Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

GCSE: is it true they're graded so that ca 1/3 must fail? How are boundaries decided?

135 replies

ParentOfOne · 12/09/2025 14:04

I understand that grade boundaries can change from year to year and from exam board to exam board. E.g. a 4 in Maths can be 40 points out of 240 one year and 45 out of 240 another year. That I get.

What I don't understand is:

  • what, exactly, is the statistical methodology to adjust the boundaries from year to year? Is it even publicly disclosed? How much of a subjective, qualitative assessment is it?
  • Is it true that the exams are graded on a curve in such a way that, by design, ca. 1/3 of the kids will fail?

On the last point, there are many mumsnetters who hold very strong opinions that it's true, but I have not found official confirmation.

If it were true, it would mean that the bottom third would fail regardless of score; e.g. one year the bottom third could score 40% of the points, another year 55%.

If we look at Maths Grade boundaries for Edexcel, we see that a 4 has ranged from 51% to 60% of the total points in the foundation paper, and from 17% to 22% of the higher paper. These are not percentiles, but percentages of the total point. https://mathsbot.com/gcse/boundaries

This doesn't seem to me like a system that's designed to fail 1/3 of the students regardless of score.
If you get less than 50-60% of the questions right in the easier version of the exam, and less than 20% in the harder version, it seems pretty clear to me that you have not even mastered the basics of the subjects. In many countries 60% or thereabout tends to be the threshold for passing.

This is also why I don't understand those who say that 1 to 3 are also passes. You pass if you get 10% of the points? What is the definition of failing then?

Or am I missing something?

TES explained that in the first year the % of grade 9 was set equal to a certain % of those achieving >=7, but how it changed after the first year is unclear https://www.tes.com/magazine/analysis/secondary/gcse-and-a-level-grade-boundaries

GCSE maths grade boundaries

All the past grade boundaries for the 9 - 1 GCSE mathematics exam. All exam boards and tiers included.

https://mathsbot.com/gcse/boundaries

OP posts:
MigGirl · 13/09/2025 07:12

@ParentOfOne have you looked at what the GCSE maths circulum entails. The maths is actually quite high brow. It doesn't mean those who get lover grades wouldn't be able to understand basic life skill maths. Life skills maths have very little input in the GCSE, I would argue that those who find it difficult would benefit from doing a different qualification same with English. When they changed the circulum a while ago now it was made very academic and I do believe there should be another option for those weaker students who just need English and maths for life skills rather then to progress in academics.

TeenToTwenties · 13/09/2025 07:10

If miraculously one year a cohort were very able then this would be noticed in the y6 sats and the national standardisation tests, and then the boundaries would be set differently so 30% or whatever wouldn't fail.

However there isn't going to be such an anomalous year. So yes around 1/3rd (including the resit cohort) will fail the maths/eng lang.

It is what it is, not too hard to understand. More important / easier to change other issues in education.

Original poster
ParentOfOne · 13/09/2025 07:02

I found a Linkedin post where someone working at the National Foundation for Education Research debunks the myth that the GCSE is designed to fail the bottom 30% regardless of score: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alex-cutbill_message-to-school-and-college-leaders-understanding-activity-7345942469982756864-awaK/

He references a letter written by the then Ofqual chief https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/39051/documents/191996/default/

GCSEs are not norm-referenced, and never have been. If they were, there would be fixed proportions of students awarded each grade for every specification, regardless of how well students performed. That is not the case.

He also points to a letter written to the Guardian by a Professor of Education, who still peddles this falsehood, to indicate how widespread this myth is: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/jun/16/gcses-are-outdated-its-time-to-ditch-them

GCSE maths myth debunked: GCSEs are not norm-referenced | Alex Cutbill posted on the topic | LinkedIn

There is a persistent myth that a third of students are doomed to 'fail' GCSE maths (i.e. not achieve at least a grade 4) every year, because GCSEs are norm-referenced (aka graded on a curve). This is simply not true. Yesterday, Ofqual published a le...

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/alex-cutbill_message-to-school-and-college-leaders-understanding-activity-7345942469982756864-awaK

OP posts:
Original poster
ParentOfOne · 13/09/2025 06:56

@Talipesmum I ask because I want to understand how GCSEs work, and how to interpret school stats when I see schools where half the kids cannot get a 4 in English and maths. I didn't know the % of kids failing to get a 4 in English and Maths ranged from 30 to 40% depending on the year, I find it shocking.

