessibility of the information they provide – both to support schools and colleges, and to build a wider understanding about access arrangements, including among students and parents * ensure that their requirements allow students to receive appropriate access arrangements for their needs while balancing school and college workload * improve data about exam board-approved access arrangements * strengthen how they monitor that the system is functioning as it should We will monitor the exam boards’ progress in these areas as part of our normal regulatory approach. Also, as we respond to the government’s proposals following the Curriculum and Assessment Review, we will consider our requirements around assessment duration for GCSEs, AS and A levels. We will also take this into account in setting our requirements for the proposed new post-16 qualifications, such as V levels. We will confirm our regulatory expectations for exam boards following that work. ## An access arrangements system we can all be confident in The research and analysis we have done shows our commitment to ensuring the access arrangements system functions effectively and is reported on accurately. It has taken time, but that’s because it’s complex. It’s also really important. And the improvements we’ve asked exam boards to make will ensure students continue to receive the support they need to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and understanding, while minimising burden on the schools and colleges managing these vital arrangements.

Every year, over 11 million qualifications are awarded in England – from GCSEs and A levels to vocational qualifications in healthcare, construction, childcare and many other sectors. These qualifications are the foundation of opportunity. They recognise students’ achievements, help them progress, and give employers confidence in the people they're hiring. The system works well. But when things go wrong – when awarding organisations fall short of the standards we all expect of them – the consequences matter for the students taking qualifications and for everyone who relies on qualifications being fair and accurate. In some cases, failure to meet the high standards we expect of our qualifications can lead to stress for students and delays to their progression. We need a regulatory approach that is clear, proportionate and effective – one that enables awarding organisations to take swift action to deal with problems but also enables us to act decisively when our high standards are not met. Today, we're publishing an updated policy that does exactly that. ## An agile enforcement policy for regulating exams and assessment Ofqual has published an updated compliance policy for awarding organisations, now called Supporting Compliance and Taking Regulatory Action. Ofqual's previous policy was last updated in 2012. We received extensive feedback through consultations in 2019 and 2025, which directly shaped this revision. The updated policy reflects how we regulate today, with a focus on early engagement with awarding organisations, proportionality, and transparency. ## Key updates There are 3 main updates: 1. A new regulatory tool called the Chief Regulator's Rebuke The Chief Regulator’s Rebuke is a new regulatory tool that fills an important gap in our enforcement options. We would propose to issue a rebuke when we have determined that an awarding organisation is in breach of our rules, but the matter may not be serious enough to warrant a financial penalty. 2. A new appeals process for awarding organisations Awarding organisations will have a right of appeal if they disagree with a determination of non-compliance or the issuing of a Chief Regulator's Rebuke. Appeals are to be heard by Ofqual's Enforcement Panel, providing a clear and fair route to challenge regulatory decisions. This adds an important layer of procedural fairness to our regulatory approach. 3. Introducing a more efficient process when taking regulatory action We have introduced more flexibility in how we issue Notices of Intention that reflects regulatory practice in other sectors. This will reduce the burden on awarding organisations and allow for the process to move swiftly to resolution. ## Implications for awarding organisations This policy does not introduce any new requirements for awarding organisations. Instead, it emphasises our commitment to working flexibly by using non-statutory tools – such as setting requirements or accepting undertakings – before considering formal enforcement action. This proactive and proportionate approach aims to resolve issues efficiently while maintaining the regulatory standards that protect learners and the value of qualifications. We have also clarified how and when we publish enforcement decisions, improving transparency while ensuring fairness. For example, as with our existing approaches, we will give awarding organisations a fair opportunity to consult with us and challenge decisions before they become public. These changes reflect Ofqual’s stewardship approach to regulation –  ensuring that qualifications remain high quality, and fair for all. **Amanda Swann** **Executive Director for General Qualifications, Ofqual**

