- Is A/L exam being made difficult deliberately?
- Students opt out of A/L exams for private foundation courses
Sri Lanka’s education is undergoing a strange shift right now. Perhaps this phenomenon has gone unnoticed, as researchers and statisticians have not yet delved into it. The GCE Advanced Level (A/L) exam, historically considered the primary route to tertiary education, is now seeing a decrease in student participation. Increasingly, students are choosing alternative pathways provided by private institutes over this conventional route. These private institutes, associated with foreign universities, present foundation courses as substitutes for Ordinary or Advanced Level examinations.
One concern centres on the difficulty level of the A/L exam itself. Students report struggling with lengthy and complex questions, which push them to the limit. This is the case even with dedicated preparation. This raises questions about accessibility and potential bias.
This trend begs examination. Are these exams inadvertently creating hurdles for certain groups, disseminating an unwanted inequality? Is it purely driven by a desire for more accessible alternatives, as some suggest? Or are deeper factors at play?
Complicated question papers
One straightforward explanation is that the authors of the question paper, primarily the university dons, intentionally make the content challenging. Despite the dedication and hard work students invest in their studies, a common thread appears among them. The complaint of challenges with the length and complexity of the questions has been a recurring issue for various selected subjects including Accountancy. Several years ago, English Literature was known for its difficulty, with more failures than students passing the paper.
Antonio Gramsci’s hegemony theory can be applied to this phenomenon. Gramsci’s theory refers to the dominance of a particular social group’s ideology over others, achieved through the manipulation of cultural institutions and practices. In the current context, the setting of tricky and challenging question papers can be seen as a form of culturally dominant influence.
The intentional difficulty in question papers may reflect the influence of a dominant ideology that seeks to maintain a certain social order. Those who succeed in challenging question papers may be perceived as more intellectually superior. This can create an unequal hierarchical structure where success in these tough exams becomes a symbol of prestige. Subjects that traditionally pose challenges may act as gatekeepers, allowing only those who get through these difficulties to be recognised as successful. It solidifies the power-based dominance within the educational system.
The intention may have its own justification: maintain high academic standards. However, the very act could put certain groups at a disadvantage and strengthen existing inequalities.
Free education
The Advanced Level (A/L) system holds a crucial position in Sri Lankan education. It is the examination that equips students for the tangible benefits of the country’s free education at the tertiary level. Against such a backdrop, the choice of students to pursue foundation courses offered by foreign universities raises concerns about whether the A/L examination has become an uninvited gatekeeper, limiting access to higher education for some individuals while providing smoother alternatives for others. This dynamic creates a two-tiered system, possibly sustaining privilege and constraining opportunities for those who excel in different ways.
The span between Ordinary Level and Advanced Level is instrumental for personal development. It marks the transition into adulthood and the cultivation of essential life skills. Individuals who opt out of A/Ls for alternative pathways may miss this transformative phase. At the same time, those who choose to persist may encounter significant pressure. They, too, tend to miss out on opportunities for leisure and exploration. This compels us to question the holistic purpose of education: whether pursuing academic excellence should be at the expense of personal growth and well-being.
Ensuring academic rigor is essential. However, an excess of demands can compromise the subject’s integrity. Pursuing excessively high standards may lead to unintended consequences, possibly undermining the overall educational experience for students. This calls for a balanced approach in setting standards that challenge students without compromising the quality of their academic journey.
When SAITM was introduced, the main concern centred around its credibility, a valid worry given the precision required in medicine. A comparable concern arises with the A/L phenomenon. If the A/L examination is excessively challenging, students opt out, turning to foundation courses offered by private institutes associated with foreign universities. The uncertainty lies in the quality of these alternatives. Can they ensure a high standard of education? The same apprehension present during the establishment of SAITM resurfaces when the A/L exams become overly complex, inadvertently pushing students towards more convenient pathways that may compromise the quality of education.
Cost of leisure
On the flip side, students who choose to persist may find success, but it often comes at the cost of their recreational activities. Unlike in the past when students struck a balance between leisure and academic work, contemporary students usually have to sacrifice their free time to steer the challenges of strict examinations. They hastily consume study material to excel in exams and secure university admission. However, once at universities, they may need more inclination to participate in leisurely activities.
There was a time when universities integrated STEM fields with aesthetic activities effortlessly. This trend is fading due to intense competition instigated right at the Advanced Level. Distinguished figures in academia, such as Carlo Fonseka, managed to excel in both medicine and aesthetic pursuits. The tragic irony lies in the diminishing presence of individuals who combine scientific expertise with artistic pursuits. Even humanities scholars are increasingly disengaging from aesthetic activities due to the competitive pressures originating from the Advanced Level. The pursuit of high academic standards can justify the power-based dominant influence within the educational system. However, it naturally widens the existing inequality.
The competitive dynamics introduced by the A/L examination unintentionally promote a cultural bias that diminishes the once-fluid integration of STEM fields with aesthetic activities. This shift has repercussions not only on the academic choices of individuals but also on the broader cultural landscape within educational institutions.
These complexities invite an open dialogue that involves stakeholders such as educators, students, policymakers, and the wider community. This dialogue should address concerns, explore alternative pathways, and ensure that education remains a transformative and inclusive experience for all.
Sachitra Mahendra