IGCSE results usually plateau for fixable reasons: too many initiatives, mocks that don’t match the real papers, tier entries made without data, gaps found too late, feedback students don’t act on, weak exam technique, and training that doesn’t change practice. Cambridge keeps grades equally hard to achieve each year, so improvement has to come from teaching.
Why can’t boundaries explain a plateau?
Because the boards set them to keep standards steady. Cambridge’s aim is that “it is no more difficult and no less difficult to obtain each grade than it was in the previous year” (Cambridge). A school whose results have flattened for three years has a school-side cause. The seven below are the most common, and each has a practical fix.
1. Are there too many improvement priorities?
Often, yes. The Education Endowment Foundation’s A School’s Guide to Implementation (third edition, 2024) “encourages schools to do fewer things better”. It advises that “schools should probably take on fewer implementation projects and pursue these diligently”, and warns that “it can take at least two years to implement complex, whole-school initiatives”. Fix: choose one or two results priorities, give them two years, and stop something else to make room. The guide notes that “reviewing and stopping some existing practices may be required”.
2. Do the mocks match the real exam?
If mocks mix questions or use the wrong component combinations, their grades mislead everyone. Cambridge advises choosing mock components “with the same final digit e.g. 12, 32, 62 or 11, 31, 61” so that published grade thresholds apply. Fix: build every decisive mock from one complete past series, marked to that series’ mark scheme and converted with its thresholds. See how to set grade boundaries for mock exams.
3. Are tier entries made with data?
Wrong tier entries cap results silently. Cambridge IGCSE Mathematics 0580 Core candidates can achieve no higher than C, and Extended candidates no lower than E. Pearson Mathematics A Higher candidates below grade 3 are unclassified. Fix: decide tiers from full mocks on each tier’s own papers, before the entry deadline, with the borderline group reviewed by the whole department. See IGCSE Core vs Extended and Edexcel Foundation vs Higher.
4. Are learning gaps found too late?
If gaps first appear in the Year 11 mock, there is little time left to close them. Fix: run question-level analysis after every full assessment from Year 10. Use Cambridge’s Principal Examiner Reports and Access to Scripts to learn from real papers. See question-level analysis for mocks and the 8-week post-mock intervention plan.
5. Do students act on feedback?
Marking that students never respond to changes little. The EEF’s marking review found that “pupils are unlikely to benefit from marking unless some time is set aside to enable pupils to consider and respond to marking” (EEF). It also found that “awarding grades for every piece of work may reduce the impact of marking”. Fix: build lesson time for students to correct and redo work, and mark fewer pieces in more depth. See how to reduce marking workload.
6. Is exam technique being taught?
Students lose marks they could have earned by misreading questions. Cambridge’s June 2024 examiner report for First Language English Paper 11 notes: “Candidates who paid attention to command/key words in the question were best placed to offer creditworthy responses and make efficient use of their time.” Others “missed opportunities to target higher marks … by paying insufficient attention to the details of the question as set” (Cambridge). Fix: teach command words explicitly in every subject, and use examiner reports to show students what full-mark answers look like.
7. Does professional development change practice?
Training that informs but does not embed rarely moves results. The EEF’s Effective Professional Development guidance (2021) says to “focus on the mechanisms”. Professional development should build knowledge, motivate staff, develop teaching techniques, and embed practice. Its mechanisms include modelling, rehearsal, monitoring and feedback, and “prompting context specific repetition”. Fix: replace one-off training days with shorter cycles where teachers see a technique modelled, rehearse it, use it, and get feedback.
How should leaders diagnose which cause applies?
Work through the seven with evidence, not opinion. A diagnostic sequence:
| Cause | Evidence to check |
|---|---|
| Too many priorities | Count current initiatives; check which have run two years |
| Mismatched mocks | Compare mock grades with final grades per subject |
| Tier entries | Students entered Core or Foundation who were near the higher tier boundary |
| Late gap-finding | When each cohort’s first question-level analysis happened |
| Feedback not acted on | Lesson time given to responding to marking |
| Exam technique | Marks lost on command words in mocks and examiner reports |
| CPD not embedded | Whether training included rehearsal and follow-up |
Compare your results with Cambridge’s worldwide figures subject by subject to see where the plateau is. See benchmarking against Cambridge worldwide statistics.
How schools do this with AI Buddy
AI Buddy addresses causes 2, 4 and 5 directly. Mocks and practice built from past-paper-style questions are marked instantly, so gaps show at topic and question level from Year 10, not in Year 11. Students get feedback while the question is fresh. Heads of department get the cohort data to target intervention and tier decisions. Leadership priorities, exam technique teaching and professional development remain the school’s own work.
Frequently asked questions
Why do a school’s IGCSE results stop improving?
Usually because of school-side causes: too many initiatives, mocks that don’t match the real papers, tier entries without data, gaps found late, feedback students don’t act on, weak exam technique, or training that doesn’t change practice.
How can a school improve IGCSE results?
Diagnose which causes apply, then fix one or two at a time for at least two years: accurate mocks, data-led tiers, early question-level analysis, feedback students act on, and command-word teaching.
How do you improve A Level results in a school?
The same causes apply, with more emphasis on unit timing and resits for Edexcel IAL, and on early full-paper practice in Year 13.
What is a good exam results improvement strategy?
Few priorities, pursued for two years or more, with evidence checked each term and professional development that includes rehearsal and follow-up.
Discover how AI Buddy helps schools strengthen teaching, learning and evidence-informed school improvement. Or start a short consultation with our schools team using the form below — we will get back to you directly.
Sources
- Education Endowment Foundation, A School’s Guide to Implementation (third edition, April 2024)
- Education Endowment Foundation, Effective Professional Development (October 2021)
- Education Endowment Foundation, A Marked Improvement? (April 2016)
- Cambridge International, Grade threshold tables and 0500 June 2024 examiner report
- Cambridge International help centre, Choosing papers for mock exams