I WAS interested in the letter from Dr David Hill. While I agree with some of the sentiments expressed, I think he is wrong to suggest that public examinations are meaningless and that a system needs to be established that will allow creativity to be unleashed.

Generally speaking, success in exams demonstrates that a candidate has drive, intelligence, and a cool head, qualities that are very important for success in most areas of life.

Students perform well in exams when they have prepared well and are able to perform effectively under pressure.

Dr Hills use of the word 'creativity' seems to me to be meaningless. Advances come largely as a result of hard work and a firm grasp of existing knowledge (a process not too dissimilar to studying for exams) not as a result of sitting in the pub having a clever idea.

As Einstein said: "genius is one per cent inspiration and 99 per cent perspiration."

It may well be that there are people with flair and the ability to 'think outside of the box' who do not perform well in exams (and these people often have a point to prove), but this is no reason to abolish the system.

The examinations system has served Britain well for many years and allows able students who work hard to be rewarded for their efforts.

W Pearce, Heysham. (full address supplied).