Although I agree with the fundamental argument put forward in The Sunday Island of 16th January by Prof. R. P. Gunawardane in favour of Z-score in place of the aggregate, I think that certain conditions for the validity of the procedure need to be recognised. Firstly, the new method presumes similarity in the mark distribution pattern for the different subjects so that it can distort individual performances unfairly when for example, one subject has a strongly bimodal distribution while another has a near normal distribution or where distributions are skewed differently.

Secondly, for normalisation using the mean and the variance to be meaningful, the overall academic quality of the group students offering each subject should not vary from subject to subject. This is hard to ensure, since streaming of students at school is based on some form of academic performance. Thus samples for different subjects can be less than matching in terms of intellectual capability. This problem can, however, be averted in some instances by applying normalisation to the performance of a defined group of students, such as those seeking admission to a particular faculty or faculties, for which selection is based on the same group of subjects. The problem will remain where different combinations of subjects are allowed for admission to the same course of study.

The more serious problem of university education in this country concerns the decline in the quality of school education and the weak correlation that exists between the GCE (AL) grade acquired by a student and the student’s understanding or appreciation of any subject. School laboratory work witnessed its initial decline around 1972 and has since suffered an almost total collapse. More importantly, the role of the school in the development of the student, which was systematically undermined since the late sixties by the private tuition industry, is now in ruins. I am aware of attempts in the early 1980’s to rectify the defects in the teaching of mathematics and the sciences, but all such efforts seem to have come to nothing.

I wonder what benefit is there in improving the comparison of performances in different subjects when the method of assessment itself is flawed. In fact, it concerns the wrong kinds of knowledge and skill. There is a need to reinvigorate our school education system and make it meaningful and free of the menace of private tuition. This daunting task is not the direct concern the UGC, but one that the UGC cannot afford to abandon.
Prof. S. Sivasegaram