A-Level art history axed (ctd.)
October 20 2016
The art historian Michael Liversidge, Emeritus Dean at Bristol University's Faculty of Arts, has kindly written to AHN. He begins by saying that all is not necessarily lost for people aged 16-18 wanting to take a course in art history:
There is an alternative to the axed AQA History of Art. It is the Cambridge International Exams Pre-U Certificate qualification - an excellent A-level by another name.
And then gives some valuable background as to why the A-Level has been axed:
AQA's decision is based on two substantive factors, and one nonsensical argument. Firstly, that with 'only' 839 entrants in 2016, the A-level is uneconomic. In fact, the cost per candidate for entering the exam was set at £158.05; this compares to £84.20 for a 'standard' humanities subject such as English Literature or History for which there are thousands of candidates (the prices rise to £168.75 and £89.90 for June 2017). Secondly, that there is a shortage of examiners. A third explanation was also offered by AQA which stated that "Our number one priority is making sure every student gets the result they deserve - and the complex and specialist nature of the exams in this subject creates too many risks on that front..." Managing the risk by taking away the opportunity is obviously an absurd argument - all it ensures is that nobody at all can get a result, whether deserved or otherwise. The financial imperative is evidently the principal excuse, and it could be conceded that the work of reforming the examination to fit the new structure of A-levels would be an added cost which the income stream from candidates' fees would not cover since presumably every penny goes on administration and examiners. But in fact much of the thinking needed has been carried out in consultation with the academic community, and rewriting the rules would be a relatively simple business. The curriculum exists, and the Association of Art Historians has recently sponsored an excellent textbook by an experienced and expert teacher of the subject, Penny Huntsman's Thinking About Art (which I commend to all your readers).
The cost of taking the A-level exam is a problem - not so much perhaps for independent schools (though budgetary considerations are important to them like everyone else in education), but certainly for the maintained sector. Perhaps not insuperable, though, if the professional art world could come forward to subsidise it: AQA is an educational charity, so there is a tax-efficient way of contributing to the cause. Finding examiners ought to be easier to solve, and surely not beyond the collective wisdom of the academic community to recruit them.
Changing an exam board's mind, especially when it has made the announcement, is not an easy thing to accomplish. So the solution probably lies with schools going over to the Cambridge International Examinations Pre-U Certificate. It is, in fact, an A-level, with a carefully structured two-year curriculum offering an excellent range of options involving visual analysis, historical periods, thematic topics and an extended research project. Many UK schools already offer CIE qualifications, and they are fully recognised by British universities for admissions. The Pre-U Art History, in other words, offers an existing, established exam which provides a rigorous and challenging qualification which universities accept, so whether a student is planning to go on to a degree in the subject or wants to do something else afterwards it affords an entirely credible indicator of intellectual attainment and potential.
Michael also takes aim at Jonathan Jones of The Guardian:
It has been quite shameful that someone like Jonathan Jones of The Guardian positively welcomed the axing of art history by AQA as "the end of one privilege of the public school elite" and has asserted that while scientists "are constantly communicating their latest whacky ideas in popular books or on TV, none of the readable books on art history you will find in shops are by academic art historians." Maybe he doesn't read enough, and evidently he's missed a lot of good TV programmes recently. The Association of Art Historians has achieved much to expand the subject by widening access through various initiatives, not least by investing in Thinking About Art, supporting its annual sell-out 'Ways of Seeing' study days at the British Museum and National Gallery (with free places for state school teachers and students funded by The Worshipful Company of Art Scholars), and through a range of schools initiatives it has encouraged universities around the country to engage with. He's not the most coherent of commentators when it comes to parading his anti-elite credentials - £99 for three hours visiting the National Gallery last September, exclusively for Guardian members? Hmmm.....more Swiss Cottage than Shepherds Bush?