A level examinations are necessary

Thank you I understand your concern with the 'one mark makes all the difference' argument. However, though I am by no means saying that the current system is perfect, the purpose of the grades is not to encourage one to 'just hop over', but to excel. I know that people are often against this, but we must have a way of differentiating two 'groups' of individuals based on abilities. We cannot have a blurred boundary which does not differentiate between an A and a B easily. Regarding university grades- it is the fault of the universities, not the exam board or the examination system, which are responsible for the 'one mark difference' problem. Even then, as two Cambridge applicants from my school have testified, the offers made by universities such as Cambridge is not always just a grade- UMS, or more specifically a small range of UMS values, are considered and required by these institutions. Furthermore, though the website of the University of Cambridge claims that typical grades required for natural science are A*A*A, in reality this may be much higher or even lower occasionally, though I do apologise for my lack of knowledge for the reason behind the variation. But the point is, even the universities do not necessarily make rigid requirements. As for my comment on Mr H's straw man, I should make it clear that it is a straw man argument in which he had given the impression that we are trying to memorise the specific mechanisms, mark schemes etc. of PUBLIC EXAMINATION, not rote learning (rote learning is not what I said). Public examinations are controlled tests whereby a whole variety of topics are tested, so that one cannot just simply focus too much on a particular topic, e. g. tissue fluid (I might add I received a 'pleasant' surprise when I sat the Biology AS unit 2 paper). It is rather the students' misunderstanding of the examination system, coupled with the teachers' misinformation, which has lead to students to believe that learning is all about 'passing the exams'. To an extend that is true, but it is also to give students the necessary information from the subject. It is easy for grammar school and gifted candidates, to dismiss the examination system as simply memorising the mark scheme, while ignoring the Cs, Ds, Es etc. Moreover, the specifications of exam boards give a list of all the topics to revise for- this is not to encourage memorizing exam techniques but rather, to inform students what the course covers. Students tend to overlook non-specification contents being taught- but they are also important as supplements to some application questions which may come up in AS or A2 exams. Regarding limited time, I may have failed to mention that some students may be eligible to have extra time. You may not be able to concentrate during the exams, that is not to say the exam board has caused your discomfort- but rather the conditions of the examination room must be improved. Also, no offence, you must train your concentration skills, as a vast majority of students should have (at least from personal testaments). Hence, I must say the exams do not just train your subject skills, but a whole variety of other skills such as time management (though this is flexible), concentration, critical thinking (in arts and humanities), data analysis and essay writing. I am sorry if science subjects are very objective- but like I said, the purpose of the exam board is to equip you with 'foundation' knowledge from the specification from which you can build up your future scientific learning. Again, to reiterate, time is not a luxury you can always afford not just in the exams. Regarding more flexible ways of examining candidates like 'mathematics speaking examination', that is not necessarily contradictory to standardised examination. We can still use this to generate grades for universities, differentiate between able and less able students for a particular subject. However, it must still be standardised (albeit with a flexible mark scheme) in order for it to be able to identify excellent students. To close my argument, I would like to defend the proposition of keeping the public examination system, albeit with more flexible mark schemes and more, but concise units for each subjects. The current examination system is constantly being improved. The problem of 'dumbing down' can be reversed. Standardised examination with several exam boards in competition give schools choices and pressure the boards to not reduce/improve their quality, while it ensures that the national curriculum being taught do not include ridiculous pseudosciences like cdesign proponentsism (i. e. a typo of Intelligent Design) or astrology being taught in science classes. It ensures that every student receive a minimum standard in their secondary education, as well as ensuring a controlled, fair condition to test their abilities. Though it's not perfect, I must add it IS NOT the only way (but still the most important way) to be successful. The supposed monopoly of A levels on success is overrated. Thank you for your time and that of the audience, may the best man win. I now rest my case.