A-Level results bring back same old dumbing down debate

The huge increase in the number of A grades is expected to fuel the old row over whether the “gold standard” exam has been dumbed down. As a result, thousands of pupils who scored straight A grades have been rejected by top universities, including Oxford and Cambridge, which are increasingly turning to other tests to try to identify the best candidates.

But schools minister Jim Knight has insisted that the better results this year were purely on merit. He said: “The publication of A-level results should be a day of celebration for students who have done well, and not a denigration of their achievement.” Dr Martin Stephen, High Master of St Paul’s School in London, agrees with the minister, at least on this point.

Writing in the London paper, the Evening Standard, he said that in many cases, talk about dumbing down is both unfair and plain wrong, adding that in any case, this familiar row hides a much more crucial failing of ministers in their approach to A-levels. He said that the better results reflected two crucial changes over the past 20 years.

First, there is a culture of hard work among many young people that has not always been there. There is also a far better appraisal of the harsh realities of adult life and the need for decent qualifications. Second, it is now far harder to be a bad teacher than it has ever been. It is not only students who are working harder. Teachers are under a spotlight of public accountability that is arguably more demanding than for any comparable profession.

The real tragedy, he said, is that the debate over declining A-level standards serves to hide a far more serious problem which is that fewer and fewer students are opting to sit maths, physics, chemistry and biology, as well as modern languages.

He explained that schools are finding it extraordinarily difficult to get good graduate teachers in these subjects, so the inspiration and the knowledge are not there for pupils. He said that in some cases, his own school maintains its supply of top graduate teachers in scarcity subjects by going completely outside the conventional supply route, taking people from industry or research.

Dr Stephen said if there is a villain in the annual row about A-level results, it is not the candidates, nor is it their teachers. The real villains are successive governments who stand back while world class physics departments at top universities close down. Unless ministers are prepared to face up to that, he stated, we shall all be the poorer for it.

A Buckingham University report also had a few things to say about the sciences. It said that physics was in danger of disappearing from schools and universities, as students desert it in favour of “easier” options. It added that the slump in the number of students taking the subject was so severe that it threatened the future health of the economy.

According to the report, half as many sixth-formers take A-level physics now than 25 years ago and more than a quarter of university physics departments have shut down in just a decade. The A-level results that have just been released also show a further decline in the take-up of all science subjects.

Professor Alan Smithers, co-author of the report, warns that the crisis will only deepen when the Government introduces controversial new “science for the 21st century” GCSEs, starting with the new school term. He said that physics was once known as the queen of sciences but we are now not bringing forward enough people to the cutting edge of pure and applied research in the subject to underpin innovation and the economy.

But as the various aspects of the A-level debate continue, another trend is becoming apparent. With the image of the unemployed and debt-ridden new graduate all too real, young people are beginning to ask whether going to university is the best option for them. They are wondering whether a degree is still the passport to the fast track that it used to be or is it just as likely to turn out to be the road to nowhere.

They are asking the question that if they have already decided on a career, do they need to spend three or more years studying before they could get employment? One such student, Henry Bouquet of London, believes that it makes more sense to learn “on the job” and earn money while you are doing that instead of racking up debts by taking student loans.

He said: “I don’t want to go to university for two reasons. One, I can’t afford it. And two, I want to be a photographer and learning while you are actually doing the job is much better. There are loads of photography courses but I don’t think they are very good. I prefer to get experience by working as a photographer’s assistant. I don’t want to have ?13,000 worth of debt after three years at university and still have to buy equipment afterwards.”

The fear of accumulating large debts before even starting to work was also a strong deterrent for production assistant Tiran Lewis. He said, “I decided halfway through my A-levels that I couldn’t afford to go to university. My sister had just finished and was massively in debt. I didn’t want that. I had a Saturday job and midway through my second year of A-level studies, the company offered me a full-time position. I took it straight away.”

These are just two examples of how an increasing number of students are thinking. But the Government has a different idea. According to its predictions, by the year 2020, up to 40 percent of jobs will require education to degree level or similar, as Britain’s economy becomes even more driven by, and reliant on, technology.

Treasury boffins and businessmen agree with this and say that the country must have more degree-qualified people. Yet, the public perception is that the country really needs more good technicians and artisans instead. So, who is right? Well, you do not need A-level maths to work out that if 40 percent of jobs will require a degree, then 60 percent will not.