The row over A-level and GCSE results has intensified after the chair of the exams regulator in England accused the Royal Statistical Society (RSS) of making comments that led to “widespread misunderstanding and suspicion” about Ofqual’s work. Ofqual has been under scrutiny for its role in the debacle, which left pupils devastated and university admissions in chaos. In the increasingly acrimonious aftermath, Roger Taylor, the chair of Ofqual, called on the RSS to set the record straight after it raised concerns about the now discredited algorithm and offered help. In a letter that will be seen as part of Ofqual’s fightback as the postmortem into the results mayhem gets under way, Taylor takes issue with comments made by the RSS to the press and the statistics watchdog, the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR), about Ofqual’s approach to moderating teacher-assessed exam grades. According to a Sky report the RSS offered to help the regulator with the algorithm in April, suggesting the expert services of two fellows, Guy Nason, professor of statistics at Imperial College London, and Paula Williamson, professor of medical statistics at the University of Liverpool. The arrangement foundered, however, after the RSS objected to the proposed confidentiality agreement the experts would be required to sign, on the grounds that it would have prevented them from commenting on the final model of the algorithm for years to come. The RSS wrote to the OSR: “The proposed confidentiality agreement [from Ofqual] would, on our reading, have precluded these Fellows (who were suggested precisely because of their relevant statistical expertise, and lack of ties to qualification regulators or exam-awarding bodies) from commenting in any way on the final choice of the model for some years after this year’s results were released. “We set out our concerns about the terms of the proposed non-disclosure agreement (NDA), and restated our willingness to help if a more suitable agreement could be reached. In the end, we did not get an official response to those questions, and our offer to help was not taken up.” Taylor denied that the confidentiality agreement would preclude anyone from commenting on the model and said Ofqual had responded. “It only precludes the disclosure of confidential information shared within the group. This approach is a normal and entirely ethical mechanism to ensure people can speak freely in the discussions and can see analyses of confidential data without fear of information being made public during the deliberative process.” Taylor continued: “Your letter and comments to the press have led to widespread misunderstanding and suspicion of Ofqual’s process. I would ask that you take all measures you can to correct this impression.” Ofqual also published a copy of the NDA. “This is important not least because the suggestion in your letter calls into question the reputations of all those who did take part in the advisory group and who, I am sure, would not have signed up to the restrictions you have incorrectly alleged.” Taylor said Ofqual was also exploring how to make the entire data set available through the ONS secure research service to enable others to look at how different approaches to moderation would have worked. The Guardian was unable to contact the RSS for comment. Following the scrapping of the controversial algorithm at the 11th hour, Taylor threatened to quit unless the education secretary, Gavin Williamson, publicly backed the exams regulator and admitted it was behind the U-turn that salvaged millions of student grades, the Guardian was told. Taylor’s ultimatum came after the education secretary tried to lay the blame for the exams fiasco at the door of Ofqual following a humiliating climbdown that scrapped A-levels and GCSEs awarded by algorithm and instead awarded pupils their school-assessed grades.