More than 5.6 million GCSE results have been issued to students in England today, along with more than 368,000 results for level 1 and 2 vocational and technical qualifications taken alongside them. These results enable young people to progress to further study or an apprenticeship. Well done to all students receiving their results today, and to all the teachers and others who have supported them every step of the way. This year’s picture is one of stability, with outcomes showing only minimal variation from previous years. This falls within the boundaries of natural year-on-year fluctuations. ## Key points That said, here are some key facts and figures from today's GCSE and level 1 and 2 results: * Overall GCSE results are similar to 2024. Outcomes at grade 7 and above are 21.8% compared with 21.6% in 2024, and outcomes at grade 4 and above are 67.1% compared with 67.4% in 2024. * 5,661,970 GCSE results were issued in 133 different qualifications. * There were more entries from post-16 students this summer for GCSE English language and maths. However, within both the 16-year-old and post-16 groups, results are stable. * Fewer students sat GCSE biology, chemistry and physics but there was an increase in entries for combined science. There was also a decline in entries for history compared with 2024, but a small increase in geography. * Overall, 4.1% (14,920) of the 368,065 vocational and technical qualification grades issued are at the top grade available. Of those, 355,590 were Technical Awards and 12,475 were Technical Certificates. * The most widely taken vocational and technical subjects were Technical Awards in Leisure, Travel and Tourism; and Health, Public Services and Care. * The geographical region with the highest percentage of GCSE grade 7s and above was London, and the north-east had the fewest. * Boys’ results improved slightly while girls’ results fell marginally. ## What are the trends behind the results? **Stable levels of performance   ** Stability is the watchword with the 2025 GCSE results. The national picture at grade 4 shows just a 0.3 percentage point reduction from 2024, and just a 0.1 percentage point increase compared to 2019 (see Figure 1). _Figure 1: GCSE outcomes across all subjects, for all ages, at grade 4/C and above, England only_ While grades overall are stable, there are still small variations reflecting differences in student performance. However, the standard of work that students must achieve to gain a grade is held consistent year on year, and these results maintain that standard. The 2025 National Reference Test results, also published today, demonstrate the continuing stability of English language and maths performance outcomes for 16-year-olds. **Post-16 GCSE candidates  ** Where there is a more notable change is the 14% increase in post-16-year-olds getting GCSE results today. This is due to the greater number of post-16 students taking English language and maths resits. The higher number of resit candidates is reflected in the changes to English and maths results at and around grade 4 for all candidates combined, compared to last year. In fact, performance within the 16-year-old age group and within the 17+ age group is broadly similar year on year. **Girls and boys  ** The gap between boys’ and girls’ GCSE attainment has narrowed, due to a combination of boys performing marginally better and girls performing marginally less well than in 2024. These are, again, only small changes. **Regional disparities  ** As in any year and at any level of qualification, today’s results reflect the regional disparities that exist across England. Within that wider picture, though, it is worth noting that the gap between London and the rest of the country has narrowed slightly at GCSE grade 4. **Vocational and technical results   ** This is just the second year of Tech Award results since these qualifications were strengthened by changes to their design and structure. Tech Awards are typically the size of a GCSE and cover subjects such as sport, hospitality and catering, and health and social care. ## Where to find more details If you’d like to dig into the data, take a look at our new statistical report on this year’s results and our interactive outcomes charts. As normal, the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) has published results in England, overall and by subject. These results are also shown in our interactive charts. Today is the culmination of a lot of hard work, not just by the students involved but also their teachers and those who have supported them along the way. Congratulations to you all. **Amanda Swann  ** **Executive Director for General Qualifications, Ofqual**

More than 850,000 A and AS level results have been issued to students in England today, along with just over 250,000 results for vocational and technical performance-table qualifications taken alongside them. These are results that enable young people to progress along a range of pathways – to university, apprenticeships or employment. They are the reward for the effort and quality of work that those students have displayed, and I would like to offer congratulations to everyone receiving their results today. Across the range of level 3 qualifications, a total of more than 1.1 million results have been issued this summer. The highest number of those are for A levels, with 814,335 being taken by 313,190 students in 137 different subjects. A further 50,475 AS level results have been issued today as well. **Here are some other key facts about today's level 3 results:** * A total of 6,845 18-year-old students received A* grades in all the A levels they took this summer – 35 of them took 5 or more A levels * About two-thirds of A level students took 3 A levels * The subjects taken by the highest number of A level students were maths, psychology and biology * Applied generals were the vocational and technical performance-table qualifications with most results issued and the most widely taken subject sector areas for applied generals were business, administration and law, social sciences, and science and mathematics * The number of students expected to complete T Levels this summer increased by more than 60% on last year, to 11,909 * The geographical region with the highest percentage of A level results at A or A* was London ## **What are the trends behind the results?** This year the number of 18-year-olds is up on 2024, and there are some small but noticeable patterns in the type of qualifications they have chosen. The number of A levels being taken this year has actually fallen slightly since 2024, by about 2,500, and the trends in the choices of subject have continued. STEM subjects such as mathematics, further maths and physics have risen in popularity, even in a slightly smaller cohort, whereas some arts and humanities subjects have declined. There has been a small increase in pass rates. We can’t say for sure why this is the case, but there are some factors that could be part of the story. Based on prior attainment, such as these students’ GCSE grades, and relative to the national population of 18-year-olds, this year’s cohort of A level students seems to be stronger than last year’s. Moreover, this year’s A level students made their post-16 choices in 2023, which was the first year GCSE grading returned to normal after the pandemic. That could mean those students had a more accurate picture of their strengths to guide their choices. We can’t be certain but it may be that some students who might have taken A levels in previous years instead opted for some of the level 3 vocational options, such as applied general qualifications (for example BTECs) or T Levels. So today’s results may reflect changes in the choices of students 2 years ago, and the types of qualifications they wanted to study to take their next step. It is important to emphasise that while each year’s cohort of students will be slightly different, the standard of work needed to get a particular grade remains comparable with previous years. This means any change in numbers achieving a grade is entirely due to a change in student performance, not a change in the standard expected. You can find out more about this process here. ## **Where to find more details** Today, for the first time, we are publishing a statistical report on this year’s results. If you want more in-depth analysis of outcomes for A levels, AS, applied generals, tech levels and technical qualifications within T Levels, this report will be a great place to find it. We have also published interactive visualisations of outcomes by centre type, variability in school and college A level results, A level outcomes in England, A level grade combinations, and an interactive map of England showing A level results in different subjects by grade and county. As normal, the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) has published results in England for AS and A level, overall and by subject. These results are also shown in our interactive visualisation. The annual results period is the culmination of a lot of hard work, not just by the students involved but also their teachers and those who have supported them along the way. Congratulations to you all. **Amanda Swann** **Executive Director for General Qualifications, Ofqual**

