tim's experiment

Disappointing to see no official response so far to an interesting offering in the HK Free Press. This was written by Winnie Tam, a 17-year-old student who is preparing for the DSE examinations to be held later this month.

The DSE examination is a cross between O and A Levels, taken at the end of form six and combining the toxic features of both. It was intended as a suitable exam for all school leavers but doubles as Hong Kong’s hukao, the key to university entrance.

As a result of this hybrid construction it has one curious feature. The original design featured five grades: 1-5 with 5 being the top. The universities complained that this would produce too many people with lots of 5 grades so a further two grades were added: 5* and 5**.

This, combined with some internal changes introduced by universities when they switched to four-year degrees, allows the universities to conduct admissions on a labour-saving basis. Most of the decisions are untouched by human brain. The computer does it all on the basis of exam results. So for would-be undergraduates the DSE is a big deal.

An obvious objection to holding mass exams at this juncture is the danger of COVID wafting through the hall. Our student author notes that the relevant officials have unveiled a solution to this: every examinee will be tested on the day of the exam and those who test positive will not be allowed to take the exam. Instead they will be given a grade based on their school work.

But this emergency grade will be capped at 5. No matter how excellent your school work or flattering your teachers’ assessments you will not be able to score 5* or 5**. For students aiming for the more exclusive programmes this will be a major setback.

This restriction is supposed to be in the interest of “fairness”. Well there is nothing fair about examinations. People are subject to a variety of changes in mood and medical condition. Ladies have the monthly thing. Some people handle stress better than others.

Little accidents can have big consequences. I once had to explain to a student that his answer to one question (fortunately in a mock exam) would get no marks because he had offered an excellent essay on Charles XII (Sweden has a lot of kings called Charles) when the question called for an answer on Charles XIII.

Anyway, if giving credit for school work is acceptable it is difficult to see why we should be confident in the difference between 4 and 5 but reject the difference between 5 and 5*.

Moreover the procedure is odious. Ms Tam argues, and I agree, that it will be a traumatic experience for a student to arrive for an exam and be turned away at the last minute for failing a RAT test. There could be tragic consequences.

This is neither necessary nor desirable. The examination is supposed to meet student needs, not the other way round. The university I attended (Oxford) had a very stressful arrangement at the time and was appropriately accommodating for people who succumbed to it.

Students with mental health problems were admitted to a specialist hospital called the Warneford. Every year, at the cost of what must have been considerable inconvenience, a full set of examinations was offered to people in the Warneford. A recurring joke had it that the Warneford produced better results than Balliol College – the target of many unkind jokes because its occupants were thought to be a bit too fond of themselves.

The obvious solution to our little local difficulty is to provide a separate room in each school for students who test positive to write their exams in. This doesn’t need to be in a quarantine camp – a classroom will do as long as it is spacious and well-ventilated. After all, unless things have changed since I went through the system, each session only lasts two or three hours.

No doubt this will make extra work for some people, but still. This is war, as we are often reminded, and requires sacrifices from all of us.