Dr Geoff Parks, Director of Undergraduate Admissions at the University of Cambridge, has expressed concern that some schools may be exaggerating the predicted A-level grades of applicants in order to improve their chances of receiving a conditional offer.

The problem has become more acute in the run-up to this summer’s introduction of the new A* A-level grade, which will form part of the University’s standard A-level conditional offer for the majority of 2010 entrants.

In fact, Varsity reported last week that 76 conditional offers were made this year requiring students to achieve a minimum of two A* grades and one A grade in their A-level exams. Such unprecedented offers have increasingly put pressure on schools to be optimistic in their grade predictions.

However, the practice of over-predicting grades – which is being carried out by schools and not by applicants themselves – is not a new one.

Even before the introduction of the new A* grade at A-level, schools’ predictions of their students’ A-level scores were known for their optimism, predicting high grades which were not borne out by the candidates’ examination results.

The introduction of the new A* grade last year, however, has increased the scope for exaggerated predictions at the higher end of the scale.

As it is the only university which requests the raw Uniform Mark Scheme (UMS) examination scores of all of its candidates, it is easier for Cambridge to detect cases of overly confident grade predictions than it is for other universities.

"Using [UMS scores] we can, in effect, make our own predictions," Dr Parks said. "It is on this evidence that we can say that some of the school predictions have been extremely optimistic."

He added, "If other universities have been using A* predictions as a basis for selection, they may have been misled."

It is likely that the problem of over-predicting grades is a result of the confusion caused by the introduction of the new grade, rather than any deliberate intention on the part of schools to mislead university admissions tutors.

In fact, the University recommended to UCAS, the national body responsible for university admissions, that schools should be asked to refrain from predicting A* grades until their effect on the system was better understood.

The recommendation was not adopted due to concerns that it would affect UCAS’s research into the accuracy of predicted grades.

Dr Parks, however, is confident that the University’s decisions on whether to admit applicants have not been influenced by inaccurate predictions.

The University will not be discriminating between predicted A* and A grades until the new grade becomes more established.

The introduction of the new A* grade was welcomed by the University. Last year, one in every eight A-level students achieved three A grades, making it difficult to identify the best performers.