THE MOVE by the State Examinations Commission (SEC) to defend the integrity of the Leaving Cert, amid increasing claims that the exam is being "dumbed down", is welcome. It is good to see the commission engaging in some public debate.
Since it took over management of the exams from the Department of Education in 2003, the SEC has enjoyed a very good record. It has dealt smoothly with the huge logistical challenge posed by the exams. The various exams "scandals" common in Britain have been mercifully few in the Republic.
But the SEC has a wider responsibility than just running the exam system; it must also protect the integrity of the exam and ensure academic standards are maintained year-on-year. In recent years, the SEC has faced increasing claims and an accumulating body of evidence that the exams are being "dumbed down". One forthcoming study, reported in this newspaper last week, makes a persuasive case. It reports how the number of very high grades has almost doubled in many higher level papers since 1991. Dr Brendan Guilfoyle of the Institute of Technology, Tralee says there is no evidence of higher academic attainment. The increase, he says, is simply grade inflation - higher grades being awarded more easily.
Dr Guilfoyle may be a leading figure in an academic think-tank campaigning against grade inflation but the evidence he has gathered raises important questions. Yesterday, the SEC said the higher grades could be traced to new, more modern syllabi, better preparation by students and better teaching. The SEC's decision to publish marking schemes for each paper is also a key factor. Students and their teachers have a much better idea of what is expected in the exams. It is also the case, as the ASTI has said, that students are working "harder and smarter".
But, even allowing for all of this, the increase in grades over the past two decades is astonishing. Significantly, the various OECD studies of academic achievement among Irish 15-year-olds has tracked no parallel increase in standards over the same period. On the eve of the exams, it may be indelicate to raise the question of "dumbing down". But this is an issue of substance, and one worthy of further investigation by the SEC and the Department of Education and Science.
This year marks the introduction of a new, more user-friendly timetable with exams spread out more evenly over the course of the first week. Students will have more recovery time. The former education minister responsible for this reform, Mary Hanafin, also pushed for a two-stage exam in some subjects, including English. The plan was that the "unseen" elements of the paper could be taken earlier in the year in order to ease the burden in June. It was a sensible proposal but one which failed to muster support from the school management bodies. But the new Minister for Education, Batt O'Keeffe, would do well to pick up the baton. The Leaving Cert is, after all, a two-year cycle. Why must all the written exams be taken in one 13-day period?