'Grenade' lobbed by exam chief blows up in his face

A-level enquiry: Beleaguered QCA chairman unites educational establishment over his claim that the Secretary of State acted improperly

It was, said one seasoned education observer, "as if the man leaving the room had tossed in a hand grenade to try and kill as many of those who remained as possible".

The extraordinary events of the last 24 hours have ensured Sir William Stubbs, the chairman of the beleaguered Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, will leave the education world having achieved one remarkable feat.

His legacy will be that for just one day he succeeded in uniting exam boards, the teachers' unions, government education ministers, Mike Tomlinson – the chairman of an independent inquiry – and universities around a common theme.

All were agreed that there was no case for suggesting, as he had done, that Estelle Morris, the Secretary of State for Education, acted improperly in urging her officials to contact the exam boards and prepare for the worst-case scenario as a result of the Tomlinson inquiry and work out how they would go about re-grading all this summer's A-level results.

The events started earlier in the day when Sir William began a series of interviews. He had just given evidence to the Tomlinson committee, which is investigating whether the authority, of which he was both chairman and chief executive at the time of the A-levels, put pressure on exam boards to lower the grades of thousands of candidates. It was alleged by headteachers that the authority had done so to avoid a row about grade inflation and slipping exam standards.

The interview he did with The Independent was revealing in itself. In it, he admitted telling exam boards at a meeting on 26 June that there might be calls for an inquiry into the results if an expected rise in standards was sustained. He was told at the meeting there was an increase in the number of students gaining E grades, with a consequent increase in the overall pass rate.

Sir William said he told representatives of the three exam boards that they must stick by the code of practice covering examinations, which says standards must be maintained year on year, but added: "I told them if this [the rise in the pass rate] was sustained ... we will probably have to have an inquiry to assure ourselves and the public that what you have done is based on real evidence and you haven't inadvertently dropped the standard."

It was this comment that, allegedly, led to some examiners believing that they were under pressure to keep the pass rate down. In his interview, Sir William insisted he was merely ensuring they were sure of their facts. He also stressed that the main complaints had been levied against just one exam board, the Oxford and Cambridge and RSA (OCR) – and suggested this showed that not all boards felt under pressure.

Surprisingly, he stressed that the OCR was still under investigation by the QCA over the way it had awarded coursework grades, even though his own inquiry published last week had exonerated it of any malpractice.

He also revealed details of a letter he sent to Ms Morris in which he told her of the expected rise in the pass rate. It said: "A large element of this is, of course, a cause for celebration, showing that the reforms are enabling students to get greater breadth in their studies at AS-level.

"Having said this, if the results do come out as currently expected, I believe the QCA ... should institute a review of the causes of these statistical changes to reassure ourselves, the Government and public at large that there has been no dilution of standards."

Two hours later all this evidence took a back seat as he went on the offensive after hearing that senior civil servants from the Department for Education and Skills had approached two exam boards – OCR and the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance – asking them to prepare for a "worst-case scenario" in which all A-levels taken this summer would have to be re-graded.

This, Sir William claimed, was evidence of interference with the integrity of the independent inquiry. His new chief executive, Ken Boston, had contacted Mr Tomlinson about this, he added, and as a result the inquiry chairman was considering resigning.

Within minutes, Ms Morris launched a counter-offensive claiming it was the duty of her department to prepare for all eventualities as a result of the Tomlinson inquiry. As one insider put it: "Just imagine if we went on to the Today programme and John Humphrys asked Estelle: 'Tomlinson has just recommended all A-levels be re-graded – what are you doing about that?' and she replied: 'Well John, as you know we've had this independent inquiry so I haven't been able to do anything during the past week'. There would be uproar."

Another education expert added: "It would have made Mike Tomlinson look a bit weak if he could be swayed by telephone calls from civil servants, saying he might recommend re-grading, into thinking that's what he should recommend."

The following morning Mr Tomlinson issued a statement saying he did not consider his inquiry had been compromised. In effect, it took the rug out from under Sir William's feet, leaving him isolated and facing an uncertain future.