GCSE Results 2026

 There seems to be some improvement in the grades allocated to Languages at GCSE this year. I am waiting for FFT education datalab to update their series of blog posts on severe grading to see to what extent this does or doesn't bring MFL grading into line with other subjects.

Meanwhile, what can we say about the grades?

Firstly, we should question any narrative that this is in some way down to the new GCSE being better. When a new GCSE is introduced, Ofqual are very careful to make sure there is parity of grading carried over from the previous GCSE. The grade boundaries are shifted to make sure the number of pupils awarded each grade is kept the same year on year (with small tweaks depending on the cohort's KS2 SATs results).

There are 3 possible reasons for improved grades being allocated in languages.

1. A deliberate decision to allocate better grades as a tacit recognition of long-standing unfairness.

2. A stronger cohort of pupils taking languages. This could accompany the drop in numbers taking languages, possibly as a result of some schools starting to remove compulsion at KS4, seeing a change to the profile of the cohort. This would be particularly hard to judge this year, given that there was no KS2 SATs baseline for this year group.

3. A deliberate decision to allocate better grades to make the new exam look successful. This could take advantage of the lack of SATs results to address some of the unfairness in grading without having to acknowledge it.

There are some aspects associated with the new GCSE that may have had an impact. The Sample Assessment Materials produced by the board were generally recognised as being much more accessible than previous materials, with pupils scoring much higher marks especially in Listening. This opened the possiblity of two implications for grades. Firstly that if unfair grading was carried over to the new GCSE, it would look ridiculous that pupils were being given low grades for very high raw scores. In the event, I think the actual exam papers were not as easy as the SAMs.

Secondly, the accessible SAMs could have led to more pupils being entered for Higher Tier. And in the event, it is the case that more pupils were entered for Higher papers this year. This could have meant an embarrassing number of pupils dropping to a U if they were incorrectly entered for Higher Tier when the actual papers weren't as accessible as the SAMs. What we see in fact, is fewer grade 5s allocated this year and an increase in 6s, presumably as a result of some schools entering more pupils for Higher Tier. And only a very small increase in Us.

So a potentially embarrasing situation was avoided, without compromising Ofqual's intention of maintaining parity with previous years at the key grades of Grade 4 and Grade 7. It will be interesting to find out as more information becomes available, exactly how this was negotiated.

The important questions are whether this goes far enough to bring MFL grading into line with other subjects. And whether it will be sustained. There is the famous "sawtooth" mechanism whereby when a new specification is introduced, grading becomes gradually harsher as teachers gain expertise in the new course and the new exam. Is this year's grading a step in the right direction? Or just a one-off to ease in the new exam?

Unfair grading has a huge impact on the narrative of national "failure" in language learning. Any steps to address it would be hugely welcome, and could be transformative alongside very necessary changes post-16. Let's hope this is a first step in the right direction!