No one has said they are much easier, but they test different skills, and have options available that aren't open to state schools. These suit learners and this can be interpreted as easier, in reality it is just different. Also as they aren't included in performance tables they are less effected by 'volatility' of the whim of the education minister at that time. When more state school kids did igcse national standards rose, this wasn't expected and to correct it, they are eliminate from tables. A conclusion you can draw is more kids passed as it was easier. These options combined with the fact more students from the independent/private sector get exam concessions, are one of the reasons these sets of students do better. It would be fairer if these chances where extended to state pupils with similar needs, rather than focus on what's harder/easier. The state sector are now 100% pure exams at the end of year 11. This doesn't suit all, this is what is confused with easier/harder. In reality if a test is actually harder they just lower the boundary to pass, the boundaries are only set after the test, based on a preset distribution of how many of each grades are going to be awarded. So the actual hardest of the test becomes less significant- the difference is the opportunities students have. Outside of performance tables, teachers have more choice to meet needs and often this is why those students do better, flourish, get a better start post 16, do better.... get to university etc.