Every year, newspapers dispatch their photographers, who apply the same tried and tested, but ultimately boring, formula to capture that special moment. Despite the lack of creativity in the images of celebrating A-level students, the press will print a photograph of the star student who scored a number of As in his/her exam. Every year, this celebration of elitism graces the pages of newspapers and TV screens around Britain. It is a celebration that mirrors the equally rapturous acclaim of HSC laureates in Mauritius. Elitism is in fact something that is celebrated everywhere.

However, this year, there was a hitch for those who traditionally shower praise upon the earners of triple or quadruple As. The results showed that there was a record 96.6% pass rate and a 24.4% of A grades, also unheard of previously. While one would imagine that this is welcome news, it provoked hysteria among the media. ?Urgent revision is needed for the entire exam system?, wrote the Daily Telegraph. The paper was also unhappy about the increasing numbers who are passing GSCE exams, now at around 98%.

While anyone would think that academic success would be unanimously welcomed, this did not prove the case. The reason is simple. The poor have to be kept out of universities. These institutions are in fact reserved for the elite of society. How does anyone expect the vanguard pupils of the nation to mix with the rabble of society and still develop into leaders? This reflects the debate that is taking place in Mauritius over ?ranking and star schools?. The whole debate in England became about the falling standards. It seems, the larger the number of pupils who pass and the more who gain the top grades, the bigger the crisis in the education system.

The complaints came from the top universities, who say that it would be impossible to find the brightest candidates. In the past, they had a very good system to allow them to be selective. The pass rate was fixed at 70% while only 10% of the student body was allowed to get maximum points. The A-levels were in fact a filtering system, which allowed only a handful to make it to professional jobs. However, by 1987, the then Tory government had seen that this ?cap? on pass rates was severely affecting the pool of people available for a professional career. It decided to ditch the restrictions and allow more people to go to university. But, meanwhile, the professions were making it harder for applicants to join them. While a university degree was enough to guarantee a job, the raised requirements have rendered the university degree the equivalent of an A-level.

But this was enough; the authorities now want to create a super A grade that will cream off the best students for the top universities. A process that is similar to the idea of competition that the Mauritius Labour Party seems addicted to. Writing in The Guardian, former New Statesman editor Peter Wilby noted: ?Before 1987, A-levels were rigged to prevent too many people from aspiring to professional careers. Now the system is designed to encourage more and more to do so. You could say it?s all part of the transition to a post-industrial society. But having reluctantly accepted that this isn?t going to change, the critics want a new form of rigging - an A*, a super-A grade, to be awarded to a fixed percentage of candidates. Thus they would restore exclusivity, and ensure that everyone strives for a level of achievement that most can?t reach.?

This is the point of competition. It raises the bar so high that only a minority, mostly from rich and privileged backgrounds, would be able to attain the higher echelons of society. It is a selective process that, Wilby says, ?stops the masses from getting ideas above their station?. And this is the idea of elitism. Far from ensuring excellence in the education system, it is a rationing process that allows the privileged to keep the status quo in society. The same is true for Mauritius. A more equal education process will allow too many people into jobs that were once reserved for a few privileged souls.

Competition succeeds in keeping the status quo in many ways. First, there is a strong correlation between success in exams and economic and social backgrounds. In a highly competitive environment, it is obvious that a stable and comfortable social scene is a definite advantage. Secondly, being from a rich family gives a student access to the best schools usually inaccessible to the poor.

The whole point of competition is to keep the status quo of an elite-led society. The reason is simple, as any rational person can see - in any competitive system some will always start with an obvious advantage. Social backgrounds, exclusive networks, and other privileges favour some children. It is erroneous to think that students stand on a level-playing field at school. Exclusive schools only perpetuate this inequality as they also help to restrict social networks. They become a members-only zone, where admission is based on class positions. In Mauritius, this applies to the whole political class. How else to explain the obstinacy of the former and the tentative arguments of the latter?

<B>Diren VALAYDEN</B>