The chief regulator of Ofqual has “signalled” his “anxiety” to ministers about the use of artificial intelligence in “extended writing” coursework and has commissioned internal work on how to “close down” the risk. Sir Ian Bauckham was quizzed by the Parliamentary education committee today. Here’s what you need to know… 1. AI not good enough for ‘sole marking‘ Ofqual will publish research on the use of artificial intelligence in marking exams this week. Bauckham told MPs 鈥渨e don鈥檛 believe AI is yet ready to undertake sole marking of student work鈥. That was because it still makes mistakes and is hard to challenge, he added. But he said it can be used to 鈥渜uality assure, detect for example unexpected patterns in examiners’ marking and so on, but not sole marking.鈥 Former chief regulator Jo Saxton warned in 2023 they wouldn’t “allow” AI to solely mark students’ work. 2. Internal work commissioned on coursework AI risk Bauckham said he had “signalled my anxiety鈥 to the Department for Education about the use of AI cheating in qualifications with extended writing coursework. He said there is “relatively little” of this coursework, but highlighted history and English A-level, where 20 per cent of the qualification is extended writing. “Part of the driver for extended writing coursework lies in the way the content itself is designed. That’s a matter for DfE.” But he has commissioned a 鈥渟ignificant piece of work internally at Ofqual to ascertain the extent to which this risk is being realised at the moment and what the options might be in any reform of those qualifications for closing down that risk and assuring ourselves of the integrity of these qualifications鈥. He added: 鈥淚 would not be being transparent if I didn鈥檛 say I am concerned about that, I visited a number of providers up and down the country, spoken to teachers and a number have raised this with me.鈥 Bauckham said there were some ways to reduce the risk of coursework malpractice, such as disclosures that “probe the extent to which the candidate may have accessed AI”. 3. More likely to be shorter exams than fewer exams Bauckham described government鈥檚 pledge to cut 10 per cent of exam time on average as 鈥渟ensible, rational鈥 and also achievable鈥. He said it would most likely see shorter exams in most cases, but there could be fewer exams. Ofqual has been under pressure to publish detailed modelling that informed the curriculum review policy. Pressed by Peter Swallow, MP for Bracknell, on whether they would release it, Bauckham said the evidence was 鈥減rovided for the purposes of ministerial policy making so we wouldn鈥檛 routinely publish that information at an early stage鈥. He added they will be consulting on 鈥渁ny proposals to do with reforming GCSEs and the evidence associated with those proposals will be published at that point鈥. 4. Seeking to 鈥榯emper boards鈥 enthusiasm鈥 on digital exams The regulator announced last month that it would allow exam boards to introduce up to two on-screen specifications for GCSEs and A-level qualifications with less than 100,000 entries per year. Exam boards had announced their own plans to take some exams on-screen, but it did rely on Ofqual approval. Bauckham said there had been 鈥渟ignificant coverage of some exam boards’ enthusiasm in this space. It鈥檚 an enthusiasm we seek to temper.鈥 鈥淪o yes there is enthusiasm amongst the awarding body community but my job is not, obviously, as regulator to do what [they] want me to do. Quite the opposite, my job is to safeguard the examination system in the interests of students.鈥 He said there were practical concerns such whether schools had enough laptops or extension leads for chargers. Ofqual: On-screen exams could be introduced by 2030 鈥淚t absolutely underpins why were first of all taking this in hand, because my view is we cannot allow on-screen specifications to begin to saturate the market in a way that is uncontrolled.” No qualification can be an 鈥渆xperiment鈥 and they will 鈥渙nly allow regulated qualifications to be used in schools if we have reached a very high bar of confidence if they won鈥檛 be design unfairly discriminate against students from less advantaged backgrounds.鈥 5. Ofqual probing whether Pearson broke rules on maths A-level Bauckham was asked for an update on Pearson Edexcel鈥檚 approach to awarding A-level maths last year, following complaints that it replaced a paper with a version that missed swathes of content pupils had expected to cover. 鈥淭he conclusion we reached was that the examination taken together 鈥 paper 1, 2 and 3 鈥 did give an accurate indication of the skills, knowledge and understanding of the content, so the grades we deemed to be reliable. 鈥淗owever I was concerned about the anxiety that had been caused to students, so I asked my team to look hard at this and try to make a decision about whether Pearson had in any senses been non-compliant in that area or not. “We鈥檝e not quite yet finished that piece of work but when we do it will be published in the normal way.鈥 6. Boards didn鈥檛 like Bauckham鈥檚 new 鈥榬ebuke鈥 Last year Ofqual awarded itself new powers to publicly 鈥渞ebuke鈥 rule-breaking exam boards serious enough to warrant a financial penalty. Bauckham said they got 鈥渧ery sharp feedback鈥 from awarding organisations who said 鈥渢hey would find it a very difficult thing to receive indeed”. “It would give chief executives cause to have difficult conversations with their boards and in the cases of awarding organisations that are commercial entities with shares, it could have an impact on share price. 鈥淪o they didn鈥檛 like it very much, which gave me assurance that it might be effective.鈥 7. ‘Welcome’ conversation on new board for BSL GCSE Schools Week reported how despite Ofqual publishing the rules to guide the design of the long-awaited British Sign Language GCSE, no exam boards had yet committed to creating it. Michael Hanton, deputy chief regulator, said they don鈥檛 have the power to force an exam board to offer a qualification but 鈥渢here is the opportunity for an awarding organisation to become recognised to offer a GCSE in this particular area鈥. 鈥淭hat is a route that is open and we would welcome conversations about that.鈥