An answer to the A-level debacle — and Gary Lineker

Peter Henry

John Witheridge may well be right in his arguments-and, over time, many may benefit at a macro level.

At an individual level however there are two downsides.

First, Universities still make offers based on A level UCAS points. An A at A level (worth 120 points) is easier than its equivalent at Pre U (a D3 worth 130 points. The grade below a D3 being worth 115 points so less than an A at A level). So an offer of 3 A's at A level is easier to achieve than 3 D3's. This year, therefore, those taking A level's have had an advantage over those taking Pre U. Not much good being better prepared for University if you don't get in.

Second,at some schools (including Charterhouse)students were given no choice between A level and Pre U. So those schools changed their proposition to students without giving them an effective choice-that is wrong.

The game may be won but there has been a cost-those students who would have achieved the necessary A level grades had they taken them, but just fell short of the higher equivalents at Pre U and so failed to win places at University.

As ever, never mind sacrificing a few individuals if the prize is to be seen as being the leading light in the field of education. An approach to life I doubt those Schools intended to instill in their pupils.

Critical Thinker

Peter Henry's response to John Witheridge, whilst undoubtedly motivated by the right concern for fairness to pupils is poorly reasoned, and does not in any significant way undermine the force of Witheridge's claims and his school's actions.

First, the assumption that an A at A-Level is easier than a D3 at Pre-U, based solely on the UCAS tariff, which was set 18 months before anybody had seen let alone marked or graded a live pre-U paper, is specious reasoning based on highly questionable factual claims.
Second, students at Charterhouse, I understand are offered a mixed economy in the 6th Form, some subjects offering Pre-U and the rest A-Level, so there is some measure of choice there. Further, the changes were hardly imposed, pupils knew well before they opted for their Sixth Form curriculum. Perhaps Mr Henry thinks every department in every school should hold a referendum before it changes exam boards, or paper options, just in case some spurious sense of 'pupil choice' is being undermined?

Third, pupils fail to get the requisite grades for all sorts of reasons, very often as a result of a lack of application. Perhaps it is the case that you can afford to be even lazier at A-Level and still get the grade than you can at Pre-U, but Mr Henry needs to argue that case in the face of the experience of thsoe state and private school teachers who have experience of teaching both systems. He may also want to consider whether it is a bad thing for lazier pupils to fail to get the grade, allowing more able and or harder working pupils to do so.

It is clear that this school, after long internal consultation, and a clear sense of what was best for its own pupils, opted to allow individual subjects to move to this new exam system. If Mr Henry thinks that teachers, senior management or governors of schools make these sorts of changes for some elusive future good of society or the education system rather than its current pupils he is sadly mistaken.

More power to the likes of John Witheridge, Charterhouse and especially to those state schools brave enough to take the lead with this exciting and unashadly academic exam.

Carthusian

It amuses me how people can talk about the benefits and drawbacks to pupils without talking to them first. As a Carthusian subject to the Pre-U course, I have a clearer understanding of the reactions of my peer group. We were all fairly sceptical of the Pre-U course to start with, and your comment on how some subjects do A-Level whilst others do Pre-U is irrelevant. The strengths of pupils may have resided in the Pre-U subjects, leaving us with no choice. And this is not to say that those who wanted A-Levels instead were the only ones who felt hard done by, because it happened in reverse too. Some who took A-Levels were unhappy because they may have felt the two year course was better suited for them.

The fact that we were never given a choice is one which irritates me the most, and it doesnt help at all towards our uni's as the grades D3 and A are not the same, and when uni's hand out their offers they treat them at the same level.

However, despite all of this the A-Level scheme does need to be changed, and someone has to go first.

Critical Thinker

Dear Carthusian,
It's dangerous to assume things about people who post on comment boards. I assure you I know very well, a very large number of Carthusians who took and taught both A-levels and Pre-U exams at Charterhouse this year so you really shouldn't presume to be better placed than am I to comment. You certainly did have a choice to go to other schools or colleges to have your 6th Form education. Whe your parents pay for private education they pay for the ethos and the skill of the institution, not some particular specific of the institution at the time of joining. It isn't clear why, for example, any department, or the school should have engaged with you personally to check that you approved of their choice of exam syllabus. The principle is no different whether they move from one set of paper options to another, one exam board to another or one assessment system to another.

ATurner

There is no doubt in my mind Pre-U was a huge mistake. More Carthusians than ever before failed to achieve their predicted grades or get their first or reserve University choices. Resultantly, more Carthusians than ever before have taken re-sits.

The cryptic and vague table of results on the Charterhouse website post the change of qualifications speaks volumes. In short, Pre-U does not Pre-pare you for University but Pre-vents you from getting there.

Charterhouse now offers IB which other private schools are stopping due to poor results and pupils failing to get into university, we can rest assured that as Charterhouse has built a new day house, changed their timetable and taken on more staff to accommodate it the IB will not be dropped in a hurry.

After all why does it matter if the pupils don’t succeed when the school, and dare I say it the Headmaster, is breaking educational frontiers and leading reform?

Carthusienne

As someone in their final year at Charterhouse, who came only for 6th form (as is the way for girls) - I certainly have an opinion on the Pre-U. After reading about how the exams work, I was a little nervous at the prospect of everything boiling down to one set of exams at the end - but ultimately, I still chose to come to Charterhouse.

Whatever the faults of Charterhouse - the one area I cannot criticise it for is the academics. The teaching is second to none, and when I compare the Pre-U papers to A-Level ones, it is incredible what a high level I have been taught to. The Pre-Us are fantastic, they encourage independence, a broader range of skills, and they require you to know your subject in far more detail.

The only issue with the Pre-U is that when a University offers you D3 D3 D3, for a course that requires AAA - it seems unfair as a D3 is certainly more difficult. However, I am not criticising Charterhouse for beginning the Pre-Us, I think they are fantastic - especially for Arts, Humanities, and Languages.