This year’s  A Level results have been released and the pass rate is over 97%.  A quarter of all passes are at grade A.  Is this a problem?  Yes, of course.   Does it suggest “dumbing down” has taken place over the years?  Almost certainly.

Firstly, why is it a problem that so many pass  and do so at such a high level?  As many have stated before, and I wholly concur, it make it very difficult for universities to differentiate between candidates competing for places.  True, A Levels (and Highers) are not the only information that Universities have to rely on – they have the candidates’ personal statements in their UCAS form – but this isn’t the same as grade based information.  Interviews are an important part of the process at some institutions – but on what basis do you decide who to interview? By looking at projected (or achieved) grades.  It will likely become necessary for more and more institutions to require candidates submit to a university’s  own in-house examinations in order to distinguish between top scoring candidates.

You could argue that it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing for a candidate wishing to study philosophy at a top university to sit an entrance exam that shows they have undertaken some reading of their own and have some prior knowledge of the subject that they wish to study.  But, it isn’t only universities and colleges that may judge people on exam results, but employers too. 

Beyond this is the argument that standards have fallen.  Universities complain they need students to take remedial English lessons.  We hear employers bemoan the numeracy and literacy standards of youngsters.  So how does this tally with ever increasing numbers of top level grades awarded in exams and the extremely high pass rate overall?  I can only give my personal experience, and it isn’t of A Levels, but Scottish Highers – which face similar accusations.   I have been both a pupil and a teacher and my time in these respective roles concludes that yes, things have become easier. 

When I was pupil I remember my maths teacher being asked if exams were harder in her day.  Yes, she replied, as some of the things she studied at O Level or O Grade, were no longer in the equivalent- Standard Grade, but could be found in the A Level equivalent – Higher.  I myself remember using an old O Level textbook for part of my Higher Grade physics course.  When I did CSYS physics the class was told that we might have problems with the first part as it wouldn’t have been covered yet in CSYS maths.  The maths pupils said they had been told that content had been dropped from CSYS maths as it was too hard. 

I was amongst the last year to sit Revised Highers before Higher Still was introduced.  In the history paper for the Revised Higher pupils were required to answer three essay questions; in HIgher Still only two essay answers were required.

Later, as a history teacher,  a hot topic of discussion amongst Scottish history teachers was that the history exam was not adequately serving pupils.  Traditionally only 15% of pupils sitting a history exam were awarded an A and anything above 23/25 for an essay question was virtually unheard of.  This was wrong, said the exam board.  We should award more full marks and the % of awards at A should be raised inline with geography and modern studies – at about 25%.    Many history teachers were against this as “dumbing down”, but were also afraid of losing out on students to modern studies and geography.  If it is harder to get an A in history and you need X number of As to gain entry to university(and the course you wish to study does not specify certain subjects) why wouldn’t students move towards an easier A? 

It is also worth bearing in mind that the more popular your subject (and easiness is often cited as a reason) then the greater the demand for teachers… 

All of this is not to denigrate the achievements of many pupils today or the hard work that is required of teachers.  I also believe ‘teaching to the test’ can account for some of the increase.  Certainly I, for one, wouldn’t like to be sitting my exams in an atmosphere that suggests (and in some cases necessitates) that anything less than straight As is some kind of a failure.   However, it is quite clear that this system needs an overhaul.  

********

On a slight sidenote, I would argue that an overhaul of the system may want to include a broadening of the subjects studied by individuals at A Level – and Higher.   Is it really appropriate to specialise on three subjects at age 16?  Especially when it is perfectly acceptable for those to be theatre studies, English and drama or maths, further maths and physics? 

In this regard, and many others, the IB makes a great alternative and it is no surprise that it is increasingly popular in British secondary schools.