The English Examining Boards: Their route from independence to government outsourcing agencies

143

Continuing Attempts to Revalue the ‘Gold Standard’

The previous chapter dealt with the abortive attempts of the Schools Council to make
changes to the structure of A levels and one initiative by the Boards to broaden their
scope. However, as time passed, their unsuitability as the only qualification available
for those remaining in education after 16 became increasingly evident. The growth of
comprehensive schools, the improved attainment rates following the introduction of
GCSE and shrinking employment opportunities meant an ever-widening range of
young people were staying on after 16. "Between 1987 and 1994, full-time
participation at 16 rose from under 50 per cent [of the age group] to about 70 per
cent” (Hodgson 1997: 6).

There lingered in some quarters the notion of the sixth form as the opportunity for an
able minority to pursue specialist disciplines through their study of A levels, which
Michael Fallon, a Junior Education Minister in 1991, termed ‘flagships’ and ‘gold
standards’. (Quoted in Mathieson 1992: 195) This was less and less a true reflection
of comprehensive sixth forms where, alongside the able majority there were those
who failed A-Ievel examinations at the age of 18 with nothing to show for two years’
work. Before the major reform of 1999 with the introduction of Curriculum 2000,
there were continuing attempts to broaden the education of those studying at advanced
level.

What critics have long identified as a major weakness of A levels is their narrow
specialisation. (Green 1997: 88) There is no national 6^th-form curriculum, and
students choose subjects without any requirement to continue their general education
- a circumstance that makes English post-16 education unique. This has led to
complaints from both higher education institutions and employers that many lack the

<<   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   >>

More intriguing information