Q and A
Sir: Many people interested in education will doubtless share Dr Rhodes Boyson's pun- gently expressed doubts (3 January) about the oddly-named Q and F level examinations now proposed for the schools. The whole scheme seems to represent an uneasy com- promise between current progressive think- ing, so-called—which would doubtless like to do away with examinations entirely—and the views of those who seek desperately to maintain somehow proper standards of uni- versity entrance at a time when academic standards are under constant insidious attack.
We have certainly had a surfeit of educational revolutions in recent years; and in this case there seems to have been some pretty quick re-thinking on the part of the Schools Council. Back in 1966 we were magisterially assured in 'Examining at 16+' that 'Within the forseeable future, there is . . . no question of abolishing ordinary level GCE examinations, or of altering their dis- tinctive character.' That was presumably before the anti-intellectual boys in and out of Curzon Street started flexing their muscles in the rosy dawn of the comp-ed revolution! Now the pious hope seems to be that 0 level will just wither away and we will revert to a stale re-hash of the once sternly denounced `matric' with its range of compulsory sub- jects to be taken a year later. Unfortunately examinations, like old soldiers, are not too easily disposed of : it may well be that many pupils will prefer to go on studying for 0 level, much to the relief, no doubt, of teachers in search of some meaningful aim to occupy their charges—and regrettably some may choose to leave school thereafter rather than be forced to study more than two or three subjects.
J. H. K. Lockhart 21b King's Avenue, Ealing, London w5
Previous page
