Centre Assessed Grades are almost done.  The bane of every GCSE and A level teacher is almost over, the marking is largely done and standardisation will then occur by the exam boards.

As an economics teacher, I get curious about numbers.  Particularly when teachers, not exam boards were asked to do the marking this year.  The back of the envelope figures look roughly like this:

There are roughly 800,000 A level students in England.

Most do three subjects, so that’s 2.4 million subjects that need marking.  Exam entry fees are around £60 at a minimum.  So that’s roughly £144 million in exam fees.

Marking I’ve done for A level papers.  You tend to have a contract of between £800-£1000 and end up marking over 400.  So around £2 per paper is a rough estimate.

Students usually sit 3 papers per A level.  At 2.4 million subjects sat, that’s 7.2 million papers that need marking at a cost of £14.2 million

The situation is even worse with GCSEs.  GCSEs cost around £40 per subject.  There were 4.7 million GCSE entries in 2020.  So that’s £188 million in income. 

Most GCSE exams have on average 2 papers that need to be marked by examiners.  So that’s 9.4 million+ papers to be marked.  At £2 per paper that would be another £18.8 million.

This means that the exam boards have taken over hundreds of millions in exam fees. Headteachers estimate this to be £440 million with other qualifications added in, and they’d like half back – £220 million (Headteachers in England call for refund of £220m summer exam fees | Exams | The Guardian)

Now exam boards still have a lot to do – alternative question papers this year (although they just used a mix of the past papers in most cases), standardisation, appeals – they do need some money to function.  

But there’s still the money not spent on marking – £33 million!  This £33 million – at a bare minimum should really go to schools and FE colleges (particularly the latter as they receive lower funding than schools).  There is a strong moral case for this when schools and FE colleges are making staff redundant due to a funding crisis for education, as is the case at my college. 

Finally, there is a limited number of exam boards in England – so much so that they fit the very definition of an oligopoly.  So, we have all the problems that come with oligopolies – sticky prices, and the danger of low consumer surplus.  Meanwhile, the Exam Boards, and the international companies connected to them, achieve high supernormal profits.

My final thought is this:  The Government prides itself on being pro-business.  So, lets treat the exam boards like the businesses they are.  Let’s have the Competition and Markets Authority investigate this oligopoly with a view to reforming it so that students, parents and schools and colleges get a fairer deal.  Let’s look at how and whether the current market structure works fully in the public interest.  Let’s look at the powers of the regulator and decide whether Ofqual is acting in the public interest, or whether there’s a danger of regulatory capture materialising.

Liberals, like any good A level economics student, know that markets can work well, but that market failures can also occur, especially in concentrated markets.  We’re naturally suspicious of power, and believe in justice, including social justice.

Let’s apply it when it comes to examinations this summer with a basic principle – if you did the work, you should be paid for it.

This issue (and the Government’s response) needs examining closely.

* Simon Foster is a lecturer in Politics and Economics, and has published twenty-five books on Politics, PSHE and Citizenship.