AN EXAMINATION OF EXAMINATIONS , [To the Editor of THE
SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I think Sir Philip Hartog does not quite apprehend my objection to his numerical grades. Their use surely implies, that all his examiners meant the same thing when they marked a script say /3. But on pp. 71-2 Sir Philip shows that he failed to obtain uniformity of nomenellture. Two of the examiners may give the same mark but mean different things in terms of first, second and third class— which is after all the practical point. Thus, for examiner F, f3 is the lowest second class mark. But for examiner Q, is a good second. This diversity is natural in a board of examiners drawn from nine different universities. It is not clear, either, how many of them had recent experience of the standards of the University concerned. Surely instead of concentrating on the actual marks which examiners with different -staddards produced it would be fairer to consider the order in which candidates were placed. how far do the examiners agree as to who are the best men for
example ? • Sir Philip does not refer to my psychological criticism of his School Certificate History results. As these were the " most disturbing " of all his examination results I hope Professor Cyril Burt may deal with the point.—Yours
GAVIN BON E.
St. John's College, Oxford.
Previous page
