The Importance of a Clear Predicted Grades Policy in Schools

Predicted Grades (PGs) play a pivotal role in shaping a student’s future, especially in systems like the UK university application process, where these grades are submitted months before final exams. While PGs are intended to reflect a student’s potential, their accuracy and fairness hinge on a well-defined and transparent policy—one that balances evidence-based evaluation with the need to manage expectations for students, parents, and teachers alike.

The Challenge of Fair Evaluation

Subjects like Design Technology (DT) and Visual Arts (VA) pose unique challenges when assigning PGs because of their heavily weighted practical components. In the current IB DT curriculum, the Internal Assessment (IA) accounts for 40% of the final grade, while the remaining 60% comes from the theory-based papers. Unlike theory-based subjects, where assessments are often standardised and easier to quantify, practical work requires continuous effort and progress.

In DT, the IA involves developing prototypes and producing detailed design documentation that must meet rigorous standards. This practical component evaluates a student’s ability to research, design, test, and refine solutions, making it a significant predictor of their success in the course. Similarly, in VA, students must produce a comparative study, a process portfolio, and an exhibition, each reflecting their creative and technical growth.

These practical elements demand not only technical skill but also sustained engagement, time management, and the ability to respond to feedback. As a result, predicted grades in these subjects must be rooted in tangible evidence, such as completed prototypes, resolved artworks, or curated portfolios. Teachers must evaluate students' progress against IB standards and cannot base predictions on potential or promises of future improvement.

This reinforces the importance of clear policies and timelines, ensuring students understand the expectations from the outset of DP1. Such clarity enables teachers to assess students fairly while managing expectations from students and parents alike.

Managing Expectations

Students and parents often view PGs as a guarantee of future success. This can lead to unrealistic expectations and pressure on teachers to inflate grades. However, PGs are not promises; they are predictions based on current evidence. It is vital to communicate this distinction clearly. Schools should implement systems where parents and mentors are kept informed of a student’s progress, especially when there are concerns. For instance, practical components of IAs should be graded periodically and shared with parents to provide a realistic picture of the student’s standing.

At the same time, teachers must feel supported. It is unfair for them to face undue pressure to assign higher grades. Schools should foster an environment where PG policies are consistently applied, reducing the burden on individual teachers and ensuring fairness for all students; and equally, students should clearly communicate their academic goals to their teachers. If a student is striving for a specific grade for example, such as a 6 or 7, it is important for them to make that aspiration known, ahead of time, to their teacher. This allows the teacher to provide tailored feedback, highlight areas for improvement, and offer guidance to help bridge the gap. Without this communication, a teacher might not perceive a situation as concerning—for instance, if a student is performing at a 5—simply because they are unaware of the student’s higher expectations. Open dialogue ensures that everyone is aligned and working toward the same goals.

Another important aspects of the predicted grade process is ensuring that students are aware of their progress well in advance, particularly when it comes to university applications. Waiting until the last minute to realise that their PGs do not meet the requirements for their desired universities can lead to unnecessary stress and disappointment for both students and parents. It’s essential for students to stay on top of their work and communicate regularly with their teachers to ensure that their PGs reflect their true potential. By addressing any concerns early, students can take the necessary steps to improve their grades before the final submission, avoiding the shock of discovering they don’t have the numbers they need for a particular university course. Proactively managing their academic progress ensures that students, parents, and teachers are all aligned.

The Hidden Dangers of Inflating Predicted Grades

Inflating predicted grades, though often done with good intentions, poses significant risks that parents and students may not fully understand. Universities rely on these grades as a measure of a student’s preparedness and potential for success in higher education. When grades are artificially elevated, they create a false impression of the student’s capabilities, which can lead to several negative outcomes.

For students, inflated grades can result in acceptance into programs where they may struggle to meet the academic demands, leading to stress, failure, or even withdrawal. For schools, repeated discrepancies between predicted and actual grades can harm their credibility with universities, potentially leading to blacklisting or reduced trust in future applicants from the institution.

Moreover, inflating grades undermines the fairness and integrity of the education system. It can disadvantage students who are accurately assessed, creating an uneven playing field. Teachers bear a heavy responsibility in this process, as they must balance the aspirations of students and parents with the reality of the student’s performance and evidence of progress.

Ultimately, predicted grades must be grounded in evidence, not optimism. This ensures that students are set up for success in environments that align with their actual abilities and achievements, preserving the integrity of the process for everyone involved.

The Need for Reform in University Applications

The current university application system exacerbates the challenges of PGs. Requiring predicted grades months before exams introduces unnecessary stress and uncertainty. A more equitable system would allow students to complete their applications with transcripts, recommendations, and other supporting documents early, but reserve the final submission of grades until after exam results are released.

This approach would recognise the variability of student performance. Some students excel in exams despite average class performance, while others may underperform due to unforeseen circumstances. Placing students in rigid boxes based on PGs months in advance fails to account for these nuances and can have long-term implications for their futures.

Conclusion

A clear and transparent PG policy is not just a tool for fairness—it is a necessity. It ensures that students, parents, and teachers are aligned in their understanding of how grades are assigned, and it provides a framework for managing expectations. By rooting grades in evidence and fostering open communication, schools can create an environment where PGs serve their intended purpose: to reflect a student’s potential as accurately as possible. At the same time, advocating for systemic changes in university applications is essential to ensure that students are judged on their actual achievements rather than predictions.

In conclusion, predicted grades are not just numbers—they are a reflection of effort, evidence, and the trust placed in the educational process. Schools must strike a delicate balance between supporting students’ aspirations and maintaining the integrity of the system. By having clear policies, fostering transparent communication, and grounding predictions in tangible evidence, we can ensure fairness and accountability for all stakeholders.

As I often remind my Design Technology students by pointing to the words outside our lab: "It's not about ideas; it's about making ideas happen." Predicted grades, much like the projects we undertake in DT, require more than just potential—they demand action, commitment, and measurable progress.

I’ve included the policy I use for IB DP Design Technology as an example here. If you think it would be helpful, I’d also be happy to share the policy we use for Visual Arts. Let me know your thoughts in the comments—I’d love to hear how you approach predicted grades in your schools!