More talk, as this every August, of A level grades getting better (Source: BBC). And of course all the usual debate with the older generations saying it’s because they are getting easier, the Government saying it’s because standards are getting better, or whatever. Does it really matter? It seems to me the whole debate always seems to overlook the basic issue of employment prospects.
As an employer, you have two choices: go with someone experienced and pay their worth, or go for someone fresh, where perhaps school or Uni leavers (sic) are a consideration. In this latter category, an employer really only has academic achievements and personality to go on, and the latter only becomes a major factor if the candidate makes it to an interview. So in the bulk of cases, the candidate’s educational achievements should probably be the “USP”.
As an employer, if I was faced with a pile of CV’s where a large majority of candidates had achieved high grades (the latest figures suggest more than 1 in 4 achieve ‘A’ grades), in order to create a shortlist, I would have to start using my opinions on the “Other Interests” section of the CV. Leaving aside the discriminatory arguments that might well arise as a result, surely this shift in emphasis starts to undermine the grading system.
So it seems to me that if we want grades to maintain a level of integrity, high grade awards should be harder to attain, irrespective of whether educational standards are improving or exams are getting easier. The net effect of having a higher % of good grades may earn a few brownie points in politics, but will potentially have a negative effect on job prospects for those attaining them.