GCSE is not advanced calculus that only scientists will need and apply. It's life skills. People who fail to get a GCSE 4 are unlikely to understand how their mortgage works, or how to convert the doses of a recipe for 6 people if they want to cook for 4. To think that 30 to 40% of our country's kids fail that is shocking.

@BreakingBroken I don't think Canada has a % that fail just to satisfy a bell curve.
But neither does the UK, despite many people thinking just that

@Talipesmum that’s not because exam boards say “cut off the bottom 30%”
But that's exactly what many people think. There are many posts of angry mumsnetters very convinced of exactly this

@TheLivelyViper A GCSE is a level 2 qualification, anything below a 4 is a fail on the level 2. However a 1-3 grade is a level one qualification but obviously shows a lack of grasp of the basics of a subject but nonetheless is a level qualification you can use to perhaps get onto a level 2 at college etc

This much wasn't clear to me, so thanks for clarifying. Obtaining a 1 can mean getting something like 10-15% of the total marks.

OP posts:
noblegiraffe · 13/09/2025 00:47

Are you going to turn this into another thread about religious schools before I bother answering in good faith?

BreakingBroken · 13/09/2025 00:46

@TheLivelyViper I don't think canada has a % that fail just to satisfy a bell curve. the provincial exams vary little canada wide or exam wise from year to year in theory everyone who takes it could pass there are 3 different choices foundation, pre calculus and calculus a student would be entered into one of the three courses based on their performance the years prior.
questions with a high % of wrong answers are discounted (like you say wrong numbers or ambiguous wording).

Talipesmum · 13/09/2025 00:01

When people say “a certain percentage will fail, this is built into the system” it doesn’t mean that precisely the bottom 30% will fail. It means that for a typical cohort, when you ask certain questions on a paper of a particular difficulty level, there are always going to be some kids who can’t answer them. And because the ability of cohorts doesn’t change dramatically across the population from one year to the next, it’s probably a similar percentage year on year. But that’s not because exam boards say “cut off the bottom 30%”. It’s because every time it’s about that many who can’t answer that level of question well.

There are slight changes in cohort ability year on year, and as mentioned in the TES article, there are randomised basic English and maths tests across the cohort to measure this. So I think this means that if a cohort do genuinely show themselves to be stronger in maths this year at a population level, by a small amount, this would be reflected in slightly improved grades. i.e. they properly reflect a real effect

Talipesmum · 12/09/2025 23:41

The TES article you linked gave a pretty good description of the different things the examining boards try to take into account when setting grade boundaries. This read to me that they balance cohort ability with absolute “this is the standard we accept for eg a grade 4, or a grade 6, based on the quality of answers across years”, they attempt to correct for misleading questions that threw too many people off (ie a badly worded question) or a more challenging exam than it would normally be. I don’t think it’s that easy to describe an exact quotable statistical methodology when it depends to some extent on examiners agreeing that “yes, this is a top grade 5 answer”, comparing it to previous years. I don’t think anyone here is going to provide a weighted equation, given the nuances described.

Why do you ask? What was your experience of GCSEs?

TheLivelyViper · 12/09/2025 23:09

Boundaries are done based on overall performance. They change because a cohort won't do the exact same each year. What they change for is to ensure that's it's no harder or easier each year to get each specific grade. So even though questions are different, it's not harder to an 8 in one year compared to another. Now some candidates may have preferences for questions and say I think the 2023 paper was easy, but grade boundaries are adjusted based on how well or badly a cohort has done. So a smarter cohort likely has higher grade boundaries but then we need to consider the paper ans whether on the whole it's 'nicer' or 'easier', taking that into consideration adjustments are made to the marks. It aims to ensure fairness and consistency.

A GCSE is a level 2 qualification, anything below a 4 is a fail on the level 2. However a 1-3 grade is a level one qualification but obviously shows a lack of grasp of the basics of a subject but nonetheless is a level qualification you can use to perhaps get onto a level 2 at college etc. Only a U is a complete fail. In terms of failure, it's not just GCSEs, every exam whether in other countries, univeristy etc dictates that some people will fail, it's sort of expected. Exams are placing people into tiers, of skills, knowledge, understanding etc and just by the numbers it doesn't make sense that everyone would get a 4 and above leaving nobody in the grades below that. It's not like they are purposefully setting it so people fail, just that in all exams people will.

twistyizzy · 12/09/2025 14:11

I would answer this but after what your other thread descended into I'm not going to