Students are enjoying a well-deserved long summer break after the scholastic year, and all have received the results of their endeavours by now.

Many are pleased with the outcome of their efforts, others passed but they might be disappointed with the result because they know they could have done better. Then there are those who failed in one or more subjects, and are wondering where they went wrong.

While some schools still choose to give their ratings in “letters”, with the best result classified as “A”, others prefer to give a better indication by giving the actual marks, out of 100, to their students. In this way, it is felt that students get a better idea of their progress or otherwise.

For example, a “B” could mean anything between 70 and 89, but students getting a “B” keep wondering whether they were closer to the higher mark or whether they just made it to 70. It would perhaps be more appropriate for primary and secondary schools to give the exact mark.

On the other hand, giving marks does have its negative side when students fail. In this respect, it is rather cruel for primary school children and those in their early teens to get, say, 47 in a given subject or, sometimes even 49.

We repeat, it does appear cruel on those students who, try as they might, do not make it to 50 or just beyond, and are listed as having failed for just one mark. It is rather discouraging.

Could it not have been possible to “review” the paper and add that extra mark or two so that students get the satisfaction of having at least a pass mark, albeit not a good one? Are students encouraged when they are so close and yet so far from getting the longed-for 50? On the other hand, should a 47-49 mark be brought down to 40 or thereabouts so as to “shock” these students into doing more?

There are positive and negative aspects in all this.

Students who get just over 50 might feel that they are doing enough in that subject and do not push for more, knowing that they are getting the pass-mark they need. Those who get 40 know that their efforts leave so much to be desired and such a result could therefore push them into doing that extra hour of studying. And those who get 47-49 might feel cheated of those few marks that could have “easily” been added to give them the satisfaction of having passed.

What is ultimately important in all this is that students who fail one or more exams by a few marks should be encouraged, and not discouraged, to make an extra effort. If they do not get enough support – from the school and from the family – to push harder, this could result in a loss of interest that would make matters worse.

Secondly, all students have the so-called weaker areas, subjects which they cannot grasp efficiently. And therefore they should not be tagged as “failures” but should be given enough backing to help them more in their efforts. Such students should perhaps be steered towards other areas in which they could give a better account of themselves.

It is often said that education is the basis of our economy, and considering the limited human resources this country possesses, we cannot afford to “lose” students along the way. Everything possible should be done to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each and every student, and build on the stronger points.

Everyone has talents that need to be nurtured and sustained. Nobody is a loser. But those who get 49 may feel to be so, especially at an age that is so vulnerable.