Well he would, wouldn't he?

This immortal line was uttered in court by Mandy Rice-Davies when it was put to her that Lord Astor denied not only having had an affair with her, but having ever met her at all. I was reminded of this comment when reading David James' critique of A levels in the Independent yesterday, which whilst admittedly being flagged as ‘opinion’, was little more than a thinly disguised advertisement feature for the International Baccalaureate's (IB) diploma programmes, which compete for market share with A levels and GCSEs.

In the article, James wheeled out the well-worn criticisms of the A level system (discussed in an earlier blog) treating them as established fact. According to James, the higher A level pass rate is down to the government’s desire to improve grades so that more students could get to university. This argument is flawed at two levels. Firstly, as argued in my earlier blog, A levels simply set a standard that has to be achieved – as time passes and teaching and learning improve, it is inevitable that more students will achieve that standard. More fundamentally, it misses the point that students don’t need higher grades to go to university – an expansion of university places is sufficient in itself. Suppose that tomorrow the number of university places doubled. Universities would want to fill these places for revenue reasons. All that would happen is that the grades needed to gain entry for courses would fall – there is no requirement for an improvement in A level grades for there to be an increase in university places. Hence James’ argument is logically flawed.

Whilst it is true, as I have argued before, that the A level system is far from perfect, this does not make the IB automatically better. The IB is a minority qualification offered at present by a small number of specialist providers. In a 2005 study (the last year for which full figures were available) IB applicants to UK universities formed 4,599 applications compared with 517, 556 non-IB applicants. This gives the IB a 0.9% market share - how suitable such a minority qualification would be for a wide-spread roll-out across the UK must be open to question, especially given the actual composition of the IB programme.

Taking a personal perspective, as I am wont to do, the IB would have been an unmitigated disaster. I was a mediocre O level student (couple of ‘A’ grades, the rest ‘C’s), but I excelled at A level, going on to win a place at a top university. What made the difference? This is something I have thought about a great deal over the years. Actually doing some revision formed an important part, but more significant is what made me want to revise. At O level, I was forced to take a whole load of subjects that I frankly detested. Anyone for the anti-corn law league and the 1832 Reform Act? Amo, amas, amat, amamus, amatis, amant? Learning the first 20 elements of the periodic table by heart? No, I thought not. The only subjects I actually enjoyed at O level were the conceptual ones – Maths and English, and these were the only ones I did well at. In the sixth form, I therefore ditched all of my O level subjects except Maths, and picked the ones I actually wanted to study (Economics and Geography). A levels were a revelation, as I specialised in subjects that I really loved.

The Achilles’ heel of the IB, for me at least, is therefore lack of choice. The programme, for example, has compulsory Maths (The lowest level allowable includes delights such as vectors, matrices and differential calculus – fine for those who enjoy Maths, but restrictive as a compulsory element I would have thought). Other compulsory elements include a foreign language and a science (I would have been reaching for the cyanide at this point), with six subjects overall (barely fewer than the eight I was forced to suffer at O level).

Whilst it is hardly surprising that the IB will be keen to expand their share – back in 2007, the government was offering a subsidy to state schools of £26,000 towards the cost of conversion (IB registration fees, accredited training and so on), we should be very careful before we throw the baby out with the bathwater. James’ implicit claim is that universities feel the IB to be superior. If this was really true, one might have expected the statistics to reflect this, but the 2005 study (above) showed an application success rate of 67% for all non-IB applicants (including those with GNVQs and the like), but only 70% for the IB – surprising given the way it has presented itself as an elite qualification.

A levels offer both depth and choice to students, giving them the freedom to enjoy their studies and to specialise in the areas they really like. I have seen students who have become completely disillusioned with education because of the grind of compulsory subjects at GCSE spread their wings (much as I did) when allowed the freedom to choose. Whilst the IB might be suitable for some, I have serious reservations about its validity as a replacement for A levels.