Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: Victoria University of Wellington Students' Newspaper. Vol. 32, No. 3. 1969.

Pass rates

Pass rates

Attiudes towards examination success and failure also vary; pass rates which in one country would be intolerable are accepted in another.

A common attitude among Wellington students (at least it is the stated attitude of their students' Education Committee) is that examination failure represents waste of staff and student time, and so of public money.

According to the Times Educational Supplement of 15 November 1963, of the students entering French universities that year at least 75% would not get a degree on the waste-of-time premise only 25% were not wasting time, and money. This degree of waste is by no means unthinkable in contemporary society: nevertheless, one suspects there is perhaps another point of view.

There is. If you ever have the opportunity to ask a French student about "the waste of time", you may get asked back, perhaps fiercely, "Do you think it a waste of time to be following Professor X's lectures!"

The French student is right to challenge our shopkeeper accounting, according to which a high pass-rate is a mark of efficiency. Let us suppose (Context A) a class of 50 students all of whom pass (pass-rate 100%). Let us suppose (Context B) a class of 100 students of whom 50 pass (pass-rate 50%). Let us now suppose that the 50 passing students of Context B would be the same passing students as in Context A. which context is socially preferable? Surely B, for not only does the same number pass but 50 additional students follow the course of study. Assuming the latter to be worth while, the failing students (many of whom have approached the pass mark) and hence the community profit; and Context B is the more economical.

Now this manner of accounting has underlying assumptions. First, the course is not given for the examination; that is, the benefit to the failing students must be real and appreciated as real otherwise the "waste" point of view will acquire validity). Then there must be a pass: fail proportion which remains within the limit of what is acceptable anywhere; it seems to me that 1:3 is well beyond this limit. Thirdly, competition for success must not be so harsh that its cost is unrelieved swotting and a distorted sense of values. Fourthly, the country's economy must be strong enough for employers to recognise the value in prospective employees of a period of study which did not lead to an academic qualification: and may not have apparent, immediate practical application, but which has potential effectiveness over a longer time scale.