Pandemic grade inflation strengthened university prospects for both private school and disadvantaged students

Disadvantaged students also benefited, however, and the long-term effects for this group could provide valuable information about how to close the university admissions gap.

Using teacher-assigned A-Level grades during the COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately improved the university prospects of private school students but also had a surprise “levelling” effect on disadvantaged applicants, a study published in Oxford Economic Papers has found. 

The University of Cambridge research is the first to provide empirical evidence of how the chaotic 2020 switch to teacher-assigned grading affected students’ trajectories into higher education. Its findings both vindicate, and complicate, concerns raised at the time about widespread grade inflation and private schools “gaming the system”.

The study provides detailed mathematical evidence of “substantial” grade inflation. While this was highest in private schools, it was also elevated in state schools with large concentrations of disadvantaged students – a demographic that typically underperforms in standard exams – but for different underlying reasons.

Crucially, the study shows that higher grade inflation directly increased applicants’ chances of securing their first-choice university course, or places on highly selective programmes. 

With the 2020 cohort now entering the labour market, the researchers argue that this “accidental experiment” could provide a unique window into the long-term effects of removing barriers to higher education for disadvantaged students.

“There is a general assumption that teacher-assigned grading simply widened educational inequalities, but the reality is more complicated,” said the study’s lead author Dr Konstantina Maragkou, from Cambridge’s Faculty of Education. 

“While the system undoubtedly amplified the advantages of students at private schools, for others it acted as a leveller, opening the door to highly selective courses from which they would normally be excluded. By tracking how this cohort progresses, we could learn vital lessons about how to close the university admissions gap and improve social mobility.”

Teacher-assigned, Centre-Assessed Grades (CAGs) replaced standard A-Level examinations in both 2020 and 2021.

The 2020 system was particularly controversial. After exams were cancelled in March, the Government initially planned to standardise CAGs using historical data. Following a public backlash, it reversed course, ultimately awarding students whichever was higher out of their teacher-assessed grade or the standardised grade – in most cases the former.

As the Cambridge study points out, this makes 2020 a unique case, because teachers had already submitted predicted grades as part of university applications in January, months before the pandemic hit. 

By comparing the gap between pre-pandemic predicted grades and the final grades in 2020 with the equivalent gap in previous years, the researchers were able to isolate the extent of grade inflation.

Their study draws on data from 941,708 university applicants between 2017 and 2020, covering 10 core subjects: Biology, Chemistry, Economics, English Literature, Geography, History, Maths, Physics, Psychology and Sociology.

It finds that there was “substantial” grade inflation, with A-Level scores rising by around a third of a grade on average. These increases ranged from 0.186 grade points in Economics to 0.412 points in English Literature. 

The increases were often enough to push students across grade boundaries. The effect also remained steady when the team controlled for background factors like gender, parental occupation and prior academic achievement. 

Across all subjects, grade inflation was consistently – often substantially – higher in private schools. In Psychology, for example, the average grade ‘bump’ was 0.253 grade points for state school applicants, compared with 0.414 for those from private schools. “This suggests that private schools were better able to leverage the system,” Maragkou said.

Among state schools, however, those with the highest concentration of disadvantaged students saw larger-than-average increases.

The researchers suggest that this reflects a “ceiling and floor” effect: disadvantaged students typically start from lower baseline attainment, leaving more scope for upward adjustment.

In practice, this levelled outcomes for students whose education, as wider research has shown, was otherwise disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.

The study also finds that each incremental increase in grade inflation raised the probability of applicants being accepted on to their first-choice university course by between two and 4.2 percentage points, while reducing the chances of entering clearing, or missing out on a place.

The researchers argue that the pandemic produced uniquely widespread cases of  students entering highly selective university courses without the level of academic preparation for which normal exams would typically have filtered.

While this raises questions about university experience and preparedness, other research has found that disadvantaged students who “overmatch” into selective universities often go on to enjoy the same level of earnings as their supposedly better-matched peers.

“It is too early to know whether these improved university prospects will translate into better long-term outcomes,” Maragkou said. “The intriguing possibility is that they might. For all its distortions, the experience may have revealed something about untapped potential in the education system.”
 

Reference

S. Ilie & K. Maragkou, 'University admissions during a pandemic', Oxford Economic Papers (2026). DOI: 10.1093/oep/gpag018