实际上，在关键的第4阶段，总结性评估主要是由学生所研究的资格所产生的。资格委员会提供的标准，客观地评价学生在相同的资格;然而，资质期望值的差异是巨大的。为确保每个孩子都能实现，作出积极贡献，最终发展和就业，为年轻人提供了大量的经费。根据人口统计和集水区的不同，学校所提供的经费将会有很大的不同。一个较富裕的集水区，包括有较高教育程度的受聘家庭，更有可能鼓励学术成就和资格，例如三等奖科学和普通中等教育证书资格;提供更多的学术资格，而不是更多的技能，实际的基础。从有限的经验来看，这些差异是显而易见的;在一个更富裕的领导学校提供更广泛的学术资格证书和普通中等教育证书(GCSE)相比之下，另一所更贫困的第二所学校提供了一整套替代资格，如BTEC, OCR National或applied GCSE。的确，这反映了学生的参与和选择，但也显示了学校必须做出的判断，以使学生与合适的资格和评估相匹配。
Indeed at key stage 4, summative assessments are mainly produced by or with reference to qualifications being studied by pupils. Qualification boards provide the criteria to judge students objectively within cohorts studying the same qualification; however differences in qualification expectations are vast. There is great provision set aside for young people in an attempt to ensure every child can achieve, make a positive contribution and ultimately develop and become employed. Depending on demographics and catchment the provision made by the school will vary greatly. A more affluent catchment area consisting of employed families with a higher regard for education is more likely to encourage academic achievement and qualifications, such as triple award science and GCSE qualifications; providing a more academic qualification base instead of a more skills, practical base. From limited experience these differences have been apparent; with a more affluent lead school offering a wider range of academic qualifications and GCSE's compared to a more deprived second school which provided a whole host of alternative qualifications such as BTEC, OCR National or applied GCSE's. Indeed this reflects engagement and choice from students but also shows the judgments which must be made by schools to match students to appropriate qualifications and assessments.