London’s lead widens as A‑level top‑grade gap with North East hits 9.2 points

Aggregated JCQ figures show London recorded 32.1% A*–A entries in 2025 while the North East fell to 22.9%, widening the regional gap to 9.2 percentage points amid calls for targeted funding, teacher recruitment and outreach to prevent the divide entrenching social mobility barriers.

London emerged again as the strongest-performing English region in this year’s A‑level tables, with 32.1% of entries awarded A–A, while the North East recorded the lowest share at 22.9%. According to aggregated awarding‑body figures compiled by the Joint Council for Qualifications, the difference between the highest‑ and lowest‑performing regions widened to 9.2 percentage points in 2025 — up from 8.8 points the previous year — even as the overall national proportion of A–A grades rose to around 28.3%.

Myles McGinley, head of exam board OCR, put the change bluntly to the Evening Standard: “If you look at the gap between the highest performing region this year, which is London, and the lowest performing region, which is the North East, we have seen an increase in the gap. Last year that gap was 8.8 percentage points, and this year, that gap is 9.2 percentage points.” His remarks reflect concern among awarding‑body leaders that headline gains mask growing geographic divergence. JCQ’s published tables were the basis for much of this reporting.

Independent analysis of the 2025 figures points to a record proportion of top grades outside the Covid years, but commentators have emphasised that the headline improvement sits alongside entrenched regional divides. Ofqual’s analytics portal — which allows county‑level inspection of A‑level outcomes — shows persistent county‑by‑county variation and helps explain why national averages can obscure sharp local differences in attainment. Journalists and policymakers have used those visualisations to map where top‑grade shares have risen and where they have fallen.

More detailed sector reporting identifies a number of sub‑trends behind the regional picture. Schools Week’s round‑up of eight key trends in the data highlights subject‑level shifts, gender differences and substantial county‑level variation, while national coverage also flagged falls in particular areas such as the West Midlands and the North East. Exam board and school leaders quoted across the coverage warned that socioeconomic factors remain a powerful driver of the uneven geography of results.

The unequal distribution of high grades has immediate consequences for progression to higher education. Education leaders and ministers responding to the results have pointed to the risk that pupils from lower‑scoring regions will face reduced access to top universities and the long‑term labour‑market opportunities that follow. Commentators have called for targeted policy responses to prevent the current pattern from reinforcing existing social mobility gaps.

Analysts and campaigners suggest several plausible explanations for the divergence. Coverage has explored how longstanding socioeconomic disparities, differences in school resources and disruption during the pandemic combined to tilt recovery in attainment towards more advantaged areas. Schools Week and Guardian analysis both emphasised that these are structural issues: short‑term fluctuations in grading cannot be disentangled from broader inequalities in funding, recruitment and local opportunity.

The official datasets that underpin this debate are publicly available: JCQ’s examination‑results hub provides the aggregated awarding‑body statistics used in media reporting, while Ofqual’s county‑level tools supply downloadable charts and interactive maps that allow closer scrutiny. Together, those resources give ministers, local authorities and school leaders the means to pinpoint where interventions are most needed.

Calls for action from across the sector have been consistent: allocate more targeted funding, address teacher recruitment and retention in harder‑hit counties, and design outreach to ensure disadvantaged pupils in lower‑scoring regions can access competitive university courses. Exam board executives and school leaders quoted in the aftermath urged both immediate and long‑term measures to narrow the gap rather than letting the current pattern become the new normal.

The paradox of 2025 is clear: while the national share of top grades has risen, the benefits of that improvement have not been evenly shared. As the JCQ and Ofqual datasets make plain, the growing gulf between London and the North East crystallises a broader policy challenge — how to translate overall grade inflation into genuine, geographically balanced opportunities for pupils across England.

📌 Reference Map:

Reference Map:

• Paragraph 1 – ^[1], ^[6], ^[3]
• Paragraph 2 – ^[1], ^[2], ^[6]
• Paragraph 3 – ^[4], ^[7]
• Paragraph 4 – ^[5], ^[3]
• Paragraph 5 – ^[3], ^[4], ^[5]
• Paragraph 6 – ^[4], ^[5]
• Paragraph 7 – ^[6], ^[7]
• Paragraph 8 – ^[5], ^[2], ^[3]
• Paragraph 9 – ^[1], ^[4], ^[6]

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
10

Notes:
✅ The narrative is fresh, with no evidence of prior publication. The earliest known publication date is August 15, 2025. The report is based on a press release from the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ), which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found. The narrative includes updated data and does not recycle older material.

Quotes check

Score:
10

Notes:
✅ The direct quote from Myles McGinley, head of the OCR exam board, is unique to this report. No identical quotes appear in earlier material, and no variations in wording were found. This suggests the content is original or exclusive.

Source reliability

Score:
10

Notes:
✅ The narrative originates from The Standard, a reputable UK news outlet. The report is based on a press release from the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ), a legitimate and authoritative source in the education sector.

Plausability check

Score:
10

Notes:
✅ The claims made in the narrative are plausible and supported by data from the JCQ. The report aligns with known trends in A-level results and does not make surprising or unsupported claims. The language and tone are consistent with typical educational reporting, and the structure is focused and relevant.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary:
✅ The narrative is fresh, original, and based on reliable sources. All claims are plausible and supported by data, with no signs of disinformation or recycled content. The report maintains a high standard of journalistic integrity.