When a predicted grade and a mock result disagree, universities on UCAS read the predicted grade as the formal offer reference, and the mock result as context. The predicted grade is what admissions tutors use to decide whether to make an offer, while the mock result helps them weigh how realistic that prediction is.
Picture the moment any family dreads. Your daughter sits at the kitchen table in Accra, a Cambridge IGCSE mock paper in front of her, and the mark is a full grade below what her teacher predicted. She asks the question you have been avoiding: "Will the university even look at this?"
The honest answer is yes, and no. What she is really asking is which number decides her future.
What the admissions team actually sees
The UCAS application carries the predicted grade as the headline academic figure. It sits in the education section, generated by her school, and it is the number an admissions tutor reads first. Cambridge A Level predicted at an A? That sets the expectation for the offer they might extend. A predicted grade is the formal statement of what the school believes she will achieve.
The mock result does not appear on the application form. It lives in her reference, the confidential letter the school writes. That is where the admissions officer reads about her performance across the year, the mock outcome included, and how it compares to her prediction.
So when both numbers sit on the same desk, the university is not deciding which one is "true." They are deciding how much confidence your daughter's prediction deserves.
When the gap becomes a story
A mock result alone rarely changes an offer. A mock result that contradicts the prediction, with no explanation, is what gives an admissions tutor pause.
Consider two students. One scores a B in her IGCSE mock and her school predicted an A*. The school's reference explains the circumstances, a disrupted term, a changed syllabus, or a paper that covered material before it was taught, and the prediction stays credible. The other scores the same B, and the reference is silent. The tutor is left to ask why the school's confidence is not reflected in the student's own performance.
This is why the mock exam matters less as a number and more as part of a narrative. It is evidence in a story the school tells about your child's trajectory, and a story with a hole in it reads differently from one with an explanation.
What a parent can actually do
Before results season, ask the school directly what the reference will say about any mock result that falls short of the prediction. Ask whether the teacher plans to note the circumstances around the paper, or whether a stronger later assessment can be flagged. Schools are usually willing to explain their reference approach; they are not always proactive about it.
If the gap is real and persistent, the constructive response is not to argue with the school. It is to act on the material that is still in your hands. Mock exams sit at a point in the year when there is time to change the narrative, and that is where structured support earns its place. A tutor who knows your child's syllabus can identify whether the gap reflects a genuine misunderstanding or a paper that misaligned with the teaching schedule. The point is to close the distance between the prediction and the performance before the next assessment.
The signal that mattered was the one they acted on
Fly half Robert Pearson had every reason to trust the readout in front of him. In 1983, Air Canada Flight 143 ran out of fuel at 41,000 feet over Manitoba, because the ground crew and the flight computer had measured it in pounds while the refuelling process had supplied litres. The plane had no power for its instruments, and Pearson had to glide a 767, with no engines, to an abandoned airfield at Gimli.
The post-incident report, documented by the Canadian Aviation Safety Board and recounted in William and Marilyn Hoffer's book Freefall, is blunt about the failure. It was not one catastrophic error. It was a chain of small misreadings, each one defensible alone, that together produced a plane with an empty tank and a silent cockpit.
No single meter was ever "lying." Each one was accurate in its own units. The disaster came from reading one number as if it were the other.
A university offer works the same way. The predicted grade and the mock result are both true readings, but they are measuring different things, and applying either one without understanding the other creates a false picture. The family that asks which number matters has already missed the real question. The family that asks how the two fit together is the one that keeps its options open.
By the time Pearson lined up for that glide, there was nothing left to correct. Your daughter's application is still on the ground, and there is still time to make sure every number the admissions team reads tells the same consistent story.
Comments
No comments yet.