In response to Liz Telcs (Letters, April 24), it is amazing that, in all the years of debate over whether school exams are getting easier, no one ever thinks to ask the students.

Upon being handed a mass of past papers for GCSE science in 1999, it was immediately obvious 1987's papers were harder than 1997's.

When I took the 1999 exam, I was thankful it was not as hard as 1997's. During my sixth-form days, my year group took A-levels while the year below took the new AS-levels.

One day in 2000, I was shown the first ever AS-level paper for politics and was amazed to find the exam board had simply split our traditional A-level questions in two.

So, rather than ask: "What impact does the EU have on British politics?", which actually gets students to make an essay plan and develop an argument, the AS level paper asked students to: "(1) Describe the key institutions of the EU", and then: "(2) Explain how each institution impacts upon British politics".

It thus demands mere listing of facts. Give me that one any day. Moving on to university level, I wrote my dissertation on Aristotle and obtained high marks. However, knowing no ancient Greek, I read all Aristotle's works in English.

My tutor told me it would have been impossible, in his day, to study Aristotle at that university without knowing significant amounts of Greek beforehand. Also, you had to complete your dissertation in the summer holidays, not during term time as is now the case.

Sorry, Ms Telcs, but it gets worse.

My economics lecturer told my class he "could not believe third year students only had to submit one sample essay in the entire year".

Nine would have been closer to the mark when he was an undergraduate.

A sports journalist who studied at my university was surprised to learn we only took six exams a year - in his day, it was eight.

The average length of exams has also mysteriously decreased from three to two-and-a-quarter hours, while hundreds of students are now able to walk away with a passable degree grade having studied for an average of about two hours per week.

Surely Ms Telcs remembers this. Or, maybe, exams were harder, even in her day.

I also know people who mark exam papers for general studies, which is basically "general knowledge".

In 2001, students needed to score 75 per cent to get an A, whereas in 2005, just 66 per cent was needed. Exams are easier because educational establishments are run like private firms rather than public service providers.

GCSE and A-level exam providers are all private, profit-making boards which make money by selling exam papers, and they sell more exam papers by making them more straightforward.

My tutor also told me: "Universities cannot afford to fail students these days". Universities worry that if more students fail, fewer students will apply and income will be lost.

I am not knocking the students who are studying now, as many of them would still have passed the tougher exams of yore.

While I appreciate Ms Telcs is a member of the Labour Party, I would guess her loyalty to her profession is just as strong.

If so, perhaps she might ask why her Government is so hell-bent on cheating kids out of a challenging education merely in order for higher pass rates from dumbed-down exams to be used for political gain.

-Chris Gould, Burgess Hill