At best misleading

It was intriguing to read Helene Ansell's defence of A-level Psychology in your interview with her. But a pity you did not take the opportunity to obtain views from university-based psychologists in response to her concern that Universities do not regard A-level psychology as an appropriate basis for Degree level psychology.

Of course, there are different psychology syllabuses set by different examination boards, but my experience of the area of psychology in which I have published extensively, so can claim some detailed understanding, is that what is taught at A-level is at best misleading and at worst actually wrong. Discussions with colleagues in other areas of psychology have indicated they feel the same about their aspects of psychology.

Even more worrying was my discovery that most courses in A-level psychology do not require students to carry out actual projects, collect empirical data and analyse it. I do not think that anyone can understand the nature of psychology as a science without the direct experience of carrying out at least an elementary research study. My own experience with sixth-form students is that they can readily do psychological research and both enjoy it and conduct reasonably sophisticated analyses of the data. But this does not seem to be a requirement of the course.

When I did A-level sciences, admittedly well over half a century ago, we explored the evidence for theories and the way scientific ideas developed over time. But what I can gather about A-level psychology today is that it has been bowdlerised into small, apparently digestible mouthfuls that can be memorised and easily examined. This is made more limited by the fact, as I am informed, that for some examination boards the syllabus, recommended textbook and examination are all produced by the same few people.

If A-level psychology is to be embraced by Universities, a very different approach is needed to how it is structured, taught and examined.

Professor David Canter

Helene Ansell responds: It is not my experience that A-level Psychology has been reduced to bitesize mouthfuls of information. We have no control over the requirements of OFQUAL, but a lot of teachers have a psychology degree and I know that what we are teaching is correct. We use teaching techniques that encourage independent learning. 

Our young people are not taught in neat modules, but in a two-year linear approach which requires some skill on the part of the teachers and students. Specifications must comply with OFQUAL subject guidance and are written in collaboration with stakeholders, which include representation from HE.

People who write examination papers are not allowed to author books or lead CPD, due to conflict of interest. Awarding bodies do endorse textbooks, but that is just to say that they are in line with the specification: they do not recommend relying on one source. Those university lecturers and Professors who have written A-level texts, such as Richard Gross, would no doubt be surprised to hear that their books are 'at best misleading and at worst actually wrong'.

Michael Gove, when Education Secretary, removed coursework from many specifications as he was concerned about plagiarism and thought exams to be more rigorous. However, I do agree that you cannot teach research methods without carrying out research projects. So, the requirement to carry out research is not explicitly mentioned in most specifications, but it is implicitly expected. This seems to be verified by your emails author who suggest that today's students can indeed carry out research and can 'conduct reasonably sophisticated analysis of the data.' The teachers must be doing something right.

If, as it appears, the letter writer is relying on hearsay and knowledge of A-levels from over half a century ago, I would recommend they go into a school today to see for themselves just what is taught and how.