I want to explain why we have withdrawn our official statistics on access arrangements today, and what we plan to do next. We know that these statistics are important for understanding how the exam system works, and have been the subject of some discussion. That is why we are keen to share what we have found and start the process of setting the record straight as soon as possible. Let me start by saying that this problem is about data collection and reporting, not the access arrangements system itself. No student has been or will be affected. Here’s what you need to know. ## **What are access arrangements?** Access arrangements are based on students’ needs. They fall into 2 categories: “reasonable adjustments” for disabled students and arrangements for those with temporary injuries or other access needs. Schools and colleges apply to exam boards for access arrangements to help ensure that those students can sit their exams without being unfairly disadvantaged. The most common form of exam board-approved access arrangement is the granting of 25% extra time in exams. ## **What happened?** In 2023 we started considering trends in access arrangements data and began research into how the arrangements were used and perceived in the education sector. As part of this work we requested more detailed data from exam boards, which we received at the end of 2024. We have always recognised that there are limitations to these figures. Our analysis has now revealed that they have led to a significant overstatement of approved access arrangements in place for the exam cohort in each year. The issue was not with how arrangements were granted, but with how the data was recorded and reported. For example: * The reporting included students with valid access arrangements but who didn't sit exams that year. * Duplicate applications for the same student were not filtered out. * Reporting was based on data that was not linked to individual student exam entry records, making validation difficult. Initial findings from our analysis suggest that the proportion of students receiving access arrangements – including 25% extra time – is more closely aligned than previously reported to the proportion of students with special educational needs (SEN) reported in the school population. ## **Important points to remember about access arrangements** Our analysis gives a more accurate picture of access arrangements in place for students actually taking an examination in any given academic year. In doing so, it has not revealed any evidence of misuse or systemic failure. This has been a technical issue with reporting rather than how the system has been used. The approach to access arrangements remains unchanged. Schools and colleges should continue to apply for access arrangements as they always have, following the same JCQ guidance. ## **What’s next?** We will publish revised statistics in late 2025, covering the academic years from 2020 to 2021 onwards. These will be designated as “official statistics in development” and will include confidence ranges to reflect the complexity of the data. They won’t be perfect, but they will give a much more accurate picture than previously. We will be working with exam boards to improve the quality of the data they give us in future so that the quality of the overall statistics continues to improve. We also plan to publish a report explaining our review of evidence (including the new data analysis), as well as research into perceptions of 25% extra time in exams. This long-term research, as well as our work to improve the official statistics, shows our commitment to improving the understanding and transparency of this important part of the qualifications system. **Tom Bramley Executive Director, Research and Analysis**,**Ofqual**

As we close in on the ninth summer of awarding GCSE grades 9 to 1, we can say they aren’t quite so ‘new’ any more. And yet we still see thousands of visits every month to our explainers on the 9 to 1 grading scale from when they were first introduced. We know why this is. Every year sees a new cohort of students and parents keen to understand the scale and relate it to the A* to G scale they have heard about from previous generations. GCSE exams have just finished and attention is turning to results. So with 8 years’ experience of the grades bedding in, we have published refreshed information on our website to answer the most common questions. ## Why did GCSE grades change to 9 to 1? The change was made when GCSEs were reformed so that: * it is immediately clear whether students studied the old pre-reform GCSEs or the updated versions of them * there is more differentiation at the top of the scale, where grades 7, 8 and 9 together are equivalent to grades A and A* on the old scale See GCSE 9 to 1 grade scale explained for more information.