ANALYSIS:The 'profile' of the issue ordered by the Minister and led by insiders is likely to be a whitewash, write BRENDAN GUILFOYLEand SIMON QUINN
SO THE Minister for Education and Science has finally recognised the glaring problem of grade inflation in the Irish education system and has ordered an “inquiry”. The fact that, according to the Minister, it is to be more of a “profile” than an inquiry, and that it is to be carried out by the insiders of the educational establishment, suggests that this is going to end up as a whitewash.
As academics we had anecdotal evidence of declining standards in third-level institutions and we decided, together with colleague Martin O’Grady, to investigate the issue in 2007. Our extensive research found conclusive evidence that, over the previous decade and a half, there had indeed been an enormous increase in higher awards with no real improvements in learning, ie grade inflation.
For example, in 1994 the percentage of first-class honours awarded across Irish universities was 7 per cent. By 2005 that figure had jumped to 17 per cent. In the institutes of technology over the same period there was a 52 per cent increase in the award of first-class honours degrees. While there has been variation in these increases between institutions, the trend has been the same – inexorably upwards.
At second level, a similar trend appeared: the percentage of higher awards had soared. All 24 higher-level subjects showed an increased rate of combined A and B grades in 2006 over 1992, with an average increase of 55 per cent. Eighteen of the 20 ordinary level subjects showed an increase in A and B grades with an average increase of 101 per cent.
Of course, a simplistic explanation of these increases could be that the abilities of our students and graduates are improving. Unfortunately, such an explanation does not bear up under any kind of scrutiny.
Understanding why grade inflation occurred so rapidly and in every area requires careful consideration and has no simple answer. Indeed, the reasons why it is happening at second level may well be different from those at third level.
However, one common thread has been the move towards universal educational access at third level – up from 25 per cent of school leavers in 1986 to 54 per cent in 2003 – and this has had ramifications at both levels. In the first instance, third-level education has become the norm, and failure to attain this level of education is likely to have negative repercussions throughout a person’s life.
This has been exacerbated by the academisation of hitherto professional qualifications. This has led to the proliferation of grind schools, increased examination scrutiny and endless pressure on Leaving Certificate examiners to set predictable exams.
The result has been a small drop in the percentage of failures in most subjects of the Leaving Certificate and a massive increase in the percentage of students achieving grades at the top of the scale. In addition, the percentage taking higher-level subjects has increased dramatically and added to inflation in CAO points.
Against this background, third-level institutions set institutional expansion as their primary goal, and failed to deal with the fact that continuing growth can only be achieved by drawing academically weak and unmotivated students into third-level courses. Moreover, the procedures for examining students and arriving at grades in third-level educational institutions have proven to be remarkably susceptible to pressure to degrade standards.
In this context, the educational regulatory authorities must accept a large proportion of the responsibility for the outcome. For example, between 1990 and the present, the Higher Education and Training Awards Council (Hetac) and its predecessor the NCEA oversaw 20 different regulation changes in the institute of technology sector whereby the academic demands made on students were lowered for qualifications.
The final result has been the paradoxical situation where weaker and weaker students have been entering third-level education and somehow obtaining higher and higher awards.
Grade inflation presents serious difficulties for employers who are faced with the challenge of differentiating between those whose qualifications and grades are backed up by actual learning and the great many whose grades are deeply misleading. Indeed, the recently announced “inquiry” is the result of lobbying by multinationals in Ireland who were concerned about the quality of grades awarded.
In contrast, our attempts since 2007 to raise these issues within the educational sector received almost no official response, other than off-handed dismissals by a blogging university president and the refusal by many institutes of technology to release further grade data. On the other hand, we received an enormous amount of positive feedback from individual academics and students praising our efforts to raise this crucial issue.
The official response of obfuscation and denial is an indictment of both the educational institutions and of those charged with responsibility to regulate them.
This underlines the weaknesses of the proposed “inquiry” to be carried out by the same “senior officials” who ignored the problem in the past.
There is a familiar ring to this tale: a decade of inflated growth cheer-led by self-serving institutions, regulators who were captured and turned a blind eye, ultimately causing a collapse in value.
The steps towards a solution are also familiar: a full and independent inquiry, acceptance of responsibility by the educational institutions, and serious reform in the regulatory authorities (the State Examinations Commission, the Hetac and the Irish Universities Quality Board). All this must be done with a new attitude of openness in which up-to-date data about award levels in all of our educational institutions is made freely available to inform the debate.
Finally, academics must demand, and take steps to ensure, that educational institutions live up to their public duty of ensuring standards that are fair both to the weaker and the stronger students.
Dr Brendan Guilfoyle is a mathematics lecturer and Simon Quinn is an accounting and finance lecturer, both at the Institute of Technology Tralee. They are founder members, along with Martin O’Grady, of the Network for Irish Educational Standards, which has published its findings at: www.stopgradeinflation.ie