Number of kids getting extra time in exams MASSIVELY overstated

[noblegiraffe]

Ofqual are withdrawing their statistics on how many children getting extra time and other accommodations in GCSEs and A-levels because they've admitted that they are completely wrong. It's something I know has been referenced quite a few times here so I thought it worth flagging.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/jul/17/ofqual-admits-massively-exaggerating-number-of-students-getting-exam-assistance?

"The new analysis suggests that the actual proportion of students receiving access arrangements – including 25% extra time in exams – is now broadly in line with the proportion of students with special educational needs in the school population."

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ofqual-withdraws-access-arrangements-statistics

Yes ,and they seem to think this extra time will magic them up and 8 or a 9.

Some kids will achieve a 3 with extra time.

Bit of a stretch lol……

It may be that in your job and in some 'professions' that use their own admissions tests they are wasting applicants time by not making it clear that fast processing is a key requirement for success in the application. Yes, it may help with sweat shops in ensuring they get the maximum volume of work out of the applicants to maximise profit but there are other jobs where innovative or deep thinking or creativity is what drives the profits for the business and being slightly slower at processing could be an advantage. Slow processing is not the same as 'thick', it means their brains are wired slightly differently. Hence, they may suit different jobs, yes, but it probably helps if they know what is required for the job applying so can focus their efforts towards employers who will consider them an asset. I bet though, that many employers who devise selection tests don't want to own up to what their selection criteria are so they hide behind the selection test instead! I am not sure that even fast processors would find some jobs as attractive as they first thought if they knew the employer valued how fast they would be churning out work above many of the 'sexier' descriptions of their chosen career that they read in the graduate jobs blurb! However, if it is what they want and they aren't put off, then letting them know what is required helps you get the applicants you want and not waste so much time assessing those you would rather not have.

One poster mentioned that no-one would want to pay a lawyer for 3 hours work if another one could do it in one hour but remember that 'extra time' when it is given is usually no more than 25% so that is an extra 15 minutes for an hour's work. It is not necessarily the case that a 'slow processor' produces less work or poorer work in the same time as a faster processor either, as people often learn coping skills so they work differently when they don't have to follow the rigidity of a timed exam paper.

Just saying the person who got a 9 with out extra time, wouldn't automatically be better than the person who needs extra time...

On the contrary, I think you make an extremely valid point and one I hadn't thought of, which is that they can then demonstrate what they know. @noblegiraffe made the same point earlier in the thread.
I'm sorry if it came across that I thought those students were gaining an "unfair advantage".

I stand by my experience though of students who have had concessions all through university, but then fail at the last hurdle. Despite what @BusWankers says, this is my experience.

It's become an absolute bandwagon.

Well no, the statistics were incorrect.

Lots of people apply for jobs they will be no good at!
You can't have it both ways.
EITHER working quickly is an important part of the assessment snd people should be aware of those who have had extra time.
Or speed is not important so everyone who wants it should be allowed to have it.

Lots of people apply for jobs they will be no good at!
You can't have it both ways.
EITHER working quickly is an important part of the assessment snd people should be aware of those who have had extra time.
Or speed is not important so everyone who wants it should be allowed to have it.

No,. because the company assessment will identify that.

A candidate shouldn't be dismissed for interview selection because they're disabled!

Most companies will actually make accomodations where it's reasonable.

And good for them.

Instead of this weird "let's highlight disability and prejudice ourselves against them"

Again, you wouldn't take Michael's glasses away from him, because he wouldn't be able to read the questions as easily, and would take more time to read them.... so why are you so insistent on taking Katie's extra time because her disability isn't visible??

Son what ... You personally know the careers paths they all took and how they fared in the work place over the next 20 years...?

This is very frustrating.

You seem to be hung up on”speed”

Many people have explained, it’s not about speed:

• The people setting the exams have determined the amount of time a standard student should be able to answer the questions in.
• Some students cannot work at this pace because they have a broken wrist, anxiety in the exam situation, slow processing, have to work with a reader or a scribe, or many other reasons that I don’t know (and aren’t my business).
• The school therefore is permitted to make reasonable adjustments for these students - based on their usual way of working in school.

Again, no-one is having anything “both ways”. Reasonable adjustments (including extra time) are all that is available to the school to assist the students to try and give them the same ( or as near to the same) opportunity to do their best in a compulsory exam that is designed for the standard student.

it is not “hey that kid is getting something extra - why can’t my kid have it too?”

And when it’s time to apply for jobs, employers can work out if candidates are suitable through the interview process and testing (if appropriate for the role).

And employees can chose which jobs to apply for based on their abilities and can ask their employer to make reasonable adjustments in law once in post.

Unless the job is to sit exams (not sure this exists) then whether someone had extra time in their school exams is not the business of a future employer. And is actually discriminatory to suggest this should be declared.

Do you think the same about all exam access arrangements? If some are given the exam access arrangement, everyone should? Or is it just extra time you have a problem with? If it is just extra time, why exactly do you specifically have a problem with that.

Or the one we had that had unlimited rest breaks. They didn't even start the exam for 2 hours... After about 5 and half hours the EO out and end tonite, they'd answered 2 questions.

They'd have a hissy fit about the child that was allowed to have their own room, invigilator, play music, take drinks and food in, had a particular chair and a scribe.

Or the child that had a reader AND a scribe.

Poor person stuck with invigilating 200% ET

You absolutely should not be told that as an employer. No way.

For me the problem is that we don’t as a country screen for issues such as slow processing. Therefore for every child who gets extra time for this, there may be another 3 who are never detected and thus disadvantaged. The only way round this is to screen every child routinely for these conditions so that it is not dependent on parental or school intervention. Alternatively, if other children don’t benefit from extra time, it seems easier to just extend the exam time slightly for all who feel they would benefit. Just work out how long a standard child should take and add a bit spare on for those who might need it. You can still add even longer on for children with a broken wrist and who need a scribe.

And that is fine. Ask the applicant about how they cope with pressure ,or test them yourself. You absolutely don't get to make judgements about how valid their qualifications are. The awarding body has done that. If you don't trust them, set up your own times application tests.

When somebody applies for a job ,it is up to them if they disclose their disability. If as an employer you think they need certain abilities, make that clear and assess them if necessary.

Pity the person doing the scribing more! 200% of A level physics is a lot of physics

Why? I would want to know who would cost me 25% more to get through the work!

Well that how it works presently. That is why I think a grade achieved using extra time should be differently classified so that the person relying on them is given a true picture

I wonder if a solution would be to just have no time limit for anyone? You just finish when you finish? Don't really see how that would be unfair to anyone.

I can see why exams would be timed though and also, why employers would would want people who could not only do a job, but do it in a timely manner as well.

Logistically having no time limit would not work.

That's because because some children would work until the end of time... Some would sit there's doing nothing for 4 hours and then take 3 hours to complete... You'd need a rolling team of invigilators...You could only have one exam in any one day...
They have to also be in a minimum amount of time, otherwise they'll be able to pass on questions to candidates that hadn't started yet.