When was the last time you thanked the exams team?

By Debra Gray CBE, the Principal and Chief Executive of Hull College.

Something interesting happens in colleges at this time of year. The operational temperature rises, deadlines tighten, and leaders like me start asking more urgent questions about achievement, progress and attainment. In the middle of all of that, the exams team simply gets on with the job. Without fuss or drama – just consistent delivery under pressure.

The challenge is that most of us don’t think about their role nearly enough, and when we do, we often underestimate how much it has changed. There was a time when exams activity followed a relatively predictable rhythm: a defined summer series, paper-based entries, and a regulatory environment that, while rigorous, was comparatively stable. That is no longer the case. The current reality is one of continuous delivery, multiple series, increasingly complex access arrangements, and a regulatory framework that leaves very little room for interpretation or error. Their job has fundamentally shifted.

What has not shifted at the same pace is how we recognise and value the work our teams do. Exams teams now sit at the centre of a highly complex system. They connect teachers, learners, awarding organisations, JCQ requirements, senior leaders and regulators. They translate between those different parts of the system and ensure that everything aligns. In many ways, they operate as the human interface that keeps the system functioning, and when it works well, it is almost entirely invisible.

That invisibility is part of the issue. When exams processes run smoothly, nothing happens. There are no headlines, no escalation, no one banging at my door in a panic. The absence of problems is taken as the norm, rather than the result of skilled, detailed work carried out by our exams teams under challenging circumstances. However, when something does go wrong, the situation changes immediately. The same role that was previously invisible becomes the focal point for investigation, scrutiny and, at times, external attention. The shift from routine to critical can be rapid and intense.

This creates a set of working conditions that we do not always acknowledge explicitly. Exams teams operate in environments where the margin for error is extremely small and the consequences of mistakes are significant, particularly for learners. The role requires a high level of technical accuracy, but also the ability to respond quickly and calmly when issues arise. In practice, this often means managing pressure on behalf of the wider organisation so that it does not disrupt teaching, learning or outcomes.

Colleges like mine rightly focus on transformation, innovation and future skills, but none of that is credible without a reliable core. Exams processes are part of that core, they underpin the integrity of outcomes, the fairness of assessment and the confidence that learners, employers and regulators place in the system. Without that reliability, other strategic ambitions become much harder to sustain.

There is still a tendency to position exams within a ‘back office’ framing, but that does not reflect the reality of the role. I prefer to see it as critical infrastructure within the organisation. It is the nexus where policy, regulation, curriculum and learner experience converge in a very practical way. When it works well, it enables everything else to function as intended.

Ultimately, this matters because of its direct impact on learners. Every accurate entry, every correctly applied access arrangement and every met deadline contributes to a learner receiving the result they have earned and the future they deserve. For many students, particularly those who require additional support or have barriers to learning, that accuracy is not a marginal issue, it is central to their progression and their future opportunities.  

Looking ahead, the trajectory is unlikely to become simpler (when does it ever?). The system is becoming more complex and expectations continue to increase, often without a corresponding increase in capacity. If we are serious about maintaining the integrity of the system, then we need to be equally serious about recognising the people who hold that integrity in place. Not just when something goes wrong, but as a matter of course, because the absence of problems is not the absence of effort. It is the result of it.

From a personal perspective, I know how much sits with exams teams and how much responsibility they carry on behalf of the rest of us. We rely on their judgement, their attention to detail and their ability to hold everything together under pressure, and we do so with a level of trust that is often unspoken but absolute. Every time results land exactly as they should, it is the outcome of careful, skilled work carried out with a strong sense of responsibility to learners. For many of those learners, getting that detail right is the difference between moving forward and being held back, and that is not something any of us should take lightly.

So, to our wonderful FE exams teams this is simply to say that your work is seen, and it is valued. Not because it draws attention to itself, but because it does not. The system works because you make it work, and I appreciate everything you do.

And to our senior leaders, if it has been a while since you saw them, pop down to see your exams team, take them some biscuits and say thank you, they deserve it.